Issues in anarchism

Part of a series on
Anarchism
History Outline
Schools of thought Feminist Green Primitivist Social ecology Total liberation Individualist Egoist Free-market Naturist Philosophical Mutualism Postcolonial African Black Queer Religious Christian Jewish Social Collectivist Parecon Communist Magonism Without adjectives Methodology Agorism Illegalism Insurrectionary Communization Expropriative Pacifist Platformism Especifismo Relationship Syndicalist Synthesis
Theory Practice Anarchy Anarchist Black Cross Anarchist criminology Anationalism Anti-authoritarianism Anti-capitalism Anti-militarism Affinity group Autonomous social center Black bloc Classless society Class struggle Consensus decision-making Conscientious objector Critique of work Decentralization Deep ecology Direct action Free association Free love Freethought Horizontalidad Individualism Isocracy Law Mutual aid Participatory politics Permanent autonomous zone Prefigurative politics Proletarian internationalism Propaganda of the deed Refusal of work Revolution Revolutionary spontaneity Rewilding Security culture Self-ownership Social ecology Sociocracy Somatherapy Spontaneous order Squatting Temporary autonomous zone Union of egoists Voluntary association Workers' council
People Armand Ba Bakunin Berkman Bonanno Bookchin Chomsky Cleyre Day Durruti Ellul Ervin Faure Ferrer Feyerabend Godwin Goldman González Prada Graeber Guillaume He-Yin Kanno Kōtoku Kropotkin Landauer Liu Magón Makhno Malatesta Michel Most Parsons Pi Pouget Proudhon Rocker Santillán Spooner Stirner Thoreau Tolstoy Tucker Volin Ward Warren Zerzan
Issues Animal rights Capitalism Education Love and sex Nationalism Religion Violence
History Paris Commune Spanish Regional Federation of the IWA Cantonal rebellion Hague Congress International Conference of Rome Trial of the Thirty Haymarket affair May Day Congress of Amsterdam Tragic Week High Treason Incident Manifesto of the Sixteen Individualist anarchism in the United States 1919 United States bombings Biennio Rosso German Revolution of 1918–1919 Bavarian Soviet Republic Kronstadt rebellion Makhnovshchina Amakasu Incident Escuela Moderna Individualist anarchism in Europe Spanish Revolution of 1936 Barcelona May Days Red inverted triangle Labadie Collection May 1968 Provo LIP Kate Sharpley Library Australian Anarchist Centenary Carnival Against Capital 1999 Seattle WTO protests Really Really Free Market Occupy movement
Culture A las Barricadas Anarchist bookfair Anarcho-punk Arts Culture jamming DIY ethic Films Freeganism Glossary Infoshop Independent Media Center The Internationale Jewish anarchism Lifestylism " No gods, no masters " Popular education "Property is theft!" Radical cheerleading Radical environmentalism Squatting Symbolism
Economics Communization Cooperative Cost the limit of price General strike Gift economy Give-away shop Free association Labour voucher Market abolitionism Mutual aid Mutual credit Participatory economics Social ownership Wage slavery Workers' self-management
By region Africa Albania Algeria Andorra Argentina Armenia Australia Austria Azerbaijan Bangladesh Belarus Belgium Bolivia Bosnia and Herzegovina Brazil Bulgaria Canada Chile China Colombia Costa Rica Croatia Cuba Czech Republic Denmark Dominican Republic East Timor Ecuador Egypt El Salvador Estonia Finland France French Guiana Georgia Germany Greece Guatemala Hong Kong Hungary Iceland India Indonesia Iran Ireland Israel Italy Japan Korea Latvia Malaysia Mexico Monaco Mongolia Morocco Netherlands New Zealand Nicaragua Nigeria Norway Panama Paraguay Peru Philippines Poland Portugal Puerto Rico Romania Russia Serbia Singapore South Africa Spain Sweden Switzerland Syria Taiwan Tunisia Turkey Ukraine United Kingdom United States Uruguay Venezuela Vietnam
Lists Anarcho-punk bands Books Communities Fictional characters Films Jewish anarchists Musicians Periodicals
Related topics Anti-corporatism Anti-consumerism Anti-fascism Anti-globalization Anti-statism Anti-war movement Autarchism Autonomism Communism Counter-economics Definition of anarchism and libertarianism Labour movement Left communism Left-libertarianism Libertarianism Libertarian Marxism Libertarian socialism Marxism Situationist International Socialism Spontaneous order Voluntaryism
Anarchism portal Politics portal
v t e

There are many philosophical differences among anarchists concerning questions of ideology, values and strategy. Ideas about how anarchist societies should work vary considerably, especially with respect to economics.^[30] There are also disagreements about how such a society might be brought about, with some anarchists being committed to a strategy of nonviolence while others advocate armed struggle.^{[31][32][33][34][35]}

Definitional concerns

Nonetheless, major elements of the definition of anarchism include the following:[36]

1. The will for a non-coercive society.
2. The rejection of the state apparatus.
3. The belief that human nature allows humans to exist in or progress toward such a non-coercive society.
4. A suggestion on how to act to pursue the ideal of anarchy.

Usages in political circles have varied considerably. In 1894,

Anarchists such as Luigi Galleani and Errico Malatesta have seen no contradiction between individualist anarchism and social anarchism,^[69] with the latter especially seeing the issues not between the two forms of anarchism, but between anarchists and non-anarchists.^[70] Furthermore, Malatesta has claimed that in practice, individualist and communist anarchism are almost identical and that the contention between these two schools of anarchism is a "question of verbal misunderstanding".^[71] Anarchists such as Benjamin Tucker argued that it was "not Socialist Anarchism against Individualist Anarchism, but of Communist Socialism against Individualist Socialism".^[72] Similarly, the view of an individualist–socialist divide is contested as individualist anarchism is largely socialistic.^{[73][74][75][76][77]}

Ends and means

Among anarchists, there is no consensus on the legitimacy or utility of violence in revolutionary struggle. For example, Mikhail Bakunin, Peter Kropotkin, Emma Goldman and Errico Malatesta wrote of violence as a necessary and sometimes desirable force in revolutionary settings. At the same time, they denounced acts of individual terrorism, see Bakunin's "The Program of the International Brotherhood" (1869)^[78] and Malatesta's "Violence as a Social Factor" (1895). Other anarchists such as Leo Tolstoy and Dorothy Day have been advocates of pacifism.

Anarchists have often been portrayed as dangerous and violent, possibly due to a number of high-profile violent actions, including riots, assassinations, insurrections and terrorism committed by some anarchists as well as persistently negative media portrayals.^[79] Late 19th-century revolutionaries encouraged acts of political violence, called propaganda of the deed, such as bombings and the assassinations of heads of state to further anarchism. However, the term originally referred to exemplary forms of direct action meant to inspire the masses to revolution and propaganda of the deed may be violent or nonviolent.

While many anarchists consider

While most anarchists firmly oppose voting, or otherwise participating in the state institution, there are a few that disagree. The prominent anarchist

During the 2004 United States presidential election, the anarchist collective CrimethInc. launched "Don't Just Vote, Get Active", a campaign promoting the importance of direct action rather than electoral change. Anarchists in other countries often engage in similar anti-voting campaigns and advocate a more pragmatic approach, including voting in referendums.^[85] Other prominent anarchists like Howard Zinn and Noam Chomsky have pledged their support for progressive candidates such as Ralph Nader.^[86] In addition to merely voting, some anarchists such as Proudhon and more recently Icelandic activist Smári McCarthy^[87] have stood for and won elections to national legislative bodies. American individualist anarchist Lysander Spooner argued that voting was a legitimate means of self-defense against the state and noted that many supporters of the state consider both voting and abstention to be acknowledgments of the state's legitimacy.^[88] Spooner's essay "No Treason"^[89] offers an individualist anarchist rebuttal to the argument that existing democratic governments are justified by majority consent.

During the

Anarchists have often been portrayed as dangerous and violent due mainly to a number of high-profile violent acts including riots, assassinations and insurrections involving anarchists. However, the use of terrorism and assassination is condemned by most anarchist ideology, although there remains no consensus on the legitimacy or utility of violence. Some anarchists have opposed coercion while others have supported it, particularly in the form of violent revolution on the path to anarchy.^[105]

Some anarchists share Leo Tolstoy's Christian anarchist belief in nonviolence. These anarcho-pacifists advocate nonviolent resistance as the only method of achieving a truly anarchist revolution. They often see violence as the basis of government and coercion and argue that as such violence is illegitimate, no matter who is the target. Some of Pierre-Joseph Proudhon's French followers even saw strike action as coercive and refused to take part in such traditional socialist tactics.

Other anarchists advocate Marshall Rosenberg's Nonviolent Communication that relates to peoples fundamental needs and feelings using strategies of requests, observations and empathy yet providing for the use of protective force while rejecting pacifism as a compromising strategy of the left that just perpetuates violence.

Other anarchists such as Mikhail Bakunin and Errico Malatesta saw violence as a necessary and sometimes desirable force. Malatesta took the view that it is "necessary to destroy with violence, since one cannot do otherwise, the violence which denies [the means of life and for development] to the workers" (Umanità Nova, number 125, 6 September 1921).^[106]

Between 1894 and 1921, individual anarchists assassinated numerous heads of state, including:

• Sadi Carnot
  (1894)
• Spanish Prime Minister Antonio Cánovas del Castillo (1897)
• Empress consort
  Elisabeth of Austria
  (1898)
• King Umberto I of Italy (1900)
• United States President William McKinley (1901)
• Spanish Prime Minister José Canalejas (1912)
• Eduardo Dato Iradier
  (1921)

Such propaganda of the deed was not popular among anarchists and many in the movement condemned the tactic. President William McKinley's assassin Leon Czolgosz claimed to be a disciple of Emma Goldman. Goldman disavowed the act, although she did not condemn Czolgosz's motivations in doing it. Goldman included in her definition of anarchism the observation that all governments rest on violence and this is one of the many reasons they should be opposed. Goldman herself did not oppose tactics like assassination until she went to Russia, where she witnessed the violence of the Russian state and the Red Army. From then on, Goldman condemned the use of terrorism, especially by the state, but she still supported most other forms of revolutionary violence throughout her life. In a debate with a pacifist five years before her death, she countered that "the organized force used against the followers of Gandhi has finally forced them to use violence, much to the distress of Gandhi" and concluded that "as a method of combating the complex social injustices and inequalities, non-resistance cannot be a decisive factor" (non-resistance was the term for nonviolence used by Tolstoy and other early 20th century pacifists). Goldman at this time was an information officer for the anarchist militias of the Spanish Revolution which were committed to armed struggle.^[107]

Depictions in the press and popular fiction (for example, a malevolent bomb-throwing anarchist in Joseph Conrad's The Secret Agent) helped create a lasting public impression that anarchists are violent terrorists. This perception was enhanced by events such as the Haymarket riot, where anarchists were blamed for throwing a bomb at police who came to break up a public meeting in Chicago. More recently, anarchists have been involved in protests against World Trade Organization (WTO) and International Monetary Fund (IMF) meetings across the globe which the media has described as violent or riots. Traditionally, May Day in London has also been a day of marching, but in recent years the Metropolitan Police have warned that a "hardcore of anarchists" are intent on causing violence. Anarchists often respond that it is the police who initiate violence at these demonstrations, with anarchists who are otherwise peaceful sometimes forced to defend themselves. The anarchists involved in such protests often formed black blocs at these protests and some engaged in property destruction, vandalism, or in violent conflicts with police, although others stuck to non-violent principles. Those participating in black blocs distinguish between violence and property destruction as they claim that violence is when a person inflicts harm to another person while property destruction or property damage is not violence, although it can have indirect harm such as financial harm. Most anarchists do not consider the destruction of property to be violent as do most activists who believe in non-violence.

Pacifism

Most anarchists consider opposition to

Anarchist literature often portrays war as an activity in which the state seeks to gain and consolidate power, both domestically and in foreign lands. Many anarchists subscribe to Randolph Bourne's view that "war is the health of the state".^[108] Anarchists believe that if they were to support a war, they would be strengthening the state—indeed, Peter Kropotkin was alienated from other anarchists when he expressed support for the British^{[citation needed]} in World War I.^[109]

Individualism vs. collectivism

This section is missing information about Tucker's and Spooner's understanding of private property (a product of one's labour) and how it was understood differently by other anarchists (privately owned land and means of production). Please expand the section to include this information. Further details may exist on the talk page. (May 2021)

While some anarchists favour

Although commonly misconcepted, Marxism rejected egalitarianism in the sense of greater equality between classes, clearly distinguishing it from the socialist notion of the abolition of classes based on the division between workers and owners of productive property.^{[note 1]} Marx and Engels believed that an international proletarian revolution would bring about a socialist society which would then eventually give way to a communist stage of social development which would be a classless, stateless, moneyless, humane society erected on common ownership. However, Marx's view of classlessness was not the subordination of society to a universal interest (such as a universal notion of equality), but it was about the creation of the conditions that would enable individuals to pursue their true interests and desires, making his notion of communist society radically individualistic.^[126] Marx was a proponent of two principles, the first ("To each according to his contribution") applied to socialism and the second ("From each according to their ability, to each according to their needs") to an advanced communist society. Although his position is often confused or conflated with distributive egalitarianism in which only the goods and services resulting from production are distributed according to a notional equality, Marx eschewed the entire concept of equality as abstract and bourgeois in nature, preferring to focus on more concrete principles such as opposition to exploitation on materialist grounds and economic logic.^[127] He is a believer in human freedom and human development. For Marx, the "true realm of freedom" consists in the "development of human powers as an end in itself".^[128] He conceives of a communist society as one in which "the full and free development of every individual forms the ruling principle".^[129] Marx justified the forms of equality he did advocate such as the communal ownership and control of the economy on the grounds that they led to human freedom and human development rather than simply because they were egalitarian, writing that in such a society there are "[u]niversally developed individuals, whose social relations, as their own communal relations, are hence also subordinated to their own communal control". This communal control includes "their subordination of their communal, social productivity as their social wealth".^[130]

Civil Liberties and Civil Rights

Gender

See also: Anarcha-feminism and Ecofeminism

Anarcha-feminism is a kind of radical feminism that espouses the belief that patriarchy is a fundamental problem in society, but it was not explicitly formulated as such until the early 1970s during the second-wave feminist movement.^[131]

Early

first-wave feminist Mary Wollstonecraft held proto-anarchist views and William Godwin is often considered a feminist anarchist precursor. Early French feminists such as Jenny d'Héricourt and Juliette Adam also criticised the misogyny in the anarchism of Pierre-Joseph Proudhon during the 1850s. While most anarchists of the period did not take these ideas seriously, others such as Florence Finch Kelly and Moses Harman held gender equality as a topic of significant importance.^[132] Anarcha-feminism garnered further attention through the work of early 20th-century authors and theorists including Emma Goldman^[133][134] and Voltairine de Cleyre.^{[135][136][137]}

In the Spanish Civil War, an anarcha-feminist group called Mujeres Libres organized to defend both anarchist and feminist ideas.^[138]

Ethnicity

See also: Black anarchism and Postcolonial anarchism

people of color and favors a non-hierarchical organization of society.^{[139][140][141][142]}

Theorists include

Anarchist People of Color (APOC) was created as a forum for non-white anarchists to express their thoughts about racial issues within the anarchist movement, particularly within the United States. Anti-Racist Action is not an anarchist group, but many anarchists are involved. It focuses on publicly confronting antisemites, racists, supremacists and others such as the Ku Klux Klan, neo-Nazi

groups and the like.

Most modern and historical anarchists describe themselves as

fascists

with physical force rather than relying on the state. Since the late 1990s, a similar tendency has developed within anarchism in the United States.

Anti-Racist Action is one of the largest grassroots anti-fascist and anti-racist organizations in North America today and counts many anarchists among its members. Their tactics, centered around directly confronting neo-fascist and white-supremacist groups, are considered controversial both within the anarchist movement (where they are sometimes portrayed as well-intentioned, but ineffective) and in mainstream society (where they are often portrayed as violent and disruptive).

Many anarchists also oppose the concept of race itself, arguing that it has no biological basis in science and is a social construction designed to divide the working class and preserve capitalism.

A minority of historically prominent anarchists have been accused of racism, e.g. Pierre-Joseph Proudhon^[143] and Mikhail Bakunin.^[144]

Religion

Main article: Anarchism and religion

See also:

Jewish anarchism

From Pierre-Joseph Proudhon and Mikhail Bakunin to the Spanish anarcho-syndicalists, most anarchists have questioned or opposed organized religion, believing that most organized religions are hierarchical or authoritarian and more often than not aligned with contemporary power structures like the state and capital.^[145] Nonetheless, others reconcile anarchism with religion.^[145]

turn the other cheek are usually strict pacifists, although some believe in a limited justification of defense, especially defense of others. The most famous advocate of Christian anarchism was Leo Tolstoy, author of The Kingdom of God Is Within You, who called for a society based on compassion, nonviolent principles and freedom. Christian anarchists tend to form experimental communities (such as the Catholic Worker). They also occasionally resist taxation

.

Swami Dayananda Saraswati (founder of Arya Samaj), saw anarchism as a way of propagating the ancient culture of the Arya (not to be confused with the much later appropriation of Aryan identity by Nazism).^[146] Buddhist anarchism was later revived in the 1960s by writers such as Gary Snyder; an incarnation of this school of thought was popularized by Jack Kerouac in his book The Dharma Bums

.

With its focus on the environment and equality along with its often decentralized nature,

Neopaganism has led to a number of Neopagan anarchists. One of the most prominent is Starhawk, who writes extensively about both spirituality and activism

.

Discussing the anarchist movement in Britain in 2002, Adam K. has argued that it "has an especially ignorant and hegemonistic perception of the Muslim community" which he attributed to "the [A]nglo-centric nature of the movement". Quoting the statement that "Islam is an enemy of all freedom loving people" from an anarchist magazine, he argues that this is "no different to the bigoted rhetoric of George Bush or even BNP leader Nick Griffin".^[147]

Capitalism

Main article: Anarchism and capitalism

See also: Anarcho-capitalism

Throughout all of its history, anarchism has been defined by its proponents in

anarcho-capitalists generally support wage labor and oppose workplace democracy which most anarchists support, claiming that wage labor is voluntary. However, most anarchists argue that certain capitalist transactions, including wage labor, are not voluntary and that maintaining the class structure of a capitalist society requires coercion which violates both anarchist principles and anarcho-capitalism's non-aggression principle itself.^[151] Anarchists who support wage labor do so as long as the employers and employees are paid equally for equal hours worked^[152] and neither party has authority over the other. By following this principle, no individual profits from the labor of another. Those anarchists describe the wages received in such an employer-employee relationship as the individual laborer's full product and generally envisione that in such a society every worker would be self-employed and own their own private means of production, free to walk away from employment contracts.^[153]

Some supporters argue that anarcho-capitalism is a form of

socialists. These early individualist anarchists defined capitalism in various ways, but it was often discussed in terms of usury: "There are three forms of usury, interest on money, rent on land and houses, and profit in exchange. Whoever is in receipt of any of these is a usurer".^[158] Excluding these, they tended to support free trade, free competition and varying levels of private property such as mutualism based on occupation and use property norms.^{[159][160][161]} It is this distinction which has led to the rift between anarchism and anarcho-capitalism. Historically, anarchists considered themselves socialists and opposed to capitalism, therefore anarcho-capitalism is considered by many anarchists today as not being a form of anarchism.^[162]

Furthermore, terms like anarcho-socialism or socialist anarchism are rejected by most anarchists since they generally consider themselves socialists of the libertarian tradition, but they are nevertheless used by anarcho-capitalism theorists and scholars who recognize anarcho-capitalism to differentiate between the two.^{[163][49][164]} Ultimately, anarcho-capitalist author Murray Rothbard, who coined the term itself and developed such philosophy through the 1970s, stated that individualist anarchism is different from capitalism due to the individualist anarchists retaining the labor theory of value^[165] and many writers deny that anarcho-capitalism is a form of anarchism at all,^[66][67] or that capitalism itself is compatible with anarchism.^[66][68] seeing it instead as a form of New Right libertarianism.^[66]

Anarchist organisations such as the

American individualist anarchists Benjamin Tucker and Lysander Spooner and British Thomas Hodgskin.^[178]

In particular, Chartier has argued that proponents of a genuinely free market, termed

pro-labor positions in economics; anti-imperialism in foreign policy; and thoroughly radical views regarding such cultural issues as gender, sexuality and race.^[181][178]

One major issue and divide between anarchism and anarcho-capitalism are the terms capitalism and socialism themselves. For anarcho-capitalists, capitalism means the free market rather than

Marxist–Leninist states. However, the term socialism originally included any opponent of capitalism, a term coined in the 18th century to mean a construed political system built on privileges for the owners of capital.^{[191][192][193]}

Contra anarcho-capitalists, anarchists argue that capitalism necessarily rests on the

classical economists such as Adam Smith did not necessarily refer to a market free from government interference as it is now commonly assumed or how anarcho-capitalists see it, but rather free from all forms of economic privilege, monopolies and artificial scarcities, implying that economic rents, i.e. profits generated from a lack of perfect competition, must be reduced or eliminated as much as possible through free competition.^[194] While anarcho-capitalists who argue for private property which supports absentee and landlordism ownership rather than occupation and use property norms as well as the homestead principle are considered right-libertarians rather than anarchists (this is due to anarchism generally viewing any absentee ownership and ownership claims on land and natural resources as immoral and illegitimate^[195] and seeing the idea of perpetually binding original appropriation as advocated by some anarcho-capitalists as anathema to traditional schools of anarchism as well as to any moral or economic philosophy that takes equal natural rights to land and the Earth's resources as a premise),^[196] other anarcho-capitalists are closer to mutualism and are considered part of free-market anarchism which argue that a true free-market or laissez-faire system would be best served under socialism rather than capitalism.^[197][198]

As a whole, anarchism is seen part of the socialist tradition, with the main divide being between anti-market anarchists (most

decentralised economic planning and pro-market anarchists (certain individualist anarchists, including free-market anarchists and mutualists) who support free-market socialism. As such, Chartier has argued that anarcho-capitalists should reject capitalism and call themselves free-market advocates,^[199] writing that "it makes sense for [freed-market advocates] to name what they oppose "capitalism." Doing so calls attention to the freedom movement's radical roots, emphasizes the value of understanding society as an alternative to the state, underscores the fact that proponents of freedom object to non-aggressive as well as aggressive restraints on liberty, ensures that advocates of freedom aren't confused with people who use market rhetoric to prop up an unjust status quo, and expresses solidarity between defenders of freed markets and workers—as well as ordinary people around the world who use "capitalism" as a short-hand label for the world-system that constrains their freedom and stunts their lives".^[176]

Another major issue and divide within anarchism and anarcho-capitalism is that of

Property is theft"), causing him to also say "Property is impossible".^[200]

Individualist anarchists like Tucker started calling possession as property, or private property. Anarcho-capitalists generally make no such distinction. Such distinction is extremely important to anarchists and other socialists because in the capitalist mode of production private and personal property are considered to be exactly equivalent. They make the following distinctions:

• Personal property, or possession, includes items intended for personal use (e.g. one's toothbrush, clothes, homes, vehicles and sometimes money).^[201] It must be gained in a socially fair manner and the owner has a distributive right to exclude others.
• Anarchists generally agree that private property is a social relationship between the owner and persons deprived (not a relationship between person and thing), e.g. artifacts, factories, mines, dams, infrastructure, natural vegetation, mountains, deserts and seas. In this context, private property and ownership means ownership of the means of production, not personal possessions.
• To anarchists and socialists alike, the term private property refers to
  consumer and non-capital goods and services.^[202][203]

Globalization

Many anarchists are actively involved in the

Central America Free Trade Agreement (CAFTA). Many also object to fiat money issued by central banks and resulting debasement of money and confiscation of wealth. Groups such as Reclaim the Streets^[204] were among the instigators of the so-called anti-globalization movement.^[205]

The

Carnival Against Capitalism on 18 June 1999 is generally regarded as the first of the major anti-globalization protests.^[206] Anarchists such as the WOMBLES have on occasion played a significant role in planning, organising and participating in subsequent protests.^[207] The protests tended to be organised on anarchist direct action principles with a general tolerance for a range of different activities ranging from those who engage in tactical frivolity to the black blocs.^[208]

Left and right anarchism

The term left anarchism, or left-wing anarchism, has been occasionally used to distinguish

left-wing theories of anarchism on grounds of redundancy and that it lends legitimacy to the notion that anarchism is compatible with capitalism^[214][215] or nationalism.^[216][217]

Syndicalist Ulrike Heider categorized anarchism into left anarchism, right anarchism and green anarchism.^[218] The term right anarchism, or right-wing anarchism, has been used to refer to schools of thoughts which are not generally considered part of anarchism, including anarcho-capitalism^[66][68] and national-anarchism.^[219]

Nationalism

Main article: Anarchism and nationalism

See also: National-anarchism and Postcolonial anarchism

Anarchism has a long history of opposing

anti-imperialists share this approach.^[220]

Historically, anarchism was supportive of the

neo-tribalism and national-anarchism's perceived racism and sexism, arguing that it represents a further evolution in the thinking of the radical right rather than an entirely new dimension.^{[224][225][226][227]} Some accuse national-anarchists of being white nationalists who promote ethnic and racial separatism while others argue they want the militant chic of calling themselves anarchists without the historical and philosophical baggage that accompanies such a claim.^[228][229]

During the

Anarchist Federation in Scotland (mainly in Edinburgh and Glasgow) took a critical stance skeptical of the benefits of Scottish independence.^[91][93] Scottish anarchists argued that Scottish independence and Scottish nationalism diverted energy away from grassroots struggles and that the movement for Scottish independence sucked people towards Scottish nationalism and electoral politics.^[231]

Environment

See also:

Social ecology

The

Eco-anarchists or green anarchists often embrace deep ecology, a worldview that strives to cultivate biodiversity and sustainability. Eco-anarchists often use direct action against what they see as Earth-destroying institutions. Of particular importance is the Earth First! movement that takes action such as tree sitting. The more militant Earth Liberation Front which grew out of Earth First! also has connections with the anarchist movement. Another important component is ecofeminism

which sees the domination of nature as a metaphor for the domination of women.

anarcho-primitivists) civilization

itself.

Relations with the left

On May 1937 the President of

Luis Companys

, who was in his office in the Palace of the Generalitat. The conversation had been going on for some time, when it was sharply interrupted by an anarchist in the Telefónica who said: "This conversation will have to stop. We have more interesting things to do than listen to your stupid conversations." The line was then broken.

—Jaume Miravitlles^[232]

While many anarchists (especially those involved in the

indigenous cultures

.

A movement called

Hakim Bey

and others.

The term

Todd May, Gilles Deleuze and Félix Guattari.^[233]

Some activists calling themselves

Alfredo M. Bonanno

, author of works including Armed Joy and The Anarchist Tension. This tendency is represented in the United States in magazines such as Willful Disobedience and Killing King Abacus.

Communism

While

American individualist anarchist Benjamin Tucker, who insisted on the voluntary nature of all association and opposed communism along with majority rule, organized religion and the institution of marriage due to their compulsory nature,^[240] argued: "Whoever denies private property is of necessity an Archist. This excludes from Anarchism all believers in compulsory Communism. As for the believers in voluntary Communism (of whom there are precious few), they are of necessity believers in the liberty to hold private property, for to pool one's possessions with those of others is nothing more or less than an exercise of proprietorship".^[111]

free association which he called a community of freely associated individuals.^[241] Marx's communist society is one in which "the full and free development of every individual forms the ruling principle" and "the free development of each is the condition for the free development of all".^[242] Hence, Marx justified the forms of equality he did advocate such as the communal ownership and control of the economy on the grounds that they led to human freedom and human development, arguing that "the realm of freedom actually begins only where labor which is determined by necessity and mundane considerations ceases; thus in the very nature of things it lies beyond the sphere of actual material production.^[243] According to Allen Woods, a communist society is one that has transcended class antagonisms and "would not be one in which some truly universal interest at last reigns, to which individual interests must be sacrificed. It would instead be a society in which individuals freely act as the truly human individuals they are", making Marx's communist society radically individualistic.^[126]

Although

panarchy that is likely to succeed it".^[114]

As a response, there emerged in the 1980s United States the tendency of

groucho-marxism",^[122] writing: "If Marxism-Stirnerism is conceivable, every orthodoxy prating of freedom or liberation is called into question, anarchism included. The only reason to read this book, as its authors would be the first to agree, is for what you can get out of it".^[120]

Lucien van der Walt has criticised the tendency among many historians of anarchism (such as George Woodcock, Daniel Guerin and Peter Marshall) to overlook the influence of anarchism and syndicalism in much of the colonial and postcolonial world. Van der Walt argues that powerful anarchist movements in places such as Argentina, Brazil, Cuba, Mexico and Portugal have been overlooked.^[273]

See also

• Anarchism and issues related to love and sex

Explanatory notes