THREE BURIALS OF THE ANARCHIST PROJECT NATALIA BUIER1 ABSTRACT. In this article I discuss David Graebers proposition of an anarchist anthropology. I focus on three key issues: Graebers understanding of ethnography and its role within the politics of anthropology, his reading of the anarchist tradition, and his involvement with the Occupy Wall Street movement as a concrete example of the limitations of the political project of an anarchist anthropology. The argument of the article is that rather than broadening the debate on political alternatives, Graebers representation of the discipline of anthropology, together with his partial reading of the anarchist tradition, run counter to a political and analytic focus that centralizes the notions of class and exploitation. Graebers small a anarchism together with his uncritical disciplinary positioning eclipse the richness of the anarchist tradition in favour of a model of knowledge production which, at heart, remains an unreformed practice of academic domination. Keywords: ethnography, anarchism, academic praxis, Occupy Wall Street
Such claims are, to use an appropriately earthly metaphor, bullshit.
(Graeber, 2007: 95) A revolutionary spectre has been haunting the halls of anthropology departments at elite universities: the promise of an anarchist anthropology. By now common currency among anthropology students, the association of the terms anarchism and anthropology has gained unexpected popularity as David Graeber was fashioned into a leading voice of Occupy Wall Street. The term has insinuated itself into discussions about the relationship between anthropology and political praxis to the point where the affinity between anthropology and anarchism is closer to being assumed rather than questioned. If almost 20 years ago we were being warned that anthropologys disdain for addressing nonacademic audiences explains part of its own marginality (Shore 1996), it now 1 Doctoral candidate, Central European University Budapest, e-mail: buier_natalia@ceu-budapest.edu.