Anarchy 70/Anarchist anthologies - Revision history

Ivanhoe at 19:44, 11 October 2021

2021-10-11T19:44:54Z

Ivanhoe at 22:39, 26 September 2021

2021-09-26T22:39:11Z

Show changes

162.158.146.242 at 20:40, 17 August 2021

2021-08-17T20:40:31Z

162.158.146.242: freedom

2021-08-17T20:35:49Z

freedom

imported>Ivanhoe at 03:22, 10 October 2017

2017-10-10T03:22:53Z

Show changes

imported>Ivanhoe at 02:00, 10 October 2017

2017-10-10T02:00:28Z

69.50.165.95 at 21:03, 9 October 2017

2017-10-09T21:03:13Z

69.50.165.95 at 01:17, 3 October 2017

2017-10-03T01:17:48Z

imported>Ivanhoe at 00:47, 30 September 2017

2017-09-30T00:47:16Z

imported>Ivanhoe at 01:15, 29 September 2017

2017-09-29T01:15:14Z

@@ Line 40: / Line 40: @@
 {{tab}}{{qq|Cri&shy;ti&shy;cising So&shy;cial&shy;ism}}—''au&shy;thor&shy;it&shy;arian'' so&shy;cial&shy;ism, that is—con&shy;tains ex&shy;tracts from {{w|Benjamin Tucker|Benjamin_Tucker}}{{s}} article {{qq|{{l|State So&shy;cial&shy;ism and Anarch&shy;ism|https://archive.org/details/statesocialisman00tuck|Full text at the Internet Archive}}}}, from his maga&shy;zine ''{{w|Liberty|Liberty_(1881–1908)|Liberty (1881-1908)}}'' (1886)* and his book
-{{l|''Instead of a Book''|https://archive.org/details/cu31924030333052|Full text at the Internet Archive}} (1893); {{w|Tolstoy|Leo_Tolstoy|Leo Tolstoy}}{{s}} book {{l|''The Slavery of Our Times''|https://archive.org/details/slaveryourtimes00tolsiala|Full text at the Internet Archive}} (1900); {{w|Bakunin|Mikhail_Bakunin|Mikhail Bakunin}}{{s}} books {{l|''Fed&shy;er&shy;al&shy;ism, So&shy;cial&shy;ism and Anti&shy;theo&shy;lo&shy;gism''|https://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/bakunin/works/various/reasons-of-state.htm|Full text at Marxists Internet Archive}} (1867)* and ''The Knouto-Germanic Empire and the So&shy;cial Re&shy;volu&shy;tion'' (1871)*, and some minor works of the same period from {{w|K. J. Kenafick|Kenneth_Kenafick|Kenneth Kenafick}}{{s}} book {{l|''Marx&shy;ism, Free&shy;dom and the State''|https://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/bakunin/works/mf-state/index.htm|Full text at Marxists Internet Archive}} (1950); [[Author:Emma Goldman|Emma Goldman]]{{s}} book {{l|''My Further Dis&shy;il&shy;lu&shy;sion&shy;ment in Russia''|https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/emma-goldman-my-further-disillusionment-in-russia|Full text at the Anarchist Library}} (1924); the {{sc|anarchy}} Edit&shy;or&shy;ial {{qq|[[Anarchy 3/Moving with the times … but not in step|Mov&shy;ing with the Times &hellip; but Not in Step]]}} from [[Anarchy 3|{{sc|anarchy}} 3]] (May 1961); and [[Author:Paul Goodman|Paul Goodman]]{{s}} book ''{{w|People or Person&shy;nel|People_or_Personnel}}'' (1965).
+{{l|''Instead of a Book''|https://archive.org/details/cu31924030333052|Full text at the Internet Archive}} (1893); {{w|Tolstoy|Leo_Tolstoy|Leo Tolstoy}}{{s}} book {{l|''The Slavery of Our Times''|https://archive.org/details/slaveryourtimes00tolsiala|Full text at the Internet Archive}} (1900); {{w|Bakunin|Mikhail_Bakunin|Mikhail Bakunin}}{{s}} books {{l|''Fed&shy;er&shy;al&shy;ism, So&shy;cial&shy;ism and Anti&shy;theo&shy;lo&shy;gism''|https://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/bakunin/works/various/reasons-of-state.htm|Full text at Marxists Internet Archive}} (1867)* and ''The Knouto-Germanic Empire and the So&shy;cial Re&shy;volu&shy;tion'' (1871)*, and some minor works of the same period from {{w|K. J. Kenafick|Kenneth_Kenafick|Kenneth Kenafick}}{{s}} book {{l|''Marx&shy;ism, Free&shy;dom and the State''|https://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/bakunin/works/mf-state/index.htm|Full text at Marxists Internet Archive}} (1950); [[Author:Emma Goldman|Emma Goldman]]{{s}} book {{l|''My Further Dis&shy;il&shy;lu&shy;sion&shy;ment in Russia''|https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/emma-goldman-my-further-disillusionment-in-russia|Full text at the Anarchist Library}} (1924); the {{sc|anarchy}} Edit&shy;or&shy;ial {{qq|[[Anarchy 3/Moving with the times … but not in step|Mov&shy;ing with the Times {{e}} but Not in Step]]}} from [[Anarchy 3|{{sc|anarchy}} 3]] (May 1961); and [[Author:Paul Goodman|Paul Goodman]]{{s}} book ''{{w|People or Person&shy;nel|People_or_Personnel}}'' (1965).
 {{tab}}{{qq|Philo&shy;soph&shy;ical Founda&shy;tions}} con&shy;tains ex&shy;tracts from {{w|Adin Ballou|Adin_Ballou}}{{s}} {{l|''Non-Resist&shy;ance in Rela&shy;tion to Human Govern&shy;ment''|https://archive.org/details/Non-resistanceInRelationToHumanGovernments|Full text at the Internet Archive}} (1839)*; {{w|Nicolas Berdyaev|Nikolai_Berdyaev|Nikolai Berdyaev}}{{s}} book ''Slavery and Free&shy;dom'' (1944); {{w|Max Stirner|Max_Stirner}}{{s}} {{l|''The Ego and His Own''|https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/max-stirner-the-ego-and-his-own|Full text at the Anarchist Library}} (1845)*; {{w|William Godwin|William_Godwin}}{{s}} {{l|''Polit&shy;ical Just&shy;ice''|http://oll.libertyfund.org/titles/godwin-an-enquiry-concerning-political-justice-in-2-vols|Full text at the Online Library of Liberty}} (1793); {{q|{{w|Stephen Andrews|Stephen_Pearl_Andrews|Stephen Pearl Andrews}}|r}} book {{l|''The Sci&shy;ence of So&shy;ciety''|http://www.anarchism.net/scienceofsociety.htm|Full text at anarchism.net}} (1852); and [[Author:Peter Kropotkin|Kropotkin]]{{s}} pamph&shy;lets {{l|''Anarch&shy;ist Com&shy;mun&shy;ism''|https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/petr-kropotkin-anarchist-communism-its-basis-and-principles|Full text at the Anarchist Library}} (1887)*, {{l|''Anarch&shy;ist Moral&shy;ity''|https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/petr-kropotkin-anarchist-morality|Full text at the Anarchist Library}} (1891)*, and {{l|''Anarchy'': ''Its Philo&shy;sophy and Ideal''|http://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/petr-kropotkin-anarchism-its-philosophy-and-ideal|Full text at the Anarchist Library}} (1896)*.

@@ Line 62: / Line 62: @@
 {{tab}}After this, his Intro&shy;duc&shy;tion is dis&shy;ap&shy;point&shy;ing. It is full of the sort of ab&shy;stract gener&shy;al&shy;isa&shy;tion that dis&shy;figures much modern so&shy;cio&shy;logical writing{{dash}}and dis&shy;figured {{w|James Joll|James_Joll}}{{s}} book ''{{l|The Anarch&shy;ists|http://www.ditext.com/joll/anarchists.html}}'' as well. Because of this, the good things he has to say are ob&shy;scured.
-{{tab}}The Intro&shy;duc&shy;tion also con&shy;tains a {{qq|typo&shy;logy of anarch&shy;ist strat&shy;egies and be&shy;liefs,}} which is un&shy;fortun&shy;ately never heard of again. Horo&shy;witz dis&shy;tin&shy;guishes eight vari&shy;eties of anarch&shy;ism; ''util&shy;it&shy;arian'' (men&shy;tion&shy;ing {{w|Hel&shy;v&eacute;tius|Claude_Adrien_Helvétius}}, {{w|Diderot|Denis_Diderot}}, {{w|Godwin|William_Godwin}}, and {{w|Saint-Simon|Claude_Henri_de_Rouvroy,_comte_de_Saint-Simon}}, ''peasant'' men&shy;tion&shy;ing {{w|M&uuml;nzer|Thomas_Müntzer}}, {{w|Sis&shy;mondi|Jean_Charles_Léonard_de_Sismondi}}, {{w|Fourier|Charles_Fourier}}, {{w|Proudhon|Pierre-Joseph_Proudhon}}, and {{w|Bakunin|Mikhail_Bakunin}}), ''syn&shy;dic&shy;al&shy;ist'' (men&shy;tion&shy;ing {{w|Pel&shy;loutier|Fernand_Pelloutier}}), ''col&shy;lect&shy;iv&shy;ist'' (men&shy;tion&shy;ing Bakunin and [[Author:Peter Kropotkin|Kropotkin]]), {{p|379}}''con&shy;spir&shy;at&shy;orial'' (mentioning {{w|Most|Johann_Most}} and {{w|Henry|Émile_Henry_(anarchist)}}), ''com&shy;mun&shy;ist'' (men&shy;tion&shy;ing {{w|Mala&shy;testa|Errico_Malatesta}}, {{w|Stepniak|Sergey_Stepnyak-Kravchinsky}}, and {{w|Cafiero|Carlo_Cafiero}}), ''in&shy;di&shy;vidual&shy;ist'' (mentioning {{w|Stirner|Max_Stirner}}, {{w|Warren|Josiah_Warren}}, {{w|Spooner|Lysander_Spooner}}, and {{w|Tucker|Benjamin_Tucker}}), and ''pacif&shy;ist'' (men&shy;tion&shy;ing {{w|Tolstoy|Leo_Tolstoy}} and {{w|Gandhi|Mahatma_Gandhi}}). This is reason&shy;able enough, though there are some oddit&shy;ies. Six of the people men&shy;tioned weren{{t}} anarch&shy;ists at all (M&uuml;nzer, Hel&shy;v&eacute;tius, Diderot, Sis&shy;mondi, Saint-<wbr>Simon, and Gandhi); two of the variet&shy;ies are surely wrongly named{{dash}}Diderot and Godwin weren{{t}} ''util&shy;it&shy;arian'', in the normal sense of the prag&shy;matic tradi&shy;tion from {{w|Bentham|Jeremy_Bentham}} and {{w|Mill|John_Stuart_Mill}} to the {{w|Fabian So&shy;ciety|Fabian_Society}} and the {{w|Wel&shy;fare State|Welfare_state}}, but ''ration&shy;al&shy;ist,'' inter&shy;ested not in the great&shy;est happi&shy;ness of the great&shy;est number but in justice and truth; and Most and Henry weren{{t}} just ''con&shy;spir&shy;at&shy;orial,'' like many other anarch&shy;ists, but ''terror&shy;ist,'' inter&shy;ested not in con&shy;spiracy for its own sake but in con&shy;spiracy to murder. And is there not some con&shy;fu&shy;sion over Bakunin, who wanted an in&shy;sur&shy;rec&shy;tion of workers as well as peas&shy;ants and called himself a ''col&shy;lect&shy;iv&shy;ist,'' and over Kropot&shy;kin, who always called himself a ''com&shy;mun&shy;ist''?
+{{tab}}The Intro&shy;duc&shy;tion also con&shy;tains a {{qq|typo&shy;logy of anarch&shy;ist strat&shy;egies and be&shy;liefs,}} which is un&shy;fortun&shy;ately never heard of again. Horo&shy;witz dis&shy;tin&shy;guishes eight vari&shy;eties of anarch&shy;ism; ''util&shy;it&shy;arian'' (men&shy;tion&shy;ing {{w|Hel&shy;v&eacute;tius|Claude_Adrien_Helvétius}}, {{w|Diderot|Denis_Diderot}}, {{w|Godwin|William_Godwin}}, and {{w|Saint-Simon|Claude_Henri_de_Rouvroy,_comte_de_Saint-Simon}}, ''peasant'' men&shy;tion&shy;ing {{w|M&uuml;nzer|Thomas_Müntzer}}, {{w|Sis&shy;mondi|Jean_Charles_Léonard_de_Sismondi}}, {{w|Fourier|Charles_Fourier}}, {{w|Proudhon|Pierre-Joseph_Proudhon}}, and {{w|Bakunin|Mikhail_Bakunin}}), ''syn&shy;dic&shy;al&shy;ist'' (men&shy;tion&shy;ing {{w|Pel&shy;loutier|Fernand_Pelloutier}}), ''col&shy;lect&shy;iv&shy;ist'' (men&shy;tion&shy;ing Bakunin and [[Author:Peter Kropotkin|Kropotkin]]), {{p|379}}''con&shy;spir&shy;at&shy;orial'' (mentioning {{w|Most|Johann_Most}} and {{w|Henry|Émile_Henry_(anarchist)}}), ''com&shy;mun&shy;ist'' (men&shy;tion&shy;ing {{w|Mala&shy;testa|Errico_Malatesta}}, {{w|Stepniak|Sergey_Stepnyak-Kravchinsky}}, and {{w|Cafiero|Carlo_Cafiero}}), ''in&shy;di&shy;vidual&shy;ist'' (mentioning {{w|Stirner|Max_Stirner}}, {{w|Warren|Josiah_Warren}}, {{w|Spooner|Lysander_Spooner}}, and {{w|Tucker|Benjamin_Tucker}}), and ''pacif&shy;ist'' (men&shy;tion&shy;ing {{w|Tolstoy|Leo_Tolstoy}} and {{w|Gandhi|Mahatma_Gandhi}}). This is reason&shy;able enough, though there are some oddit&shy;ies. Six of the people men&shy;tioned weren{{t}} anarch&shy;ists at all (M&uuml;nzer, Hel&shy;v&eacute;tius, Diderot, Sis&shy;mondi, Saint-Simon, and Gandhi); two of the variet&shy;ies are surely wrongly named{{dash}}Diderot and Godwin weren{{t}} ''util&shy;it&shy;arian'', in the normal sense of the prag&shy;matic tradi&shy;tion from {{w|Bentham|Jeremy_Bentham}} and {{w|Mill|John_Stuart_Mill}} to the {{w|Fabian So&shy;ciety|Fabian_Society}} and the {{w|Wel&shy;fare State|Welfare_state}}, but ''ration&shy;al&shy;ist,'' inter&shy;ested not in the great&shy;est happi&shy;ness of the great&shy;est number but in justice and truth; and Most and Henry weren{{t}} just ''con&shy;spir&shy;at&shy;orial,'' like many other anarch&shy;ists, but ''terror&shy;ist,'' inter&shy;ested not in con&shy;spiracy for its own sake but in con&shy;spiracy to murder. And is there not some con&shy;fu&shy;sion over Bakunin, who wanted an in&shy;sur&shy;rec&shy;tion of workers as well as peas&shy;ants and called himself a ''col&shy;lect&shy;iv&shy;ist,'' and over Kropot&shy;kin, who always called himself a ''com&shy;mun&shy;ist''?
 {{tab}}Horo&shy;witz{{s}} [[Anarchy 50/A postscript to the anarchists|Post&shy;script]] was pub&shy;lished in [[Anarchy 50|{{sc|anarchy}} 50]], and readers will remem&shy;ber it as a useful survey of some of the prob&shy;lems of anarch&shy;ism{{dash|the liber&shy;at&shy;ive poten&shy;ti&shy;al&shy;ity of the state, the uto&shy;pian, meta&shy;phys&shy;ical, de&shy;struct&shy;ive and re&shy;ac&shy;tion&shy;ary tend&shy;en&shy;cies of anarch&shy;ism, and the per&shy;sonal pecu&shy;li&shy;ar&shy;it&shy;ies of anarch&shy;ists}}but it really has no place in this book.
@@ Line 88: / Line 88: @@
 {{tab}}This is indeed one of the most seri&shy;ous de&shy;fects of the English-<wbr>speak&shy;ing anarch&shy;ist move&shy;ment today. Many im&shy;port&shy;ant anarch&shy;ist works have been written in, or trans&shy;lated into, English at one time or an&shy;other, but very few are still ob&shy;tain&shy;able. I wonder how many read&shy;ers of {{sc|anarchy}} have ever read any book by any major anarch&shy;ist writer, and how many of those who have done so ac&shy;tu&shy;ally own one. It is pos&shy;sible to get hold of them, but it isn{{t}} easy. {{w|Win&shy;stanley|Gerrard_Winstanley}} and Godwin were re&shy;printed in the United States and Canada during the {{popup|war|1939–1945}}, but were soon out of print again. The old trans&shy;la&shy;tion of Stirner by {{w|Steven Byington|Steven_T._Byington}} was re&shy;printed in the United States a few years ago, but it has aready gone. The old trans&shy;la&shy;tions of Proudhon by Benjamin Tucker{{dash|and Tucker{{s}} own ''Instead of a Book''}}have been out of print for years. Bakunin{{s}} frag&shy;ment&shy;ary out&shy;put has long been ob&shy;tain&shy;able only in di&shy;gests, and Kropot&shy;kin{{s}} enorm&shy;ous out&shy;put only through a few pamph&shy;lets. Some of Tolstoy{{s}} tracts are still in print, but mostly the reli&shy;gious rather than the polit&shy;ical ones. Emma Gold&shy;man and Rudolf Rocker have virtu&shy;ally dis&shy;ap&shy;peared, and the same was true of Mala&shy;testa until Vernon Richards res&shy;cued him last year. Many more have com&shy;{{p|383}}pletely dis&shy;ap&shy;peared. Krimer&shy;man and Perry re&shy;mark that {{qq|there is a need for full new edi&shy;tions of the best works of Proudhon, Tucker, Kropot&shy;kin, and many others, whom the reader can only begin to ap&shy;preci&shy;ate here.}} There is indeed, but until then these two antho&shy;logies will give their read&shy;ers at least some idea of what the major anarch&shy;ist writers are like.
-{{tab}}In the present circum&shy;stances, then, we must be grate&shy;ful for both books, and they are cer&shy;tainly good value for only a guinea or so. But we must also con&shy;sider the dangers of these circum&shy;stances. We have a weekly and a monthly paper, a new pamph&shy;let every year or so, oc&shy;ca&shy;sional re&shy;prints of old pamph&shy;lets (Berk&shy;man and Mala&shy;testa being the most re&shy;cent), and very oc&shy;ca&shy;sional books (such as Richard{{s|r}} {{l|''Malatesta''|https://libcom.org/files/Malatesta%20-%20Life%20and%20Ideas.pdf}}). Apart from that, there are mis&shy;cel&shy;laneous second-<wbr>hand books and pamph&shy;lets in cur&shy;cu&shy;la&shy;tion, and oc&shy;ca&shy;sional maga&shy;zines ap&shy;pear&shy;ing at ir&shy;regu&shy;lar inter&shy;vals. That{{s}} about all, because that{{s}} about all we can af&shy;ford. The trouble is that there are not only old<!-- 'not old' in original --> things which ought to be re&shy;printed again, but also new things which ought to be printed or re&shy;printed for the first time. It is im&shy;port&shy;ant to re&shy;member the past, as these antho&shy;logies remind us, but not at the price of for&shy;get&shy;ting the future. In practice, what hap&shy;pens is that we are stuck in the present, run&shy;ning as fast as we can to stay in the same place, work&shy;ing so hard to fill up our papers and keep them going from week to week and from month to month, that we have no time or energy (or money) for any&shy;thing else. Partly because of this, most of what is printed is dis&shy;ap&shy;point&shy;ingly bad{{dash}}most of the articles in {{w|{{sc|freedom}}|Freedom_(newspaper)}} and {{sc|anarchy}} are best for&shy;got&shy;ten, but the good ones are for&shy;got&shy;ten too. We have had to wait for ''Pat&shy;terns of Anarchy'' to see a few of the valu&shy;able articles dis&shy;in&shy;terred, and this is the sort of work we should be doing our&shy;selves; it is not enough to bind up back numbers or annual selec&shy;tions.
+{{tab}}In the present circum&shy;stances, then, we must be grate&shy;ful for both books, and they are cer&shy;tainly good value for only a guinea or so. But we must also con&shy;sider the dangers of these circum&shy;stances. We have a weekly and a monthly paper, a new pamph&shy;let every year or so, oc&shy;ca&shy;sional re&shy;prints of old pamph&shy;lets (Berk&shy;man and Mala&shy;testa being the most re&shy;cent), and very oc&shy;ca&shy;sional books (such as Richard{{s|r}} {{l|''Malatesta''|https://libcom.org/files/Malatesta%20-%20Life%20and%20Ideas.pdf}}). Apart from that, there are mis&shy;cel&shy;laneous second-<wbr>hand books and pamph&shy;lets in cur&shy;cu&shy;la&shy;tion, and oc&shy;ca&shy;sional maga&shy;zines ap&shy;pear&shy;ing at ir&shy;regu&shy;lar inter&shy;vals. That{{s}} about all, because that{{s}} about all we can af&shy;ford. The trouble is that there are not only old<!-- 'not old' in original --> things which ought to be re&shy;printed again, but also new things which ought to be printed or re&shy;printed for the first time. It is im&shy;port&shy;ant to re&shy;member the past, as these antho&shy;logies remind us, but not at the price of for&shy;get&shy;ting the future. In practice, what hap&shy;pens is that we are stuck in the present, run&shy;ning as fast as we can to stay in the same place, work&shy;ing so hard to fill up our papers and keep them going from week to week and from month to month, that we have no time or energy (or money) for any&shy;thing else. Partly because of this, most of what is printed is dis&shy;ap&shy;point&shy;ingly bad{{dash}}most of the articles in {{sc|{{w|freedom|Freedom_(newspaper)}}}} and {{sc|anarchy}} are best for&shy;got&shy;ten, but the good ones are for&shy;got&shy;ten too. We have had to wait for ''Pat&shy;terns of Anarchy'' to see a few of the valu&shy;able articles dis&shy;in&shy;terred, and this is the sort of work we should be doing our&shy;selves; it is not enough to bind up back numbers or annual selec&shy;tions.
 {{tab}}It is true that if we pay too much at&shy;ten&shy;tion to lit&shy;er&shy;at&shy;ure we may neglect other im&shy;port&shy;ant things{{dash|di&shy;rect con&shy;tact with ap&shy;pro&shy;pri&shy;ate people, for ex&shy;ample, and di&shy;rect action in ap&shy;pro&shy;pri&shy;ate places}}and it is true that both these antho&shy;logies, like most lit&shy;er&shy;at&shy;ure, stress the theory of anarch&shy;ism at the ex&shy;pense of the practice. But no one can say that we are all so active that we have no time to pre&shy;serve the lit&shy;er&shy;at&shy;ure of the past or create the lit&shy;er&shy;at&shy;ure of the future. Lit&shy;er&shy;at&shy;ure is after all the main voice of a move&shy;ment. These antho&shy;logies may be only a faint echo, but then our own ef&shy;forts are hardly more than a whisper. If we don{{t}} like what people write about us, the remedy is in our hands. Both the antho&shy;logies refer to and re&shy;sult from the re&shy;cent re&shy;vival of inter&shy;est in anarch&shy;ism. It is a pity that this re&shy;vival has taken place almost in spite of, rather than because of, what we have said or done. It is time that we took ad&shy;vant&shy;age of it, and raised our voice again.

@@ Line 19: / Line 19: @@
 {{tab}}Both books are Amer&shy;ican paper&shy;backs edited by Amer&shy;ican aca&shy;dem&shy;ics. Horowitz is As&shy;soci&shy;ate Pro&shy;fessor of So&shy;ci&shy;ology at {{w|Wash&shy;ing&shy;ton Uni&shy;ver&shy;sity|Washington_University_in_St._Louis}}, {{w|St. Louis|St._Louis}}, and ''The Anarch&shy;ists'' is pub&shy;lished by Dell as Laurel Book 0131 (1964, 95c.). Krimerman is As&shy;sist&shy;ant Pro&shy;fessor of Philo&shy;sophy at {{w|Louisi&shy;ana State Uni&shy;ver&shy;sity|Louisiana_State_University}}, {{w|New Orleans|New_Orleans}}, and Perry is Lec&shy;turer in History at {{w|New York State Uni&shy;ver&shy;sity|University_at_Buffalo}}, {{w|Buffalo|Buffalo,_New_York}}, and ''Pat&shy;terns of Anarchy'' is pub&shy;lished by Double&shy;day as Anchor Book A501 (1966, $1.95).
-{{tab}}Both books come from out&shy;side the anarch&shy;ist move&shy;ment. ''The Anarch&shy;ists'' ori&shy;gin&shy;ated when {{w|C. Wright Mills|C._Wright_Mills}}, the left-<wbr>wing Amer&shy;ican soci&shy;olo&shy;gist, planned {{qq|a reader on ''Anar&shy;chists, Crim&shy;in&shy;als and Devi&shy;ants''}} (shades of {{w|Lombroso|Cesare_Lombroso}}!). He later {{qq|came to con&shy;sider anarch&shy;ism as one of the three major pivots of {{w|Marxism}}, the other two being {{w|So&shy;cial {{p|375}}Demo&shy;cracy|Social_democracy}} and {{w|Bolshev&shy;ism|Bolsheviks}}}}, and then planned a tri&shy;logy of an&shy;tho&shy;lo&shy;gies of Marxist, {{w|Trotsky&shy;ist|Trotskyism}}, and anarch&shy;ist writ&shy;ings. The only one he pro&shy;duced before he died in 1962 was ''{{w|The Marxists|The_Marxists}}'' (1962, pub&shy;lished as a Penguin Book in 1963). He hadn{{t}} begun work on the anarch&shy;ist volume, and it was taken over by his dis&shy;ciple Horowitz (who has edited a post&shy;hum&shy;ous volume of his essays and a me&shy;morial volume of essays by his ad&shy;mirers). It is com&shy;fort&shy;ing to know that Horowitz has more sens&shy;ible ideas about anarch&shy;ism than Wright Mills: {{qq|My own view is that anarch&shy;ism, far from being a {{q|pivot}} of Marxism, as Mills be&shy;lieved, is an ef&shy;fort to fash&shy;ion a rad&shy;ical al&shy;tern&shy;at&shy;ive to the Marxist tradi&shy;tion in its ortho&shy;dox forms.}}
+{{tab}}Both books come from out&shy;side the anarch&shy;ist move&shy;ment. ''The Anarch&shy;ists'' ori&shy;gin&shy;ated when {{w|C. Wright Mills|C._Wright_Mills}}, the left-<wbr>wing Amer&shy;ican soci&shy;olo&shy;gist, planned {{qq|a reader on ''Anar&shy;chists, Crim&shy;in&shy;als and Devi&shy;ants''}} (shades of {{w|Lombroso|Cesare_Lombroso}}!). He later {{qq|came to con&shy;sider anarch&shy;ism as one of the three major pivots of {{w|Marxism}}, the other two being {{w|So&shy;cial Demo&shy;cracy|Social_democracy}}{{p|375}} and {{w|Bolshev&shy;ism|Bolsheviks}}}}, and then planned a tri&shy;logy of an&shy;tho&shy;lo&shy;gies of Marxist, {{w|Trotsky&shy;ist|Trotskyism}}, and anarch&shy;ist writ&shy;ings. The only one he pro&shy;duced before he died in 1962 was ''{{w|The Marxists|The_Marxists}}'' (1962, pub&shy;lished as a Penguin Book in 1963). He hadn{{t}} begun work on the anarch&shy;ist volume, and it was taken over by his dis&shy;ciple Horowitz (who has edited a post&shy;hum&shy;ous volume of his essays and a me&shy;morial volume of essays by his ad&shy;mirers). It is com&shy;fort&shy;ing to know that Horowitz has more sens&shy;ible ideas about anarch&shy;ism than Wright Mills: {{qq|My own view is that anarch&shy;ism, far from being a {{q|pivot}} of Marxism, as Mills be&shy;lieved, is an ef&shy;fort to fash&shy;ion a rad&shy;ical al&shy;tern&shy;at&shy;ive to the Marxist tradi&shy;tion in its ortho&shy;dox forms.}}
 {{tab}}''Patterns of Anarchy'' ori&shy;gin&shy;ated when Krimerman and Perry {{qq|began to dis&shy;cuss, in deep ignor&shy;ance, the like&shy;li&shy;hood that the anarch&shy;ist posi&shy;tion had not been given its due.}} Well, it is prob&shy;ably better to have no ideas than wrong ideas. {{qq|Agreed on the likely value of anarch&shy;ism, we were almost stymied by the paucity of avail&shy;able ma&shy;ter&shy;i&shy;als. Slowly the idea of an an&shy;tho&shy;logy took hold, as we con&shy;tinued to un&shy;cover inter&shy;est&shy;ing but neglec&shy;ted anarch&shy;ist writ&shy;ings. Our amaze&shy;ment at the wealth of anarch&shy;ist liter&shy;ature has been grow&shy;ing ever since.}}
@@ Line 62: / Line 62: @@
 {{tab}}After this, his Intro&shy;duc&shy;tion is dis&shy;ap&shy;point&shy;ing. It is full of the sort of ab&shy;stract gener&shy;al&shy;isa&shy;tion that dis&shy;figures much modern so&shy;cio&shy;logical writing{{dash}}and dis&shy;figured {{w|James Joll|James_Joll}}{{s}} book ''{{l|The Anarch&shy;ists|http://www.ditext.com/joll/anarchists.html}}'' as well. Because of this, the good things he has to say are ob&shy;scured.
-{{tab}}The Intro&shy;duc&shy;tion also con&shy;tains a {{qq|typo&shy;logy of anarch&shy;ist strat&shy;egies and be&shy;liefs,}} which is un&shy;fortun&shy;ately never heard of again. Horo&shy;witz dis&shy;tin&shy;guishes eight vari&shy;eties of anarch&shy;ism; ''util&shy;it&shy;arian'' (men&shy;tion&shy;ing {{w|Hel&shy;v&eacute;tius|Claude_Adrien_Helvétius}}, {{w|Diderot|Denis_Diderot}}, {{w|Godwin|William_Godwin}}, and {{w|Saint-<wbr>Simon|Claude_Henri_de_Rouvroy,_comte_de_Saint-Simon}}, ''peasant'' men&shy;tion&shy;ing {{w|M&uuml;nzer|Thomas_Müntzer}}, {{w|Sis&shy;mondi|Jean_Charles_Léonard_de_Sismondi}}, {{w|Fourier|Charles_Fourier}}, {{w|Proudhon|Pierre-Joseph_Proudhon}}, and {{w|Bakunin|Mikhail_Bakunin}}), ''syn&shy;dic&shy;al&shy;ist'' (men&shy;tion&shy;ing {{w|Pel&shy;loutier|Fernand_Pelloutier}}), ''col&shy;lect&shy;iv&shy;ist'' (men&shy;tion&shy;ing Bakunin and [[Author:Peter Kropotkin|Kropotkin]]), {{p|379}}''con&shy;spir&shy;at&shy;orial'' (mentioning {{w|Most|Johann_Most}} and {{w|Henry|Émile_Henry_(anarchist)}}), ''com&shy;mun&shy;ist'' (men&shy;tion&shy;ing {{w|Mala&shy;testa|Errico_Malatesta}}, {{w|Stepniak|Sergey_Stepnyak-Kravchinsky}}, and {{w|Cafiero|Carlo_Cafiero}}), ''in&shy;di&shy;vidual&shy;ist'' (mentioning {{w|Stirner|Max_Stirner}}, {{w|Warren|Josiah_Warren}}, {{w|Spooner|Lysander_Spooner}}, and {{w|Tucker|Benjamin_Tucker}}), and ''pacif&shy;ist'' (men&shy;tion&shy;ing {{w|Tolstoy|Leo_Tolstoy}} and {{w|Gandhi|Mahatma_Gandhi}}). This is reason&shy;able enough, though there are some oddit&shy;ies. Six of the people men&shy;tioned weren{{t}} anarch&shy;ists at all (M&uuml;nzer, Hel&shy;v&eacute;tius, Diderot, Sis&shy;mondi, Saint-<wbr>Simon, and Gandhi); two of the variet&shy;ies are surely wrongly named{{dash}}Diderot and Godwin weren{{t}} ''util&shy;it&shy;arian'', in the normal sense of the prag&shy;matic tradi&shy;tion from {{w|Bentham|Jeremy_Bentham}} and {{w|Mill|John_Stuart_Mill}} to the {{w|Fabian So&shy;ciety|Fabian_Society}} and the {{w|Wel&shy;fare State|Welfare_state}}, but ''ration&shy;al&shy;ist,'' inter&shy;ested not in the great&shy;est happi&shy;ness of the great&shy;est number but in justice and truth; and Most and Henry weren{{t}} just ''con&shy;spir&shy;at&shy;orial,'' like many other anarch&shy;ists, but ''terror&shy;ist,'' inter&shy;ested not in con&shy;spiracy for its own sake but in con&shy;spiracy to murder. And is there not some con&shy;fu&shy;sion over Bakunin, who wanted an in&shy;sur&shy;rec&shy;tion of workers as well as peas&shy;ants and called himself a ''col&shy;lect&shy;iv&shy;ist,'' and over Kropot&shy;kin, who always called himself a ''com&shy;mun&shy;ist''?
+{{tab}}The Intro&shy;duc&shy;tion also con&shy;tains a {{qq|typo&shy;logy of anarch&shy;ist strat&shy;egies and be&shy;liefs,}} which is un&shy;fortun&shy;ately never heard of again. Horo&shy;witz dis&shy;tin&shy;guishes eight vari&shy;eties of anarch&shy;ism; ''util&shy;it&shy;arian'' (men&shy;tion&shy;ing {{w|Hel&shy;v&eacute;tius|Claude_Adrien_Helvétius}}, {{w|Diderot|Denis_Diderot}}, {{w|Godwin|William_Godwin}}, and {{w|Saint-Simon|Claude_Henri_de_Rouvroy,_comte_de_Saint-Simon}}, ''peasant'' men&shy;tion&shy;ing {{w|M&uuml;nzer|Thomas_Müntzer}}, {{w|Sis&shy;mondi|Jean_Charles_Léonard_de_Sismondi}}, {{w|Fourier|Charles_Fourier}}, {{w|Proudhon|Pierre-Joseph_Proudhon}}, and {{w|Bakunin|Mikhail_Bakunin}}), ''syn&shy;dic&shy;al&shy;ist'' (men&shy;tion&shy;ing {{w|Pel&shy;loutier|Fernand_Pelloutier}}), ''col&shy;lect&shy;iv&shy;ist'' (men&shy;tion&shy;ing Bakunin and [[Author:Peter Kropotkin|Kropotkin]]), {{p|379}}''con&shy;spir&shy;at&shy;orial'' (mentioning {{w|Most|Johann_Most}} and {{w|Henry|Émile_Henry_(anarchist)}}), ''com&shy;mun&shy;ist'' (men&shy;tion&shy;ing {{w|Mala&shy;testa|Errico_Malatesta}}, {{w|Stepniak|Sergey_Stepnyak-Kravchinsky}}, and {{w|Cafiero|Carlo_Cafiero}}), ''in&shy;di&shy;vidual&shy;ist'' (mentioning {{w|Stirner|Max_Stirner}}, {{w|Warren|Josiah_Warren}}, {{w|Spooner|Lysander_Spooner}}, and {{w|Tucker|Benjamin_Tucker}}), and ''pacif&shy;ist'' (men&shy;tion&shy;ing {{w|Tolstoy|Leo_Tolstoy}} and {{w|Gandhi|Mahatma_Gandhi}}). This is reason&shy;able enough, though there are some oddit&shy;ies. Six of the people men&shy;tioned weren{{t}} anarch&shy;ists at all (M&uuml;nzer, Hel&shy;v&eacute;tius, Diderot, Sis&shy;mondi, Saint-<wbr>Simon, and Gandhi); two of the variet&shy;ies are surely wrongly named{{dash}}Diderot and Godwin weren{{t}} ''util&shy;it&shy;arian'', in the normal sense of the prag&shy;matic tradi&shy;tion from {{w|Bentham|Jeremy_Bentham}} and {{w|Mill|John_Stuart_Mill}} to the {{w|Fabian So&shy;ciety|Fabian_Society}} and the {{w|Wel&shy;fare State|Welfare_state}}, but ''ration&shy;al&shy;ist,'' inter&shy;ested not in the great&shy;est happi&shy;ness of the great&shy;est number but in justice and truth; and Most and Henry weren{{t}} just ''con&shy;spir&shy;at&shy;orial,'' like many other anarch&shy;ists, but ''terror&shy;ist,'' inter&shy;ested not in con&shy;spiracy for its own sake but in con&shy;spiracy to murder. And is there not some con&shy;fu&shy;sion over Bakunin, who wanted an in&shy;sur&shy;rec&shy;tion of workers as well as peas&shy;ants and called himself a ''col&shy;lect&shy;iv&shy;ist,'' and over Kropot&shy;kin, who always called himself a ''com&shy;mun&shy;ist''?
 {{tab}}Horo&shy;witz{{s}} [[Anarchy 50/A postscript to the anarchists|Post&shy;script]] was pub&shy;lished in [[Anarchy 50|{{sc|anarchy}} 50]], and readers will remem&shy;ber it as a useful survey of some of the prob&shy;lems of anarch&shy;ism{{dash|the liber&shy;at&shy;ive poten&shy;ti&shy;al&shy;ity of the state, the uto&shy;pian, meta&shy;phys&shy;ical, de&shy;struct&shy;ive and re&shy;ac&shy;tion&shy;ary tend&shy;en&shy;cies of anarch&shy;ism, and the per&shy;sonal pecu&shy;li&shy;ar&shy;it&shy;ies of anarch&shy;ists}}but it really has no place in this book.

@@ Line 37: / Line 37: @@
 {{tab}}''Patterns of Anarchy'' has 570 pages. It begins with a Fore&shy;word and ends with an essay called {{qq|Anarch&shy;ism: The Method of Indi&shy;vidu&shy;al&shy;isa&shy;tion}} by the editors. The rest of the book is di&shy;vided into seven sec&shy;tions con&shy;tain&shy;ing 63 pas&shy;sages.
-{{tab}}{{qq|Defin&shy;ing Anarch&shy;ism}} con&shy;tains ex&shy;tracts from {{popup|D. Novak|American political scientist Derry Novak (born 1919)}}{{s}} article {{qq|{{l|The Place of Anarch&shy;ism in the History of Polit&shy;ical Thought|http://www.ditext.com/novak/anarchism.html}}}}, from the maga&shy;zine {{w|''The Re&shy;view of Polit&shy;ics''|The_Review_of_Politics}} (1958); {{w|John Mackay|John_Henry_Mackay}}{{s}} novel ''{{l|''The Anarch&shy;ists|https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/john-henry-mackay-the-anarchists-a-picture-of-civilization-at-the-close-of-the-nineteenth-centu}} (1891); {{popup|Senex|Mark Schmidt}}{{s}} article {{qq|{{l|Whither the Liber&shy;tarian Move&shy;ment?|https://libcom.org/files/Vanguard%20(Vol.%201,%20No.%205,%20January%201933).pdf}}}}, from the maga&shy;zine {{l|''Vanguard''|https://libcom.org/library/history-vanguard}} (1933); [[Author:George Woodcock|George Woodcock]]{{s}} pamph&shy;let ''Rail&shy;ways and So&shy;ciety'' (1943)*; {{popup|James Estey|Canadian economist James Arthur Estey (1886–1961)}}{{s}} book {{l|''Re&shy;volu&shy;tion&shy;ary Syn&shy;dic&shy;al&shy;ism''|https://archive.org/details/revolutionarysy00estegoog}} (1913); {{w|Ammon Hennacy|Ammon_Hennacy}}{{s}} {{l|''Auto&shy;bio&shy;graphy of a Cath&shy;olic Anarch&shy;ist''|https://archive.org/details/AutobiographyOfACatholicAnarchist}} (1954); and [[Author:Paul Goodman|Paul Goodman]]{{s}} {{qq|{{l|Reply|https://www.commentarymagazine.com/articles/pornography-censorship/}}}}, to {{l|Richard Lichtman|http://www.wi.edu/psyd-faculty-richard-lichtman}} on porno&shy;graphy and cen&shy;sor&shy;ship from the maga&shy;zine {{w|''Com&shy;ment&shy;ary''|Commentary_(magazine)}} (1961).
+{{tab}}{{qq|Defin&shy;ing Anarch&shy;ism}} con&shy;tains ex&shy;tracts from {{popup|D. Novak|American political scientist Derry Novak (born 1919)}}{{s}} article {{qq|{{l|The Place of Anarch&shy;ism in the History of Polit&shy;ical Thought|http://www.ditext.com/novak/anarchism.html}}}}, from the maga&shy;zine {{w|''The Re&shy;view of Polit&shy;ics''|The_Review_of_Politics}} (1958); {{w|John Mackay|John_Henry_Mackay}}{{s}} novel {{l|''The Anarch&shy;ists''|https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/john-henry-mackay-the-anarchists-a-picture-of-civilization-at-the-close-of-the-nineteenth-centu}} (1891); {{popup|Senex|Mark Schmidt}}{{s}} article {{qq|{{l|Whither the Liber&shy;tarian Move&shy;ment?|https://libcom.org/files/Vanguard%20(Vol.%201,%20No.%205,%20January%201933).pdf}}}}, from the maga&shy;zine {{l|''Vanguard''|https://libcom.org/library/history-vanguard}} (1933); [[Author:George Woodcock|George Woodcock]]{{s}} pamph&shy;let ''Rail&shy;ways and So&shy;ciety'' (1943)*; {{popup|James Estey|Canadian economist James Arthur Estey (1886–1961)}}{{s}} book {{l|''Re&shy;volu&shy;tion&shy;ary Syn&shy;dic&shy;al&shy;ism''|https://archive.org/details/revolutionarysy00estegoog}} (1913); {{w|Ammon Hennacy|Ammon_Hennacy}}{{s}} {{l|''Auto&shy;bio&shy;graphy of a Cath&shy;olic Anarch&shy;ist''|https://archive.org/details/AutobiographyOfACatholicAnarchist}} (1954); and [[Author:Paul Goodman|Paul Goodman]]{{s}} {{qq|{{l|Reply|https://www.commentarymagazine.com/articles/pornography-censorship/}}}}, to {{l|Richard Lichtman|http://www.wi.edu/psyd-faculty-richard-lichtman}} on porno&shy;graphy and cen&shy;sor&shy;ship from the maga&shy;zine {{w|''Com&shy;ment&shy;ary''|Commentary_(magazine)}} (1961).
 {{tab}}{{qq|Cri&shy;ti&shy;cising So&shy;cial&shy;ism}}{{dash|''au&shy;thor&shy;it&shy;arian'' so&shy;cial&shy;ism, that is}}con&shy;tains ex&shy;tracts from {{w|Benjamin Tucker|Benjamin_Tucker}}{{s}} article {{qq|{{l|State So&shy;cial&shy;ism and Anarch&shy;ism|https://archive.org/details/statesocialisman00tuck}}}}, from his maga&shy;zine {{w|''Liberty''|Liberty_(1881–1908)}} (1886)* and his book
@@ Line 62: / Line 62: @@
 {{tab}}After this, his Intro&shy;duc&shy;tion is dis&shy;ap&shy;point&shy;ing. It is full of the sort of ab&shy;stract gener&shy;al&shy;isa&shy;tion that dis&shy;figures much modern so&shy;cio&shy;logical writing{{dash}}and dis&shy;figured {{w|James Joll|James_Joll}}{{s}} book ''{{l|The Anarch&shy;ists|http://www.ditext.com/joll/anarchists.html}}'' as well. Because of this, the good things he has to say are ob&shy;scured.
-{{tab}}The Intro&shy;duc&shy;tion also con&shy;tains a {{qq|typo&shy;logy of anarch&shy;ist strat&shy;egies and be&shy;liefs,}} which is un&shy;fortun&shy;ately never heard of again. Horo&shy;witz dis&shy;tin&shy;guishes eight vari&shy;eties of anarch&shy;ism; ''util&shy;it&shy;arian'' (men&shy;tion&shy;ing {{w|Hel&shy;v&eacute;tius|Claude_Adrien_Helvétius}}, {{w|Diderot|Denis_Diderot}}, {{w|Godwin|William_Godwin}}, and {{w|Saint-<wbr>Simon|Claude_Henri_de_Rouvroy,_comte_de_Saint-Simon}}, ''peasant'' men&shy;tion&shy;ing {{w|M&uuml;nzer|Thomas_Müntzer}}, {{w|Sis&shy;mondi|Jean_Charles_Léonard_de_Sismondi}}, {{w|Fourier|Charles_Fourier}}, {{w|Proudhon|Pierre-Joseph_Proudhon}}, and {{w|Bakunin|Mikhail_Bakunin}}), ''syn&shy;dic&shy;al&shy;ist'' (men&shy;tion&shy;ing {{w|Pel&shy;loutier|Fernand_Pelloutier}}), ''col&shy;lect&shy;iv&shy;ist'' (men&shy;tion&shy;ing Bakunin and [[Author:Peter Kropotkin|Kropotkin]]), {{p|379}}''con&shy;spir&shy;at&shy;orial'' (mentioning {{w|Most|Johann_Most}} and {{w|Henry|Émile_Henry_(anarchist)}}), ''com&shy;mun&shy;ist'' (men&shy;tion&shy;ing {{w|Mala&shy;testa|Errico_Malatesta}}, {{w|Stepniak|Sergey_Stepnyak-Kravchinsky}}, and {{w|Cafiero|Carlo_Cafiero}}), ''in&shy;di&shy;vidual&shy;ist'' (mentioning {{w|Stirner|Max_Stirner}}, {{w|Warren|Josiah_Warren}}, {{w|Lysander Spooner|Lysander_Spooner}}, and {{w|Benjamin Tucker|Benjamin_Tucker}}), and ''pacif&shy;ist'' (men&shy;tion&shy;ing {{w|Tolstoy|Leo_Tolstoy}} and {{w|Gandhi|Mahatma_Gandhi}}). This is reason&shy;able enough, though there are some oddit&shy;ies. Six of the people men&shy;tioned weren{{t}} anarch&shy;ists at all (M&uuml;nzer, Hel&shy;v&eacute;tius, Diderot, Sis&shy;mondi, Saint-<wbr>Simon, and Gandhi); two of the variet&shy;ies are surely wrongly named{{dash}}Diderot and Godwin weren{{t}} ''util&shy;it&shy;arian'', in the normal sense of the prag&shy;matic tradi&shy;tion from {{w|Bentham|Jeremy_Bentham}} and {{w|Mill|John_Stuart_Mill}} to the {{w|Fabian So&shy;ciety|Fabian_Society}} and the {{w|Wel&shy;fare State|Welfare_state}}, but ''ration&shy;al&shy;ist,'' inter&shy;ested not in the great&shy;est happi&shy;ness of the great&shy;est number but in justice and truth; and Most and Henry weren{{t}} just ''con&shy;spir&shy;at&shy;orial,'' like many other anarch&shy;ists, but ''terror&shy;ist,'' inter&shy;ested not in con&shy;spiracy for its own sake but in con&shy;spiracy to murder. And is there not some con&shy;fu&shy;sion over Bakunin, who wanted an in&shy;sur&shy;rec&shy;tion of workers as well as peas&shy;ants and called himself a ''col&shy;lect&shy;iv&shy;ist,'' and over Kropot&shy;kin, who always called himself a ''com&shy;mun&shy;ist''?
+{{tab}}The Intro&shy;duc&shy;tion also con&shy;tains a {{qq|typo&shy;logy of anarch&shy;ist strat&shy;egies and be&shy;liefs,}} which is un&shy;fortun&shy;ately never heard of again. Horo&shy;witz dis&shy;tin&shy;guishes eight vari&shy;eties of anarch&shy;ism; ''util&shy;it&shy;arian'' (men&shy;tion&shy;ing {{w|Hel&shy;v&eacute;tius|Claude_Adrien_Helvétius}}, {{w|Diderot|Denis_Diderot}}, {{w|Godwin|William_Godwin}}, and {{w|Saint-<wbr>Simon|Claude_Henri_de_Rouvroy,_comte_de_Saint-Simon}}, ''peasant'' men&shy;tion&shy;ing {{w|M&uuml;nzer|Thomas_Müntzer}}, {{w|Sis&shy;mondi|Jean_Charles_Léonard_de_Sismondi}}, {{w|Fourier|Charles_Fourier}}, {{w|Proudhon|Pierre-Joseph_Proudhon}}, and {{w|Bakunin|Mikhail_Bakunin}}), ''syn&shy;dic&shy;al&shy;ist'' (men&shy;tion&shy;ing {{w|Pel&shy;loutier|Fernand_Pelloutier}}), ''col&shy;lect&shy;iv&shy;ist'' (men&shy;tion&shy;ing Bakunin and [[Author:Peter Kropotkin|Kropotkin]]), {{p|379}}''con&shy;spir&shy;at&shy;orial'' (mentioning {{w|Most|Johann_Most}} and {{w|Henry|Émile_Henry_(anarchist)}}), ''com&shy;mun&shy;ist'' (men&shy;tion&shy;ing {{w|Mala&shy;testa|Errico_Malatesta}}, {{w|Stepniak|Sergey_Stepnyak-Kravchinsky}}, and {{w|Cafiero|Carlo_Cafiero}}), ''in&shy;di&shy;vidual&shy;ist'' (mentioning {{w|Stirner|Max_Stirner}}, {{w|Warren|Josiah_Warren}}, {{w|Spooner|Lysander_Spooner}}, and {{w|Tucker|Benjamin_Tucker}}), and ''pacif&shy;ist'' (men&shy;tion&shy;ing {{w|Tolstoy|Leo_Tolstoy}} and {{w|Gandhi|Mahatma_Gandhi}}). This is reason&shy;able enough, though there are some oddit&shy;ies. Six of the people men&shy;tioned weren{{t}} anarch&shy;ists at all (M&uuml;nzer, Hel&shy;v&eacute;tius, Diderot, Sis&shy;mondi, Saint-<wbr>Simon, and Gandhi); two of the variet&shy;ies are surely wrongly named{{dash}}Diderot and Godwin weren{{t}} ''util&shy;it&shy;arian'', in the normal sense of the prag&shy;matic tradi&shy;tion from {{w|Bentham|Jeremy_Bentham}} and {{w|Mill|John_Stuart_Mill}} to the {{w|Fabian So&shy;ciety|Fabian_Society}} and the {{w|Wel&shy;fare State|Welfare_state}}, but ''ration&shy;al&shy;ist,'' inter&shy;ested not in the great&shy;est happi&shy;ness of the great&shy;est number but in justice and truth; and Most and Henry weren{{t}} just ''con&shy;spir&shy;at&shy;orial,'' like many other anarch&shy;ists, but ''terror&shy;ist,'' inter&shy;ested not in con&shy;spiracy for its own sake but in con&shy;spiracy to murder. And is there not some con&shy;fu&shy;sion over Bakunin, who wanted an in&shy;sur&shy;rec&shy;tion of workers as well as peas&shy;ants and called himself a ''col&shy;lect&shy;iv&shy;ist,'' and over Kropot&shy;kin, who always called himself a ''com&shy;mun&shy;ist''?
 {{tab}}Horo&shy;witz{{s}} [[Anarchy 50/A postscript to the anarchists|Post&shy;script]] was pub&shy;lished in [[Anarchy 50|{{sc|anarchy}} 50]], and readers will remem&shy;ber it as a useful survey of some of the prob&shy;lems of anarch&shy;ism{{dash|the liber&shy;at&shy;ive poten&shy;ti&shy;al&shy;ity of the state, the uto&shy;pian, meta&shy;phys&shy;ical, de&shy;struct&shy;ive and re&shy;ac&shy;tion&shy;ary tend&shy;en&shy;cies of anarch&shy;ism, and the per&shy;sonal pecu&shy;li&shy;ar&shy;it&shy;ies of anarch&shy;ists}}but it really has no place in this book.

@@ Line 27: / Line 27: @@
 {{tab}}{{qq|The Theory}} is di&shy;vided into three sec&shy;tions. {{qq|Anarch&shy;ism as a Cri&shy;tique of So&shy;ciety}} con&shy;tains ex&shy;tracts from {{w|Diderot|Denis_Diderot}}{{s}} ''{{l|Sup&shy;ple&shy;ment to Bougain&shy;ville{{s}} {{qq|Voyage}}|http://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/6501}}'' (1772){{ref|aster|*}}; {{w|Mala&shy;testa|Errico_Malatesta}}{{s}} pamph&shy;let ''{{l|Anarchy|https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/errico-malatesta-anarchy}}'' (1891)*; {{w|Proudhon|Pierre-Joseph_Proudhon}}{{s}} book {{l|''What is Prop&shy;erty''?|https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/pierre-joseph-proudhon-what-is-property-an-inquiry-into-the-principle-of-right-and-of-governmen}} (1840); {{w|Godwin|William_Godwin}}{{s}} book ''{{l|Polit&shy;ical Just&shy;ice|https://ebooks.adelaide.edu.au/g/godwin/william/enquiry/complete.html}}'' (1793); {{w|Bakunin|Mikhail_Bakunin}}{{s}} essays {{qq|Sci&shy;ence and the Urgent Revo&shy;lu&shy;tion&shy;ary Task}} (1870) and {{qq|The Pro&shy;gramme of the Inter&shy;na&shy;tional Revo&shy;lu&shy;tion&shy;ary Alli&shy;ance}} (1871)*, both from {{w|G. P. Maximoff|Gregori_Maximoff}}{{s}} book ''{{l|The Polit&shy;ical Philo&shy;sophy of Bakunin|https://libcom.org/files/Maximoff%20-%20The%20Political%20Philosophy%20of%20Bakunin.pdf}}'' (1953); [[Author:Peter Kropotkin|Kropot&shy;kin]]{{s}} book ''{{l|Modern Sci&shy;ence and Anarch&shy;ism|https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/petr-kropotkin-modern-science-and-anarchism}}'' (1903)*; {{w|Benjamin Tucker|Benjamin_Tucker}}{{s}} article {{qq|{{l|State Social&shy;ism and Anarch&shy;ism|https://archive.org/details/statesocialisman00tuck}}}} from his maga&shy;zine {{w|''Liberty''|Liberty_(1881–1908)}} (1886)* and his book ''{{l|Instead of a Book|https://archive.org/details/cu31924030333052}}'' (1893); and {{w|Rudolf Rocker|Rudolf_Rocker}}{{s}} essay {{qq|{{l|Anarch&shy;ism and Anarcho-<wbr>Syn&shy;dic&shy;al&shy;ism|https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/rudolf-rocker-anarchism-and-anarcho-syndicalism}}}} from {{w|Feliks Gross|Feliks_Gross}}{{s}} book ''European Ideo&shy;logies'' (1948).
-{{tab}}{{qq|Anarch&shy;ism as a Style of Life}} con&shy;tains ex&shy;tracts from {{w|Joseph Conrad|Joseph_Conrad}}{{s}} novel ''{{l|The Secret Agent|http://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/974}}'' (1907); {{w|Dostoev&shy;ski|Fyodor_Dostoyevsky}}{{s}} novel ''{{l|Notes from Underground|http://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/600}}'' (1864)*; {{w|Tolstoy|Leo_Tolstoy}}{{s}} book {{l|''What Then Shall We Do''?|http://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/38690}} (1886)*; {{w|Albert Camus|Albert_Camus}}{{s}} book {{w|''The Rebel''|The_Rebel_(book)}} (1951)*; [[Author:Emma Goldman|Emma Goldman]]{{s}} essays {{qq|{{l|The Tragedy of Women{{s}} Eman&shy;cip&shy;a&shy;tion|https://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/goldman/works/1906/tragedy-women.htm}}}} (1906)* and {{qq|{{l|Marriage and Love|https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/emma-goldman-marriage-and-love}}}},* both from her maga&shy;zine {{w|''Mother Earth''|Mother_Earth_(magazine)}} and her book {{l|''Anarch&shy;ism and Other Essays''|https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/emma-goldman-anarchism-and-other-essays}} (1910); and the letters of {{w|Sacco and Vanzetti|Sacco_and_Vanzetti}} (1927), from the edition by Frank&shy;furter and Jack&shy;son.
+{{tab}}{{qq|Anarch&shy;ism as a Style of Life}} con&shy;tains ex&shy;tracts from {{w|Joseph Conrad|Joseph_Conrad}}{{s}} novel ''{{l|The Secret Agent|http://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/974}}'' (1907); {{w|Dostoev&shy;ski|Fyodor_Dostoyevsky}}{{s}} novel ''{{l|Notes from Underground|http://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/600}}'' (1864)*; {{w|Tolstoy|Leo_Tolstoy}}{{s}} book {{l|''What Then Shall We Do''?|http://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/38690}} (1886)*; {{w|Albert Camus|Albert_Camus}}{{s}} book {{w|''The Rebel''|The_Rebel_(book)}} (1951)*; [[Author:Emma Goldman|Emma Goldman]]{{s}} essays {{qq|{{l|The Tragedy of Woman{{s}} Eman&shy;cip&shy;a&shy;tion|https://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/goldman/works/1906/tragedy-women.htm}}}} (1906)* and {{qq|{{l|Marriage and Love|https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/emma-goldman-marriage-and-love}}}},* both from her maga&shy;zine {{w|''Mother Earth''|Mother_Earth_(magazine)}} and her book {{l|''Anarch&shy;ism and Other Essays''|https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/emma-goldman-anarchism-and-other-essays}} (1910); and the letters of {{w|Sacco and Vanzetti|Sacco_and_Vanzetti}} (1927), from the edition by Frank&shy;furter and Jack&shy;son.
-{{tab}}{{qq|Anarch&shy;ism as a Sys&shy;tem of Philo&shy;sophy}} con&shy;tains ex&shy;tracts from {{w|Max Stirner|Max_Stirner}}{{s}} book {{l|''The Ego and His Own''|https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/max-stirner-the-ego-and-his-own}} (1845)*; {{w|Thoreau|Henry_David_Thoreau}}{{s}} essay {{qq|{{l|Resist&shy;ance to Civil Govern&shy;ment|https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Aesthetic_Papers/Resistance_to_Civil_Government}}}} (1848)*; {{w|Josiah Warren|Josiah_Warren}}{{s}} book {{l|''True Civil&shy;isa&shy;tion''|https://archive.org/details/truecivilizatio00warrgoog}} (1869); {{w|William Hocking|William_Ernest_Hocking}}{{s}} book ''Man and the State'' (1926); {{w|Herbert Read|Herbert_Read}}{{s}} article {{qq|Anarch&shy;ism and Capit&shy;al&shy;ist So&shy;ciety}}, from the maga&shy;zine {{l|''Re&shy;con&shy;struir''|http://www.federacionlibertaria.org/editorial.html}} (1962); and {{w|Paul Schilpp|Paul_Arthur_Schilpp}}{{s}} article {{qq|In Defence {{p|376}}of Socrate{{s|r}} Judges}}, from the maga&shy;zine {{popup|''Enquiry''|Enquiry: A Journal of Independent Radical Thought}} (1944).
+{{tab}}{{qq|Anarch&shy;ism as a Sys&shy;tem of Philo&shy;sophy}} con&shy;tains ex&shy;tracts from {{w|Max Stirner|Max_Stirner}}{{s}} book {{l|''The Ego and His Own''|https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/max-stirner-the-ego-and-his-own}} (1845)*; {{w|Thoreau|Henry_David_Thoreau}}{{s}} essay {{qq|{{l|Resist&shy;ance to Civil Govern&shy;ment|https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Aesthetic_Papers/Resistance_to_Civil_Government}}}} (1848)*; {{w|Josiah Warren|Josiah_Warren}}{{s}} book {{l|''True Civil&shy;isa&shy;tion''|https://archive.org/details/truecivilizatio00warrgoog}} (1869); {{w|William Hocking|William_Ernest_Hocking}}{{s}} book ''Man and the State'' (1926); {{w|Herbert Read|Herbert_Read}}{{s}} article {{qq|Anarch&shy;ism in a Capit&shy;al&shy;ist So&shy;ciety}}, from the maga&shy;zine {{l|''Re&shy;con&shy;struir''|http://www.federacionlibertaria.org/editorial.html}} (1962); and {{w|Paul Schilpp|Paul_Arthur_Schilpp}}{{s}} article {{qq|In Defence {{p|376}}of Socrate{{s|r}} Judges}}, from the maga&shy;zine {{popup|''Enquiry''|Enquiry: A Journal of Independent Radical Thought}} (1944).
-{{tab}}{{qq|The Practice}} is di&shy;vided into two sec&shy;tions. {{qq|The Histor&shy;ical Di&shy;men&shy;sion}} con&shy;tains ac&shy;counts of the anarch&shy;ist move&shy;ment in {{l|Spain|https://archive.org/details/spanishlabyrinth001334mbp}} up to 1902 (by {{w|Gerald Brenan|Gerald_Brenan}}), in Italy during the 1870s (by {{popup|Richard Hostetter|Richard Jerome Hostetter (1913–1987), author of The Italian Socialist Movement (1958)}}, in the United States during the 1880s (by {{popup|Samuel Yellen|author of American Labor Struggles (1936)}}), in France, Italy, Switzerland, and the United States during the 1890s (by {{w|Barbara Tuchman|Barbara_W._Tuchman}}), in Russia up to 1883 (by {{w|Thomas Masaryk|Tomáš_Garrigue_Masaryk}}, in America out&shy;side the United States and in northern Europe out&shy;side {{w|Britain|United_Kingdom}} up to the 1930s (by [[Author:George Woodcock|George Woodcock]]), and in Spain during the 1930s (by {{w|Hugh Thomas|Hugh_Thomas,_Baron_Thomas_of_Swynnerton}}), to&shy;gether with [[Author:Alexander Berkman|Alexander Berkman]]{{s}} [[Anarchy 81/Kronstadt diary|diary]] of the {{w|Kronstadt Rising|Kronstadt_rebellion}} (1921).
+{{tab}}{{qq|The Practice}} is di&shy;vided into two sec&shy;tions. {{qq|The Histor&shy;ical Di&shy;men&shy;sion}} con&shy;tains ac&shy;counts of the anarch&shy;ist move&shy;ment in {{l|Spain|https://archive.org/details/spanishlabyrinth001334mbp}} up to 1902 (by {{w|Gerald Brenan|Gerald_Brenan}}), in Italy during the 1870s (by {{popup|Richard Hostetter|Richard Jerome Hostetter (1913–1987), author of The Italian Socialist Movement (1958)}}, in the United States during the 1880s (by {{popup|Samuel Yellen|author of American Labor Struggles (1936)}}), in France, Italy, Switzerland, and the United States during the 1890s (by {{w|Barbara Tuchman|Barbara_W._Tuchman}}), in Russia up to 1883 (by {{w|Thomas Masaryk|Tomáš_Garrigue_Masaryk}}), in America out&shy;side the United States and in northern Europe out&shy;side {{w|Britain|United_Kingdom}} up to the 1930s (by [[Author:George Woodcock|George Woodcock]]), and in Spain during the 1930s (by {{w|Hugh Thomas|Hugh_Thomas,_Baron_Thomas_of_Swynnerton}}), to&shy;gether with [[Author:Alexander Berkman|Alexander Berkman]]{{s}} [[Anarchy 81/Kronstadt diary|diary]] of the {{w|Kronstadt Rising|Kronstadt_rebellion}} (1921).
 {{tab}}{{qq|The Socio&shy;logical Di&shy;men&shy;sion}} con&shy;tains ex&shy;tracts from {{w|Sorel|Georges_Sorel}}{{s}} book {{l|''Re&shy;flec&shy;tions on Viol&shy;ence''|https://libcom.org/files/Sorel-Reflections-on-Violence-ed-Jennings.pdf}} (1906)*; [[Author:Paul Goodman|Paul Goodman]]{{s}} book ''Draw&shy;ing the Line'' (1946); {{popup|Robert Presthus|American educator Robert Vance Presthus (1917–2001)}}{{s}} book ''The Organ&shy;isa&shy;tional So&shy;ciety'' (1962); {{w|Philip Selznick|Philip_Selznick}}{{s}} article {{qq|Revo&shy;lu&shy;tion Sacred and Pro&shy;fane}}, from the maga&shy;zine ''Enquiry'' (1944); and {{w|Karl Shapiro|Karl_Shapiro}}{{s}} article {{qq|On the Re&shy;vival of Anarch&shy;ism}}, from the maga&shy;zine {{w|''Lib&shy;er&shy;a&shy;tion''|Liberation_(magazine)}} (1961).

@@ Line 46: / Line 46: @@
 {{p|377}}{{tab}}{{qq|Anarch&shy;ism on the At&shy;tack}} con&shy;tains ex&shy;tracts from {{w|Lysander Spooner|Lysander_Spooner}}{{s}} {{l|''No Treason''|http://oll.libertyfund.org/titles/spooner-no-treason-no-i-1867}} (1867); {{w|Benjamin Tucker|Benjamin_Tucker}}{{s}} article {{qq|{{l|The Rela&shy;tion of the State to the Indi&shy;vidual|http://fair-use.org/benjamin-tucker/instead-of-a-book/relation-of-the-state-to-the-individual}}}}, from his maga&shy;zine {{w|''Liberty''|Liberty_(1881–1908)}} (1890)* and {{l|''Instead of a Book''|https://archive.org/details/cu31924030333052}}; {{w|Max Stirner|Max_Stirner}}{{s}} {{l|''The Ego and His Own''|https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/max-stirner-the-ego-and-his-own}}; {{popup|John Beverley Robin&shy;son|American anarchist (1853–1923)}}{{s}} book {{l|''The Eco&shy;nom&shy;ics of Liberty''|https://archive.org/details/economicsofliber00robi}} (1916); Frank Lanham{{s}} article {{qq|Two Kinds of Union&shy;ism}} from the maga&shy;zine {{l|''Why''?|https://libcom.org/library/why}} (1947); {{w|Sam Weiner|Sam_Dolgoff}}{{s}} pamph&shy;let {{l|''Ethics and Amer&shy;ican Union&shy;ism''|https://libcom.org/library/ethics-american-unionism-sam-dolgoff}} (1958); [[Author:Peter Kropotkin|Kropotkin]]{{s}} pamph&shy;let {{l|''Law and Author&shy;ity''|https://archive.org/details/lawauthorityanar00kropuoft}} (1882); and [[Author:Alex Comfort|Alex Comfort]]{{s}} book {{l|''Author&shy;ity and De&shy;lin&shy;quency in the Modern State''|https://libcom.org/library/authority-delinquency-alex-comfort}} (1950).
-{{tab}}{{qq|Con&shy;struct&shy;ive Anarch&shy;ism}} con&shy;tains ex&shy;tracts from {{w|Josiah Warren|Josiah_Warren}}{{s}} book {{l|''Equit&shy;able Com&shy;merce''|https://archive.org/details/equitablecommerc00warr}} (1846); {{w|Charles Dana|Charles_Anderson_Dana}}{{s}} articles {{qq|{{l|Proudhon and His Bank of the People|https://archive.org/details/proudhonandhisb00danagoog}}}}, from the {{w|New York ''Tribune''|New-York_Tribune}} (1849)*; [[Author:Alexander Berkman|Alexander Berkman]]{{s}} pamphlet {{l|''What is Com&shy;mun&shy;ist Anarch&shy;ism''<!-- 'Anarchist Communism' in original -->?|https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/alexander-berkman-what-is-communist-anarchism}} (1929)*; {{popup|Senex|Mark Schmidt}}{{s}} article {{qq|{{l|De&shy;central&shy;isa&shy;tion and So&shy;cial&shy;ism|https://libcom.org/library/decentralization-socialism-senex}}}}, from the maga&shy;zine {{l|''Van&shy;guard''|https://libcom.org/library/history-vanguard}} (1938); {{w|Rudolf Rocker|Rudolf_Rocker}}{{s}} book {{l|''Anarcho-<wbr>Syn&shy;dic&shy;al&shy;ism''|https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/rudolf-rocker-anarchosyndicalism}} (1938); {{w|Ammon Hennacy|Ammon_Hennacy}}{{s}} {{l|''Auto&shy;bio&shy;graphy of a Cath&shy;olic Anarch&shy;ist''|https://archive.org/details/AutobiographyOfACatholicAnarchist}} (1954); {{w|Dorothy Day|Dorothy_Day}}{{s}} book {{w|''The Long Lone&shy;li&shy;ness''|The_Long_Loneliness}} (1952); [[Author:Paul Goodman|Paul Goodman]]{{s}} {{w|''People or<!-- 'and' in original --> Person&shy;nel''|People_or_Personnel}} (1965); and [[Author:Colin Ward|Colin Ward]]{{s}} articles {{qq|[[Anarchy_62/Anarchism as a theory of organisation|Anarch&shy;ism as a Theory of Organ&shy;isa&shy;tion]]}} and {{qq|[[Anarchy 7/Adventure Playground: a parable of anarchy|Ad&shy;ven&shy;ture Play&shy;ground]]}}, from [[Anarchy 62|{{sc|anarchy}} 62]] (April 1966) and [[Anarchy 7|{{sc|anarchy}} 7]] (September 1961).Monarchist anarchy
+{{tab}}{{qq|Con&shy;struct&shy;ive Anarch&shy;ism}} con&shy;tains ex&shy;tracts from {{w|Josiah Warren|Josiah_Warren}}{{s}} book {{l|''Equit&shy;able Com&shy;merce''|https://archive.org/details/equitablecommerc00warr}} (1846); {{w|Charles Dana|Charles_Anderson_Dana}}{{s}} articles {{qq|{{l|Proudhon and His Bank of the People|https://archive.org/details/proudhonandhisb00danagoog}}}}, from the {{w|New York ''Tribune''|New-York_Tribune}} (1849)*; [[Author:Alexander Berkman|Alexander Berkman]]{{s}} pamphlet {{l|''What is Com&shy;mun&shy;ist Anarch&shy;ism''<!-- 'Anarchist Communism' in original -->?|https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/alexander-berkman-what-is-communist-anarchism}} (1929)*; {{popup|Senex|Mark Schmidt}}{{s}} article {{qq|{{l|De&shy;central&shy;isa&shy;tion and So&shy;cial&shy;ism|https://libcom.org/library/decentralization-socialism-senex}}}}, from the maga&shy;zine {{l|''Van&shy;guard''|https://libcom.org/library/history-vanguard}} (1938); {{w|Rudolf Rocker|Rudolf_Rocker}}{{s}} book {{l|''Anarcho-<wbr>Syn&shy;dic&shy;al&shy;ism''|https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/rudolf-rocker-anarchosyndicalism}} (1938); {{w|Ammon Hennacy|Ammon_Hennacy}}{{s}} {{l|''Auto&shy;bio&shy;graphy of a Cath&shy;olic Anarch&shy;ist''|https://archive.org/details/AutobiographyOfACatholicAnarchist}} (1954); {{w|Dorothy Day|Dorothy_Day}}{{s}} book {{w|''The Long Lone&shy;li&shy;ness''|The_Long_Loneliness}} (1952); [[Author:Paul Goodman|Paul Goodman]]{{s}} {{w|''People or<!-- 'and' in original --> Person&shy;nel''|People_or_Personnel}} (1965); and [[Author:Colin Ward|Colin Ward]]{{s}} articles {{qq|[[Anarchy_62/Anarchism as a theory of organisation|Anarch&shy;ism as a Theory of Organ&shy;isa&shy;tion]]}} and {{qq|[[Anarchy 7/Adventure Playground: a parable of anarchy|Ad&shy;ven&shy;ture Play&shy;ground]]}}, from [[Anarchy 62|{{sc|anarchy}} 62]] (April 1966) and [[Anarchy 7|{{sc|anarchy}} 7]] (September 1961).
 {{tab}}{{qq|The Anarch&shy;ists on Edu&shy;ca&shy;tion}} con&shy;tains ex&shy;tracts from {{w|Herbert Read|Herbert_Read}}{{s}} books ''Edu&shy;ca&shy;tion through Art'' (1943) and ''Edu&shy;ca&shy;tion for Peace'' (1949); {{w|Francis&shy;co Ferrer|Francesc_Ferrer_i_Guàrdia}}{{s}} book {{l|''The Origins and Ideals of the Modern School''|https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/francisco-ferrer-the-origin-and-ideals-of-the-modern-school}} (1908)*; {{l|Bayard Boyesen|http://margins.fair-use.org/note/Bayard_Boyesen}}{{s}} pamph&shy;let {{l|''The Modern School''|http://dwardmac.pitzer.edu/Anarchist_Archives/bright/ferrer/boyesen/boyesen.html}} (1911)*; {{w|William Godwin|William_Godwin}}{{s}} books {{l|''The En&shy;quirer''|https://archive.org/details/enquirer00godwgoog}} (1797) and ''{{l|Polit&shy;ical Just&shy;ice|https://ebooks.adelaide.edu.au/g/godwin/william/enquiry/complete.html}}'' (1793); [[Author:Tony Gibson|Tony Gibson]]{{s}} pamph&shy;let ''Youth for Freedom'' (1951); {{w|Josiah Warren|Josiah_Warren}}{{s}} {{l|''Equit&shy;able Com&shy;merce''|https://archive.org/details/equitablecommerc00warr}} (1846); [[Author:Paul Goodman|Paul Goodman]]{{s}} book [[Anarchy 24|''The Com&shy;mun&shy;ity of Schol&shy;ars'']] (1962); and {{w|Tolstoy|Leo_Tolstoy}}{{s}} essays {{qq|{{l|The School at Yasnaya Polyana|https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Yasnaya_Polyana_School}}}} and {{qq|{{l|Are the Peas&shy;ant Chil&shy;dren to Learn to Write from Us?|https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Who_Should_Learn_Writing_of_Whom;_Peasant_Children_of_Us,_or_We_of_Peasant_Children%3F}}}}*

← Older revision		Revision as of 00:47, 30 September 2017
Line 81:		Line 81:

	{{tab}}Another very useful feature is the final section{{dash\|{{qq\|How Sound is Anarchism?}}}}but this is to some extent spoilt by the large claims made for it. Krimerman and Perry describe it as {{qq\|far more than a sample of the serious efforts to evaluate the anarchist position,}} and they even claim that, {{qq\|with little exaggeration, we could offer them as the only efforts of this sort.}} On the contrary, this is a huge exaggeration. Take for example the statement that there aren{{t}} {{qq\|anything approaching comprehensive critical works on such first-<wbr>rank libertarian thinkers as Berdyaev, Bakunin, and the individualist anarchists.}} Berdyaev was hardly a libertarian, or a first-<wbr>rank thinker of any kind, but there are several books about him published just after the {{w\|last war\|World_War_II}}. There are also several books about Bakunin, as well as important contemporary criticisms by {{w\|Herzen\|Alexander_Herzen}} and {{w\|Marx\|Karl_Marx}}. There is a book about Max Stirner, as well as Marx{{s}} attack in {{l\|''The German Ideology''\|https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1845/german-ideology/ch03.htm}}'','' which is after all given in this section{{dash}}though in {{w\|Sidney Hook\|Sidney_Hook}}{{s}} words, {{qq\|For {{p\|382}}some reason, rather than that of Marx himself.}}		{{tab}}Another very useful feature is the final section{{dash\|{{qq\|How Sound is Anarchism?}}}}but this is to some extent spoilt by the large claims made for it. Krimerman and Perry describe it as {{qq\|far more than a sample of the serious efforts to evaluate the anarchist position,}} and they even claim that, {{qq\|with little exaggeration, we could offer them as the only efforts of this sort.}} On the contrary, this is a huge exaggeration. Take for example the statement that there aren{{t}} {{qq\|anything approaching comprehensive critical works on such first-<wbr>rank libertarian thinkers as Berdyaev, Bakunin, and the individualist anarchists.}} Berdyaev was hardly a libertarian, or a first-<wbr>rank thinker of any kind, but there are several books about him published just after the {{w\|last war\|World_War_II}}. There are also several books about Bakunin, as well as important contemporary criticisms by {{w\|Herzen\|Alexander_Herzen}} and {{w\|Marx\|Karl_Marx}}. There is a book about Max Stirner, as well as Marx{{s}} attack in {{l\|''The German Ideology''\|https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1845/german-ideology/ch03.htm}}'','' which is after all given in this section{{dash}}though in {{w\|Sidney Hook\|Sidney_Hook}}{{s}} words, {{qq\|For {{p\|382}}some reason, rather than that of Marx himself.}}
		+
		+	{{tab}}There is in fact a much larger body of criticism of anarchism than Krimerman and Perry realise. They give Marx{{s}} attack on Stirner, but not his attack of Proudhon in {{l\|''The Poverty of Philosophy''\|https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1847/poverty-philosophy/}} (1847), though this is included in the bibliography. They give {{w\|Georgi Plekhanov\|Georgi_Plekhanov}}{{s}} {{l\|''Anarchism and Socialism''\|https://www.marxists.org/archive/plekhanov/1895/anarch/index.htm}}, but not the earlier works by Marx ({{l\|''Indifference in Political Matters''\|https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1873/01/indifferentism.htm}}) and {{w\|Engels\|Friedrich_Engels}} ({{l\|''On Authority''\|https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1872/10/authority.htm}}), or the later works by {{w\|Lenin\|Vladimir_Lenin}} ({{l\|''The State and the Revolution''\|https://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1917/staterev/}}) and {{w\|Stalin\|Joseph_Stalin}} ({{l\|''Anarchism or Socialism''\|https://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/stalin/works/1906/12/x01.htm}}). They give {{l\|Monro\|http://www.oxfordreference.com/view/10.1093/oi/authority.20110803100206529}}{{s}} modern {{popup\|criticism\|Godwin’s Moral Philosophy}} of Godwin, but not {{w\|Hazlitt\|William_Hazlitt}}{{s}} contemporary criticism in {{l\|''The Spirit of the Age''\|https://archive.org/details/aea8982.0001.001.umich.edu}} (1825). They don{{t}} mention the capters on Godwin, Proudhon and Bakunin in {{w\|Alexander Gray\|Alexander_Gray_(poet)}}{{s}} {{l\|''The Socialist Tradition''\|https://mises.org/library/socialist-tradition-moses-lenin}} (1946) and in {{w\|John Bowle\|John_Edward_Bowle}}{{s}} ''Politics and Opinion in the Nineteenth Century'' (1954). They don{{t}} seem to be aware of the long list of 19th-<wbr>century studies of anarchism mentioned in {{w\|Eltzbacher\|Paul_Eltzbacher}}{{s}} {{l\|''Anarchism''\|http://dwardmac.pitzer.edu/anarchist_archives/eltzbacher/eltzbacher.html}} (1900). They don{{t}} mention the Epilogue of Woodcock{{s}} ''Anarchism'' or the Conclusion of Joll{{s}} ''The Anarchists''. And they don{{t}} even mention the Postscript of Horowitz{{s}} ''The Anarchists''.
		+
		+	{{tab}}''Patterns of Anarchy'' is clearly a better book than ''The Anarchists,'' though the latter does quote more basic anarchist texts at length, and is of course much cheaper. The real trouble is that neither book is as good as it could and should have been. Horowitz has a great deal of ability, and Krimerman and Perry have done a great deal of work, but somehow they have all missed their opportunity, and there is still room for a really good anthology of anarchism. In ideal circumstances both books would be almost valueless, because even the best anthology is only a second-<wbr>best comparison with original material, and these are far from the best. But the circumstances are not ideal, and in fact both books are extremely valuable, because even the worst anthology is better than nothing{{dash}}and apart from them, there is almost nothing of the original material of anarchist literature in print.
		+
		+	{{tab}}This is indeed one of the most serious defects of the English-<wbr>speaking anarchist movement today. Many important works have been written in, or translated into, English at one time or another, but very few are still obtainable. I wonder how many readers of {{sc\|anarchy}} have ever read any book by any major anarchist writer, and how many of those who have done so actually own one. It is possible to get hold of them, but it isn{{t}} easy. {{w\|Winstanley\|Gerrard_Winstanley}} and Godwin were reprinted in the United States and Canada during the {{popup\|war\|1939–1945}}, but were soon out of print again. The old translation of Stirner by {{w\|Steven Byington\|Steven_T._Byington}} was reprinted in the United States a few years ago, but it has aready gone. The old translations of Proudhon by Benjamin Tucker{{dash\|and Tucker{{s}} own ''Instead of a Book''}}have been out of print for years. Bakunin{{s}} fragmentary output has long been obtainable only in digests, and Kropotkin{{s}} enormous output only through a few pamphlets. Some of Tolstoy{{s}} tracts are still in print, but mostly the religious rather than the political ones. Emma Goldman and Rudolf Rocker have virtually disappeared, and the same was true of Malatesta until Vernon Richards rescued him last year. Many more have com{{p\|383}}pletely disappeared. Krimerman and Perry remark that {{qq\|there is a need for full new editions of the best works of Proudhon, Tucker, Kropotkin, and many others, whom the reader can only begin to appreciate here.}} There is indeed, but until then these two anthologies will give their readers at least some idea of what the major anarchist writers are like.
		+
		+	{{tab}}In the present circumstances, then, we must be grateful for both books, and they are certainly good value for only a guinea or so. But we must also consider the dangers of these circumstances. We have a weekly and a monthly paper, a new pamphlet every year or so, occasional reprints of old pamphlets (Berkman and Malatesta being the most recent), and very occasional books (such as Richard{{s\|r}} {{l\|''Malatesta''\|https://libcom.org/files/Malatesta%20-%20Life%20and%20Ideas.pdf}}). Apart from that, there are miscellaneous second-<wbr>hand books and pamphlets in curculation, and occasional magazines appearing at irregular intervals. That{{s}} about all, because that{{s}} about all we can afford. The trouble is that there are not only old<!-- 'not old' in original --> things which ought to be reprinted again, but also new things which ought to be printed or reprinted for the first time. It is important to remember the past, as these anthologies remind us, but not at the price of forgetting the future. In practice, what happens is that we are stuck in the present, running as fast as we can to stay in the same place, working so hard to full up our papers and keep them going from week to week and from month to month, that we have no time or energy (or money) for anything else. Partly because of this, most of what is printed is disappointingly bad{{dash}}most of the articles in {{w\|{{sc\|freedom}}\|Freedom_(newspaper)}} and {{sc\|anarchy}} are best forgotten, but the good ones are forgotten too. We have had to wait for ''Patterns of Anarchy'' to see a few of the valuable articles disinterred, and this is the sort of work we should be doing ourselves; it is not enough to bind up back numbers or annual selections.
		+
		+	{{tab}}It is true that if we pay too much attention to literature we may neglect other important things{{dash\|direct contact with appropriate people, for example, and direct action in appropriate places}}and it is true that both these anthologies, like most literature, stress the theory of anarchism at the expense of the practice. But no one can say that we are all so active that we have no time to preserve the literature of the past or create the literature of the future. Literature is after all the main voice of a movement. These anthologies may be only a faint echo, but then our own efforts are hardly more than a whisper. If we don{{t}} like what people write about us, the remedy is in our hands. Both the anthologies refer to and result from the recent revival of interest in anarchism. It is a pity that this revival has taken place almost in spite of, rather than because of, what we have said or done. It is time that we took advantage of it, and raised our voice again.

← Older revision		Revision as of 01:15, 29 September 2017
Line 73:		Line 73:

	{{tab}}The {{qq\|sociological}} section has little sociological about it. {{w\|Sorel\|Georges_Sorel}} was hardly a social scientist; nor was he one of {{qq\|the classical anarchists,}} as Horowitz claims (he ought to know, too, since he has written a whole book on Sorel, called ''Radicalism and the Revolt against Reason''). {{l\|''Reflections on Violence''\|https://libcom.org/files/Sorel-Reflections-on-Violence-ed-Jennings.pdf}} is always interesting to read, but for some reason the passage here is not the one in which Sorel deals with the myth of the general strike{{dash}}his most important idea. [[Author:Paul Goodman\|Paul Goodman]] is much admired by many anarchists, but I must say I find his writing quite antipathetic, and the passage here quite absurd (to use on of his favourite words); but other readers may well think otherwise. {{popup\|Robert Presthus\|American educator Robert Vance Presthus (1917–2001)}} is a real sociologist, and his {{popup\|book\|The Organisational Society}} seems to be similar to {{w\|William Whyte\|William_H._Whyte}}{{s}} better-<wbr>known {{w\|''Organisation Man''\|The_Organization_Man}}{{dash}}not really anarchist, but certainly relevant to modern anarchism. {{w\|Selznick\|Philip_Selznick}} rightly apologises for his {{popup\|essay\|“Revolution Sacred and Profane”}} and it would really have been kinder to leave it out. {{w\|Shapiro\|Karl_Shapiro}}{{s}} {{popup\|essay\|“On the Revival of Anarchism”}} isn{{t}} really about the revival of anarchism so much as the increasing attraction of libertarian ideas, with special reference to {{w\|Gandhi\|Mahatma_Gandhi}}, and it is a weak ending for an anthology described {{p\|381}}by the publisher as {{qq\|a ringing roll-<wbr>call of the great non-<wbr>conformists and dissenters}}.		{{tab}}The {{qq\|sociological}} section has little sociological about it. {{w\|Sorel\|Georges_Sorel}} was hardly a social scientist; nor was he one of {{qq\|the classical anarchists,}} as Horowitz claims (he ought to know, too, since he has written a whole book on Sorel, called ''Radicalism and the Revolt against Reason''). {{l\|''Reflections on Violence''\|https://libcom.org/files/Sorel-Reflections-on-Violence-ed-Jennings.pdf}} is always interesting to read, but for some reason the passage here is not the one in which Sorel deals with the myth of the general strike{{dash}}his most important idea. [[Author:Paul Goodman\|Paul Goodman]] is much admired by many anarchists, but I must say I find his writing quite antipathetic, and the passage here quite absurd (to use on of his favourite words); but other readers may well think otherwise. {{popup\|Robert Presthus\|American educator Robert Vance Presthus (1917–2001)}} is a real sociologist, and his {{popup\|book\|The Organisational Society}} seems to be similar to {{w\|William Whyte\|William_H._Whyte}}{{s}} better-<wbr>known {{w\|''Organisation Man''\|The_Organization_Man}}{{dash}}not really anarchist, but certainly relevant to modern anarchism. {{w\|Selznick\|Philip_Selznick}} rightly apologises for his {{popup\|essay\|“Revolution Sacred and Profane”}} and it would really have been kinder to leave it out. {{w\|Shapiro\|Karl_Shapiro}}{{s}} {{popup\|essay\|“On the Revival of Anarchism”}} isn{{t}} really about the revival of anarchism so much as the increasing attraction of libertarian ideas, with special reference to {{w\|Gandhi\|Mahatma_Gandhi}}, and it is a weak ending for an anthology described {{p\|381}}by the publisher as {{qq\|a ringing roll-<wbr>call of the great non-<wbr>conformists and dissenters}}.
		+
		+	{{tab}}Turning to ''Patterns of Anarchy,'' Krimerman and Perry remark in the Foreword that {{qq\|the peace movements, the civil rights struggles, the agitation of students for unshackled education have evinced vague feelings of affinity to anarchism,}} and that disillusionment with Communism {{qq\|has raised further interest in left-<wbr>wing alternatives to Marxism.}} Although most of the renewed interest in anarchism is not serious, they {{qq\|are determined to take anarchism seriously,}} for they {{qq\|have become more and more amazed at how many perceptive social theorists have spoken in the anarchist tradition,}} and they {{qq\|have tried to restore anarchism to its rightful place as more than a rejection of politics, indeed as a rewarding full-<wbr>scale theory of human conduct.}}
		+
		+	{{tab}}There is much less detailed criticism to be made of the passages they have selected. They have had the help of the {{w\|Freedom Press\|Freedom_Press}} in {{w\|London}} and of the {{w\|Libertarian League\|Libertarian_League}} in {{w\|New York\|New_YorK_City}}, and they have made good use of it. I must say that I am sorry to see so little from Bakunin and Malatesta, who I think are underrated, and so much from {{w\|Berdyaev\|Nikolai_Berdyaev}} and Paul Goodman, who I think are overrated. But I am glad to see proper attention given to the neglected early American anarchists ({{w\|Ballou\|Adin_Ballou}}, Warren, {{w\|Andrews\|Stephen_Pearl_Andrews}}, and Spooner), and to at least some of the contemporary English anarchists (Herbert Read, [[Author:Alex Comfort\|Alex Comfort]], [[Author:Tony Gibson\|Tony Gibson]], and [[Author:Colin Ward\|Colin Ward]]).
		+
		+	{{tab}}There are a few detailed criticisms to make. {{popup\|Novak\|American political scientist Derry Novak (born 1919)}}{{s}} {{l\|essay\|http://www.ditext.com/novak/anarchism.html}} is a weak opening for such an ambitious work, and Novak is hardly {{qq\|one of the few scholars}} to deal with the origins of anarchism, which is after all one of the commonest preoccupations of anarchist scholars, from Kropotkin onwards. It should have been explained that {{popup\|Estey\|Canadian economist James Arthur Estey (1886–1961)}}{{s}} {{l\|study\|https://archive.org/details/revolutionarysy00estegoog}} of syndicalism is confused about more than just Proudhon{{s}} relationship with anarchism and syndicalism, above all in giving far too much prominence to the writings of Sorel. It should also have been explained that {{w\|Dana\|Charles_Anderson_Dana}}, though an admirer of Proudhon{{s}} economic ideas, later became an extreme reactionary newspaper editor, as well as {{w\|Abraham Lincoln\|Lincoln}}{{s}} {{w\|Assistant Secretary of War\|United_States_Assistant_Secretary_of_War}} during the {{w\|American Civil War\|American_Civil_War}}.
		+
		+	{{tab}}Another very useful feature is the final section{{dash\|{{qq\|How Sound is Anarchism?}}}}but this is to some extent spoilt by the large claims made for it. Krimerman and Perry describe it as {{qq\|far more than a sample of the serious efforts to evaluate the anarchist position,}} and they even claim that, {{qq\|with little exaggeration, we could offer them as the only efforts of this sort.}} On the contrary, this is a huge exaggeration. Take for example the statement that there aren{{t}} {{qq\|anything approaching comprehensive critical works on such first-<wbr>rank libertarian thinkers as Berdyaev, Bakunin, and the individualist anarchists.}} Berdyaev was hardly a libertarian, or a first-<wbr>rank thinker of any kind, but there are several books about him published just after the {{w\|last war\|World_War_II}}. There are also several books about Bakunin, as well as important contemporary criticisms by {{w\|Herzen\|Alexander_Herzen}} and {{w\|Marx\|Karl_Marx}}. There is a book about Max Stirner, as well as Marx{{s}} attack in {{l\|''The German Ideology''\|https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1845/german-ideology/ch03.htm}}'','' which is after all given in this section{{dash}}though in {{w\|Sidney Hook\|Sidney_Hook}}{{s}} words, {{qq\|For {{p\|382}}some reason, rather than that of Marx himself.}}