JohnP.Clark,"WhatIsAnarchism?"inJ.RolandPennock,&JohnW.Chapman,eds.,Anarchism:NomosXIX.

NewYork:NewYorkUniversityPress,1978.

WHATISANARCHISM?
JOHNP.CLARK

Muchoftherecentphilosophicaldiscussionofanarchismexhibitsadisturbinglackofclaritybecauseof
widespreadfailureonthepartofpoliticaltheoriststodefinetermssuchas"anarchy,""anarchist,"and"anarchism"
withsufficientcare.Thisfailureresults,Ibelieve,fromneglectofanumberoftopicsrelevanttothesubject,
including(tomentionthemostimportantofthese)thenatureofclassicalanarchisttheory,thehistoryofthe
anarchistmovement,andnumerousendeavorstoapplyanarchisttheoryandpracticetocontemporaryrealities.In
thisessayanattemptwillbemadetoformulateadefinitionwhichtakesintoaccountallsignificantaspectsof
anarchism:boththeoryandpractice,bothpasthistoricalformsandcontemporarymanifestations.Atthesametime,
thoseconceptsofanarchismwhichdisregardanyoftheseimportantelements,orwhichmisrepresenttheanarchist
position,willbecriticized.

I.OVERSIMPLIFICATIONSOFANARCHISM

AccordingtoGeorgeWoodcock,oneofthemostjudicioushistoriansofanarchism,"thefirstthingtoguardagainst"
indiscussingthetopicissimplicity.1Unfortunately,mostcommentatorsonthesubject,farfromguardingagainst
oversimplification,eagerlygraspatthemostsimplisticandnontechnicalsensesoftheterm,andseemtohavelittle
interestinanalyzingthephenomenontowhichitrefers.Thus,itisnotunusualforscholarstogathernomore
evidenceaboutthenatureofanarchismthanthederivationoftheterm,afterwhichtheycanascendtotheheightsof
abstraction,payingattentionneithertosocialhistorynortothehistoryofideas.Sinceanarchymeans"without
rule,"itissaid,ananarchistisonewhoadvocatesasocietyinwhichrulingisabolished,andanarchismisthe
theorythatsuchasocietyisnecessary.Inalmosteverycasetheconclusiondrawnfromthissuperficialanalysisis
thatsuchagoalisobviouslybeyondourreach,andthatanarchismshouldthereforebedismissedasnaive
utopianism.Thiswillnotdo.AsIhopetoshow,suchanapproachfailsabysmallytodojusticetoanarchism,as,in
fact,doesanydefinitionwhichattemptstodefinethetermbyonesimpleidea.Iwouldliketodiscusssuchsimple
definitionsfurtherbeforepointingoutadditionaldifficultiesinanalyzinganarchism.

TheassumptionwhichunderliesthesortofdefinitionIamcriticizingisthatanarchismcanbeidentifiedthrough
oneessentialcharacteristicthatdistinguishesitfromallothersocialandpoliticalpositions.Mostdefinitionsofthis
typecharacterizeanarchismintermsofsomeprincipleorsomeinstitutionthatitopposes.Onesuchdefinition
wouldseeanarchismasamovementthatisdefinedbyitscompleterejectionofgovernment.Agreatdealof
evidencefromtheanarchisttraditioncouldbepointedoutinsupportofthisview.Thus,inhisEncyclopaedia
Britannicaarticleonanarchism,Kropotkindefinesitis"aprincipleortheoryoflifeandconductinwhichsocietyis
conceivedwithoutgovernment."2EmmaGoldman,inheressay,"Anarchism,"definesitas"thetheorythatall
formsofgovernmentrestonviolence,andarethereforewrongandharmful,aswellasunnecessary."3Awell
knowncontemporaryanarchist,ColinWard(editorofthefirstseriesofthejournalAnarchy),definesanarchyas
"theabsenceofgovernment,"4andanarchismas"theideathatitispossibleanddesirableforsocietytoorganize
itselfwithoutgovernment."5Insomedefinitions,thatwhichisrejectedisidentified,notasgovernment,butrather
asthepowerthatcontrolsgovernment.Insupportofthisposition,onecouldciteProudhon,whodefinesanarchyas
"theabsenceofarulerorasovereign."6Anumberofwriterswouldtaketheessenceofanarchismtobeitsattack
onthestate,whichisoftendistinguishedfromgovernment,aswillbediscussedindetaillater.Thiscanbe
supportedbyBakunin'sstatementthat"thesystemofAnarchism...aimsattheabolitionoftheState,"7tomention
justoneofmanysuchstatementsbymajoranarchisttheorists.Woodcockassertsthat"thecommonelementuniting
allitsforms"isitsaimof"thereplacementoftheauthoritarianstatebysomeformofnongovernmental
cooperationbetweenfreeindividuals."8Otherwritersholdthatitisnotmerelythestateorpoliticalauthority,butin
factauthorityitselfwhichanarchismopposes.SebastienFaureproclaimsthat"whoeverdeniesauthorityandfights
againstitisananarchist."9Malatestaacceptstheviewthatanarchymeans"withoutgovernment"butheexpands
thedefinitiontomean"withoutanyconstitutedauthority."10Recently,Wardhassaidthatanarchistsopposethe
"principleofauthority,"11whileRunkle,inhisattackonanarchism,maintainsthatit"opposesauthorityinallits
forms."12WhileDanielGuerinisinmostcasesaperceptivecommentatoronanarchism,atonepointhe
characterizesitinawaywhichisreminiscentofthemostsuperficialanduncriticalviews.Hegoessofarasto
suggestthattheanarchistisonewho"rejectssocietyasawhole."13Anegativecharacterizationwhichisprobably
themostadequateofall,ifanyistobetakeninisolation,ismadebyMalatesta,whoholdsthatanarchistsdesire
"thecompletedestructionofthedominationandexploitationofmanbyman."14Recently,MurrayBookchinhas
describedanarchismintermsofitsoppositiontoallformsofdominationandalltypesofhierarchical
organization.15

Whilefewertheorists(andespeciallynonanarchists)haveattemptedtodefineanarchismintermsofitspositive
side,thereareexamplesofgeneralizationsaboutitsproposals.Itmightbeseen,forexample,asatheoryof
voluntaryassociation.Kropotkindescribesanarchismasseekingsocialorder"byfreeagreementsbetweenthe
variousgroups,territorialandprofessional,freelyconstitutedforthesakeofproductionandconsumption."16
Proudhonsaysthatinanarchism"thenotionofGovernmentissucceededbythatofContract."17Thisideaof
voluntaryassociationisalsoincludedinWoodcock'sreference,citedabove,to"cooperationbetweenfree
individuals."18Anarchismmightalsobedefinedasatheoryofdecentralization.PaulGoodmannotesthatif
anarchymeans"lackoforderandplanning,"then"mostAnarchists,liketheanarchosyndicalistsorthe
communityanarchists,havenotbeen'anarchists'either,butdecentralists."19Acloselyrelatedconceptdescriptive
ofanarchismisfederalism.Bakuninholdsthatanarchismproposes"anorganizationfrombelowupward,bymeans
ofafederation."20Anotherwayofdefininganarchismisbyitsadvocacyoffreedom.Runkleholdsthat"the
essenceofanarchismisindividualliberty."21AmorespecificbutrelatedconceptionissuggestedbyBookchin,
whodescribesthegoalas"asituationinwhichmenliberatenotonly'history,'butalltheimmediatecircumstances
oftheireverydaylives."22

Thus,anarchismcanbedescribednotonlyasatheorythatopposessuchthingsasgovernment,thestate,authority,
ordomination,butalsoasatheorythatproposesvoluntarism,decentralization,orfreedom.Yettodefineanarchism
intermsofitsoppositionorsupportforanyorallofthesewouldbeinadequate.Infact,theanarchistswhohave
beencited,whiletheysometimespresentillconsidered,simplisticdefinitions,areawareofthecomplexityofthe
theorythattheyespouse,andtheirworks,whentakenasawhole,pointtothenecessityofamorecomprehensive
definition.23

Ofallthosewhohaveattemptedtodefineanarchism,tomyknowledgeonlyone,Woodcock,clearlyandconcisely
indicatestheelementsthatwillbetakenheretoconstituteaminimumdefinitionofanarchism.Accordingto
Woodcock,"historically,anarchismisadoctrinewhichposesacriticismofexistingsocietyaviewofadesirable
futuresocietyandameansofpassingfromonetotheother."24Inthisdiscussion,thenatureofthesethreecriteria
foranarchisttheorywillbeelaboratedupon,andafourth,whichisonlyimpliedbyWoodcock,willbeadded.At
thispoint,itwillmerelybepointedoutthatanydefinitionwhichreducesanarchismtoasingledimension,suchas
itscriticalelement,mustbejudgedseriouslyinadequate.

II.MISINTERPRETATIONSOFANARCHISM
Notallmisunderstandingofthenatureofanarchismresultsfromoversimplification.Aswasmentionedearlier,one
ofthemostseriousfaultsofmostdiscussionsofanarchismisneglectofhistoricalanarchistthoughtandpractice.
Theparadoxicalresultisthatwefindpoliticaltheoristsattackingananarchismthathasexistedprimarilyasa
fictioninthemindsofitsopponents,andwefindphilosophersdefendingananarchismthatwouldbe
unrecognizabletothevastmajorityofanarchiststhroughouthistory(includingthepresent).Forexample,Benjamin
Barber,inhisessay"PoetryandRevolution:TheAnarchistasReactionary,"repeatstheclicheoftheirrationally
Utopiannatureofanarchism."Theanarchists"hesays,"managetostandthenaturalisticfallacyonitshead:notthat
naturalman,asheis,iswhatheoughttobebutthatUtopianman,astheanarchistconceivesheoughttobe,isin
factwhatmanis."25Barbercontendsfurtherthatanarchismhasnoideaofpoliticalrealities,andisconcerned
insteadwitharomanticistexhortationtorevolution."Itmustrejectpoliticaltheoryitselfinfavorofpoetryand
revolution."26IsaacKramnickdevelopsBarber'sviewpointfurtherinhisarticle"OnAnarchismandtheReal
World:WilliamGodwinandRadicalEngland."Kramnickholdsthat"whatreplacespoliticsfortheanarchistis
eithereducationortheater,"27andthat,again,anarchistsaretotallyoutoftouchwithreality.28Runkle,inhisbook
Anarchism:OldandNew,assertsthat"thestudentleft,theradicalright,andexistentialismseem,atleast
superficially,tobecontemporaryformsofanarchism."29Runkledevoteshalfhisbooktothedevelopmentofthis
view,whichhecorrectlyseesassuperficial.
ThewritingsofBarber,Kramnick,andRunkleexhibitverywelltheconsequencesofanignoranceofmany
elementsoftheanarchisttradition,andoftheselectiveuseofevidenceaboutthattraditiontoconstructmisleading
generalizations.Barber'schargeofutopianismoverlooksthemanyconcreteandpracticalproposalsthatanarchists
havepresented,whilehisbeliefthattheanarchistviewofhumannatureisnaivelyoptimisticisaperennialhalf
truththatdeservestobecriticallyexamined.Kramnick'sviewthatanarchiststrategyhasbeenlimitedprimarilyto
educationandtheatricsshowsanalmostinconceivabledisregardforthehistoryoftheanarchistmovement.Finally,
Runkle'scarelessattributionofrelationsbetweenanarchismandrecentpoliticalandphilosophicaltendenciesis
coupledwithanapparentunawarenessoftheexistenceofatrue"newanarchism,"whichhassoughttosynthesize
theinsightsofclassicalanarchismwithdevelopmentssuchasadvancedtechnologyandecologicaltheory.

Whilethesevariousattacksonanarchismdoagreatdealtoconfusetheissue,someofitsphilosophicaldefenders
succeedonlyinincreasingthechaos.Theworkthathasdonemosttoretardmeaningfulanalysisandcriticismof
theanarchistpositionisWolffsInDefenseofAnarchism.30Ashiscriticshaverightlypointedout,Wolffsargument
thatautonomyandmoralauthorityareincompatibleconstitutesneitheradefenseofanarchismasapoliticaltheory
noraproofoftheunjustifiablenatureofthestateandgovernment.31WhateversupportWolffsethicalposition
mightgivetoanarchismiseffectivelyunderminedbyhisstatementthatheseesnopracticalproposalsthatfollow
fromhistheoreticalacceptanceofanarchism.32Anarchistshavedifferedgreatlyontheissueofthedegreeof
activismdemandedbytheirposition,butneverbeforetomyknowledgehasanytheoristclaimingtobeananarchist
presentednoproposalsforactionatall.

III.ANARCHISMANDGOVERNMENT
Thewidespreadmisunderstandingofthenatureofanarchismpointstotheneedforacleardefinitionoftheterm,
andthiswillbeattemptedshortly.First,however,twosubjectsaboutwhichthereisparticularlywidespread
confusionmustbeconsidered.Thefirstoftheseconcernstheanarchistviewofgovernment.Ashasbeenindicated,
manywritersaboutanarchismhavetakenoppositiontogovernmenttobethemostdistinctivecharacteristicofthe
theory.Thisis,infact,probablythemostpopularmeansofdefiningtheterm.Muchofthepresentdiscussionbrings
intoquestiontheadequacyofadefinitionofanarchismthatconceivesofitexclusivelyintermsofitsrelationtoone
socialinstitution,evenifthatinstitutionisheldtobethemostimportantone.However,thereisfurtherreasonfor
questioningsuchacharacterization:thedistinctionthatsomeanarchistshavethemselvesmadebetween
governmentandthestate.Whilethererunsthroughallanarchistwritingsanunmitigatedcontemptforthestate,the
anarchistpositionongovernmentisfarfromunequivocalhostility.

AcaseinpointisthethoughtoftheAmericanindividualistanarchist,AlbertJayNock.InNock'sbookOurEnemy
theState,hedistinguishessharplybetweenthestateandgovernment.Government,hesays,consistsof"strictly
negativeintervention"tosecurethenaturalrightsoftheindividual.33Bythishemeansprotectionoflife,liberty,
andpropertyinthestrictestLockeansense.Whensocietyactstopreventoneindividualfromaggressingagainsta
secondindividualwhohasactedpeacefully,suchgovernmentisperfectlyjustifiable.Itisimportanttorealizethat
Nockisnotsupportinggovernmentalprotectionofhugeconcentrationsofwealth,property,oreconomicpower.In
facthearguesquitevehementlythatunlessspecialinterestsaregivenfavorabletreatmentandprotectionthrough
politicalmeans,therecanbenoamassingofvastwealth.Muchofhisbook,whichshowsindividualistanarchismat
itsbest,isdedicatedtoananalysisofstatepowerinAmericanhistory,andtoademonstrationofthewaysinwhich
thestatehassupportedcertainmercantileinterests,especiallythroughlandgrantsandprotectivetariffs.Thestate,
accordingtoNock,ariseswhenpoliticalmeansareusedfortheprotectionofexclusiveinterests.FollowingFranz
Oppenheimer,hecontendsthatthestateoriginatedhistoricallyasthetoolofadominantclass.34Accordingtothis
view,statepowerbeganwiththeconquestofaweaker(probablyagrarian)tribebyastronger(probablyherding)
tribe,thelatterofwhichestablishedasystemofclassruleinordertousetheformerforitslaborpower.Thestate,
Nocksays,hasalwaysmaintainedthisclasscharacter,andstatepowerhasalwaysbeenseenbyspecialinterestsas
analluringmeansofgainingadvantageoverothergroupsinsociety.

Nock'suseoftheterm"government"isquiteatypicalofthatofanarchistsingeneral,sincemosthavenothesitated
tousethetermtorefertotheabusestheyattributetothestate.However,hisideasareseentofitwellintothe
mainstreamofanarchistthoughtwhenexaminedintermsofthescaleofthetwosystemshecompares.Hecontends
thatifthestatewerereplacedby"government"(inhisunusual,limitedsenseoftheterm),thiswouldresultin
somethingveryclosetoJefferson'sproposalfor"ward"government.Undersuchasystem,thefundamentalpolitical
unitwouldbethelocaltownship(forwhichIthinkwemightalsosubstitutetheurbanneighborhood),whichwould
be"therepositoryandsourceofpoliticalauthorityandinitiative."35Actiononalargerscaleshouldbecarriedout,
Nocksays,throughavoluntaryfederationofcommunitiesfortheircommonpurposes.Hebelievesthattheessential
protectivefunctionsofgovernmentcanbeachievedthroughsuchasystem,whileavoidingthedangersof
exploitationthatexistinacentralized,largescalestate.
WhileNockisnotoneofthemostwidelyknownanarchisttheorists(althoughheisoneofthemosteloquentofthe
individualists),ideassimilartohiscanbefoundinthewritingsoftheforemostexponentofanarchistcommunism,
Kropotkin.WhileitistruethatKropotkinholdsthatanarchismaimsattheproductionofasociety"without
government,"36neverthelesshesometimespraisesaconditionofsocietyinwhichsomeelementsofgovernment
remain,whilethestateisnotpresent.InhisessayTheState:ItsHistoricRole,Kropotkindistinguishessharply
betweenthestateandgovernment."SincetherecanbenoStatewithoutgovernment,ithassometimesbeensaid
thatonemustaimattheabsenceofgovernmentandnottheabolitionofthestate."37Kropotkincorrectlyseesthis
strategyasunrealisticinrelationtopracticalpoliticalpossibilities.Thestateinparticularshouldbetheobjectof
immediateattention,foritentailsnotonlypoliticalpowerbutadditionalelements,suchaslargeterritorialareas,
centralizationandtheconcentrationofpowerinthehandsofafew,hierarchicalrelationships,andclass
domination.38Tosuchaninstitution,Kropotkincontraststhemedievalcity,whichhetakestobethebestpolity
developedhistorically.39Whilethesecitieswerenotpartofthenationstate,theycertainlyhadgovernmentsbut
farfromlamentingtheirexistence,Kropotkinhasgreatpraiseforthesegovernmentalinstitutions.He
enthusiasticallyapprovesoftheirassemblies,electedjudges,andlocalmilitias,whichareinaccordwithhisown
ideasaboutdecentralized,participatoryinstitutions.Healsopraisestheirbeliefinarbitrationasopposedto
authoritywithoutconsent,andthesubordinationofmilitarypowertocivilauthority.40Thus,whilehealwayskept
inmindtheultimategoalofdispensingwithgovernmententirely,hewasrealisticenoughtoseethatfroman
anarchistperspectivedecentralizedcommunitygovernmentwasaconsiderableadvancebeyondtheempiresof
ancienttimes,andwouldconstituteprogressbeyondthemodernnationstate.Inviewofthismorecomplexviewof
government,itcanbeseenthatasimpleconceptionofanarchismas"oppositiontogovernment"doesnot
accuratelyrepresentitsposition.

IV.GOALSANDSTRATEGIESINANARCHISM
Thereisafurtherproblemwhich,perhapsmorethananyother,underliesthewidespreadconfusionaboutthenature
ofanarchism.Itdealswiththedistinctionbetweenanarchism'svisionoftheidealsocietyanditsviewofimmediate
action.Stateddifferently,itisthequestionoftherelationbetweenUtopiangoalsandpracticalpossibilities.Several
difficultiesariseinregardtothisquestion.Somewoulddefineananarchistentirelyintermsoftheacceptanceofa
noncoercive,nonauthoritarianUtopiaasthemoralideal.Thus,onewhocandescribewhattheidealsocietymight
belike,expressabeliefthatitmightinsomewaybepossible,andjudgethisidealtobetheonlysystemwhichcan
befullyjustifiedmorallyiscalledananarchist.

Ibelievethatthisisaratherbadmisuseofterminology,iftraditionaldistinctionsaretobemaintainedand
contradictionavoided.Undersuchadefinitionitisclearthatmany(perhapsmost)Marxistswouldqualifyas
anarchists,sincetheyaccepttheidealofthewitheringawayofthestate.41Asmanyanarchists(forexample,
Bakunin)havepointedout,itisonthequestionofpracticalstrategiesthatanarchistsandMarxistspartcompany,
ratherthanontheirvisionsoftheidealsociety.Inmanyways,Kropotkin'sdescriptionofcommunismissimilarto
thatofMarxandEngels.Theanarchist'spointisnotnecessarilythattheMarxists'goaliswrong,butthatgiventhe
methodstheyadvocate,theycanbecertainnevertoreachit.Methodsofachievingchangemustthereforebe
consideredifanarchismisnottobeconfusedwithMarxism(nottomentionothersocialist,andperhapseven
liberal,positionsthatcould,withoutcontradiction,setupthesamelongrangegoal).

ItistruethatweoftencomeacrossarticlesonMarx'sanarchism,butwefindthattheydonotrevealnew
informationshowingthatMarxadvocateddecentralization,selfmanagement,andvoluntaryassociation,northathe
wasasecretadmirerofBakunin.Rather,theydiscussonelimitedaspectofhisposition:hisviewofthefinal
Utopia.RobertTucker'sdiscussionofMarxismandanarchisminTheMarxianRevolutionaryIdeamaybetakenas
anexample.TuckerholdsthatMarxismisanarchistinthesensementioned,but"ifweconsiderAnarchismnotas
anabstractpoliticalphilosophybutasarevolutionarymovementassociatedwithapoliticalphilosophy,thenweare
confrontedwiththefactthatMarxismwasdeeplyatoddswithit."42Thisviewofthematterismuchsuperiorto
thosewhichexhibitnoawarenessoftherelevanceofanarchismtosocialrealities.Yetitisstillinadequate,forthere
isnoneedtolookfortwoanarchismsoneapoliticaltheory,andtheotherasocialpractice.Tuckerdoesthiswhen
heaskshowitis"thatclassicalMarxism,whileembracinganarchismasapoliticalphilosophy,disagreedwith
Anarchismasasocialistideology."43Thisshowsamisunderstandingoftherelationbetweentheoryandpracticein
anarchism.Itisessentialtoanarchismthatendsnotbeseparatedfrommeans,andtherecanbeno"anarchism"ina
fullsensewhichdoesnotasanintegralpartofitstheoreticalframeworkmakedistinctiveproposalsconcerning
practice,andtakeaccountofrealhistoricalconditions.Anarchistpoliticalphilosophyimpliesanarchistactivityin
society.
ItshouldbeapparentfromthediscussionthusfarthattheinterpretationofanarchismasthebeliefthatUtopiacan
beachievedimmediatelyiserroneous.Becauseanarchistshaveacceptedtheidealofanoncoercive,
nonauthoritariansociety,somehaveassumedthattheyautomaticallymustrejectanythingshortoftheidealas
unjustifiable,andthereforedeservingofimmediatedestruction.Theresultisthatanarchismissometimesseenas
implyingadesiretodestroyallestablishedsocialinstitutions,preferablythroughviolence.Yetnoneofthemajor
anarchisttheoriesfromGodwintothepresenthasheldsuchanextremeview,andnoanarchistpopularmovement
haspresentedsuchaproposalaspartofitsprogram.Inspiteofsuchlackofevidence,weoftenfindevenstudents
ofpoliticaltheoryconfusinganarchismandnihilism,andscholarsattendingconferencesonpoliticalphilosophy
questioningwhetheranarchisttheoryhasanynecessarylinkwithbombthrowing.

V.ADEFINITIONOFANARCHISM
Inhopesofclarifyingthemeaningofanarchism,Iwouldliketoproposeadefinitionthatisspecificenoughtobe
recognizableasareasonablecharacterizationofhistoricalanarchismandtodistinguishitfrompoliticalpositions
thathavenottraditionallybeendenominated"anarchist,"andthatisalsogeneralenoughtotakeaccountofthe
wealthofdiversitycontainedwithintheanarchisttradition.Itishopedthatthisdefinitionwilllaythegroundwork
forfurtherclarificationoftheconceptbyothers.

Therearefourelementstothisproposeddefinition,andIbelievethatforonetobedescribedasananarchistina
fullsense,allfourcriteriashouldbemet.Thefoundersofanarchisttheory(Godwin,Proudhon,Bakunin,and
Kropotkin)allfitthisparadigm,andtheprinciplesembodiedthereinareimplicitintheprogramsoftheanarcho
syndicalistandanarchocommunistmovements,whichconstitutethemainstreamofhistoricalanarchistactivism.
Individualistanarchisminmostformsalsofallsunderthedefinition(althoughthereareafewborderlinecases).

Inorderforapoliticaltheorytobecalled"anarchism"inacompletesense,itmustcontain:

1.aviewofanideal,noncoercive,nonauthoritariansociety
2.acriticismofexistingsocietyanditsinstitutions,basedonthisantiauthoritarianideal
3.aviewofhumannaturethatjustifiesthehopeforsignificantprogresstowardtheidealand
4.astrategyforchange,involvingimmediateinstitutionofnoncoercive,nonauthoritarian,and
decentralistalternatives.

Thisdefinitionwouldallowforuseoftheterm"anarchist"inbothastrongandinseveralweakersenses.
Obviously,ananarchistinthestrongestsensewouldexhibitallfourcharacteristics.Yet,one,forexample,who
advocatedanarchistictacticswithoutanexplicitcommitmenttotheanarchistideal,oronewhoacceptedtheideal
butproposeddifferentstrategies,couldonlybecalledan"anarchist"inamorelimitedsense.

VI.THEIDEALOFANARCHISM

"Anarchy"isthetermusuallyappliedtotheidealsocietyforwhichtheanarchiststrives,andbelievestobefully
moral.Itistruethatmanyanarchistsarerathervagueaboutthenatureofthisideal.Thisisthecaseforseveral
reasons.One,whichDeGeorgementions,isthatfree,autonomousindividualswillworkoutsolutionsthatwecan
hardly,inthecontextofpresentsociety,foresee.Furthermore,theanarchistdoesnotwanttobindanyonetoone
visionoftheideal,sincetheacceptanceofpluralismimpliesthatvariousgroupswillcreatenumerousvariationson
thegeneralgoal.However,thisargumentconcerningtheauthoritarianisminherentinsuchprescriptionscanbe
overstated.Thereiscertainlynocontradictionintheideaofananarchistsettingforthafairlyspecificdescriptionof
asocietywouldliveuptotheanarchistcriteriaformoraljustification,solongasitisclearthatthemodelissubject
tocriticismandmodification,andthatothermodelsmightbefoundtoconformatleastasadequatelytothose
criteria.Ashasbeenmentioned,thecriteriaarethatsuchasocietybenoncoerciveandnonauthoritarian,andthatall
formsofdominationbeeliminated.Todescribesuchasociety,onewouldhavetoshowhowinstitutionsmightbe
designedthatwould,ataminimum,eliminatetheneedfortheuseofphysicalforce,government,andthestate.In
viewofthethirdcriterion,thisidealmustbeatleastplausibleinrelationtotheanarchistconceptionofhuman
nature,whichincludesspeculationaboutwhatpeoplearecapableofbecoming,inadditiontoadescriptionofwhat
theyare.Themostconvincinganarchisttheories,whileacceptingthenoncoercive,nongovernmental,and,of
course,nonstatistnatureofanarchy,deducefurthercharacteristicsofasocietythathasabolisheddomination.
Examplesoftenmentionedbyanarchistsincludeeconomic,social,racial,sexual,andgenerationalequality,mutual
aid,cooperation,andcommunalism.

Theworkingoutofaconsistentviewofanarchyisanimportantproblemfortheanarchisttheorist.However,itis
necessarytorealizethatworkonthisproblemmakesatheoristan"anarchist"onlyinaverylimitedsense,ashas
alreadybeennoted.Thus,theMarxistpoliticalphilosophermighttakeonthistaskasanintegralpartofthe
developmentofatheoryoftransitionfromcapitalismandsocialismtofullcommunism.Itmightalsobeundertaken
byaUtopiannovelistwhoenjoysdreamingaboutidealsocieties,orbyapoliticalphilosopherwhohasamerely
academicinterestinthenatureofthemorallyjustifiablesociety.

VII.THEANARCHISTCRITIQUEOFTHEPRESENT
Ananarchisthasadistinctiveviewofthepresentstateofthings.Thisviewis,inasense,thelinkbetweenthe
visionoftheidealandthosepoliticalandsocialproposalsthataretypicalofanarchism.Itconsistsofadistinctive
critiqueofexistingsocialinstitutions,thecoreofwhichdealswithcoercionandauthoritarianism.Theanarchist
findsmanyinstitutionstobeunacceptablefromamoralstandpointbecausetheyarebasedonforceandexternally
imposedauthority.Itis,ofcourse,thestateandcentralizedpoliticalauthoritythatreceivethemostdestructive
analysisonthesegrounds.Itisthereforereasonabletoacceptasfulfillingthiscriterionanytheorythatonan
antiauthoritarianbasisquestionsthemoralfoundationsofthestateandgovernment.However,itmustbenotedthat
theanarchistalmostalwaysproceedstoafurtheranalysisofsocialinstitutions.Anarchismhasnotstoppedwitha
criticismofpoliticalorganization,buthasinvestigatedtheauthoritariannatureofeconomicinequalityandprivate
property,hierarchicaleconomicstructures,traditionaleducation,thepatriarchalfamily,classandracial
discrimination,andrigidsexandageroles,tomentionjustafewofthemoreimportanttopics.Insomevarietiesof
anarchism,institutionssuchasprivatepropertyandpatriarchyarecondemnedatleastasseverelyasisthestate.

Itishardlynecessarytodwellonthiscriterion,sinceitistheonethathasreceivedthemostattention,aswas
mentionedatthebeginningofthisessay.Mostcommentatorsonanarchismarewellawareoftheanarchist
oppositiontotheformsofpoliticalorganizationexistinginthemodernnationstate.Toalesserdegree,theygrasp
theanarchistcritiqueofotherauthoritariansocialinstitutions.Whattheyoftendonotcomprehendisthewayin
whichthisoppositiontopresentsocialconditionsfitsintotheanarchistpositionasawhole.

VIII.THEANARCHISTVIEWOFHUMANNATURE

Acentralelementofanarchismisitsviewofhumannature.Theanarchistbelievesthattherearequalitiesofhuman
beingswhichenablethemtolivetogetherinaconditionofpeaceandfreedom.Mostanarchistsgofurtherand
describethehumancapacityformutualaid,cooperation,respect,andcommunalrelationships,whichareseenas
thebasisforexpectationofsocialprogress.Whilemostanarchistsholdabeliefinsuchhumansolidarity,itis
significantthatsomeindividualistsrejectit.Instead,theybasetheirproposalsforsocialorganizationoncontract
onrationalselfinterestand,intheextremecaseofStirner,onruthlessegoism.44Inbothsocialandindividualist
anarchism,however,thereexiststheviewthatpeoplehaveagreatpotentialforvoluntaristicaction,andabilityto
overcometheuseofviolenceandcoercion.

Thisviewisthebasisforthefrequentcriticismofanarchismthatitisexcessivelyoptimisticabouthumannature.
Foranarchismtobeacoherenttheory,itmusthaveaconceptionofhumannaturewhichformsthebasisfor
speculationabouttheidealforsocietyandwhichgivesafoundationforthosepracticalproposalsthatarenecessary
iftheidealistohavepoliticalandsocialrelevance.However,itisfalsethatalltheviewsofhumannaturethathave
beenputforthbyanarchistshavebeeninanymeaningfulway"optimistic,"andthatthisqualityisanecessary
characteristicofthetheory.Itmightbeargued,infact,thatinsomewaysanarchistsholdaquiterealisticifnot
pessimisticviewofhumannature.Itisthebeliefthatpowercorruptsandthatpeopleeasilybecomeirresponsiblein
theirexerciseofitthatformsthebasisformuchoftheircriticismofpoliticalauthorityandcentralizedpower.
Powermustbedispersed,theysay,notsomuchbecauseeveryoneisalwayssogood,butbecausewhenitis
concentratedsomepeopletendtobecomeextremelyevil.Thepointismade,notonlyinregardtopoliticalpower,
butalsotoavarietyofothersorts,rangingfromconcentratedeconomicpoweronthelevelofsocietyto
concentratedpatriarchalpoweronthelevelofthefamily.

Thereis,ofcourse,abundantevidenceofoptimismintheanarchisttradition.Someofthegreatestanarchist
philosophers(e.g.,Kropotkin)haveattimesexpressedarathernaivebeliefinthecapacityofpeopletoact
benevolentlyandtocooperate.Yetsuchoptimismshouldcertainlynotbetakenaspartofthedefinitionof
anarchism,asitisbythosewhodismissitas"utopiansocialism,"inthederogatorysenseofthatterm.Thereis
muchintheanarchisttraditionwhichwouldpointtoarejectionofalldogmaticviewsofhumannature(whether
"optimistic,""pessimistic,"or"realistic"),andtotheacceptanceofenvironmentalism.Godwin'sthoughtis
explicitlybasedonthisoutlook,anditisimplicitinBakunin'sdeterministicmaterialism.Insuchaview,peopleare
inherentlyneithergoodnorevil,butrathertheybehaveandthinkinradicallydifferentwaysunderdifferent
circumstances.Theproblemforanarchistsistocreatethesocialconditionsunderwhichthelibertarianratherthan
theauthoritarian(or,insomecases,thecooperativeratherthanthecompetitive)capacitiesofpeoplearerealized.
Whatallanarchistpositionshaveincommonisthattheyacceptthislibertarianpotentialasaconstituentofhuman
nature.

IX.THEANARCHISTPROGRAMFORCHANGE
Thefinaldefiningcharacteristicofanarchismisitspracticalproposalsforchange.Ananarchisthasadistinctive
programforactioninthepresent,whichconstitutesastrategyformovementinthedirectionoftheideal,whichisa
responsetothefailureofexistinginstitutions,andwhichisconsistentwiththeanarchistviewofhuman
potentialities.Anarchismcanhavenomeaningasasocialandpoliticaltheoryifitsaysnothingaboutpraxis,andit
canhavenoclearmeaningifitisdefinedinwayswhichwouldconfuseitsproposalswiththoseoftheoriesknown
byothernames.Thus,ashasbeenmentioned,theoriesthatsaynothingaboutstrategiesforchange,orwhich
advocatecentralist,authoritarian,orbureaucraticpoliciescannotmeaningfullybelabeled"anarchist,"ifthetheory
thathasbeenknownbythatnamesinceProudhon(andwhichhasroots,someclaim,asfarbackinhistoryasthe
thoughtofLaotzuandDiogenestheCynic,andinthepracticeoftribalsociety)istobeconsideredrelevant.

Thedistinctivecharacteristicofanarchistprogramsisthattheyinstituteanimmediatemovementinthedirectionof
voluntarismandantiauthoritarianism.Examplesoftypicalanarchistprogramsincludedecentralizationofpolitical
authorityworkerselfmanagementofworkplacesextensionoffreedomofthoughtandexpressionexpansionof
sexualfreedomvoluntaryeducationdecentralizationofeconomicstructurescooperativesopenaccesstomedia
freeschoolsopeneducationanddeschoolingneighborhoodgovernment,noninstitutionalpsychotherapy
nondominatingfamilyandpersonalrelationshipsandeliminationofarbitrarydistinctionsbasedonsex,race,age,
linguisticusage,andsoforth.Suchanarchistproposalsarepracticalintwosenses.Themostambitiousofthose
mentionedarewithinthepowerofasocietytoinstitute,wereanarchistideologytobecomewidelyacceptedwithin
thesociety(ashappenedhistoricallyduringtheSpanishRevolutionof193639).45Furthermore,itiswithinthe
reachofanarchistsinmanysocietiesinwhichanarchisttheoryisnotyetwidelyacceptedtoputsomeofthe
proposalsintoimmediatepracticeamongthemselves,asanalternativetothedominantinstitutions.Infact,the
greatestenergyofanarchiststhemselves(asopposedtowritersaboutanarchism)hasbeenputintothistask,rather
thanintospeculationaboutminutedetailsofanidealsociety.

Itshouldnowbeclearhowerroneoustheviewiswhichreducestheanarchistprogramtoanuncriticaldemandfor
theimmediateabolitionofgovernment.Whathasconfusedmanysuperficialobserversisthedemandbyanarchists
thatthestatebeabolished.Inmostcasestheydonot,however,proposethatthenationstatebereplacedbyanideal
anarchicsociety,butratherbyadecentralizedsystem,inwhichfederationfrombelowincreasinglydisplaces
centralizedauthority.Itiscertainlyheldtobedesirablethattheprimarygroupswhichfederatebeasvoluntaryasis
practicallypossible,butthereisnodogmaticdemandthatallvestigesofgovernment,eveninadecentralizedform,
beimmediatelydestroyed.Theguidingprinciple,tobeappliedaccordingtohistoricalconditions,isthe
replacementofcoerciveandauthoritarianinstitutionsbyvoluntaryandlibertarianones.

Aconsiderationofanarchistproposalsasanalyzedhereshowsthattheydiffermarkedlyfromthosetypicalofother
politicalideologies.Theseproposalsemphasizedecentralizationandvoluntarism,whiletheMarxist,thenon
Marxiansocialist,thewelfarestatist,andthemodernliberalhavequiteobviouslycometorelyincreasinglyonthe
state,centralizedpoliticalauthority,andhierarchicalbureaucracyasameanstowardsocialchange.Theanarchist
differsfromtheclassicalliberal(whohasbeenreincarnatedinsomeelementsofAmericanconservatism)inthatthe
formerrejectstheuseofgovernmenttoprotectanyinterests,includingthosebasedonprivateownershipofthe
meansofproductionandclassdifferences,whiletheclassicalliberalacceptsthelimitedstateasameansbywhich
topreservecapitalism.Inspiteofthesedistinctions,therearenoclearboundariesbetweenthepoliticalpositions
mentioned,andtheytendtomergeatsomepoints.Thus,leftistMarxismmergesintoanarchosyndicalism.Daniel
andGabrielCohnBendit,intheirwellknownbookonthe1968Frenchrevolt,calltheirpositionLinksradicalismus
orlegauchisme,anddescribeitasbeingbothMarxistandanarchist.46WhenleftistMarxistscallforworkers'
councilsandattackelitismandbureaucracy,itbecomesdifficulttodistinguishthemfromtheanarchosyndicalists,
whopresentsimilarproposalsbasedonasimilarclassanalysis.47Ontheotherhand,thepositionofthe
individualistsmergeswiththatofclassicalliberals.AsBenjaminTucker,thegreatAmericanindividualist,claimed,
"genuine[i.e.,individualist]AnarchismisconsistentManchesterism."48Theindividualistanarchistshopedthatthe
abolitionofstateinterferencewouldleadtoafreeandrelativelyequalsocietybasedonthelabortheoryofvalue.In
thistheyhavemuchincommonwithLocke,AdamSmith,Jefferson,and,aboveall,Spencer.49Inviewofsuch
similarities,itmustbeconcludedthatwhilemostofthosewhofallwithinthedefinitionof"anarchist"presented
hereholdapositionwhichisdistinctive,andwhichconstitutesanalternativetothestandardpoliticaloptions,itis
neverthelessthecasethatsomewhofulfillthecriteriahaveviewpointswhicharequiteclosetothoseofotherswho
fitwithinotheridentifiablepoliticaltraditions.Thereisnoreasonwhytermsinpoliticaltheorysuchas"anarchist"
and"Marxist"shouldbemutuallyexclusiveintheirdenotation,eventhoughtheirconnotationsdifferconsiderably.
X.ISANARCHISMUTOPIAN?

Ibelievethat,thedefinitionofanarchismthathasbeenpresentedanddiscussedcanhelpavoidcertainerrorsabout
theanarchistposition.OneoftheseisthechargethatanarchistsmustbeoralwayshavebeenUtopians.Somehave
attemptedtodemonstratethatanarchistsareUtopiansbyincludingthequalityofutopianisminthedefinitionof
anarchism.Iwouldsuggestadifferentapproachtothequestion.Ifwewishtofindoutwhetheranarchismis
Utopian,insofarasthattermimpliessomesortofneglectforreality,weshouldexaminethetheoriesandpractical
proposalsofthosewhohavebeenconventionallycalled,andwhohavecalledthemselves,anarchists.Ifwedo,Ido
notbelievethatwewillcometoDeGeorge'sconclusionthattheanarchist's"thresholdofacceptanceissohigh,his
faithintherationalityandmoralityoftheordinarypersonsolittleinaccordwithwhatmanypeopleexperiencein
theirdealingswiththeirfellowman,andhisschemeforbringingabouthisdesiredanarchistsocietyisasvaguethat
heisnotapoliticalrealistbutanidealisticUtopian."50

Iseenoreasonwhyanarchismshouldbedefinedastoexcludepeoplewhocanpracticallyaccept,ifnotbeentirely
satisfiedwith,limitedprogresstowardtheideal.Manygreatanarchistshave,infact,beensuch"pragmatic
libertarians"(forexample,Proudhonamongtheclassicalanarchists,andPaulGoodmanamongtherecentones).
Thus,Goodmandefends"piecemealchange"inhisarticle"TheBlackFlagofAnarchism."Thisarticledrewa
ranting,simplistic,andblatantlyadhominemreplyfromMarkRudd,whointerpretsanarchismasconservative
becauseitattemptstochangeavarietyofinstitutionsinsteadofputtingallitseffortsintotopplingtheeconomic
structure(assumedtobethesolebasisforalltheillsofsociety)atonce.51CriticismlikeRudd'smakesDeGeorge's
firstaccusationsoundstrangeandsuggeststhattheymighteachbemissingsomethingimportantaboutthenatureof
anarchism.

ProblemsalsoariseinconnectionwithDeGeorge'ssecondpoint.Ashasbeennoted,anarchistsdonothavean
exclusivelyoptimisticviewofhumannature.Ithas,infact,becomepopularrecentlyforliberalsandunsympathetic
socialiststocondemnanarchismfortheoppositequality:alackoffaithinthecapacitiesofordinarypeople.Barber,
forexample,accusesanarchistsofhavingcontemptforthemassesandbeingelitists.Notbeingtotallyobliviousto
history,heisforcedtorecognizethatanarchistshaveindeeddefendedpeople'sabilitytodeterminetheirown
destiny.Ratherthanquestioningtheaccuracyofhispreviouscontention,orconsideringthepossibilitythatheis
describingtwoconflictingfactionswithinanarchism,heconcludesthatanarchistsare"egalitarianelitists."52
Kramnick,whoreliesheavilyonBarber'sanalysis,goesastepfurtheranddepictsanarchismasunmitigatedelitism.
Throughthemethodofselectivequotation(whenhebotherstociteevidenceatall),heattemptstoshowthat
anarchistsareextremelypessimisticabouttheabilitiesoftheaverageperson.53Whilesuchcriticismdoeslittleto
increaseunderstandingofanarchism,itatleastservestopointoutthatelementofanarchistthoughtwhichexhibits
skepticismabouthumangoodness.

Finally,itshouldbenotedthatanarchistsarenotasvagueabouttheirproposalsasDeGeorgethinkstheyare,and
infact,mustbe.PaulandPercivalGoodman,forexample,presentnumerousproposals(basedonananarchist
outlook)forcommunityplanningintheirbookCommunitas.54RichardSennett'sviewpointinTheUsesof
Disorder,thesecondpartofwhichhecalls"anewanarchism,"ishighlysuggestiveintermsofurbanpolicy
issues.55A.S.Neill'sSummerhillpresentsaneducationalphilosophywhichhasbeencloselyidentifiedwith
anarchism,andwhichhasbeenappliednotonlyathisschoolforoverfiftyyearsbutatnumerousotherswhichit
hasinfluenced.56Descriptionoflargescaleapplicationoftheanarchistprograminthecollectivisedfactoriesand
communalfarmsinwhichmillionsparticipatedduringtheSpanishRevolutioncanbefoundinDolgoff'sThe
AnarchistCollectives.57Inviewofsuchevidence(anabundanceofwhichexistsforthosewhocaretoinvestigate),
theattributionofvaguenesstoanarchistproposalsmustbejudgedincompleteasadescriptionoftheactual
performanceofanarchismasawhole.Althoughsomeanarchistshavebeenvague(whetheroutofprincipleorlack
ofimagination),othershavenot,especiallyinregardtoimmediatestrategiesforchange.Thedesirenottoimpose
one'swillonothersdoesnot,asDeGeorgecontends,demandvagueness.Whatitdemandsisthatsuggestions,
whichmightbefullyworkedout,perhapsintermsofpossiblevariations,shouldnotbeimposedthroughcoercion,
oraccepteduncriticallybythecommunity.

XI.VARIETIESOFANARCHISM

Iwouldliketodiscussonefinaltopicthatmighthelpclarifythenatureofanarchism.Thisconcernsthevarious
schemesofclassifyinganarchistpositions.Onesuchschemedividesanarchismintothosevarietieswhichputthe
greatestemphasisonpersonalautonomyandindividualfreedom,andthosewhichstressparticipationincommunal
andintentionalgroups.Inthiswayadistinctioncanbemadebetweenindividualistandsocialanarchism(although
somefigures,likeEmmaGoldman,seemtohaveanequallystrongcommitmenttobothindividualfreedomand
socialsolidarity).

Amoredetailedclassificationbasedontheoriesofsocialorganizationdividesanarchistsintoindividualists,
mutualists,syndicalists,andcommunists.Individualists(whosemajortheoristsincludeMaxStirner,JosiahWarren,
andBenjaminTucker)areinterestednotsomuchinformingassociations,asinenablingindividualstopursuetheir
ownendswithoutinterferencefromothers.Theydesireasocietyofselfreliantandlargelyselfsufficient
individuals,achievingtheirendsthroughvoluntaryagreement,orcontracts,withothers.Themutualists,following
Proudhon,seeagreaterneedforsocialorganization.Sinceeconomicandpoliticalpowerareconcentrated,people
mustorganizetodefendtheirinterests,andespeciallytoeliminatesuchstatesupportedabusesasrent,profit,and
interest.Thereis,forthatreason,aneedformutualbanksandproducers'andconsumers'cooperatives.The
anarchosyndicalistsgoonestepfurtherandproposelargescaleorganizationoftheworkingclassintoasingle
laborunionastheessentialmeanstowardmeaningfulsocialchange.Theirtypicaltacticisthegeneralstrike,which
istobefollowedbythereorganizationofthemeansofproductiononprinciplesofselfmanagement.Theyare
muchinthetraditionofBakunin'scollectivism.Finally,anarchistcommunismtakesthecommune,town,or
neighborhoodasitsbasicunit.Decisionsaretobemadeonthebasisofcommunalneeds,withproduction
accordingtoabilityanddistributionaccordingtoneed.Kropotkinistheclassicaltheoristofthisvarietyof
anarchism.

Iwouldliketoelaboratesomewhatonthedistinctionbetweenanarchosyndicalismandanarchocommunismfor
tworeasons.First,thesearethetwoformsofanarchismwhichhavebeenofthegreatesthistoricalimportanceand
haveproducedthemostdebateamonganarchiststhemselvesconcerningpracticalproposals.Secondly,many
observersofanarchismdonotrealizethefundamentalimportanceofthisdivisiontoanarchisttheory.DeGeorge,
forexample,holdsthat"thestrongestpresentdayposition"consistsof"anamalgam"ofthetwopositions
mentioned.HetakesGuerinasthebestexemplarofthisposition.58IbelievethatGuerinhasrenderedanenormous
servicetoMarxists,anarchists,andtothoseinterestedineitherofthesetheories,inhisattemptstoeffectasynthesis
betweenthetwotraditions.Hisoutstandingbookonanarchismisanotableproductofthisendeavor.However,itis
thissynthesisofMarxismandanarchismthatisthe"amalgam"presentedbyGuerin,nottheonementionedbyDe
George.ThereisstillafundamentaloppositionbetweenthepositiontakenbyGuerinandthatofanarcho
communistslikeMurrayBookchin,orofanyofthosewhoareinameaningfulsense"communitarian"or
"community"anarchists.59

Whileitistruethatcommunitariananarchismhasincorporatedmanyelementsoftheanarchosyndicalistposition,
theconversedoesnotseemtobetrue.Wefindinpresentdayanarchismaperpetuationofatraditionaldivision,in
whichthecommunitarianscontinueinthetraditionofthecommunistanarchists(whodidnotdenytheimportance
ofthesyndicalistemphasisonliberatingtheworkplace),whileothers,likeGuerinandChomsky,preservean
essentiallysyndicalistapproach.60Thecommunitariananarchistsdonottaketheworkplaceoreventheeconomyas
theprimaryfocus(asimportantasthesemaybe),butratherthetotalcommunity,withallitsinterrelatedelements,
suchaswork,play,education,communication,transportation,ecology,andsoforth.Theyarguethattoisolate
problemsofproductionfromtheirsocialcontextmightleadtotheperennialMarxisterrorofcombatingeconomic
exploitationwhileperpetuatingandperhapsevenexpandingotherformsofdomination.Further,communitarian
anarchistsarguethattheanalysisofeconomicsandclassonwhichbothclassicalMarxismandsyndicalismarebuilt
isoutdated,andthatanarchosyndicalismitselfisthereforeatleastpartiallyobsolete.61Ifanarchismistobefully
understood,thenatureofthisveryimportantdisputemustbeunderstood:onealternativefocusesonwork,theother
onlifeasawholeoneoneconomicrelationships,theotheronthetotalityofhumanrelationships,andonthe
relationshipsbetweenhumanityandnature.

Althoughthesubjectcannotbediscussedindetailhere,itismyviewthattheanarchocommunistpositionas
developedbyBookchinandothersisthestrongestcontemporaryanarchistposition.Infact,itappearstobethe
sociopoliticalpositionwhichisbestcapableofincorporatingsuchdevelopmentsinmodernthoughtasthetheoryof
theriseofneotechniccivilization,62theecologicalviewofhumansocietyandnature,63and,onthehighestlevelof
generality,theorganicandprocessviewofreality,basedinpartonmodernscience.64Ifanarchismistobe
evaluated,itisthis,itsstrongestandmosthighlydevelopedform,whichshouldbeconsidered.

Itishopedthatthedefinitionpresentedandthedistinctionsdelineatedherecanmakeacontributiontoreducingthe
prevailingconfusionconcerningthenatureofanarchism.Ifso,itwillperhapsbecomeincreasinglypossiblefor
anarchismtobeseenforwhatitisacomplexandchallengingsocialandpoliticaltheoryandtobejudged
accordingtoitsmerits.
 NOTES

1.GeorgeWoodcock,Anarchism(Harmondsworth,Middlesex:PenguinBooks,1963),p.7.

2.PeterKropotkin,RevolutionaryPamphlets(NewYork:Dover,1970),p.284.

3.EmmaGoldman,AnarchismandOtherEssays(NewYork:Dover,1969),p.50.

4.ColinWard,AnarchyinAction(London:AllenandUnwin,1973),p.11.

5.Ibid.,p.12.

6.StewardEdwards,ed.,SelectedWritingsofPierreJosephProudhon(GardenCity:DoubledayAnchor,1969),p.
89.Withhisusualpenchantforparadox,Proudhondescribesthisconditionas"aformofgovernment."

7.G.P.Maximoff,ed.,ThePoliticalPhilosophyofBakunin(NewYork:FreePress,1964),pp.29798.

8.Woodcock,p.11.

9.Ibid.,p.7.

10.ErricoMalatesta,Anarchy(London:FreedomPress,n.d.),p.7.

11.Ward,p.12.

12.GeraldRunkle,Anarchism:OldandNew(NewYork:Delta,1972),p.3.

13.DanielGuerin,Anarchism:FromTheorytoPractice(NewYork:MonthlyReviewPress,1970),p.13.

14.PaulBerman,ed.,QuotationsfromtheAnarchists(NewYork:Praeger,1972),p.28.

15.SeePostScarcityAnarchism(Berkeley:RampartsPress,1971),especiallythetitleessay.

16.Kropotkin,RevolutionaryPamphlets,p.284.

17.Proudhon,p.98.

18.Woodcock,p.11.

19.PaulGoodman,PeopleorPersonnelandLikeaConqueredProvince(NewYork:Vintage,1968),p.6.

20.Bakunin,p.298.

21.Runkle,p.3.

22.Bookchin,PostScarcityAnarchism,p.41.

23.Itmightbementionedthatadefinitionofanarchismwhichdiffersfrombothtypesmentionedisputforth
recentlybyRobertWolff.AccordingtoWolff,thedistinctivecharacteristicofwhathecallsananarchististhathe
orshe"willneverviewthecommandsofthestateaslegitimate,ashavingbindingmoralforce."InDefenseof
Anarchism(NewYork:HarperandRow,1970),p.18.Theuniquenessofthisdefinitionliesinthefactthatit
commitstheanarchistneithertosupportfor,nortooppositiontoanysocialandpoliticalinstitution,atleastinany
obviousway.Thispointwillbediscussedfurtherbelow.

24.Woodcock,p.7.

25.BenjaminBarber,SupermanandCommonMen:Freedom,Anarchy,andtheRevolution(NewYork:Praeger,
1972),p.18.

26.Thetextreads"revelation,"butpresumablythisisamisprint.However,thosewhoareinterestedinthe
relationshipbetweenanarchismandrevelationaredirectedtotheCatholicWorker.

27.IsaacKramnick,"OnAnarchismandtheRealWorld:WilliamGodwinandRadicalEngland,"American
PoliticalScienceReview66(March1972),114.IhavedealtwithKramnick'scontentionselsewhereindetail.See
"OnAnarchisminanUnrealWorld:Kramnick'sViewofGodwinandtheAnarchists,"AmericanPoliticalScience
Review69(March1975),16267,andalsoKramnick'scommentandmyrejoinder,inthesameissue.Foramore
detaileddiscussionofGodwin'scontributiontoanarchistthought,seemybook,ThePhilosophicalAnarchismof
WilliamGodwin(Princeton:PrincetonUniversityPress,1977).

28.Kramnick,p.128.Kramnickconcludesthat"utopiananarchism"isultimatelyreactionary,sinceithasno
effectivestrategyforchange.

29.Runkle,p.13.Theideaofaprofessorofphilosophysuggestingthatexistentialismmightseemtobe"aform"of
anarchismappearsludicrousbeyondbelief,andthatsuggestionisagoodhintastothequalityofhisbook.The
relationshipbetweenanarchismandexistentialismis,however,atopicwhichdeservesseriousstudy(asopposedto
Runkle'ssensationalisticexploitation).Strangely,inordertofindoutwhetherexistentialismreallyis"aform"of
anarchism,RunkleexaminesthethoughtofSartre,whountilhisrecentmovementtowardanarchismhadlongbeen
muchclosertoMarxism.Atthesametime,Runkleoverlooksthefactthattwowellknownexistentialists,Martin
BuberandNikolaiBerdyaev,havebeenanarchists.SeeBuber'sPathsinUtopia(Boston:BeaconPress,1955),and
Berdyaev'sDreamandReality(NewYork:Collier,1962),especiallytheepilogueTheBeginningandtheEnd
(NewYork:HarperandRow,1957),ChapterviiiandSlaveryandFreedom(NewYork:Scribners,1944),PartIII,
SectionIA.

30.RobertWolff,InDefenseofAnarchism(NewYork:HarperandRow,1970).

31.SeeJeffreyReiman,InDefenseofPoliticalPhilosophy(NewYork:HarperandRow,1972).

32.InterviewwithRobertWolff,includedinaradiobroadcastentitled"TheBlackFlagofAnarchy"(Baltimore:
GreatAtlanticRadioConspiracy,1973).Acatalogueoftapesonanarchismandrelatedtopics,includinginterviews
withWolff,Bookchin,andotherwellknownfigures,isavailablefromthatgroup.

33.AlbertJayNock,OurEnemytheState(NewYork:FreeLifeEditions,1973),p.22.

34.Nock,p.20.SeeFranzOppenheimer,TheState(NewYork:FreeLifeEditions,1975).

35.Ibid.,p.57.

36.Kropotkin,RevolutionaryPamphlets,p.284.

37.Ibid.,p.10.

38.Ibid.,pp.1011.

39.Ibid.,p.27.HadhebeenmorefamiliarwithnonWesternandtribalsocieties,hemighthavejudgeddifferently.
SeeDorothyLee,FreedomandCulture(EnglewoodCliffs:PrenticeHall,1959)FrederickEngels,TheOriginof
theFamily,PrivatePropertyandtheState(NewYork:InternationalPublishers,1973)andanyofthemanyworks
onstatelesssocieties,including,perhapsmostnotably,E.E.EvansPritchard,TheNuer(Oxford:ClarendonPress,
1940).

40.Kropotkin,RevolutionaryPamphlets,pp.2627.

41.Theauthenticityofthisidealhasbeenquestionedbysome.SeeRichardAdamiak,"TheWitheringAwayofthe
State:AReconsideration,"JournalofPolitics32(February1970):

42.RobertTucker,TheMarxianRevolutionaryIdea(NewYork:Norton,1969),p.87.

43.Ibid.,p.88.Asaresult,hefeelshemustusecapitalizationtodistinguishbetweenthetwo.

44.Foracriticismofextremeindividualistanarchism,seemybookMaxStirner'sEgoism,(London:Freedom
Press,1976).

45.FordescriptionsofrevolutionarySpain,seeSamDolgoffsTheAnarchistCollectives:WorkerSelfManagement
intheSpanishRevolution(193639)(NewYork:FreeLifeEditions,1974),VernonRichards'sLessonsofthe
SpanishRevolution(London:FreedomPress,1972),andGastonLeval,CollectivesintheSpanishRevolution
(London:FreedomPress,1975).
46.SeetheirbookmistranslatedasObsoleteCommunism:TheLeftWingAlternative(London:Pengui1968).The
correcttitle,asanarchistreviewershavepointedout,shouldbesomethinglikeLeftism:ACurefortheSenile
DisorderofCommunism,which,besidesbeinglessconfusing,preservestheparodyonLenin'sworkLeftWing
Communism:AnInfantileDisorder.

47.DeGeorgeholdsthatcommunistanarchistspresenta"Marxiananalysis."RichardDeGeorge,"Anarchismand
Authority,"thisvolume,p.000.Thisispartiallytruehowever,suchananalysisismoretypicalofanarcho
syndicalism,aswillbediscussedfurther.

48.CitedinLeonardKrimermanandLewisPerry,eds.PatternsofAnarchy(GardenCity:DoubledayAnchor,
1966),p.34.

49.Thecaseisperhapsdifferentwiththe"anarchocapitalists"ofthepresent,wholiveinaneraofentrenched
economicpower.Sincetheyhavenotexplainedhowallcanbeplacedinanequalbargainingpositionwithout
abolishingpresentpropertyrelationships,itseemslikelythatwhattheyproposeisasysteminwhichtheaffluent
voluntarilyassociatetouseforceandcoercionagainstthepoorandweakinordertomaintainclassprivilege.The
abusesofthestatearethusperpetuatedafterthestateisallegedlyabolished.

50.DeGeorge,p.37.

51.PaulGoodman,"TheBlackFlagofAnarchy"(Corinth,Vermont:BlackMountainPress,n.d.).Thearticle
originallyappearedintheNewYorkTimesMagazine,July14,1968.

52.Barber,p.25.

53.Kramnick,p.114.

54.PaulandPercivalGoodman,Communitas(NewYork:RandomHouse,1960).

55.RichardSennett,TheUsesofDisorder:PersonalIdentityandCityLife(NewYork:Vintage,1970).

56.A.S.Neill,Summerhill(Harmondsworth,Middlesex:Penguin,1968).

57.SeeespeciallyBookchin'sintroductoryessay,whichisabriefbutmasterlytreatmentoftherelationshipbetween
theoryandpractice,inhistoricalcontext.

58.ThestatementsherequotedfromDeGeorge'soriginalpaperwereomittedfromhisrevisedversion.The
discussioninthisparagraphisnonethelessusefulfortheexpositionofClark'sinterpretationofanarchism.(The
Editors.)

59.AgoodexampleisKarlHess(aformerGoldwaterspeechwriter,nowacommunityanarchist),wholivesinand
workswiththeAdamsMorganneighborhoodcommunityinWashington,D.C.Seehisarticles"WashingtonUtopia:
AnElectionEveDream,"WashingtonPost/Potomac(3November1974),and"TheSystemhasFailed,"Penthouse
(August1974),whicharepopularpresentationsofhiscommunalanddecentralistideas.HisCommunity
Technologygrouppublishesanewsletterondecentralizedtechnology,"ScienceintheNeighborhood."

60.ItisthelatterwhohaveaMarxiananalysis,notsomuchthecommunitarians,asDeGeorgecontends.Onthis
question,see"SyndicalismandAnarchism"inFreedom35(26October1974),4and(2November1974),6.The
debatebetweenMonatteandMalatestaconcerningsyndicalismandcommunismisreproduced.Evenmore
importantisGeorgeWoodcock's"Chomsky'sAnarchism,"Freedom35(16November1974),4,inwhichthenature
oftheanarchismofChomskyandGuerinisdiscussedinviewofthathistoricaldivisionwithinanarchism.

61.Again,Bookchin'sintroductiontoTheAnarchistCollectivesisrelevant.

62.SeeLewisMumford,TechnicsandCivilization(NewYork:Harcourt,BraceandWorld,1934),especially
Chapterviii,"Orientation."Thesectionsentitled"BasicCommunism,""SocializeCreation,"and"PoliticalControl"
areparticularlyrelevant.

63.ThemostimportantrecentworksinthisconnectionareBookchin'sLimitsoftheCity(NewYork:Harperand
Row,1974)andE.F.Schumacher'sSmallIsBeautiful:EconomicsasifPeopleMattered(NewYork:Harperand
Row,1973).
64.Theliteratureonthistopichasyettobewritten.However,severaloftheworksmentionedabove,including
thosebyLee,Bookchin,Mumford,andSchumacherpresentevidencerelatedtothesubject.SeealsoGeoffrey
OstergaardandMelvilleCurrell,TheGentleAnarchists(NewYork:OxfordUniversityPress),whichdiscuss
Gandhiananarchism,whichisbasedonanorganicworldview.Anothersourceoforganicistthinkinginanarchism
istheworkofKropotkin.SeePeterKropotkin,MutualAid:AFactorofEvolution(Boston:PorterSargent,n.d.),
andRoelvanDuyn,MessageofaWiseKabouter(London:GeraldDuckworth,1972).