What do you think?
Rate this book
Means and Ends: The Revolutionary Practice of Anarchism in Europe and the United States
Means and Ends is a new overview of the revolutionary strategy of anarchism in Europe and the United States between 1868 and 1939. Zoe Baker clearly and accessibly explains the ideas that historical anarchists developed in order to change the world. This includes their views on direct action, revolution, organization, state socialism, reforms, and trade unions. Throughout, she demonstrates that the reasons anarchists gave for supporting or opposing particular strategies were grounded in a theoretical framework—a theory of practice—which maintained that, as people engage in activity, they simultaneously change the world and themselves. This theoretical framework was the foundation for the anarchist commitment to the unity of means and ends: the means that revolutionaries propose to achieve social change have to involve forms of activity which transform people into individuals who are capable of, and driven to, both overthrow capitalism and the state and build a free society. The consistent heart of anarchism was the idea that anarchist ends can only be achieved through anarchist means. Cutting through misconceptions and historical inaccuracies, Baker draws upon a vast assortment of examples to show how this simple premise underpinned anarchist attempts to put theory into action.
488 pages, Paperback
First published July 25, 2023
44 people are currently reading
970 people want to read
About the author
Zoe Baker
1 book85 followersHistorian of social movements. Enjoy reading about anarchism, Marxism and feminism.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 40 reviews
July 18, 2023
I wasn't familiar with Zoe at all, and got this book as a friend of AK Press who joined their membership to learn more about the history and practice of leftist politics, so this book fell into my lap at the perfect time. I didn't have much knowledge of the history Zoe covers, and I found this book very clear and accessible. It walks you through big players and how the idea of anarchism grew and divided and tried to define itself. I flew through this book and found it really interesting and it feels like the kind of book I can refer back to in the future.
February 12, 2024
Absolutely love it! As a history nerd who has been struggling to read much lately I must say that these kinds of rigurous syntheses of primary sources are an utter blessing!
June 17, 2024
An informative and well-documented history of anarchism - its goals, its conflicts, and its necessity for a livable future.
Baker offers in her conclusion perhaps one of the best summaries of anarchism ever written. It begins:
"Anarchists were antistate socialists who advocated the achievement of freedom, equality, and solidarity. For anarchists, these values were interdependent, such that the realization of one of them can only occur through the realization of all three at once. Although all anarchists advocated freedom, they disagreed with one another about how to define it. Some anarchists defined freedom as nondomination such that a person is free if and only if they are not subordinate to someone who wields the arbitrary power to impose their will on them. Other anarchists defined freedom as the real possibility to do and/or be a broad range of things such that a person becomes more free as their opportunities expand. One of the main reasons why anarchists valued freedom is that it is a prerequisite for people fully developing themselves and realizing their human potential. Irrespective of how they defined freedom, anarchists agreed that humans can, given the kind of animals we are, only be free in and through society."
Baker offers in her conclusion perhaps one of the best summaries of anarchism ever written. It begins:
"Anarchists were antistate socialists who advocated the achievement of freedom, equality, and solidarity. For anarchists, these values were interdependent, such that the realization of one of them can only occur through the realization of all three at once. Although all anarchists advocated freedom, they disagreed with one another about how to define it. Some anarchists defined freedom as nondomination such that a person is free if and only if they are not subordinate to someone who wields the arbitrary power to impose their will on them. Other anarchists defined freedom as the real possibility to do and/or be a broad range of things such that a person becomes more free as their opportunities expand. One of the main reasons why anarchists valued freedom is that it is a prerequisite for people fully developing themselves and realizing their human potential. Irrespective of how they defined freedom, anarchists agreed that humans can, given the kind of animals we are, only be free in and through society."
July 27, 2024
Baker be baking the Bread
In Means and Ends, Zoe Baker, of Anarchopac fame, combines her rigorous background in analytic philosophy with her PhD thesis to create a comprehensive history of –primarily western– anarchist thought and praxis between 1868 and 1939. She examines the history of anarchists thought not only through abstract philosophical concepts and debates, but rather as contextualized within the material conditions of their time and the movements for class struggle. Through this process, anarchism emerges as a unified and coherent system of thought, values, and strategies. As Zoe Baker acknowledges, there is no neutral starting point. Thus, for practical purposes, she largely omits proto-anarchists like Proudhon, individualist anarchists like Max Stirner, and Christian pacifist anarchists like Tolstoy. Instead, she focuses on collectivist and communist anarchists, advocating for an anti-state form of socialism, including Michael Bakunin, Peter Kropotkin, Carlo Cafiero, Errico Malatesta, Emma Goldman, Alexander Berkman, Rudolf Rocker and many many others.
Theory of practice
Anarchists were predominantly materialists, viewing matter as the fundamental building block of reality. They regarded humans as primarily material and biological beings, yet highly social and adaptive. However, both the natural world and human nature are not static but processes in flux. Human action is seen as processes in which individuals employ their capacities (real possibility to do or to be) to satisfy psychological drives (psychological, needs, goals), and in doing so, we change the world and ourselves at the same time [double production].
Social structures are created by human beings and are seen as part of the natural world, influencing forms of activities, drives and capacities. However, social structures are self-reproducing. They produce individuals who in turn act to reproduce these structures. This creates a feedback loop, where in order to transform society, we need transformed people and in order to have transformed people, we need a new society. Anarchists grapple with breaking this cycle by engaging in different forms of practice, and specifically revolutionary practices such as direct action, workers and renters strikes, industrial sabotage, boycott, civil disobedience and so on.
In attempting to “build the new in the shell of the old” [prefiguration], individuals will transform the world and themselves, and in the process, learn to be autonomous, organize collaboratively, and associate freely. And through this evolutionary phase, they will actually be prepared for the “day after” the revolution.
Anarchist Socialists vs State Socialists
In contrast to state socialist approaches (MLs or SocDems) which are top-down, and workers often expect salvation from above, without engaging themselves in the process, anarchist forms of practice create individuals that are capable of and driven to achieve and reproduce anarchism. For this reason, anarchists criticized state socialists and predicted that: (1) electoral politics will transform socialist reformists into bourgeois parties, turning social democracy into capitalism + welfare programs and (2) revolutionary state socialism will lead to a “red bureaucracy” where a minority controls the party and in turn dominates over the workers and society. These predictions, remarkably prescient and repeatedly confirmed, stem directly from anarchist theory of practice. Hierarchical power will transform (and corrupt), even those with the best intentions or those who were once workers, who will begin to see themselves and the world differently, and who will ultimately seek to maintain their power at the top. Or as summarized by Anark: (1) means can not be disentangled from ends, (2) hierarchical power begets monopoly and domination, (3) power structures seek to to perpetuate themselves.
To What Ends? With What Means?
Instead, anarchists support the principle of “unity of Means and Ends”, where the strategies employed to achieve the “Ends” should be aligned with those Ends. And what were their Ends? A free and equal libertarian communist society where decisions are made horizontally, via direct democracy and consensus, and resources are distributed according to need.
- Freedom: encompasses not only “negative freedom,” the ability to act according to one’s will without coercion, but also “positive freedom,” having the actual opportunity and power to act or be.
- Equality: not a Bourgeois “equality under the law” or “equality of opportunity”, but rather equality of freedom and political equality in decision-making power.
- Solidarity: forming reciprocal, caring relationships where each person acts to uphold the freedom and equality of others. This solidarity is achievable only among equals who engage in horizontal, free and mutual associations.
But through what Means are these Ends supposed to be achieved? 5 out of 11 chapters are dedicated on the differences and disagreements between insurrection anarchists (against formal organizations, “propaganda of the deed”) and mass anarchists, primarily focusing on anarcho-syndicalism and organizational dualism (synthesists and platformists), supporting mass organization and anarchist militants' involvement in mass organizations to combat reformist tendencies within trade unions. Zoe Baker also delves into the controversy around Bakunin’s “Invisible Legions” and the Makhno-Malatesta debates, which I was mostly unaware of and found rather interesting.
Beyond dead men with large beards
The book is not a mere exercise in the history of (mostly) “dead men with large beards”. Instead, the aim is to revisit the past of one of the most important emancipatory movements, to learn both from its successes and, more often, its failures. To retain what remains true, useful and relevant. To update the old and synthesize new ideas for current emancipatory efforts; especially in the light of current and worsening challenges we face, such as climate breakdown, Surveillance Capitalism/Techno Feudalism, the resurgence of fascism and so on. Such efforts to update anarchism encompass expanding its scope to include intersectional class struggle, incorporating feminism, black liberation, queer politics, as well as ecological anarchism, and even vegan-anarchism.
Anarchism is often criticized by certain strands of Marxism for being overly Idealist and ignoring Materialist analysis; ideas and values being the primary force that shape the world. While Zoe Baker makes clear that this is not the case (i.e. see Prefiguration), I also see the value in integrating Marx’s lens of historical materialism with libertarian thought. For this reason, I would highly recommend watching, see “What is Politics” political anthropology series.
As Noam Chomsky has remarked, anarchism is grounded in “truisms” —“self-evident truths”. So I have found that after grasping the core arguments, delving deeper into anarchist theory offers limited additional value — though, if convinced, one’s focus ought to turn towards praxis. But if I were to choose only one book to learn about anarchism, Means and Ends would be hard to beat, since it strikes an excellent balance between being accessible, thorough, informative, and entertaining, all at the same time.
In Means and Ends, Zoe Baker, of Anarchopac fame, combines her rigorous background in analytic philosophy with her PhD thesis to create a comprehensive history of –primarily western– anarchist thought and praxis between 1868 and 1939. She examines the history of anarchists thought not only through abstract philosophical concepts and debates, but rather as contextualized within the material conditions of their time and the movements for class struggle. Through this process, anarchism emerges as a unified and coherent system of thought, values, and strategies. As Zoe Baker acknowledges, there is no neutral starting point. Thus, for practical purposes, she largely omits proto-anarchists like Proudhon, individualist anarchists like Max Stirner, and Christian pacifist anarchists like Tolstoy. Instead, she focuses on collectivist and communist anarchists, advocating for an anti-state form of socialism, including Michael Bakunin, Peter Kropotkin, Carlo Cafiero, Errico Malatesta, Emma Goldman, Alexander Berkman, Rudolf Rocker and many many others.
Theory of practice
Anarchists were predominantly materialists, viewing matter as the fundamental building block of reality. They regarded humans as primarily material and biological beings, yet highly social and adaptive. However, both the natural world and human nature are not static but processes in flux. Human action is seen as processes in which individuals employ their capacities (real possibility to do or to be) to satisfy psychological drives (psychological, needs, goals), and in doing so, we change the world and ourselves at the same time [double production].
Social structures are created by human beings and are seen as part of the natural world, influencing forms of activities, drives and capacities. However, social structures are self-reproducing. They produce individuals who in turn act to reproduce these structures. This creates a feedback loop, where in order to transform society, we need transformed people and in order to have transformed people, we need a new society. Anarchists grapple with breaking this cycle by engaging in different forms of practice, and specifically revolutionary practices such as direct action, workers and renters strikes, industrial sabotage, boycott, civil disobedience and so on.
In attempting to “build the new in the shell of the old” [prefiguration], individuals will transform the world and themselves, and in the process, learn to be autonomous, organize collaboratively, and associate freely. And through this evolutionary phase, they will actually be prepared for the “day after” the revolution.
Anarchist Socialists vs State Socialists
In contrast to state socialist approaches (MLs or SocDems) which are top-down, and workers often expect salvation from above, without engaging themselves in the process, anarchist forms of practice create individuals that are capable of and driven to achieve and reproduce anarchism. For this reason, anarchists criticized state socialists and predicted that: (1) electoral politics will transform socialist reformists into bourgeois parties, turning social democracy into capitalism + welfare programs and (2) revolutionary state socialism will lead to a “red bureaucracy” where a minority controls the party and in turn dominates over the workers and society. These predictions, remarkably prescient and repeatedly confirmed, stem directly from anarchist theory of practice. Hierarchical power will transform (and corrupt), even those with the best intentions or those who were once workers, who will begin to see themselves and the world differently, and who will ultimately seek to maintain their power at the top. Or as summarized by Anark: (1) means can not be disentangled from ends, (2) hierarchical power begets monopoly and domination, (3) power structures seek to to perpetuate themselves.
To What Ends? With What Means?
Instead, anarchists support the principle of “unity of Means and Ends”, where the strategies employed to achieve the “Ends” should be aligned with those Ends. And what were their Ends? A free and equal libertarian communist society where decisions are made horizontally, via direct democracy and consensus, and resources are distributed according to need.
- Freedom: encompasses not only “negative freedom,” the ability to act according to one’s will without coercion, but also “positive freedom,” having the actual opportunity and power to act or be.
- Equality: not a Bourgeois “equality under the law” or “equality of opportunity”, but rather equality of freedom and political equality in decision-making power.
- Solidarity: forming reciprocal, caring relationships where each person acts to uphold the freedom and equality of others. This solidarity is achievable only among equals who engage in horizontal, free and mutual associations.
But through what Means are these Ends supposed to be achieved? 5 out of 11 chapters are dedicated on the differences and disagreements between insurrection anarchists (against formal organizations, “propaganda of the deed”) and mass anarchists, primarily focusing on anarcho-syndicalism and organizational dualism (synthesists and platformists), supporting mass organization and anarchist militants' involvement in mass organizations to combat reformist tendencies within trade unions. Zoe Baker also delves into the controversy around Bakunin’s “Invisible Legions” and the Makhno-Malatesta debates, which I was mostly unaware of and found rather interesting.
Beyond dead men with large beards
The book is not a mere exercise in the history of (mostly) “dead men with large beards”. Instead, the aim is to revisit the past of one of the most important emancipatory movements, to learn both from its successes and, more often, its failures. To retain what remains true, useful and relevant. To update the old and synthesize new ideas for current emancipatory efforts; especially in the light of current and worsening challenges we face, such as climate breakdown, Surveillance Capitalism/Techno Feudalism, the resurgence of fascism and so on. Such efforts to update anarchism encompass expanding its scope to include intersectional class struggle, incorporating feminism, black liberation, queer politics, as well as ecological anarchism, and even vegan-anarchism.
Anarchism is often criticized by certain strands of Marxism for being overly Idealist and ignoring Materialist analysis; ideas and values being the primary force that shape the world. While Zoe Baker makes clear that this is not the case (i.e. see Prefiguration), I also see the value in integrating Marx’s lens of historical materialism with libertarian thought. For this reason, I would highly recommend watching, see “What is Politics” political anthropology series.
As Noam Chomsky has remarked, anarchism is grounded in “truisms” —“self-evident truths”. So I have found that after grasping the core arguments, delving deeper into anarchist theory offers limited additional value — though, if convinced, one’s focus ought to turn towards praxis. But if I were to choose only one book to learn about anarchism, Means and Ends would be hard to beat, since it strikes an excellent balance between being accessible, thorough, informative, and entertaining, all at the same time.
October 24, 2023
This book is an excellent rational reconstruction of the historical anarchist movement in the US and Europe and I would recommend it to anyone interested in leftism, socialism, anarchism, or labour history. Baker engages with a wide variety of primary and secondary sources and produces a very coherent and logical reconstruction which artfully weaves together the different strands of anarchist thought and analyzes where they agree with one another, where they disagree, and how these ideas were implemented. She logically charts out how anarchism evolved from the ideas of Proudhon and the various changes it underwent due to the influence of different authors and activists and the historical events that the movement faced like state repression, the breakdown of the First International, et cetera, before becoming what we today know as the anarchist movement. She also provides plenty of historical examples of these ideas in action (both their failures and their successes) and how anarchists reacted to these historical events. In so doing, she not only provides a clear and comprehensive look at the theory of anarchists, but she also grounds it in their actual praxis, helping to historically situate anarchists, their theories, and their actions.
Baker also writes very precisely, which I enjoyed. She clearly identifies the scope of the book while re-iterating the importance of things outside the scope of the book and she is careful not to conflate individual anarchist authors with the movement as a whole. She helps to emphasize this later point by not only referring to popular authors like Kropotkin, Malatesta, and Goldman, but also making reference to various newspapers, organizations, and their platforms/manifestos. As such, I found that the book had a high level of academic rigour but it was still written clearly and accessibly enough for the lay person to understand. It can be a bit dry at points, but overall I quite enjoyed the writing. I look forwards to Baker's next book and I hope that one day she will expand upon the scope of this book and either write about the more recent evolution of the anarchist movement or incorporate sources from outside of the US and Europe.
Baker also writes very precisely, which I enjoyed. She clearly identifies the scope of the book while re-iterating the importance of things outside the scope of the book and she is careful not to conflate individual anarchist authors with the movement as a whole. She helps to emphasize this later point by not only referring to popular authors like Kropotkin, Malatesta, and Goldman, but also making reference to various newspapers, organizations, and their platforms/manifestos. As such, I found that the book had a high level of academic rigour but it was still written clearly and accessibly enough for the lay person to understand. It can be a bit dry at points, but overall I quite enjoyed the writing. I look forwards to Baker's next book and I hope that one day she will expand upon the scope of this book and either write about the more recent evolution of the anarchist movement or incorporate sources from outside of the US and Europe.
April 18, 2023
It's Zoe Baker, come on. I'm almost certain everyone who is looking for this book knows who Zoe Baker is. But for those who don't, perfect book if you want a definitive history of Anarchism without going through 5 different biographies by Nettlau and Fabbri before looking through a bunch of 19th century articles dated inconsistently in the internet archive.
July 27, 2025
This book is an excellent primer on anarchist theory, specifically the ideas of late-nineteenth/early-twentieth century European and American thinkers. It does get a bit dense at times, but it's extremely well researched and relies pretty much entirely on primary sources. The later chapters are organized with a more traditional chronological approach, in contrast to some of the earlier ones, which are mostly structured around the various theoretical concepts.
Zoe's got some great content out there you should check out if you're interested in anarchism.
Zoe's got some great content out there you should check out if you're interested in anarchism.
April 8, 2024
Well-researched, a great introduction and explanation of anarchist theory, using direct sources and quotes. A bit wordy, but still easy to follow.
September 12, 2023
The best, most clear, (oddly enough) concise, and well-put together book I’ve read this far on anarchism as a political theory, anarchism in practice, and the history of the anarchist movement in (primarily) Europe, and a little bit of the United States.
Really fantastic work, fantastically educational.
Really fantastic work, fantastically educational.
July 24, 2024
So, I've been a fan of Baker's work for years (she has a YouTube channel that you should absolutely check out if you're interested in anarchist theory) and I was so excited to finally read her book.
Basically, it's the only book about anarchism that you will ever need to read if you aren't put off by an academic approach. It is extremely well-researched, though this is to be expected of Baker. Her work ethic is unmatched.
She does an incredible job of debunking some of the most annoying myths held by too many non-anarchist leftists (okay, marxists specifically): that anarchism is naive, utopian to a fault, relies entirely on wishful thinking or, most perpexingly, that it has no basis in theory whatsoever. Baker shows us that, in reality, anarchists are and always were pragmatic in their approach. Their beliefs aren't based on some vague hippie kumbaya nonsense, but rather on a specific theoretical framework, that is, a complex theory of practice. Their worldview is informed by a deep knowledge of history, political science and anthropology.
Baker isn't shy to point out when certain practices have failed. She encourages the reader to think critically about historical anarchist movements and to learn from their mistakes. Still, she offers grace to the anarchists of yesterday by considering the larger sociopolitical and historical context they were in.
Although this is an academic book, Baker's dry sense of humor pops in every once in a while which was pleasantly surprising. For example:
What capacities, drives and consciousness people develop varies across social and historical contexts. The capacity to sail a longboat and the drive to die heroically in battle so that you will go to Valhalla developped from living as a warrior in a ninth-century Norse society. These traits are not widespread in modern Nordic societies because people are no longer engaging in that sort of Viking practice. Instead, people engage in practices that develop their capacity to assemble flat-pack furniture or their drive to go to melodic death metal concerts."
That said, if there's one thing I have to complain about, it's that in her desire for clarity and precision, Baker tends to overstate her case. After a certain point, I think I understand what a federation is. I don't need a huge paragraph of her explaining it to me, AND a long quote from a 20th century Spanish guy telling me essentially the same thing but in different words, AND a graphic illustrating the organizational structure of the CNT. Granted this is pretty minor. This book is still more than worth your time, especially if you're a nerdy leftist.
Basically, it's the only book about anarchism that you will ever need to read if you aren't put off by an academic approach. It is extremely well-researched, though this is to be expected of Baker. Her work ethic is unmatched.
She does an incredible job of debunking some of the most annoying myths held by too many non-anarchist leftists (okay, marxists specifically): that anarchism is naive, utopian to a fault, relies entirely on wishful thinking or, most perpexingly, that it has no basis in theory whatsoever. Baker shows us that, in reality, anarchists are and always were pragmatic in their approach. Their beliefs aren't based on some vague hippie kumbaya nonsense, but rather on a specific theoretical framework, that is, a complex theory of practice. Their worldview is informed by a deep knowledge of history, political science and anthropology.
Baker isn't shy to point out when certain practices have failed. She encourages the reader to think critically about historical anarchist movements and to learn from their mistakes. Still, she offers grace to the anarchists of yesterday by considering the larger sociopolitical and historical context they were in.
Although this is an academic book, Baker's dry sense of humor pops in every once in a while which was pleasantly surprising. For example:
What capacities, drives and consciousness people develop varies across social and historical contexts. The capacity to sail a longboat and the drive to die heroically in battle so that you will go to Valhalla developped from living as a warrior in a ninth-century Norse society. These traits are not widespread in modern Nordic societies because people are no longer engaging in that sort of Viking practice. Instead, people engage in practices that develop their capacity to assemble flat-pack furniture or their drive to go to melodic death metal concerts."
That said, if there's one thing I have to complain about, it's that in her desire for clarity and precision, Baker tends to overstate her case. After a certain point, I think I understand what a federation is. I don't need a huge paragraph of her explaining it to me, AND a long quote from a 20th century Spanish guy telling me essentially the same thing but in different words, AND a graphic illustrating the organizational structure of the CNT. Granted this is pretty minor. This book is still more than worth your time, especially if you're a nerdy leftist.
July 31, 2024
Means and Ends: The Revolutionary Practise of Anarchism in Europe and the United States - 4/5
An interesting and engaging introduction to the both the ideological discourse in 19th and early 20th century anarchism in Europe and the USA and into the practical means taken by anarchists in this era to achieve their ends, from strikes, schools, sabotage and more. It can be a little dry to read at times, definitely coming across as the reworking of a PhD thesis, but it's still readable and avoids relying on jargon which would needlessly alienate readers.
The only other major flaw is one that the text freely acknowledges: it's focus on just Europe and the US, and on material Baker could both access and read, does limit the work and largely excludes strains of anarchist thought from the rest of the world, only really cropping up when figures from those other movements interact with European or American groups. However, this is something the text freely acknowledges and it encourages it's readers to keep this in mind whilst reading, pushing them to engage with anarchist writings from Africa, Asia, South & Central America, and Oceania instead of relying on solely Europe or US-based writers.
Overall, definitely a worthwhile read for those looking for an overview of anarchist thought and practise from this period and place. Recommended!
An interesting and engaging introduction to the both the ideological discourse in 19th and early 20th century anarchism in Europe and the USA and into the practical means taken by anarchists in this era to achieve their ends, from strikes, schools, sabotage and more. It can be a little dry to read at times, definitely coming across as the reworking of a PhD thesis, but it's still readable and avoids relying on jargon which would needlessly alienate readers.
The only other major flaw is one that the text freely acknowledges: it's focus on just Europe and the US, and on material Baker could both access and read, does limit the work and largely excludes strains of anarchist thought from the rest of the world, only really cropping up when figures from those other movements interact with European or American groups. However, this is something the text freely acknowledges and it encourages it's readers to keep this in mind whilst reading, pushing them to engage with anarchist writings from Africa, Asia, South & Central America, and Oceania instead of relying on solely Europe or US-based writers.
Overall, definitely a worthwhile read for those looking for an overview of anarchist thought and practise from this period and place. Recommended!
June 26, 2024
this book does what it says it does. it is a summary of the different tendencies and practices of anarchism between the nineteenth century and ca. 1933. it is not, however, a very interesting read. furthermore, for me at least, it was too long and too detailed to spark many ideas or new viewpoints to implement in my activism.
i think i would have liked something more focussed, or something with a broader view instead of mentionings of what feels like every single anarchist bombing, meeting and letter from that time period. i had hoped for an overview, but this is very detailed. it might be great for people who write papers or something, but the author explicitly states they wish for it to lead modern anarchists in their activism and i am not sure it does this. if anything it made me feel more hopless. maybe the realisations of anarchism after the second world war would be more interesting to me.
also, while i probably wouldn't have gotten through this if it wasn't for the audiobook, it also didn't help me to concentrate. it felt very monotone and repetitive. and again, this is not the book's fault, which is essentially an academic text, a summary of primary sources and not something to be entertained by.
i think i would have liked something more focussed, or something with a broader view instead of mentionings of what feels like every single anarchist bombing, meeting and letter from that time period. i had hoped for an overview, but this is very detailed. it might be great for people who write papers or something, but the author explicitly states they wish for it to lead modern anarchists in their activism and i am not sure it does this. if anything it made me feel more hopless. maybe the realisations of anarchism after the second world war would be more interesting to me.
also, while i probably wouldn't have gotten through this if it wasn't for the audiobook, it also didn't help me to concentrate. it felt very monotone and repetitive. and again, this is not the book's fault, which is essentially an academic text, a summary of primary sources and not something to be entertained by.
February 19, 2025
This was a doozy to get through,but it was worth it. I learned a lot about anarchist history and the different sects of anarchist thought. Some I agreed with some I didn't,but I am better off having read this book. This book is not the end all be all for anarchist history and Zoe Baker even notes at the end that this book only covers a European perspective and that anarchism exists in other regions. She urges readers to look up Asian, indigenous, and black writers to get a fuller perspective on what anarchism is and what it can be and notes that anarchism is not just the thoughts of people long dead. She encourages the reader to learn from this book and take from it what we need and to create our own thoughts on anarchism for our time. I appreciated this message.
If you are serious about learning leftist socialist theory and are tired of the fear mongering and propaganda whenever words like anarchism are brought up, I encourage you to read this book and form your own opinions. You'll only come out better for it.
If you are serious about learning leftist socialist theory and are tired of the fear mongering and propaganda whenever words like anarchism are brought up, I encourage you to read this book and form your own opinions. You'll only come out better for it.
January 23, 2024
Zoe Baker's Means and Ends is comprehensive, with its theoretical framework, the unity of means and ends, serving as the through line. It primarily references Émile Pouget, Errico Malatesta, Mikhail Bakunin, Peter Kropotkin, the CNT, Alexander Berkman, and Emma Goldman. Adherent to its title, it primarily focuses on French, Italian, and Spanish anarchism. It conveys information concisely whilst quoting heavily; although its largest limitation is its reliance on English-language or translated works. Such did not prevent it from accumulating a 92-page endnotes & bibliography section. Overall, it is a great rational reconstruction of anarcho-communism, insurrectionist anarchism, mass anarchism, anarcho-syndicalism, "syndicalism-plus", revolutionary syndicalism, organizational dualism, and platformism. The 8 years dedicated to producing this book paid off well.
Additionally, if you need a preview, their YouTube content (@Zoe Baker) is identical in essential points.
Additionally, if you need a preview, their YouTube content (@Zoe Baker) is identical in essential points.
February 20, 2024
Claro y conciso paseíto por las estrategias y argumentos anarquistas de los siglos XIX y XX. Es consciente de sus limitaciones y lo que ello implican y se maneja dentro de las fronteras que la autora se impone y justifica de una manera fácil de entender para todos los públicos. Pese a su lenguaje sobrio y académico toma partido, algo que se ve claramente sobre todo en una conclusión bastante propositiva. Conclusión que es también una muy buena síntesis de todo el libro en general. Evita ser un compendio de señores, eventos y palabras al viento y trata de centrarse en distintas prácticas, estrategias, relaciones y, por supuesto, contradicciones.
Espero que en algún momento se anime a escribir sobre el anarquismo fuera de Europa y Norteamérica en esos mismos años porque las pistitas y menciones que hace le dejan a uno con las ganas de saber más.
Espero que en algún momento se anime a escribir sobre el anarquismo fuera de Europa y Norteamérica en esos mismos años porque las pistitas y menciones que hace le dejan a uno con las ganas de saber más.
August 25, 2023
This book does exactly what it sets out to do, and that is to explain Anarchist's ideas and organizing during the second half of the 19th century to the first half of the 20th century. Baker does a great job of breaking down ideas and concepts clearly and precisely. This is a very good primer for those new to anarchist history and philosophy. The only drawback is that it only covers anarchism in its early stages so one does not see how it intersects and evolves with other movements such as feminist, black, brown, indigenous, queer, ecological, and people with disabilities theories and practices. Hopefully, Baker will do a follow-up showing how anarchism has evolved throughout the years after what this work chronicles and into our contemporary times.
June 24, 2025
The book is meticulously organized into the basis of anarchist ideals, their formation, their reasoning, theory, and then into organizational structure throughout its early history and those groups' differences and arguments.
I felt like I still didn't fully understand every single anarchist adjective type by the end, but it gives a good breakdown of the gist of what each adjective is focused on. Anarcho-syndicalists: trade unions. Anarcho-Communists: communal ownership of land, the conquest of bread describes it well.
It is a good starting point *for an anarchist* or more generally a socialist in my opinion. It's not the read for an introduction to anarchism if you're just partially interested in the subject, unless you love historical nonfiction.
I felt like I still didn't fully understand every single anarchist adjective type by the end, but it gives a good breakdown of the gist of what each adjective is focused on. Anarcho-syndicalists: trade unions. Anarcho-Communists: communal ownership of land, the conquest of bread describes it well.
It is a good starting point *for an anarchist* or more generally a socialist in my opinion. It's not the read for an introduction to anarchism if you're just partially interested in the subject, unless you love historical nonfiction.
December 31, 2023
She wrote a book! Means and Ends is an incredibly detailed and engaging treatment of the history of late-18th/early-19th century anarchism in Europe and the United States. All the best qualities of Zoe's work that she has posted on YouTube for years translate beyond smoothly to print. The book is thorough yet accessible, elegantly written yet concise, and vast yet incisive. I would recommend it especially to non-anarchist readers who are curious about the theoretical, strategic, and historical foundations of anti-state socialism.
February 20, 2024
1 Star = I didn't finish it. (I stopped at 70% through the audiobook)
I was hoping for a history of anarchism activities and the motivation behind them. I'm not 100% sure what this is. Baker states in the intro that he is advocating for the movement but the writing doesn't really seem to be that persuasive. There are so many different versions of anarchism that the author spends most of the time talking about these differences at the philosophical level that it is hard for the reader to come away with any one thread of logic to move on from.
I was hoping for a history of anarchism activities and the motivation behind them. I'm not 100% sure what this is. Baker states in the intro that he is advocating for the movement but the writing doesn't really seem to be that persuasive. There are so many different versions of anarchism that the author spends most of the time talking about these differences at the philosophical level that it is hard for the reader to come away with any one thread of logic to move on from.
March 3, 2025
This is not only the most comprehensive and concise study of Euro-American anarchist history in existence, but it's also essential information for every leftist, regardless of which ideology you fall under. I'm a big fan of Zoe's YouTube channel, and I simply cannot wait for her next project, whatever it might be. We are so fortunate to live during a time when this type of academic work is being created, and I will surely be buying physical copies of this book for all of my leftist friends.
December 25, 2025
Good example of the weaknesses and self-contradictions of anarchist theory, but good overview nevertheless by one prominent supporter of the ideas.
Some extra problems:
1. Use of very small/cut quotations within the text (tiring while reading, and obscuring the ideas of the original authors).
2. Double-standards when comparing with other currents (like marxism).
3. In many cases, wider context missing and lack of practical assessment of the ideas.
Some extra problems:
1. Use of very small/cut quotations within the text (tiring while reading, and obscuring the ideas of the original authors).
2. Double-standards when comparing with other currents (like marxism).
3. In many cases, wider context missing and lack of practical assessment of the ideas.
June 5, 2024
I ended up kinda skim reading a lot of this book because it is so repetitive. While it is very well researched and pulls a lot of various works together, I find it’s like reading an essay by a student. It’s very formulaic and I cant stress repetition enough.
It’s a great introduction, but didn’t really provide me with a history of anarchists and theories, more of a collection of pamphlets on it.
It’s a great introduction, but didn’t really provide me with a history of anarchists and theories, more of a collection of pamphlets on it.
May 17, 2025
Great overview of much of the history of anarchist political thought and practice. I particularly appreciated the author's deft tellings of conflicts between Marxists and anarchists, and individualist anarchists and social anarchists; and why anarchists of different schools came to their particular conclusions out of necessity and/or social scientific analysis.
January 22, 2024
My only criticism is that the author defines anarchism primarily as 'anti-state socialism', when it should be defined more broadly as 'anti-authoritarian socialism'. But this is a fine book which I recommend.
May 8, 2024
This is a very interesting book if you have any interest in the history of anarchism or the working class struggle for freedom in general. It is also an academically rigorous book but written in a much more accessible and understandable way than most academic books.
July 12, 2025
very much a must read for those unfamiliar or not in the history and philosophy of anarchism. thoroughly researched and packed with information including the corrections of many historical misconceptions.
October 4, 2023
Pretty good. Stuffed with info
Read
October 8, 2023Very good
December 27, 2023
This work deserves 6/5 stars.
Read
January 27, 2024DNF because for me the writing style didn't work for an audiobook so I'm going to return to the print version later. Mostly note to self.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 40 reviews