Communalism, municipalism, and the erosion strategy

Contemporary communalist theories and practices are shaped by a strategic debate around a central question: Is seizing municipal power the essential first step in local democratization, or should the focus be on acting independently of state institutions and developing social and economic commons? Supporters of seizing city halls are associated with the municipalist label, whereas those advocating the creation of counter-institutions more readily identify with communalism. This article compares the arguments of proponents of each approach with empirical evidence from ongoing research in two French case studies. It argues that this theoretical opposition is often bridged in practice through a division of activist labor and interactions between state institutions and autonomous commons. This overcoming can be understood as an example of Erik Olin Wright’s “erosion strategy,” insofar as it reflects, at the communal level, the waning opposition between anarchism and communism through practical convergences.