Abstract
There are certain widespread assumptions in anarchist circles about philosophical anarchism: about what it is and what is wrong with it. My purpose in this chapter is to call these assumptions into question and to present a defence of what I describe as weak but engaged philosophical anarchism. Accordingly, I borrow my title (in slightly revised form) from one of the most influential works in the modest canon of philosophical anarchism: Robert Paul Wolff’s In Defence of Anarchism (1976). This short essay has enjoyed significant academic attention (among political and legal philosophers), but is widely reviled in anarchist circles. While I oppose Wolff’s strong but disengaged brand of philosophical anarchism, my reasons for this are somewhat untypical of his anarchist opponents, and we will examine their objections in due course, as well as my own.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Bibliography
I. Berlin (1998) The Proper Study of Mankind: An Anthology of Essays, eds H. Hardy and R. Hausheer (London: Pimlico).
A. Carter (2000) ‘Analytical anarchism: Some conceptual foundations’ Political Theory, XXVIII, 230–53.
G. Crowder (1991) Classical Anarchism: The Political Thought of Godwin, Proudhon, Bakunin, and Kropotkin (Oxford: Oxford University Press).
R. T. De George (1985) The Nature and Limits of Authority (Lawrence: University Press of Kansas).
H. G. Frankfurt (1973) ‘The anarchism of Robert Paul Wolff’ Political Theory, I, 405–14.
L. Green (1990) The Authority of the State (Oxford: Clarendon Press).
W. von Humboldt (1996) The Sphere and Duties of Government, trans. Joseph Coulthard (Bristol: Thoemmes Press).
P. Marshall (1993) Demanding the Impossible: A History of Anarchism, rev. edn (London: Fontana).
R. Martin (1974) ‘Wolff’s defence of philosophical anarchism’ The Philosophical Quarterly, XXIV, 140–9.
P. McLaughlin (2007) Anarchism and Authority: A Philosophical Introduction to Classical Anarchism (Aldershot: Ashgate).
A. Meltzer (2000) Anarchism: Arguments For and Against (Edinburgh: AK Press).
D. Miller (1984) Anarchism (London: Dent).
W. O. Reichert (1967) ‘Toward a new understanding of anarchism’ The Western Political Quarterly, XX, 856–65.
A. Ritter (1980) Anarchism: A Theoretical Analysis (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).
J. J. Rousseau (1986) The Social Contract and Discourses, ed. G. D. H. Cole (London: Everyman).
A. J. Simmons (1987) ‘The anarchist position: A reply to Klosko and Senor’ Philosophy and Public Affairs, XVI, 269–79.
— (1996) ‘Philosophical anarchism’ in J. T. Sanders and J. Narveson (eds) For and Against the State: New Philosophical Readings (Lanham: Rowman and Littlefield).
— (1999) ‘Justification and legitimacy’ Ethics, CIX, 739–71.
R. P. Wolff (1969) ‘On violence’ Journal of Philosophy, LXVI, 601–16.
— (1976) In Defence of Anarchism (New York: Harper Torchbooks).
V. S. Yarros (1936) ‘Philosophical anarchism: Its rise, decline, and eclipse’ The American Journal of Sociology, XLI, 470–83.
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Copyright information
© 2010 Paul McLaughlin
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
McLaughlin, P. (2010). In Defence of Philosophical Anarchism. In: Franks, B., Wilson, M. (eds) Anarchism and Moral Philosophy. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230289680_2
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230289680_2
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, London
Print ISBN: 978-1-349-36859-4
Online ISBN: 978-0-230-28968-0
eBook Packages: Palgrave Religion & Philosophy CollectionPhilosophy and Religion (R0)