Romantic Anarche: The Philosophical and Literary Anarchism of William Godwin (original) (raw)
Related papers
Anarchy as Order: The History and Future of Civic Humanity, 2009
This book took shape over many years and was written in at least five cities. As it evolved I benefited from conversations, critique, and learning opportunities from more sources than I can count. Overall, I benefited most from those who were suspicious of this work and doubted its argument. But the real encouragement came from my students at various institutions, long before I set finger to keyboard. They always and unfailingly asked me to say more when I mentioned anarchy in passing in connection to civic histories, democracy, or global processes. They helped me realize that the answers I wanted to give, or at least explore, were not available in any modern text. Older texts of anarchy seemed to require much updating and revamping, I thought, before the anarchist tradition may become useful again. And the argument for anarchy had to be straightforward and simple yet comprehensive and rationally defensible on all grounds. So it is my students who deserve most credit for motivating this project into light. An early conversation with James Scott helped me see what was at stake. A definite note of gratitude goes to Mark Selden, whose questioning of the dialectic of freedom and community gave stronger shape to my exploration of those critical concepts. Thanks also go to the anonymous reviewer, who saw clearly the merits of the book and also saw much to disagree with, while delivering an exemplary scholarly judgment. I also thank my colleague John Markoff for his insights and for suggesting the main title after it became clear that the original title had to be changed. As always, much is owed to Randall Halle, who exposed this project to his discernment and approached it with healthy skepticism, and in doing so helped make it better. I have incorporated much of his critique, which was especially crucial for clarifying the distinction between Anarchism and viii Acknowledgments Anarchy as a Science of Humanity 9 state of attention to that which is not yet in it. The point, indeed, is "not to discover what we are, but to refuse what we are." 1 Confused intellectual guidance here and now seems part and parcel of an ethic of discovery characterized by hesitance and contentment with diagnosis once it becomes apparent that the cure requires something closer to anarchy. Political theorizing within left as well as establishment paradigms has long noted not only the decline of politics, but moreover seemed to mimic in style, theory, and recommendations the stale prescriptions in political life such theories themselves describe. On the establishment side the problem was noted by very well-placed commentators. 2 The arguments in this line of thinking concentrate on what might be called the decline in the quality of democracy in democratically governed countries. Typical indicators here include declining rates of voter participation; ideological convergence across the main political parties (i.e., the practical disappearance of the opposition); the increase in the social expectations of the state (i.e., the tendency of all classes and groups to simply regard the state as a dispenser of rewards, entitlements, and new rights); the decline of enthusiasm for collective tasks (i.e., the reorganization of the political scene around localized niches: "life politics" and special interest groups); the rise of style over substance in election campaigns; the decline in rates of participation in civil society; and so on. These observations usually offer little in the way of guidance as to what could be done. Samuel Huntington prefers to wait for cultures and civilizations to do what they are preprogrammed to do; in the new edition of his Cultural Contradictions of Capitalism, Daniel Bell finds no solution to the social fragmentation and hedonism engendered by modern capitalism other than to advise a voluntary return to some sort of religious consciousness. 3 After a meticulous appraisal, Robert Putnam finds no way to strengthen civil society and social capital other than simply waiting for a long historical process (a few centuries) to accomplish the task. 4 The problem with the diagnoses of the maladies of modern democracy issuing from the side of establishment-aligned or liberal thinkers is not their inaccuracy. Rather, the problem is their lack of sufficient radicalismthat is, willingness to pursue their own insights to their proper conclusion. Anarchist thought does not require impulsively disagreeing with establishment or liberal thought. It may even diagnose the same problem, but then proceed to where establishment-oriented thought refuses to go. Thinking anarchically means in one sense that existing order, along with the institutions that sustain it, must be constantly justified. Anarchically thinking here means attention to the original intention and continuing usefulness of collective institutions, rather than holding them sacred due to the force of habit: saving the state, upholding the law, or pursuing collective social
Anarchism as the road to peace and order
Several misconceptions that have surrounded anarchism gave it an eerily glow and associated it with malevolent concepts, blood, and violence. Firstly, it is sometimes synonymized with anarchy. Secondly, there is an assumption that all tendencies of anarchism are socialist (on the left of the political spectrum.) That is, theoretically at least, untrue. The purpose of this paper is to clear this misconception: the misleading similarity in the two concepts of anarchy and anarchism, and in doing so will also be clarifying the stance of extreme right-wing anarchism. As such, the paper will be exploring the claim that anarchism is connected to disorder and chaos, through arguing that while some anarchists were revolutionary and advocated a violent upheaval of the state as the only path to freedom, there are more peaceful anarchist tendencies, also known as anarcho-pacifism which seek to abolish the state for the greater good to achieve peace and order. The paper will do so through a discourse analysis of several original texts for prominent anarchists such as Emma Goldman, Petr Kropotkin, and Pierre Joseph Proudhon. The paper will first seek to define anarchism. It will then begin exploring the several writings of anarchists who promoted human development and the harmonizing of the society and individual. The paper will then use this to denounce individualist anarchism as anarchist at all. The paper will also explore the various commonalities between communism and anarchism to prove its affiliation with political economy and commitment to equality; as opposed to the after-thought notion of equality found in other ideologies such as classical liberalism.
Anarchy Is Order: A Defense of a Stateless Society
LeBaron Liberty Library , 2017
There exists a common misconception of the term and concept of “anarchism.” The term anarchism alone, when used in a group of devout statists (those who affirm absolute political authority) will no doubt warrant the statists to take the defensive side of the conversation, bringing with their defensive response(s) a preconceived notion of the acceptance and advancement of amoral behavior and criminal acts, and the condoning and praise of violence. The focus of this paper is threefold. First, there will be an inquiry into the political theory of anarchism and the subsequent hyphenated subset anarchies within the general realm of anarchism. This paper will grant the reader a general philosophical and political understanding of theory and implementation of a stateless society. Second, the psychology of authority will be challenged in the hopes of bringing to light the inherent contradictions existing within statism and authority. This will include the examination of operant conditioning, which enables subjects to unquestionably accept authority and government as legitimate, by denial of individual sovereignty. This paper will demonstrate that government is synonymous with civil war, while anarchism is synonymous with social order. Finally, the notion of society and religion will be examined. F. Scott Fitzgerald: “The test of first rate intelligence is the ability to hold two opposed ideas in the mind at the same time, and still retain the ability to function.”
Review: Anarchism Revisited: A New Philosophy
Diacritics, 1978
One can well see how, beneath all the democratic and socialistic phrases and promises of Herr Marx's programme, there survives in his State everything that contributes to the truly despotic and brutal nature of all States, whatever their forms of government, and that in the last resort, the People's State so strongly recommended by Herr Marx, and the aristocratic-monarchic State maintained with such skill and power by Herr Bismarck, are completely identical in the nature of both their internal and external aims. Externally there is the same deployment of military power, which means conquest; internally, there is the same employment of armed forces, the last argument of all threatened political powers, against the masses who, tired of always believing, hoping, accepting and obeying, rise in rebellion.-Michael Bakunin GCS: It is not often our privilege to write on writers recently treated by Newsweek, Playboy (frangais), Der Spiegel, Time: Bernard-Henri L6vy,
Anarchism and Philosophy: A Critical Introduction
Brill's Companion to Anarchism and Philosophy, ed. Nathan Jun, 2017
For use by the Author only | © 2018 Koninklijke Brill NV Disputes over the meaning of "anarchism" are sometimes reducible to disputes over specific definitions-as when Jones defines anarchism as a philosophy that rejects all authority as such, whereas Smith defines it more narrowly as a philosophy that regards all states as illegitimate. In this case, Jones and Smith agree on the general kind of which anarchism is a particular instance but disagree about how it differs from all other instances of that kind. This is in marked contrast with disputes over whether anarchism should be considered an ideology,4 a political philosophy,5 a social system,6 a theory of organization,7
ANARCHISM: WHAT IT REALLY STANDS FOR
THE history of human growth and development is at the same time the history of the terrible struggle of every new idea heralding the approach of a brighter dawn. In its tenacious hold on tradition, the Old has never hesitated to make use of the foulest and cruelest means to stay the advent of the New, in whatever form or period the latter may have asserted itself. Nor need we retrace our steps into the distant past to realize the enormity of opposition, difficulties, and hardships placed in the path of every progressive idea. The rack, the thumbscrew, and the knout are still with us; so are the convict's garb and the social wrath, all conspiring against the spirit that is serenely marching on.