76
several points of communication and coordination; and these disciples found pre-existing
social networks amenable to anarchism that were simply activated and mobilized in
support of the movement (see Holmes 2000:59; Mintz 1982). However, one other major
difference separates the Spanish from the Greek example. In Spain, organizers found an
oppressed but potentially explosive rural population whereas in Greece the population
had recently been freed: the revolution was already half over. It is likely that local people
were ultimately uninterested in actively mobilizing to resist yet another ruler. Perhaps
they were willing to trade home-grown leadership and autonomy for peace, order, and
freedom under foreign control.
Whatever the reason a mass anarchy movement failed to materialize in Greece,
smaller more temporary organizations did nonetheless come together mostly around
Athens, western Peloponnesus, and in the north of the country following one or another
iteration of anarchy including anarcho-romanticism, anarcho-communism, anarcho-
workerism, and anarcho-christianism. However, after 1920 anarchist activity in Greece
seemed to cease altogether. Again, there are a number of reasons why this might have
occurred, but I will highlight five possibilities or contributing factors. First, the eventual
domination of Greek working-class movements by Marxist-Leninist ideology effectively
cut anarchists off from their prime recruiting grounds. Anarchists were also wary to
mobilize and advertise as the Communist Party of Greece (KKE), famously hostile
towards anarchists, enjoyed substantial political success and social influence during this
early period of the country’s history. Also, Greeks, despite their political orientation,
seemed eager for a strong state with strong dynamic leadership, therefore the anarchist
message might have been seen by the public as dangerous, counterproductive, and un-