Classical Anarchism: The Political Thought of Godwin, Proudhon, Bakunin, and Kropotkin

by George Crowder

How can there be order in a modern society without government? In Classical Anarchism, George Crowder considers the presentation of stateless order in the works of writers who epitomized the "classical" tradition of anarchistic thought--Godwin, Proudhon, Kropotkin, and Bakunin. Crowder argues that their theses of stateless order are more coherent and persuasive than usually supposed if considered in their intellectual and historical context. He concentrates on three aspects of anarchist thought which have been previously neglected or misunderstood: the "positive" character of their concept of freedom, the complexity of their responses to Rousseau, and the degree to which they were influenced by contemporary scientism. Crowder closes with an evaluation of classical anarchism from a current perspective and considers prospects for the future of anarchist ideology.

Genres: Philosophy

224 pages, Hardcover

First published January 1, 1991

Reviews

[Preetam Chatterjee · Rating 4 out of 5]

The English word anarchy is derived from the Greek word anarkhia. Or some scholars hold the view that it may be derived from anarchia. Whatever may be the etymological source, the dictionary meaning is "complete absence of law or government: a harmonious condition of society in which law is abolished as unnecessary: utter lawlessness; chaos; complete disorder." It is interesting to note that there is not one meaning of the term anarchy, it is blessed with several meanings. But all the meanings indicate only one thing: the lawlessness or chaos.

To put it in a slightly different language, anarchy or anarchism is synonymous with utter disorder and chaos. In this way the term is normally used pejoratively. Dictionary also speaks of the harmonious relationship among all the people of society and this harmony will make law unnecessary. The implication is purpose of law is harmonization. If somehow people succeed in effecting a harmonious relationship among them all, law will be redundant and we shall call that condition an anarchical. Of course, it is a farfetched meaning and anarchism is not normally used in this sense.

In its political connotation it is very difficult to define anarchism. This particular work by George Crowder, gives you a bird’s eye view into the subject’s origin and development.

Historically anarchism is a doctrine which poses a criticism of existing society; a view of a desirable future society; and a means of passing from one to another" .Anarchism in the sense used by Woodlock is not a thought-bank, it is an action. Woodlock continues-"Anarchism is concerned mainly with man in relation to society. Its ultimate aim is always social change; its present attitude is always one of social condemnation its method is always that of social rebellion, violent or otherwise.

Prince Peter Kropotkin published the Great French Revolution in 1909 and he wrote in this book "What We learn today from the study of the Great Revolution is that it was the source and origin of all the present communist, anarchist and socialist conceptions." It is now admitted by all historians that the words anarchy and anarchism Were freely used' during the revolution. The French Revolution, in fact, did not have the anarchistic aims, achievements and methods. Inspite of this it is regarded as the most effective source of anarchism and communism.

The Revolution was the spectacle of the greatest political up­heavals for centuries. In the Revolution there were certain move­ments which the anarchists and communists used to justify their own motives and activities. During the revolution there was great chaos and the chaos is generally identified with anarchy: There Was the least prevalence of law and order during the revolutionary activities. In the spring and summer of 1793 France Was in a cauldron of severe economic and social crises and it was beyond the capacity of the existing government to tackle these problems. People were on the streets. The sky-touching prices of food and other necessary goods encouraged the popular agitation.

In his speeches Jacques-Roux insisted upon economic freedom. He said that without economic freedom political liberty was meaning­less and nothing but an empty phantom Jacques-Roux believed that only a revolution could emancipate the people from oppression and people must demonstrate their revolutionary power. Revolution to him was direct action-to seize goods in grocers' shops. Where necessary mob would resort to pillage and robbery and in this way they would be able to establish justice in society.

Though the French Revolution is regarded as the important source of anarchist thought in the academic world it was first used by Pierre-Joseph Proudhon in 1840 in his famous book What is Property. The celebrated answer which he gave in the book was "property is theft." In this book Proudhon declared himself an anarchist and such a declaration we get for the first time. Notwithstanding the fact that Proudhon declared himself an anarchist, he never considered himself an advocate of disorder and chaos. He also claimed that he did not accept the ambiguity of the Greek word anarchos.

Different anarchists viewed state, law, society, individual and sphere of government activities from their respective standpoints and as a result of this variety there did not develop a comprehensive, and systematic theory of anarchism. Several strands of thought were knit together to give an acceptable shape of theory of anarchism.

Paradoxes could not be removed. Woodcock pertinently remarks­ "To describe the essential theory of anarchism is rather trying to grapple with Proteus, for the very nature of libertarian attitude-its rejection of dogmas, its deliberate avoidance of rigidly systematic theory, and above all its stress on extreme freedom of choice and on the primacy of the individual judgment-creates immediately the possibility of a variety of viewpoints inconceivable in a closely dogmatic system."


The basis of the anarchist's critique of the state starts with the premise that men are by nature not good. But like Hobbes's men they are not unsociable and quarrelsome. He is sociable and cooperative. Proudhon Wrote "An integral part of collective existence, man feels his dignity at the same time in himself and in others and thus carries in his heart the principle of morality superior to himself. This principle does not come from outside; it is secreted within him ; it is immanent. It constitutes his essence. The essence of society itself. It is the true form of human spirit, a form which takes shape and grows towards perfection only by the relationship that everyday gives birth to social life." The sociability is the inherent characteristic of man. When he came out of the animal world this development took place.

To sum up this book, one can quote what Bakunin said, "The future social organization must be made solely from the bottom upwards, by the free association or federation of workers, firstly in their unions, then in the communes, regions, nations and finally in the great federation international and universal. Then alone will be realised the true and life-giving order of freedom and common good."

“The mind can make a heaven out of hell or a hell out of heaven”: Milton

A must read for students of politics.

[michael]

Crowder posses some tough questions for traditional anarhcist theory. The first part serves as a great intro to anarchist ideas.