Anarchists employdiverse approaches, which may be generally divided intorevolutionary andevolutionary strategies; there is significant overlap between the two. Evolutionary methods try to simulate what an anarchist society might be like, but revolutionary tactics, which have historically taken aviolent turn, aim to overthrow authority and the state. Many facets ofhuman civilization have been influenced by anarchist theory, critique, andpraxis.
Wilhelm Weitling is an example of a writer who added to anarchist theory without using the exact term.[2]
Theetymological origin ofanarchism is from theAncient Greekanarkhia (ἀναρχία), meaning "without a ruler", composed of theprefixan- ("without") and the wordarkhos ("leader" or "ruler"). Thesuffix-ism denotes the ideological current that favours anarchy.[3]Anarchism appears in English from 1642 asanarchisme andanarchy from 1539; early English usages emphasised a sense of disorder.[4] Various factions within theFrench Revolution labelled their opponents asanarchists, although few such accused shared many views with later anarchists. Many revolutionaries of the 19th century such asWilliam Godwin (1756–1836) andWilhelm Weitling (1808–1871) would contribute to the anarchist doctrines of the next generation but did not useanarchist oranarchism in describing themselves or their beliefs.[5]
The firstpolitical philosopher to call himself ananarchist (French:anarchiste) wasPierre-Joseph Proudhon (1809–1865),[6] marking the formal birth of anarchism in the mid-19th century. Since the 1890s and beginning in France,[7]libertarianism has often been used as a synonym for anarchism;[8] its use as a synonym is still common outside the United States.[9] Some usages oflibertarianism refer toindividualisticfree-market philosophy only, andfree-market anarchism in particular is termedlibertarian anarchism.[10]
While the termlibertarian has been largely synonymous with anarchism,[11] its meaning has more recently been diluted by wider adoption from ideologically disparate groups,[12] including both theNew Left andlibertarian Marxists, who do not associate themselves withauthoritarian socialists or avanguard party, and extremecultural liberals, who are primarily concerned withcivil liberties.[12] Additionally, some anarchists uselibertarian socialist[13] to avoid anarchism's negative connotations and emphasise its connections withsocialism.[12]Anarchism is broadly used to describe theanti-authoritarian wing of thesocialist movement.[14][nb 1] Anarchism is contrasted to socialist forms which arestate-oriented or from above.[18] Scholars of anarchism generally highlight anarchism's socialist credentials[19] and criticise attempts at creating dichotomies between the two.[20] Some scholars describe anarchism as having many influences from liberalism,[12] and being both liberal and socialist but more so.[21] Many scholars rejectanarcho-capitalism as a misunderstanding of anarchist principles.[22][nb 2]
Whileopposition to the state is central to anarchist thought, defininganarchism is not an easy task for scholars, as there is a lot of discussion among scholars and anarchists on the matter, and various currents perceive anarchism slightly differently.[24][nb 3] Major definitional elements include the will for a non-coercive society, the rejection of the state apparatus, the belief thathuman nature allows humans to exist in or progress toward such a non-coercive society, and a suggestion on how to act to pursue the ideal of anarchy.[27]
The most notable precursors to anarchism in the ancient world were inChina andGreece. In China,philosophical anarchism (the discussion on the legitimacy of the state) was delineated byTaoist philosophersZhuang Zhou andLaozi.[29] AlongsideStoicism, Taoism has been said to have had "significant anticipations" of anarchism.[30]
Anarchic attitudes were also articulated bytragedians andphilosophers in Greece.Aeschylus andSophocles used the myth ofAntigone to illustrate the conflict between laws imposed by the state and personalautonomy.Socrates questionedAthenian authorities constantly and insisted on the right of individualfreedom of conscience.Cynics dismissed human law (nomos) and associated authorities while trying to live according to nature (physis).Stoics were supportive of a society based on unofficial and friendly relations among its citizens without the presence of a state.[31]
Inmedieval Europe, there was no anarchistic activity except some ascetic religious movements. These, and other Muslim movements, later gave birth toreligious anarchism. In theSasanian Empire,Mazdak called for anegalitarian society and theabolition of monarchy, only to be soon executed by EmperorKavad I.[32] InBasra, religious sects preached against the state.[33] In Europe, various religious sects developed anti-state and libertarian tendencies.[34]
Renewed interest in antiquity during theRenaissance and in private judgment during theReformation restored elements of anti-authoritariansecularism in Europe, particularly in France.[35]Enlightenment challenges to intellectual authority (secular and religious) and therevolutions of the 1790s and 1848 all spurred the ideological development of what became the era of classical anarchism.[36]
Mikhail Bakunin opposed the Marxist aim ofdictatorship of the proletariat and allied himself with the federalists in the First International before his expulsion by the Marxists.
By the turn of the 20th century, anarchism had spread all over the world.[45] It was a notable feature of the internationalsyndicalist movement.[46] InChina, small groups of students imported thehumanistic pro-science version of anarcho-communism.[47]Tokyo was a hotspot forrebellious youth from East Asian countries, who moved to the Japanese capital to study.[48] In Latin America,Argentina was a stronghold foranarcho-syndicalism, where it became the most prominent left-wing ideology.[49] During this time, a minority of anarchists adopted tactics of revolutionarypolitical violence, known aspropaganda of the deed.[50] The dismemberment of the French socialist movement into many groups and the execution and exile of manyCommunards topenal colonies following the suppression of the Paris Commune favoured individualist political expression and acts.[51] Even though many anarchists distanced themselves from these terrorist acts, infamy came upon the movement and attempts were made to preventanarchists immigrating to the US, including theImmigration Act of 1903, also called the Anarchist Exclusion Act.[52]Illegalism was another strategy which some anarchists adopted during this period.[53]
In theSpanish Civil War of 1936–39, anarchists and syndicalists (CNT andFAI) once again allied themselves with various currents of leftists. A long tradition ofSpanish anarchism led to anarchists playing a pivotal role in the war, and particularly in theSpanish Revolution of 1936. In response to the armyrebellion, ananarchist-inspired movement of peasants and workers, supported by armed militias, took control ofBarcelona and of large areas of rural Spain, where theycollectivised the land.[56] TheSoviet Union provided some limited assistance at the beginning of the war, but the result was a bitter fight between communists and other leftists in a series of events known as theMay Days, asJoseph Stalin asserted Soviet control of theRepublican government, ending in another defeat of anarchists at the hands of the communists.[57]
Post-WWII
Rojava's support efforts for workers to form cooperatives is exemplified in this sewing cooperative.
While having revolutionary aspirations, many contemporary forms of anarchism are not confrontational. Instead, they are trying to build an alternative way ofsocial organization (following the theories ofdual power), based onmutual interdependence and voluntary cooperation. Scholar Carissa Honeywell takes the example ofFood Not Bombs group of collectives, to highlight some features of how contemporary anarchist groups work:direct action, working together and in solidarity with those left behind. While doing so, Food Not Bombs providesconsciousness raising about the rising rates of worldhunger and suggest policies to tackle hunger, ranging fromde-funding thearms industry to addressingMonsantoseed-saving policies andpatents, helpingfarmers, and resisting thecommodification of food and housing.[68] Honeywell also emphasizes that contemporary anarchists are interested in the flourishing not only ofhumans, butnon-humans and theenvironment as well.[69] Honeywell argues that their analysis of capitalism and governments results in anarchistsrejectingrepresentative democracy and the state as a whole.[70]
Schools of thought
Anarchist schools of thought have been generally grouped into two main historical traditions,social anarchism andindividualist anarchism, owing to their different origins,values and evolution.[71] The individualist current emphasisesnegative liberty in opposing restraints upon the free individual, while the social current emphasisespositive liberty in aiming to achieve the free potential of society through equality andsocial ownership.[72] In a chronological sense, anarchism can be segmented by the classical currents of the late 19th century and the post-classical currents (anarcha-feminism,green anarchism, andpost-anarchism) developed thereafter.[73]
Beyond the specific factions of anarchist movements which constitute political anarchism lies philosophical anarchism which holds that the state lacksmoral legitimacy, without necessarily accepting the imperative of revolution to eliminate it.[74] A component especially of individualist anarchism,[75] philosophical anarchism may tolerate the existence of aminimal state but claims that citizens have nomoral obligation to obey government when it conflicts with individualautonomy.[76] Anarchism pays significant attention to moral arguments since ethics have a central role in anarchist philosophy.[77] Anarchism's emphasis onanti-capitalism,egalitarianism, and for the extension of community andindividuality sets it apart from anarcho-capitalism and other types ofeconomic libertarianism.[22]
Mutualism is an 18th-century economic theory that was developed into anarchist theory by Pierre-Joseph Proudhon. Its aims include "abolishing the state",[87]reciprocity,free association, voluntary contract, federation andmonetary reform of both credit and currency that would be regulated by a bank of the people.[88] Mutualism has been retrospectively characterised as ideologically situated between individualist and collectivist forms of anarchism.[89] InWhat Is Property? (1840), Proudhon first characterised his goal as a "third form of society, the synthesis of communism and property."[90] Collectivist anarchism is arevolutionary socialist form of anarchism[91] commonly associated withMikhail Bakunin.[92] Collectivist anarchists advocatecollective ownership of themeans of production which is theorised to be achieved through violent revolution[93] and that workers be paid according to time worked, rather than goods being distributed according to need as in communism. Collectivist anarchism arose alongsideMarxism but rejected thedictatorship of the proletariat despite the stated Marxist goal of a collectiviststateless society.[94]
Individualist anarchism is a set of several traditions of thought within the anarchist movement that emphasise theindividual and theirwill over any kinds of external determinants.[103] Early influences on individualist forms of anarchism includeWilliam Godwin,Max Stirner, andHenry David Thoreau. Through many countries, individualist anarchism attracted a small yet diverse following of Bohemian artists and intellectuals[104] as well as young anarchist outlaws in what became known asillegalism andindividual reclamation.[105]
Lawrence Jarach (left) andJohn Zerzan (right) are two prominent contemporary anarchist authors, with Zerzan being a prominent voice withinanarcho-primitivism and Jarach a notable advocate ofpost-left anarchy.
Anarchist principles undergird contemporary radicalsocial movements of the left. Interest in the anarchist movement developed alongside momentum in the anti-globalisation movement,[106] whose leading activist networks were anarchist in orientation.[107] As the movement shaped 21st century radicalism, wider embrace of anarchist principles signaled a revival of interest.[107] Anarchism has continued to generate many philosophies and movements, at times eclectic, drawing upon various sources andcombining disparate concepts to create new philosophical approaches.[108] The anti-capitalist tradition of classical anarchism has remained prominent within contemporary currents.[109]
Contemporary news coverage which emphasizesblack bloc demonstrations has reinforced anarchism's historical association with chaos and violence. Its publicity has also led more scholars in fields such asanthropology andhistory to engage with the anarchist movement, although contemporary anarchism favours actions overacademic theory.[110] Various anarchist groups, tendencies, and schools of thought exist today, making it difficult to describe the contemporary anarchist movement.[111] While theorists and activists have established "relatively stable constellations of anarchist principles", there is no consensus on which principles are core and commentators describe multipleanarchisms, rather than a singularanarchism, in which common principles are shared between schools of anarchism while each group prioritizes those principles differently.Gender equality can be a common principle, although it ranks as a higher priority to anarcha-feminists than anarcho-communists.[112]
Anarchists are generally committed against coercive authority in all forms, namely "all centralized andhierarchical forms of government (e.g., monarchy, representative democracy, state socialism, etc.), economic class systems (e.g., capitalism,Bolshevism,feudalism,slavery, etc.), autocratic religions (e.g.,fundamentalist Islam,Roman Catholicism, etc.),patriarchy,heterosexism,white supremacy, andimperialism."[113] Anarchist schools disagree on the methods by which these forms should be opposed.[114] The principle ofequal liberty is closer to anarchist political ethics in that it transcends both the liberal and socialist traditions. This entails that liberty and equality cannot be implemented within the state, resulting in the questioning of all forms of domination and hierarchy.[115]
Tactics
Anarchists' tactics take various forms but in general serve two major goals, namely, to first opposethe Establishment and secondly to promote anarchist ethics and reflect an anarchist vision of society, illustrating theunity of means and ends.[116] A broad categorisation can be made between aims to destroy oppressive states and institutions by revolutionary means on one hand and aims to change society through evolutionary means on the other.[117] Evolutionary tactics embracenonviolence and take a gradual approach to anarchist aims, although there is significant overlap between the two.[118]
Anarchist tactics have shifted during the course of the last century. Anarchists during the early 20th century focused more on strikes and militancy while contemporary anarchists use abroader array of approaches.[119]
During the classical era, anarchists had a militant tendency. Not only did they confront state armed forces, as in Spain and Ukraine, but some of them also employed terrorism aspropaganda of the deed. Assassination attempts were carried out againstheads of state, some of which were successful. Anarchists also took part in revolutions.[120] Many anarchists, especially theGalleanists, believed that these attempts would be the impetus for a revolution against capitalism and the state.[121] Many of these attacks were done by individual assailants and the majority took place in the late 1870s, the early 1880s and the 1890s, with some still occurring in the early 1900s.[122] Their decrease in prevalence was the result of further judicial power and of targeting and cataloging by state institutions.[123]
Anarchist perspectives towards violence have always been controversial.[124]Anarcho-pacifists advocate for non-violence means to achieve their stateless, nonviolent ends.[125] Other anarchist groups advocatedirect action, a tactic which can include acts ofsabotage orterrorism. This attitude was quite prominent a century ago when seeing the state as atyrant and some anarchists believing that they had every right to oppose its oppression by any means possible.[126]Emma Goldman andErrico Malatesta, who were proponents of limited use of violence, stated that violence is merely a reaction to state violence as anecessary evil.[127]
Anarchists took an active role in strike actions, although they tended to be antipathetic to formalsyndicalism, seeing it asreformist. They saw it as a part of the movement which sought to overthrow the state and capitalism.[128] Anarchists also reinforced their propagandawithin the arts, some of whom practicednaturism andnudism. Those anarchists also built communities which were based on friendship and were involved in the news media.[129]
Revolutionary
Black bloc protesters parading anarcho-communism imagery such as the motto "No War but the Class War"
In the current era,Italian anarchistAlfredo Bonanno, a proponent ofinsurrectionary anarchism, has reinstated the debate on violence by rejecting the nonviolence tactic adopted since the late 19th century by Kropotkin and other prominent anarchists afterwards. Both Bonanno and the French groupThe Invisible Committee advocate for small, informal affiliation groups, where each member is responsible for their own actions but works together to bring down oppression usingsabotage and other violent means against state, capitalism, and other enemies.Members of The Invisible Committee were arrested in 2008 on various charges, terrorism included.[130]
Overall, contemporary anarchists are much less violent and militant than their ideological ancestors. They mostly engage in confronting the police during demonstrations and riots, especially in countries such asCanada,Greece, andMexico. Militant black bloc protest groups are known for clashing with the police;[131] however, anarchists not only clash with state operators, they also engage in the struggle againstfascists,racists, andother bigots, takinganti-fascist action and mobilizing to prevent hate rallies from happening.[132]
Evolutionary
Anarchists commonly employdirect action. This can take the form of disrupting and protesting against unjust hierarchy, or the form of self-managing their lives through the creation of counter-institutions such ascommunes and non-hierarchical collectives.[117] Decision-making is often handled in an anti-authoritarian way, with everyone havingequal say in each decision, an approach known ashorizontalism.[133] Contemporary-era anarchists have been engaging with variousgrassroots movements that are more or less based on horizontalism, although not explicitly anarchist, respecting personal autonomy and participating in mass activism such as strikes and demonstrations. In contrast with the "big-A Anarchism" of the classical era, the newly coined term "small-a anarchism" signals their tendency not to base their thoughts and actions on classical-era anarchism or to refer to classical anarchists such as Peter Kropotkin and Pierre-Joseph Proudhon to justify their opinions. Those anarchists would rather base their thought and praxis on their own experience, which they will later theorize.[134]
The concept ofprefigurative politics is enacted by many contemporary anarchist groups, striving to embody the principles, organization and tactics of the changed social structure they hope to bring about. As part of this the decision-making process of small anarchist affinity groups plays a significant tactical role.[135] Anarchists have employed various methods to build a rough consensus among members of their group without the need of a leader or a leading group. One way is for an individual from the group to play the role offacilitator to help achieve aconsensus without taking part in the discussion themselves or promoting a specific point. Minorities usually accept rough consensus, except when they feel the proposal contradicts anarchist ethics, goals and values. Anarchists usually form small groups (5–20 individuals) to enhance autonomy and friendships among their members. These kinds of groups more often than not interconnect with each other, forming larger networks. Anarchists still support and participate in strikes, especiallywildcat strikes as these are leaderless strikes not organised centrally by a syndicate.[136]
As in the past, newspapers and journals are used, and anarchists have gone online to spread their message. Anarchists have found it easier to create websites because of distributional and other difficulties, hosting electronic libraries and other portals.[137] Anarchists were also involved in developing various software that are available for free. The way thesehacktivists work to develop and distribute resembles the anarchist ideals, especially when it comes to preserving users' privacy fromstate surveillance.[138]
Anarchists organize themselves tosquat and reclaimpublic spaces. During important events such as protests and when spaces are being occupied, they are often calledTemporary Autonomous Zones (TAZ), spaces where art, poetry, andsurrealism are blended to display the anarchist ideal.[139] As seen by anarchists,squatting is a way to regain urban space from the capitalist market, serving pragmatical needs and also being an exemplary direct action.[140] Acquiring space enables anarchists to experiment with their ideas and build social bonds.[141] Adding up these tactics while having in mind that not all anarchists share the same attitudes towards them, along with various forms of protesting at highly symbolic events, make up acarnivalesque atmosphere that is part of contemporary anarchist vividity.[142]
Key issues
As anarchism is a philosophy that embodies many diverse attitudes, tendencies, and schools of thought, disagreement over questions of values, ideology, andtactics is common. Its diversity has led to widely different uses of identical terms among different anarchist traditions which has created a number ofdefinitional concerns in anarchist theory. The compatibility ofcapitalism,[143]nationalism, andreligion with anarchism is widely disputed, and anarchism enjoys complex relationships with ideologies such ascommunism,collectivism,Marxism, andtrade unionism. Anarchists may be motivated byhumanism,divine authority,enlightened self-interest,veganism, or any number of alternative ethical doctrines. Phenomena such ascivilisation, technology (e.g. within anarcho-primitivism), and thedemocratic process may be sharply criticised within some anarchist tendencies and simultaneously lauded in others.[144]
The state
Anarchist protesters inBoston opposing state-waged war
Objection to thestate and its institutions is asine qua non of anarchism.[145] Anarchists consider the state as a tool of domination and believe it to be illegitimate regardless of its political tendencies. Instead of people being able to control the aspects of their life, major decisions are taken by a small elite. Authority ultimately rests solely on power, regardless of whether that power isopen ortransparent, as it still has the ability to coerce people. Another anarchist argument against states is that the people constituting a government, even the most altruistic among officials, will unavoidably seek to gain more power, leading to corruption. Anarchists consider the idea that the state is the collective will of the people to be an unachievable fiction due to the fact that theruling class is distinct from the rest of society.[146]
Specific anarchist attitudes towards the state vary.Robert Paul Wolff believed that the tension between authority and autonomy would mean the state could never be legitimate. Bakunin saw the state as meaning "coercion, domination by means of coercion, camouflaged if possible but unceremonious and overt if need be."A. John Simmons andLeslie Green, who leaned toward philosophical anarchism, believed that the state could be legitimate if it is governed by consensus, although they saw this as highly unlikely.[147] Beliefs on how to abolish the state also differ.[148]
Asgender andsexuality carry along them dynamics of hierarchy, many anarchists address, analyse, and oppose the suppression of one's autonomy imposed by gender roles.[149]
Sexuality was not often discussed by classical anarchists but the few that did felt that an anarchist society would lead to sexuality naturally developing.[150] Sexual violence was a concern for anarchists such asBenjamin Tucker, who opposedage of consent laws, believing they would benefit predatory men.[151] A historical current that arose and flourished during 1890 and 1920 within anarchism wasfree love. In contemporary anarchism, this current survives as a tendency to supportpolyamory,relationship anarchy, andqueer anarchism.[152] Free love advocates were against marriage, which they saw as a way of men imposing authority over women, largely because marriage law greatly favoured the power of men. The notion of free love was much broader and included a critique of the established order that limited women's sexual freedom and pleasure.[153] Those free love movements contributed to the establishment of communal houses, where large groups of travelers, anarchists and other activists slept in beds together.[154] Free love had roots both in Europe and the United States; however, some anarchists struggled with the jealousy that arose from free love.[155] Anarchist feminists were advocates of free love, against marriage, andpro-choice (using a contemporary term), and had a similar agenda. Anarchist and non-anarchist feminists differed onsuffrage but were supportive of one another.[156]
During the second half of the 20th century, anarchism intermingled with thesecond wave of feminism, radicalising some currents of the feminist movement and being influenced as well. By the latest decades of the 20th century, anarchists and feminists were advocating for the rights and autonomy of women, gays, queers and other marginalised groups, with some feminist thinkers suggesting a fusion of the two currents.[157] With thethird wave of feminism, sexual identity andcompulsory heterosexuality became a subject of study for anarchists, yielding apost-structuralist critique ofsexual normality.[158] Some anarchists distanced themselves from this line of thinking, suggesting that it leaned towards an individualism that was dropping the cause of social liberation.[159]
Anarchist vs. statist perspectives on education Ruth Kinna (2019)[160]
Anarchist education
State education
Concept
Education as self-mastery
Education as service
Management
Community based
State run
Methods
Practice-based learning
Vocational training
Aims
Being a critical member of society
Being a productive member of society
The interest of anarchists in education stretches back to the first emergence of classical anarchism. Anarchists consider proper education, one which sets the foundations of the future autonomy of the individual and the society, to be an act ofmutual aid.[161] Anarchist writers such as William Godwin (Political Justice) and Max Stirner ("The False Principle of Our Education") attacked bothstate education and private education as another means by which the ruling class replicate their privileges.[162]
In 1901,Catalan anarchist and free thinkerFrancisco Ferrer established theEscuela Moderna in Barcelona as an opposition to the established education system which was dictated largely by the Catholic Church.[163] Ferrer's approach was secular, rejecting both state and church involvement in the educational process while giving pupils large amounts of autonomy in planning their work and attendance. Ferrer aimed to educate the working class and explicitly sought to fosterclass consciousness among students. The school closed after constant harassment by the state and Ferrer was later arrested. Nonetheless, his ideas formed the inspiration for a series ofmodern schools around the world.[164]Christian anarchistLeo Tolstoy, who published the essayEducation and Culture, also established a similar school with its founding principle being that "for education to be effective it had to be free."[165] In a similar token,A. S. Neill founded what became theSummerhill School in 1921, also declaring being free from coercion.[166]
Anarchist education is based largely on the idea that a child's right to develop freely and without manipulation ought to be respected and that rationality would lead children to morally good conclusions; however, there has been little consensus among anarchist figures as to what constitutesmanipulation. Ferrer believed that moral indoctrination was necessary and explicitly taught pupils that equality, liberty andsocial justice were not possible under capitalism, along with other critiques of government and nationalism.[167]
Late 20th century and contemporary anarchist writers (Paul Goodman,Herbert Read, andColin Ward) intensified and expanded the anarchist critique ofstate education, largely focusing on the need for a system that focuses on children's creativity rather than on their ability to attain a career or participate inconsumerism as part of a consumer society.[168] Contemporary anarchists such as Ward claim that state education serves to perpetuatesocioeconomic inequality.[169]
While few anarchist education institutions have survived to the modern-day, major tenets of anarchist schools, among them respect forchild autonomy and relying on reasoning rather than indoctrination as a teaching method, have spread among mainstream educational institutions. Judith Suissa names three schools as explicitly anarchists' schools, namely the Free Skool Santa Cruz in the United States which is part of a wider American-Canadian network of schools, the Self-Managed Learning College inBrighton, England, and the Paideia School in Spain.[170]
Les chataigniers a Osny (1888) by anarchist painterCamille Pissarro is a notable example of blending anarchism and the arts.[171]
The connection between anarchism and art was quite profound during the classical era of anarchism, especially among artistic currents that were developing during that era such as futurists, surrealists and others.[172] In literature, anarchism was mostly associated with theNew Apocalyptics and theneo-romanticism movement.[173] In music, anarchism has been associated with music scenes such aspunk.[174] Anarchists such asLeo Tolstoy andHerbert Read stated that the border between the artist and the non-artist, what separates art from a daily act, is a construct produced by the alienation caused by capitalism and it prevents humans from living a joyful life.[175]
Other anarchists advocated for or used art as a means to achieve anarchist ends.[176] In his bookBreaking the Spell: A History of Anarchist Filmmakers, Videotape Guerrillas, and Digital Ninjas, Chris Robé claims that "anarchist-inflected practices have increasingly structured movement-based video activism."[177] Throughout the 20th century, many prominent anarchists (Peter Kropotkin,Emma Goldman,Gustav Landauer andCamillo Berneri) and publications such asAnarchy wrote about matters pertaining to the arts.[178]
Three overlapping properties made art useful to anarchists. It could depict a critique of existing society and hierarchies, serve as a prefigurative tool to reflect the anarchist ideal society and even turn into a means of direct action such as in protests. As it appeals to both emotion and reason, art could appeal to the whole human and have a powerful effect.[179] The 19th-centuryneo-impressionist movement had an ecological aesthetic and offered an example of an anarchist perception of the road towards socialism.[180] InLes chataigniers a Osny by anarchist painterCamille Pissarro, the blending of aesthetic and social harmony is prefiguring an ideal anarchistic agrarian community.[171]
Criticism
The most common critique of anarchism is the assertion that humans cannotself-govern and so a state is necessary for human survival. PhilosopherBertrand Russell supported this critique, stating that "[p]eace and war,tariffs, regulations ofsanitary conditions and the sale of noxiousdrugs, the preservation of a just system of distribution: these, among others, are functions which could hardly be performed in a community in which there was no central government."[181] Another common criticism of anarchism is that it fits a world ofisolation in which only the small enough entities can be self-governing; a response would be that major anarchist thinkers advocated anarchist federalism.[182]
Another criticism of anarchism is the belief that it is inherently unstable: that an anarchist society would inevitably evolve back into a state.Thomas Hobbes and other early social contract theorists argued that the state emerges in response to natural anarchy to protect the people's interests and keep order. PhilosopherRobert Nozick argued that a "night-watchman state", or minarchy, would emerge from anarchy through the process of aninvisible hand, in which people would exercise their liberty and buy protection from protection agencies, evolving into a minimal state. Anarchists reject these criticisms by arguing that humans in astate of nature would not just be in a state of war.Anarcho-primitivists in particular argue that humans were better off in a state of nature in small tribes living close to the land, while anarchists in general argue that the negatives of state organization, such as hierarchies, monopolies and inequality, outweigh the benefits.[183]
Philosophy lecturer Andrew G. Fiala composed a list of common arguments against anarchism which includes critiques such as that anarchism is innately related to violence and destruction, not only in the pragmatic world, such as at protests, but in the world of ethics as well. Secondly, anarchism is evaluated as unfeasible or utopian since the state cannot be defeated practically. This line of arguments most often calls for political action within the system to reform it. The third argument is that anarchism is self-contradictory as a ruling theory that has no ruling theory. Anarchism also calls for collective action while endorsing the autonomy of the individual, hence no collective action can be taken. Lastly, Fiala mentions a critique towards philosophical anarchism of being ineffective (all talk and thoughts) and in the meantime capitalism and bourgeois class remains strong.[184]
Philosophical anarchism has met the criticism of members of academia following the release of pro-anarchist books such asA. John Simmons'Moral Principles and Political Obligations.[185] Law professor William A. Edmundson authored an essay to argue against three major philosophical anarchist principles which he finds fallacious. Edmundson says that while the individual does not owe the state a duty of obedience, this does not imply that anarchism is the inevitable conclusion and the state is still morally legitimate.[186] InThe Problem of Political Authority,Michael Huemer defends philosophical anarchism,[187] claiming that "political authority is a moral illusion."[188]
One of the earliest criticisms is that anarchism defies and fails to understand the biological inclination to authority.[189]Joseph Raz states that the acceptance of authority implies the belief that following their instructions will afford more success.[190] Raz believes that this argument is true in following both authorities' successful and mistaken instruction.[191] Anarchists reject this criticism because challenging or disobeying authority does not entail the disappearance of its advantages by acknowledging authority such as doctors or lawyers as reliable, nor does it involve a complete surrender of independent judgment.[192] Anarchist perception of human nature, rejection of the state, and commitment to social revolution has been criticised by academics as naive, overly simplistic, and unrealistic, respectively.[193] Classical anarchism has been criticised for relying too heavily on the belief that the abolition of the state will lead to human cooperation prospering.[150]
Friedrich Engels, considered to be one of the principal founders of Marxism, criticised anarchism's anti-authoritarianism as inherently counter-revolutionary because in his view a revolution is by itself authoritarian.[194] AcademicJohn Molyneux writes in his bookAnarchism: A Marxist Criticism that "anarchism cannot win", believing that it lacks the ability to properly implement its ideas.[195] The Marxist criticism of anarchism is that it has a utopian character because all individuals should have anarchist views and values. According to the Marxist view, that a social idea would follow directly from this human ideal and out of the free will of every individual formed its essence. Marxists state that this contradiction was responsible for their inability to act. In the anarchist vision, the conflict between liberty and equality was resolved through coexistence and intertwining.[196]
Anarcho-communistAlbert Meltzer acknowledged "Marx's quite sensible analysis" that anarchism was the movement of formerly self-employed, independent-minded, individualistic, intrepid, advanced craftsmen and artisans who had been ruined by capitalistic industrialization or even war and then driven to factories; even so, they refused to subject themselves to factory discipline, party leadership, and State control, were prone to violence when frustrated, and advocated seizing factories only to break down mass production and return to craftsmanship.[197]
^InAnarchism: From Theory to Practice (1970),[15] anarchist historianDaniel Guérin described it as a synonym forlibertarian socialism, and wrote that anarchism "is really a synonym for socialism. The anarchist is primarily a socialist whose aim is to abolish the exploitation of man by man. Anarchism is only one of the streams of socialist thought, that stream whose main components are concern for liberty and haste to abolish the State."[16] In his many works on anarchism, historianNoam Chomsky describes anarchism, alongsidelibertarian Marxism, as thelibertarian wing ofsocialism.[17]
^Herbert L. Osgood claimed that anarchism is "the extreme antithesis" ofauthoritarian communism andstate socialism.[18]Peter Marshall states that "[i]n general anarchism is closer to socialism than liberalism. ... Anarchism finds itself largely in the socialist camp, but it also has outriders in liberalism. It cannot be reduced to socialism, and is best seen as a separate and distinctive doctrine."[12] According toJeremy Jennings, "[i]t is hard not to conclude that these ideas", referring toanarcho-capitalism, "are described as anarchist only on the basis of a misunderstanding of what anarchism is." Jennings adds that "anarchism does not stand for the untrammelled freedom of the individual (as the 'anarcho-capitalists' appear to believe) but, as we have already seen, for the extension of individuality and community."[23]Nicolas Walter wrote that "anarchism does derive from liberalism and socialism both historically and ideologically. ... In a sense, anarchists always remain liberals and socialists, and whenever they reject what is good in either they betray anarchism itself. ... We are liberals but more so, and socialists but more so."[21] Michael Newman includes anarchism as one of manysocialist traditions, especially the more socialist-aligned tradition following Proudhon andMikhail Bakunin.[19]Brian Morris argues that it is "conceptually and historically misleading" to "create a dichotomy between socialism and anarchism."[20]
^One common definition adopted by anarchists is that anarchism is a cluster of political philosophies opposingauthority andhierarchical organisation, includingcapitalism,nationalism, thestate, and all associated institutions, in the conduct of allhuman relations in favour of a society based ondecentralisation,freedom, andvoluntary association. Scholars highlight that this definition has the same shortcomings as the definition based on anti-authoritarianism (a posteriori conclusion), anti-statism (anarchism is much more than that),[25] and etymology (negation of rulers).[26]
Citations
^Fiala, Andrew (2021), Zalta, Edward N. (ed.),"Anarchism",The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Winter 2021 ed.), Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University, retrieved23 February 2025
^Fiala, Andrew (2021),"Anarchism", in Zalta, Edward N. (ed.),The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Winter 2021 ed.), Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University, retrieved17 June 2023
Antliff, Mark (1998). "Cubism, Futurism, Anarchism: The 'Aestheticism' of the "Action d'art" Group, 1906–1920".Oxford Art Journal.21 (2):101–120.doi:10.1093/oxartj/21.2.99.JSTOR1360616.
Baár, Monika; Falina, Maria; Janowski, Maciej; Kopeček, Michal; Trencsényi, Balázs Trencsényi (2016).A History of Modern Political Thought in East Central Europe: Negotiating Modernity in the 'Long Nineteenth Century'. Vol. I. Oxford:Oxford University Press.ISBN978-0-1910-5695-6.
Johnson, Charles (2008). "Liberty, Equality, Solidarity Toward a Dialectical Anarchism". In Long, Roderick T.;Machan, Tibor R. (eds.).Anarchism/Minarchism: Is a Government Part of a Free Country?.Ashgate Publishing. pp. 155–188.ISBN978-0-7546-6066-8.
Klosko, George (1999). "More than Obligation – William A. Edmundson: Three Anarchical Fallacies: An Essay on Political Authority".The Review of Politics.61 (3):536–538.doi:10.1017/S0034670500028989.ISSN1748-6858.S2CID144417469.
Kristjánsson, Kristján (2000). "Three Anarchical Fallacies: An Essay on Political Authority by William A. Edmundson".Mind.109 (436):896–900.JSTOR2660038.
Lutz, James M.; Ulmschneider, Georgia Wralstad (2019). "Civil Liberties, National Security and U.S. Courts in Times of Terrorism".Perspectives on Terrorism.13 (6):43–57.JSTOR26853740.
Nesser, Petter (2012). "Research Note: Single Actor Terrorism: Scope, Characteristics and Explanations".Perspectives on Terrorism.6 (6):61–73.JSTOR26296894.
Norris, Jesse J. (2020). "Idiosyncratic Terrorism: Disaggregating an Undertheorized Concept".Perspectives on Terrorism.14 (3).ISSN2334-3745.JSTOR26918296s.
Shannon, Deric (2019). "Anti-Capitalism and Libertarian Political Economy". InLevy, Carl; Adams, Matthew S. (eds.).The Palgrave Handbook of Anarchism.Springer Publishing. pp. 91–106.ISBN978-3-3197-5620-2.
Skirda, Alexandre (2002).Facing the Enemy: A History of Anarchist Organization From Proudhon to May 1968.AK Press.ISBN978-1-9025-9319-7.
—— (2019). "Tactics: Conceptions of Social Change, Revolution, and Anarchist Organisation". InLevy, Carl; Adams, Matthew S. (eds.).The Palgrave Handbook of Anarchism.Springer Publishing.ISBN978-3-3197-5620-2.
Miller, Martin A.; Dirlik, Arif; Rosemont, Franklin; Augustyn, Adam; Duignan, Brian; Lotha, Gloria (2019)."Anarchism In The Arts".Encyclopædia Britannica.Archived from the original on 28 November 2020. Retrieved31 July 2020.
Esenwein, George (1989).Anarchist Ideology and the Working-Class Movement in Spain, 1868–1898. Berkeley: University of California Press.ISBN978-0-5200-6398-3.
Huemer, Michael (2012).The Problem of Political Authority: An Examination of the Right to Coerce and the Duty to Obey. London:Palgrave Macmillan. p. 137.ISBN978-1-1372-8164-7. A defence of philosophical anarchism, stating that "both kinds of 'anarchism' [i.e. philosophical and political anarchism] are philosophical and political claims."
_-_BEIC_6353768.jpg)
