View source for Issues in anarchism

{{short description|Issues related to the political philosophy of anarchism}}
{{anarchism sidebar|issues}}
[[Anarchism]] is generally defined as the [[political philosophy]] which holds the [[State (polity)|state]] to be undesirable, unnecessary and harmful<ref name="definition">{{cite journal|last=Malatesta|first=Errico|title=Towards Anarchism|journal=Man!|publisher=International Group of San Francisco|location=Los Angeles|oclc=3930443|url=http://www.marxists.org/archive/malatesta/1930s/xx/toanarchy.htm|author-link=Errico Malatesta}}
{{cite journal|url=https://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20070514.wxlanarchist14/BNStory/lifeWork/home/|title=Working for The Man|journal=[[The Globe and Mail]]|access-date=14 April 2008|last=Agrell|first=Siri|date=14 May 2007|url-status=dead|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20070516094548/http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20070514.wxlanarchist14/BNStory/lifeWork/home|archive-date=16 May 2007}} {{cite encyclopedia|url=https://www.britannica.com/eb/article-9117285|title=Anarchism|year=2006|encyclopedia=Encyclopædia Britannica|publisher=Encyclopædia Britannica Premium Service|access-date=29 August 2006|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20061214085638/https://www.britannica.com/eb/article-9117285|archive-date=14 December 2006|url-status=live}} {{cite journal|year=2005|title=Anarchism|journal=The Shorter Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy|page=14|quote=Anarchism is the view that a society without the state, or government, is both possible and desirable}}. The following sources cite anarchism as a political philosophy: {{cite book|last=Mclaughlin|first=Paul|title=Anarchism and Authority|publisher=Ashgate|location=Aldershot|year=2007|isbn=978-0-7546-6196-2|page=59}} {{cite book|last=Johnston|first=R.|title=The Dictionary of Human Geography|publisher=Blackwell Publishers|location=Cambridge|year=2000|isbn=0-631-20561-6|page=24}}</ref><ref name=slevin>Slevin, Carl (2003). McLean, Aiaun; McMillan, Allistair, eds. "Anarchism". ''The Concise Oxford Dictionary of Politics''. Oxford University Press.</ref> as well as opposing [[authority]] and [[hierarchical organization]] in the conduct of [[human relations]].<ref name="iaf-ifa.org">[http://www.iaf-ifa.org/principles/english.html "Principles of The International of Anarchist Federations"]. {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120105095946/http://www.iaf-ifa.org/principles/english.html|date=5 January 2012}} [[International of Anarchist Federations]]. "The IAF – IFA fights for : the abolition of all forms of authority whether economical, political, social, religious, cultural or sexual".</ref><ref>[[Emma Goldman|Goldman, Emma]]. "What it Really Stands for Anarchy". ''[[Anarchism and Other Essays]]''. "Anarchism, then, really stands for the liberation of the human mind from the dominion of religion; the liberation of the human body from the dominion of property; liberation from the shackles and restraint of government. Anarchism stands for a social order based on the free grouping of individuals for the purpose of producing real social wealth; an order that will guarantee to every human being free access to the earth and full enjoyment of the necessities of life, according to individual desires, tastes, and inclinations".</ref><ref>[[Benjamin Tucker|Tucker, Benjamin]]. [http://www.revoltlib.com/?id=2803 ''Individual Liberty'']. "They found that they must turn either to the right or to the left, — follow either the path of Authority or the path of Liberty. Marx went one way; Warren and Proudhon the other. Thus were born State Socialism and Anarchism. [...] Authority, takes many shapes, but, broadly speaking, her enemies divide themselves into three classes: first, those who abhor her both as a means and as an end of progress, opposing her openly, avowedly, sincerely, consistently, universally; second, those who profess to believe in her as a means of progress, but who accept her only so far as they think she will subserve their own selfish interests, denying her and her blessings to the rest of the world; third, those who distrust her as a means of progress, believing in her only as an end to be obtained by first trampling upon, violating, and outraging her. These three phases of opposition to Liberty are met in almost every sphere of thought and human activity. Good representatives of the first are seen in the Catholic Church and the Russian autocracy; of the second, in the Protestant Church and the Manchester school of politics and political economy; of the third, in the atheism of Gambetta and the socialism of the socialism off Karl Marx".</ref><ref name="Ward 1966">{{cite web|url=http://www.panarchy.org/ward/organization.1966.html|last=Ward|first=Colin|year=1966|title=Anarchism as a Theory of Organization|access-date=1 March 2010|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100325081119/http://www.panarchy.org/ward/organization.1966.html|archive-date=25 March 2010<!-- Added by DASHBot. -->}}</ref><ref>Anarchist historian [[George Woodcock]] report of [[Mikhail Bakunin]]'s anti-authoritarianism and shows opposition to both state and non-state forms of authority as follows: "All anarchists deny authority; many of them fight against it". (p. 9) "[...] Bakunin did not convert the League's central committee to his full program, but he did persuade them to accept a remarkably radical recommendation to the Berne Congress of September 1868, demanding economic equality and implicitly attacking authority in both Church and State".</ref><ref>{{cite book|last=Brown|first=L. Susan|chapter=Anarchism as a Political Philosophy of Existential Individualism: Implications for Feminism|title=The Politics of Individualism: Liberalism, Liberal Feminism and Anarchism|publisher=Black Rose Books Ltd. Publishing|year=2002|page=106}}</ref> Proponents of anarchism, known as anarchists, advocate [[Stateless society|stateless societies]] based on non-[[Hierarchy|hierarchical]]<ref name="iaf-ifa.org"/><ref>[[Peter Kropotkin|Kropotkin, Peter]]. [http://www.revoltlib.com/?id=110 "Anarchism: its philosophy and ideal"]. "That is why Anarchy, when it works to destroy authority in all its aspects, when it demands the abrogation of laws and the abolition of the mechanism that serves to impose them, when it refuses all hierarchical organization and preaches free agreement — at the same time strives to maintain and enlarge the precious kernel of social customs without which no human or animal society can exist".</ref><ref>[http://www.theanarchistlibrary.org/HTML/The_Anarchist_FAQ_Editorial_Collective__An_Anarchist_FAQ__03_17_.html#toc2 "B.1 Why are anarchists against authority and hierarchy?"] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120615071249/http://theanarchistlibrary.org/HTML/The_Anarchist_FAQ_Editorial_Collective__An_Anarchist_FAQ__03_17_.html#toc2|date=2012-06-15}}. ''[[An Anarchist FAQ]]''. "Anarchists are opposed to irrational (e.g., illegitimate) authority, in other words, hierarchy — hierarchy being the institutionalisation of authority within a society".</ref> [[voluntary association]]s.<ref>[[George Woodcock|Woodcock, George]]. "Anarchism". ''[[Encyclopedia of Philosophy]]''. "ANARCHISM, a social philosophy that rejects authoritarian government and maintains that voluntary institutions are best suited to express man's natural social tendencies".</ref><ref>[[Peter Kropotkin|Kropotkin, Peter]]. [http://www.revoltlib.com/?id=109 "Anarchism"]. ''[[Encyclopædia Britannica]]''. "In a society developed on these lines, the voluntary associations which already now begin to cover all the fields of human activity would take a still greater extension so as to substitute themselves for the state in all its functions".</ref> While anarchism holds the state to be undesirable, unnecessary and harmful,<ref>McLean; McMillan 2003; Craig 2005, p. 14.</ref> [[Anti-statism|opposition to the state]] is not its central or sole definition.<ref>McLaughlin 2007, p. 28. "Anarchists do reject the state, as we will see. But to claim that this central aspect of anarchism is definitive is to sell anarchism short".</ref> Anarchism can entail opposing authority or hierarchy in the conduct of all human relations.<ref>Proudhon 1849. "Anarchy is the condition of existence of adult society, as hierarchy is the condition of [[Urgesellschaft|primitive society]]. There is a continual progress in human society from hierarchy to anarchy".</ref><ref>Bakunin 1882. "In a word, we reject all legislation, all authority, and all privileged, licensed, official, and legal influence, even though arising from universal suffrage, convinced that it can turn only to the advantage of a dominant minority of exploiters against the interests of the immense majority in subjection to them. This is the sense in which we are really Anarchists".</ref><ref>Armand 1926. "In practice, any individual who, because of his or her temperament or because of conscious and serious reflection, repudiates all external authority or coercion, whether of a governmental, ethical, intellectual, or economic order, can be considered an anarchist. Everyone who consciously rejects the domination of people by other people or by the social ambiance, and its economic corollaries, can be said to be an anarchist as well".</ref><ref>{{cite web|last=Wilbur|first=Shawn P.|title=The Anarchist Encyclopedia: Hierarchy|url=https://www.libertarian-labyrinth.org/working-translations/anarchist-encyclopedia-hierarchy/|date=19 February 2018|quote=The anarchists are against all hierarchy, be it moral or material. They oppose to it the respect for liberty and the absolute autonomy of the individual|website=Libertarian Labyrinth}}.</ref>

Anarchism is often considered a [[Far-left politics|far-left]] ideology<ref name="Far-left">Brooks 1994, p. xi; Kahn 2000; Moynihan 2007.</ref> and much of its [[Anarchist economics|economics]] and [[Anarchist law|legal philosophy]] reflect [[Libertarian socialism|anti-authoritarian interpretations]] of [[Anarcho-communism|communism]], [[Collectivist anarchism|collectivism]], [[Anarcho-syndicalism|syndicalism]], [[Mutualism (economic theory)|mutualism]], or [[participatory economics]].<ref name="Guerin 1970, p. 35">Guerin 1970, p. 35.</ref> As anarchism does not offer a fixed body of doctrine from a single particular worldview,<ref name="Marshall 1993, pp. 14–17">Marshall 1993, pp. 14–17.</ref> many [[History of anarchism|anarchist types and traditions]] exist, not all of which are mutually exclusive.<ref name="Sylvan 2007, p. 262">Sylvan 2007, p. 262.</ref> [[Anarchist schools of thought]] can differ fundamentally, supporting anything from extreme [[individualism]] to complete [[Collectivism and individualism|collectivism]].<ref>McLean; McMillan 2003.</ref> Strains of anarchism have often been divided into the categories of [[Social anarchism|social]] and [[individualist anarchism]] or similar dual classifications.<ref>Fowler 1972; Kropotkin 2002, p. 5; Ostergaard 2009, p. 14.</ref> Other classifications may add mutualism as a third category while some consider it part of individualist anarchism<ref name="Anarchism">{{cite encyclopedia|editor-last=Rines|editor-first=George Edwin|editor-link=George Edwin Rines|encyclopedia=[[Encyclopedia Americana|The Encyclopedia Americana: A Library of Universal Knowledge]]|title=Anarchism|url=https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=hvd.hn52hq;view=1up;seq=722|via=Hathi Trust|year=1918|volume=1|location=New York|oclc=7308909|lccn=18016023|pages=624}}</ref><ref>{{cite book|last=Hamilton|first=Peter|title=Émile Durkheim|publisher=Routledge|location=New York|year=1995|isbn=978-0415110471|page=79}}</ref><ref>{{cite book|last=Faguet|first=Émile|title=Politicians & Moralists of the Nineteenth Century|publisher=Books for Libraries Press|location=Freeport|year=1970|isbn=978-0-8369-1828-1|page=147}}</ref> and others regard it to be part of social anarchism.<ref>{{cite book|last1=Bowen|first1=James|last2=Purkis|first2=Jon|title=Changing Anarchism: Anarchist Theory and Practice in a Global Age|url=https://archive.org/details/changinganarchis00bowe|url-access=limited|publisher=Manchester University Press|year=2004|page=[https://archive.org/details/changinganarchis00bowe/page/n30 24]|isbn=9780719066948}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal|last=Knowles|first=Rob|title=Political Economy From Below: Communitarian Anarchism as a Neglected Discourse in Histories of Economic Thought|journal=History of Economics Review|number=31|date=Winter 2000|volume=31|pages=30–47|doi=10.1080/10370196.2000.11733332|s2cid=141027974}}</ref>

There are many philosophical differences among anarchists concerning questions of ideology, values and strategy. Ideas about how anarchist societies should work vary considerably, especially with respect to [[Anarchist economics|economics]].<ref>Honderich, Ted (1995). ''The Oxford Companion to Philosophy''. Oxford University Press. {{ISBN|978-0-19-866132-0}}.</ref> There are also disagreements about how such a society might be brought about, with some anarchists being committed to a strategy of nonviolence while others advocate armed struggle.<ref>Carter, April (1978). "Anarchism and violence". Nomos. American Society for Political and Legal Philosophy. 19: 320–340. JSTOR 24219053.</ref><ref>Trevijano, Carmen García (2001). Ted Honderich (ed.). ''Enciclopedia Oxford de filosofía'' (in Spanish). Tecnos. {{ISBN|978-84-309-3699-1}}.</ref><ref>Fiala, Andrew (2017). "Anarchism". ''Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy''. Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University.</ref><ref>Williams, Dana M. (2018). "Contemporary anarchist and anarchistic movements". ''Sociology Compass''. '''12''' (6). Wiley. doi:10.1111/soc4.12582. ISSN 1751-9020.</ref><ref>Williams, Dana M. (2019). "Tactics: Conceptions of Social Change, Revolution, and Anarchist Organisation". In Levy, Carl; Adams, Matthew S. (eds.). ''The Palgrave Handbook of Anarchism''. Springer Publishing. {{ISBN|978-3-319-75620-2}}.</ref>

== Definitional concerns ==
{{main|Definition of anarchism and libertarianism}}
{{see also|Anarchist terminology}}
While it might be true to say that anarchism is a cluster of political philosophies opposing [[authority]] and [[hierarchical organization]] (including the [[State (polity)|state]], [[Anarchism and capitalism#Anarchist criticism of capitalism and economic issues|capitalism]], [[Anarchism and nationalism|nationalism]] and all associated [[institution]]s) in the conduct of all [[human relations]] in favour of a society based on [[voluntary association]], [[freedom]] and [[decentralisation]], this definition has its own shortcomings as the definition based on etymology (which is simply a negation of a ruler), or based on anti-statism (anarchism is much more than that) or even the anti-authoritarian (which is an ''a posteriori'' concussion).<ref name="McLaughlin 2007, pp 25–26">McLaughlin 2007, pp 25–26.</ref>{{verify source|date=April 2021}}

Nonetheless, major elements of the definition of anarchism include the following:<ref name="McLaughlin 2007, pp 25–26"/>
# The will for a non-coercive society.
# The rejection of the state apparatus.
# The belief that human nature allows humans to exist in or progress toward such a non-coercive society.
# A suggestion on how to act to pursue the ideal of [[anarchy]].

Usages in political circles have varied considerably. In 1894, [[Richard T. Ely]] noted that the term had "already acquired a variety of meanings". In its most general sense, these included the view that society is "a living, growing organism, the laws of which are something different from the laws of individual action".<ref>Richard Theodore Ely, ''Socialism: An Examination of Its Nature, Its Strength and Its Weakness'' (New York: Thomas Y. Crowell, 1894), p. 3.</ref> Several years earlier in 1888, the [[individualist anarchist]] [[Benjamin Tucker]] included the full text of a "Socialistic Letter" by [[Ernest Lesigne]] in his essay on "State Socialism and Anarchism". According to Lesigne, there are two socialisms: "One is [[Dictatorship|dictatorial]], the other [[Libertarianism|libertarian]]".<ref>Tucker, Benjamin. ''State Socialism and Anarchism: How Far They Agree and Wherein They Differ''.</ref> As an [[Anti-capitalism|anti-capitalist]] and [[Libertarian socialism|libertarian socialist]] philosophy, anarchism is placed on the [[Far-left politics|far-left]] of the [[political spectrum]]<ref name="Far-left"/> and much of its [[Anarchist economics|economics]] and [[Anarchist law|legal philosophy]] reflect anti-authoritarian interpretations of [[left-wing politics]] such as [[Anarcho-communism|communism]], [[Collectivist anarchism|collectivism]], [[Anarcho-syndicalism|syndicalism]], [[Mutualism (economic theory)|mutualism]], or [[participatory economics]].<ref name="Guerin 1970, p. 35"/> As anarchism does not offer a fixed body of doctrine from a single particular worldview,<ref name="Marshall 1993, pp. 14–17"/> many [[History of anarchism|anarchist types and traditions]] exist and varieties of anarchy diverge widely.<ref name="Sylvan 2007, p. 262"/> As a result, [[anarchist schools of thought]] can differ fundamentally yet maintain the common tenets of anarchism, supporting anything from extreme [[individualism]] to complete [[Collectivism and individualism|collectivism]].<ref>McLean and McMillan 2003.</ref> Strains of anarchism have often been divided into the categories of [[Social anarchism|social]] and [[individualist anarchism]], or similar dual classifications.<ref>Anarchism; Fowler 1972; Kropotkin 2002, p. 5; Ostergaard 2009, p. 14.</ref> Nonetheless, anti-capitalism is considered a necessary element of anarchism by most anarchists.<ref>Anarchist survey highlighting a general opposition to capitalism: {{cite web|url=http://www.anarchistsurvey.com/results/|title=2010 Anarchist Survey report|access-date=8 November 2010|url-status=dead|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120314184800/http://www.anarchistsurvey.com/results/|archive-date=14 March 2012}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|last=Chomsky|first=Noam|title=On Capitalism|url=http://www.chomsky.info/interviews/1991----02.htm|work=Chomsky.info|access-date=26 November 2013|year=1991|quote=catastrophe of capitalism|url-status=dead|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130928043924/http://www.chomsky.info/interviews/1991----02.htm|archive-date=28 September 2013}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|title=Is "anarcho-capitalism" a form of capitalism?|url=http://www.infoshop.org/AnarchistFAQSectionF|access-date=26 November 2013|author=Anarchist FAQ collective|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20131202230740/http://www.infoshop.org/AnarchistFAQSectionF|archive-date=2 December 2013|url-status=dead}}</ref>

=== Individualist anarchism vs. social anarchism ===
Due to the many anarchist schools of thought, anarchism can be divided into two or more categories, the most used being [[individualist anarchism]] vs. [[social anarchism]]. Other categorizations may include [[green anarchism]] and/or [[Left anarchism|left]] and [[right anarchism]]. Terms like [[anarcho-socialism]] or [[socialist anarchism]] can also be used as synonymous for social anarchism, but this is rejected by most anarchists since they generally consider themselves socialists of the libertarian tradition and are seen as unnecessary and confusing when not used as synonymous for [[Libertarian socialism|libertarian or stateless socialism]] vis-à-vis [[Authoritarian socialism|authoritarian]] or [[state socialism]].<ref>Iverson, Stan. (1968). "Sex and Anarcho-socialism". ''Sex Marchers''. p. 57. "Libertarian Socialism, or if you please, anarcho-socialism [...]".</ref><ref>Walford, George (1979). ''Ideologies and Their Functions: A Study in Systematic Ideology''. pp. 139–145.</ref><ref>[[David McNally (professor)|McNally, David]] (1993). "'Proudhon did Enormous Mischief': Marx's Critique of the First Market Socialists". ''Against the Market: Political Economy, Market Socialism and the Marxist Critique''. Verso.</ref><ref>[[Amy H. Sturgis|Sturgis, Amy H.]] (2003). ''Presidents from Hayes Through McKinley: Debating the Issues in Pro and Con Primary Documents''. Greenwood Publishing Group. p. 106. "Composed of many differing strains of thought (such as mutualism, anarcho-individualism, anarcho-socialism, and anarcho-communism), anarchism revolves around the concept of noncoercion and the belief that force is illegitimate and unethical".</ref> Anarchism has been historically identified with the [[History of socialism|socialist]] and [[anti-capitalist movement]], with the main divide being between [[Market abolitionism|anti-market]] anarchists who support some form of [[Decentralized planning (economics)|decentralised economic planning]] and [[Free-market anarchism|pro-market]] anarchists who support [[Market socialism|free-market socialism]], therefore such terms are mainly used by anarcho-capitalism theorists and scholars who recognize anarcho-capitalism to differentiate between the two.<ref name="Busky p. 2">{{cite book|title=Democratic Socialism: A Global Survey|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=3joQKjDtn4wC|publisher=Greenwood Publishing Group|date=1 January 2000|isbn=9780275968861|first=Donald F.|last=Busky|page=2|quote=The same may be said of anarchism: social anarchism—a nonstate form of socialism—may be distinguished from the nonsocialist, and, in some cases, procapitalist school of individualist anarchism}}.</ref><ref name="Ostergaard p. 14">[[Geoffrey Ostergaard|Ostergaard, Geoffrey]] (2008). "Anarchism". ''The Blackwell Dictionary of Modern Social Thought''. Blackwell Publishing. p. 14.</ref><ref>Bylund, Per (19 March 2019). [https://mises.org/library/trouble-socialist-anarchism "The Trouble With Socialist Anarchism"]. [[Mises Institute]]. Retrieved 31 March 2019.</ref> For similar reasons, anarchists also reject categorizations such as left<ref name="thagard">Thagard, Paul. 2002. ''Coherence in Thought and Action''. MIT Press. p. 153.</ref> and right anarchism ([[anarcho-capitalism]] and [[national-anarchism]]),<ref>Heider, Ulrike (1994). ''Anarchism: Left, Right and Green''. San Francisco: City Lights Books.</ref> seeing anarchism as a libertarian socialist and [[Political radicalism|radical]] [[left-wing]] or [[far-left]] ideology.<ref name="Far-left"/>

While most anarcho-capitalists theorists and scholars divide anarchism into social anarchism vis-à-vis individualist anarchism meaning [[socialism]] vs. [[capitalism]], seeing the two as mutually exclusive although accepting all anarchist schools of thought under [[panarchy (political philosophy)|panarchy]] on the basis of [[voluntaryism]], anarchist theorists and scholars opposing to anarcho-capitalism reject this, not seeing them as a struggle between socialism and capitalism or as mutually exclusive, but instead as complementary, with their differences mainly being based on the means to attain [[anarchy]], rather than on their ends, arguing against certain anarcho-capitalist theorists and scholars who see individualist anarchism as pro-capitalist and reiterating that anarchism as a whole is socialist, meaning [[libertarian]] and [[anti-statist]] socialism. Many [[anarcho-communists]] regard themselves as radically individualists,<ref name="Stirner: The Ego and His Own">[[Max Baginski|Baginki, Max]] (May 1907). [http://dwardmac.pitzer.edu/anarchist_archives/goldman/ME/mev2n3.html#142 "Stirner: The Ego and His Own"]. ''[[Mother Earth (magazine)|Mother Earth]]'' (2: 3). "Modern Communists are more individualistic than Stirner. To them, not merely religion, morality, family and State are spooks, but property also is no more than a spook, in whose name the individual is enslaved — and how enslaved! [...] Communism thus creates a basis for the liberty and Eigenheit of the individual. I am a Communist because I am an Individualist. Fully as heartily the Communists concur with Stirner when he puts the word take in place of demand — that leads to the dissolution of property, to expropriation. Individualism and Communism go hand in hand."; [[Renzo Novatore|Novatore, Renzo]] (1924). [http://www.theanarchistlibrary.org/HTML/Renzo_Novatore__Toward_the_Creative_Nothing.html "Towards the Creative Nothing"]; Gray, Christopher (1974). ''Leaving the Twentieth Century''. p. 88; [[The Abolition of Work|Black, Bob]] (2010). [http://www.theanarchistlibrary.org/HTML/Bob_Black__Nightmares_of_Reason.html#toc22 "Nightmares of Reason"]. "[C]ommunism is the final fulfillment of individualism. [...] The apparent contradiction between individualism and communism rests on a misunderstanding of both. [...] Subjectivity is also objective: the individual really is subjective. It is nonsense to speak of "emphatically prioritizing the social over the individual," [...]. You may as well speak of prioritizing the chicken over the egg. Anarchy is a "method of individualization." It aims to combine the greatest individual development with the greatest communal unity".</ref> seeing anarcho-communism as the best [[social system]] for the realization of individual freedom.<ref name="Communism and Anarchy">[[Peter Kropotkin|Kropotkin, Peter]] (1901). [http://www.revoltlib.com/?id=141 "Communism and Anarchy"]. "Communism is the one which guarantees the greatest amount of individual liberty — provided that the idea that begets the community be Liberty, Anarchy [...]. Communism guarantees economic freedom better than any other form of association, because it can guarantee wellbeing, even luxury, in return for a few hours of work instead of a day's work."; [[Dielo Truda|Truda, Dielo]] (1926). [http://www.theanarchistlibrary.org/HTML/Dielo_Truda__Workers__Cause___Organisational_Platform_of_the_Libertarian_Communists.html "Organisational Platform of the Libertarian Communists"]. "This other society will be libertarian communism, in which social solidarity and free individuality find their full expression, and in which these two ideas develop in perfect harmony."; [https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/various-authors-willful-disobedience-volume-2-number-12#toc18 "My Perspectives"]. ''Willful Disobedience'' (2: 12). "I see the dichotomies made between individualism and communism, individual revolt and class struggle, the struggle against human exploitation and the exploitation of nature as false dichotomies and feel that those who accept them are impoverishing their own critique and struggle."; [[L. Susan Brown|Brown, L. Susan]] (2002). ''[[The Politics of Individualism]]''. Black Rose Books; [[L. Susan Brown|Brown, L. Susan]] (2 February 2011). [https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/l-susan-brown-does-work-really-work "Does Work Really Work?"].</ref> Notwithstanding the name, [[collectivist anarchism]] is also seen as a blend of [[individualism]] and collectivism.<ref>Morriss, Brian (1993). ''Bakukunin: The Philosophy of Freedom''. Black Rose Books Ltd. p. 115.</ref> Anarchism is generally considered an individualist philosophy, opposing all forms of authoritarian collectivism, but one which does see the [[individual]] or the [[community]] as complementary rather than mutually exclusive, with anarcho-communism and social anarchism in particular most rejecting the individualist–collectivist dichotomy. Finally, social anarchism is a term used in the United States to refer to [[Murray Bookchin]]'s circle and its [[Social Anarchism (journal)|omonymous journal]].<ref>[[Murray Bookchin|Bookchin, Murray]] (1995). [https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/murray-bookchin-social-anarchism-or-lifestyle-anarchism-an-unbridgeable-chasm "Social Anarchism or Lifestyle Anarchism: An Unbridgeable Chasm"]. The Anarchist Library. Retrieved 31 March 2019.</ref><ref>Ehrlich, Howard J. (2013). [https://www.akpress.org/bestofsocialanarchism.html "The Best of Social Anarchism"] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190331042708/https://www.akpress.org/bestofsocialanarchism.html |date=2019-03-31 }}. See Sharp Press. Retrieved 31 March 2019.</ref>

Schools of thought such as [[anarcha-feminism]], [[anarcho-pacifism]], [[anarcho-primitivism]], [[anarcho-transhumanism]] and [[green anarchism]] have different economic views and can be either part of individualist anarchism or social anarchism. To differentiate it from individualist anarchism, anarchists prefer using social anarchism, a term used to characterize certain strides of anarchism vis-à-vis individualist anarchism, with the former focusing on the social aspect and generally being more organisational as well as supporting [[decentralised]] [[economic planning]] and the latter focusing on the individual and generally being more anti-organisational as well as supporting a [[Free market#Socialist economics|free-market form of socialism]], respectively, rather than seeing the two categories as mutually exclusive or as socialism vis-à-vis capitalism, leading to [[anarchism without adjectives]].<ref>Esenwein, George Richard (1989). ''Anarchist Ideology and the Working Class Movement in Spain, 1868-1898''. p. 135. "Anarchism without adjectives referred to an unhyphenated form of anarchism, that is, a doctrine without any qualifying labels such as communist, collectivist, mutualist, or individualist. For others, [...] [it] was simply understood as an attitude that tolerated the coexistence of different anarchist schools".</ref> [[Mutualism (economic theory)|Mutualism]] is seen as the middle or third category between social anarchism and individualist anarchism, although it has been considered part of both social anarchism<ref>{{cite book|title=Changing Anarchism: Anarchist Theory and Practice in a Global Age|url=https://archive.org/details/changinganarchis00bowe|url-access=limited|last1=Bowen|first1=James|last2=Purkis|first2=Jon|publisher=Manchester University Press|year=2004|page=[https://archive.org/details/changinganarchis00bowe/page/n30 24]|isbn=9780719066948}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal|last=Knowles|first=Rob|date=Winter 2000|title=Political Economy From Below: Communitarian Anarchism as a Neglected Discourse in Histories of Economic Thought|journal=History of Economics Review|volume=31|number=31|pages=30–47|doi=10.1080/10370196.2000.11733332|s2cid=141027974}}</ref> and individualist anarchism.<ref name="Anarchism"/><ref>{{cite book|title=Émile Durkheim|last=Hamilton|first=Peter|publisher=Routledge|year=1995|isbn=978-0415110471|location=New York|page=79}}</ref><ref>{{cite book|title=Politicians & Moralists of the Nineteenth Century|last=Faguet|first=Émile|publisher=Books for Libraries Press|year=1970|isbn=978-0-8369-1828-1|location=Freeport|page=147}}</ref> [[Pierre-Joseph Proudhon]] spoke of social individualism and described mutualism and the freedom it pursued as the synthesis between [[communism]] and [[property]].<ref>[[Pierre-Joseph Proudhon|Proudhon, Pierre-Joseph]] (1848). ''[[What Is Property?]]''.</ref>

From a materialist perspective, individualist anarchism is the anarchist form in the pre-capitalist and largely agrarian and merchantilist capitalism before the [[Industrial Revolution]], during which individualist anarchism became a form of artisanal and self-employed socialism, especially in the United States. Instead, social anarchism is anarchism in an [[industrial society]], being the form of industrial or proletarian socialism, with [[post-left anarchy]] and its criticism of [[industrial technology]] and [[Refusal of work|anti-workerism]] arising in a [[post-industrial society]]. Some anarchists may see such categorisations in these terms.<ref>[http://www.infoshop.org/page/AnarchistFAQSectionG1#secg14 "G.1.4 Why is the social context important in evaluating Individualist Anarchism?"]. ''[[An Anarchist FAQ]]''. {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130315000327/http://www.infoshop.org/page/AnarchistFAQSectionG1#secg14|date=15 March 2013}}</ref> Despite their differences, these are all forms of libertarian socialism. Before socialism became associated in the 20th century with [[List of socialist states|Marxist–Leninist states]] and similar forms of [[authoritarian]] and [[statist]] socialism, considered by critics as [[state capitalism]] and [[Command economy|administrative command economies]] rather than [[planned economies]], the word socialism was a broad concept which was aimed at solving the [[The labor problem|labour problem]] through radical changes in the capitalist economy.<ref>Brooks, Frank H. (1994). ''The Individualist Anarchists: An Anthology of Liberty (1881–1908)''. Transaction Publishers. p. 75.</ref> This caused issues between traditional anarchists and anarcho-captalists, whose understanding of socialism is that of the 20th century Marxist–Leninist states and whose school of thought is generally not [[Anarchism and capitalism|recognized as part of anarchism]].<ref name=Capitalism>{{cite book|last=Marshall|first=Peter|author-link=Peter Marshall (author)|title=Demanding the Impossible: A History of Anarchism|url=https://archive.org/details/demandingimpossi00mars_633|url-access=limited|year=1993|publisher=PM Press|place=Oakland, California|page=[https://archive.org/details/demandingimpossi00mars_633/page/n581 565]|isbn=978-1-60486-064-1}}: "In fact, few anarchists would accept the 'anarcho-capitalists' into the anarchist camp since they do not share a concern for economic equality and social justice, Their self-interested, calculating market men would be incapable of practising voluntary co-operation and mutual aid. Anarcho-capitalists, even if they do reject the State, might therefore best be called right-wing libertarians rather than anarchists."; {{cite journal|last=Sabatini|first=Peter (Fall/Winter 1994–1995)|title=Libertarianism: Bogus Anarchy|url=http://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/peter-sabatini-libertarianism-bogus-anarchy|journal=[[Anarchy: A Journal of Desire Armed]]|issue=41}} "Within Libertarianism, Rothbard represents a minority perspective that actually argues for the total elimination of the state. However Rothbard's claim as an anarchist is quickly voided when it is shown that he only wants an end to the public state. In its place he allows countless private states, with each person supplying their own police force, army, and law, or else purchasing these services from capitalist venders. [...] [S]o what remains is shrill anti-statism conjoined to a vacuous freedom in hackneyed defense of capitalism. In sum, the "anarchy" of Libertarianism reduces to a liberal fraud."; {{cite book|last=Meltzer|first=Albert|author-link=Albert Meltzer|title=Anarchism: Arguments for and Against|url=https://archive.org/details/anarchism00albe|url-access=registration|date=1 January 2000|publisher=AK Press|page=[https://archive.org/details/anarchism00albe/page/50 50]|isbn=978-1-873176-57-3}} "The philosophy of "anarcho-capitalism" dreamed up by the "libertarian" New Right, has nothing to do with Anarchism as known by the Anarchist movement proper."; {{cite book|last=Goodway|first=David|author-link=David Goodway|title=Anarchist Seeds Beneath the Snow|publisher=Liverpool Press|year=2006|page=4|isbn=978-1-84631-025-6}}: "'Libertarian' and 'libertarianism' are frequently employed by anarchists as synonyms for 'anarchist' and 'anarchism', largely as an attempt to distance themselves from the negative connotations of 'anarchy' and its derivatives. The situation has been vastly complicated in recent decades with the rise of anarcho-capitalism, 'minimal statism' and an extreme right-wing laissez-faire philosophy advocated by such theorists as Murray Rothbard and Robert Nozick and their adoption of the words 'libertarian' and 'libertarianism'. It has therefore now become necessary to distinguish between their right libertarianism and the left libertarianism of the anarchist tradition."; {{cite book|last=Newman|first=Saul|author-link=Saul Newman|title=The Politics of Postanarchism|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=SiqBiViUsOkC&pg=PA43|year=2010|publisher=Edinburgh University Press|pages=53|isbn=978-0-7486-3495-8}}: "It is important to distinguish between anarchism and certain strands of right-wing libertarianism which at times go by the same name (for example, Murray Rothbard's anarcho-capitalism). There is a complex debate within this tradition between those like Robert Nozick, who advocate a 'minimal state', and those like Rothbard who want to do away with the state altogether and allow all transactions to be governed by the market alone. From an anarchist perspective, however, both positions—the minimal state (minarchist) and the no-state ('anarchist') positions—neglect the problem of economic domination; in other words, they neglect the hierarchies, oppressions, and forms of exploitation that would inevitably arise in a laissez-faire 'free' market. [...] Anarchism, therefore, has no truck with this right-wing libertarianism, not only because it neglects economic inequality and domination, but also because in practice (and theory) it is highly inconsistent and contradictory. The individual freedom invoked by right-wing libertarians is only a narrow economic freedom within the constraints of a capitalist market, which, as anarchists show, is no freedom at all".</ref><ref name="David 2005">See also the following sources:
* K, David (2005). ''What is Anarchism?''. Bastard Press.
* Marshall, Peter (1992). ''Demanding the Impossible''. Chapther 38. London: Fontana Press. {{ISBN|0-00-686245-4}}.
* MacSaorsa, Iain (2009). ''Is 'Anarcho' Capitalism Against the State?''. Spunk Press.
* Wells, Sam (January 1979). ''Anarcho-Capitalism is Not Anarchism, and Political Competition is Not Economic Competition''. Frontlines 1.</ref><ref name="Doyle, Kevin 2002 pp. 447">See also the following sources:
* Peikoff, Leonard (1991). ''Objectivism: The Philosophy of Ayn Rand''. Chapter "Government". Dutton Adult.
* Doyle, Kevin (2002). ''Crypto Anarchy, Cyberstates, and Pirate Utopias''. New York: Lexington Books. pp. 447–448.
* Sheehan, Seán M. (2003). ''Anarchism'' Reaktion Books. p. 17.
* Kelsen, Hans (1988). ''The Communist Theory of Law''. Wm. S. Hein Publishing. p. 110.
* Tellegen, Egbert; Wolsink, Maarten (1998). ''Society and Its Environment: an introduction''. Routledge. p. 64.
* Jones, James (2004). ''The Merry Month of May''. Akashic Books. pp. 37–38.
* Sparks, Chris. Isaacs, Stuart (2004). ''Political Theorists in Context''. Routledge. p. 238.
* Bookchin, Murray (2004). ''Post-Scarcity Anarchism''. AK Press. p. 37.
* Berkman, Alexander (2005). ''Life of an Anarchist''. Seven Stories Press. p. 268.</ref>

Anarchists such as [[Luigi Galleani]] and [[Errico Malatesta]] have seen no contradiction between individualist anarchism and social anarchism,<ref>[[Luigi Galleani|Galleani, Luigi]] (1925). [https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/luigi-galleani-the-end-of-anarchism "The End of Anarchism?"]. The Anarchist Library. Retrieved 2 May 2019.</ref> with the latter especially seeing the issues not between the two forms of anarchism, but between anarchists and non-anarchists.<ref>[[Errico Malatesta|Malatesta, Errico]] (1924). [https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/errico-malatesta-note-to-the-article-individualism-and-anarchism-by-adamas "Note to the article "Individualism and Anarchism" by Adamas"]. The Anarchist Library. Retrieved 2 May 2019.</ref> Furthermore, Malatesta has claimed that in practice, individualist and communist anarchism are almost identical and that the contention between these two schools of anarchism is a "question of verbal misunderstanding".<ref>{{Cite web |title=Individualism and Communism in Anarchism |url=https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/errico-malatesta-individualism-and-communism-in-anarchism |access-date=2023-05-11 |website=The Anarchist Library |language=en}}</ref> Anarchists such as [[Benjamin Tucker]] argued that it was "not Socialist Anarchism against Individualist Anarchism, but of Communist Socialism against Individualist Socialism".<ref>Tucker, Benjamin. ''Liberty'' (129). p. 2.</ref> Similarly, the view of an individualist–socialist divide is contested as individualist anarchism is largely socialistic.<ref>Martin, James J. (1953). ''Men Against the State: the State the Expositors of Individualist Anarchism''. Dekalb, Illinois: The Adrian Allen Associates.</ref><ref>Tucker, Benjamin (1970). ''Liberty''. Greenwood Reprint Corporation. '''7–8'''. p. 26. "''Liberty'' has always insisted that Individualism and Socialism are not antithetical terms; that, on the contrary, the most ... not of Socialist Anarchism against Individualist Anarchism, but of Communist Socialism against Individualist Socialism."</ref><ref>{{cite book|editor-last=McKay|editor-first=Iain|year=2012|chapter=Section G – Is Individualist Anarchism Capitalistic?|title=An Anarchist FAQ|volume=II|location=Stirling|publisher=AK Press|isbn=9781849351225}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal|last=Franks|first=Benjamin|date=August 2013|editor-last1=Freeden|editor-first1=Michael|editor-last2=Stears|editor-first2=Marc|title=Anarchism|journal=The Oxford Handbook of Political Ideologies|publisher=Oxford University Press|pages=385–404|doi=10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199585977.013.0001}}</ref><ref>Carson, Kevin (2017). "Anarchism and Markets". In Jun, Nathan J. (2017). ''Brill's Companion to Anarchism and Philosophy''. BRILL. p. 81. {{ISBN|9789004356894}}.</ref>

== Ends and means ==
{{see also|Direct action|Illegalism|Propaganda of the deed}}

=== Participation in statist democracy ===
{{see also|Criticisms of electoralism|Voluntaryism}}
[[File:Our dreams cannot fit in their ballot boxes.jpg|thumb|Anarchist [[street art]] in [[Madison, Wisconsin]] declaring: "Our dreams cannot fit in their [[ballot box]]es"]]
While most anarchists firmly oppose voting, or otherwise participating in the state institution, there are a few that disagree. The prominent anarchist [[Pierre-Joseph Proudhon]] stood for election to the French Constituent Assembly twice in [[Revolutions of 1848 in France|1848]]. In the 1890s, [[Paul Brousse]] developed the concept of [[libertarian municipalism]] in [[Switzerland]] which involved participating in local elections.<ref>Smith, George H. [http://fuckthevote.org/TheEthicsofVoting "The Ethics of Voting"]. {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20050404190517/http://fuckthevote.org/TheEthicsofVoting|date=4 April 2005}}</ref> Anarchists have opposed voting for multiple reasons. Taking part in elections has historically resulted in radicals becoming part of the system they oppose rather than ending it.<ref>[http://www.infoshop.org/faq/secJ2.html "J.2 What is direct action?"]. {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20060627215135/http://www.infoshop.org/faq/secJ2.html|date=27 June 2006}}</ref>{{better source needed|date=July 2022}} Voting acknowledges the state's legitimacy.<ref>Peacott, Joe, [http://world.std.com/~bbrigade/badbsd8.htm "Voting Anarchists: An Oxymoron or What?"] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20070808001655/http://world.std.com/~bbrigade/badbsd8.htm |date=2007-08-08 }}. BAD Broadside #8, Boston Anarchist Drinking Brigade, 1992; [[Colin Ward|Ward, Colin]] [http://www.takver.com/history/elections/ward_on_voting.htm "The Case Against Voting"], originally published in ''New Society'' on 15 May 1987; reprinted in ''Freedom'', Vol. 48, No. 6, June 1987; [http://www.infoshop.org/voting.html "Choose and Lose – The anarchist case against voting and electoralism"] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20070723215426/http://infoshop.org/voting.html |date=2007-07-23 }}. Infoshop.org.</ref>

During the [[2004 United States presidential election]], the anarchist [[collective]] [[CrimethInc.]] launched "[[Don't Just Vote, Get Active]]", a campaign promoting the importance of [[direct action]] rather than electoral change. Anarchists in other countries often engage in similar anti-voting campaigns and advocate a more pragmatic approach, including voting in referendums.<ref>[http://flag.blackened.net/revolt/ws/2002/ws69/referendum.html "Thinking about anarchism – Referendums"] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20071109172924/http://flag.blackened.net/revolt/ws/2002/ws69/referendum.html |date=2007-11-09 }}. ''Workers Solidarity'' No 69, published in March 2002. Retrieved 7 September 2006.</ref> Other prominent anarchists like [[Howard Zinn]] and [[Noam Chomsky]] have pledged their support for [[Progressivism|progressive]] candidates such as [[Ralph Nader]].<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.chomsky.info/onchomsky/20040526.htm|title=chomsky.info : The Noam Chomsky Website|website=chomsky.info|access-date=2 April 2018|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150930045635/http://www.chomsky.info/onchomsky/20040526.htm|archive-date=30 September 2015|url-status=dead}}</ref> In addition to merely voting, some anarchists such as Proudhon and more recently Icelandic activist [[Smári McCarthy]]<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/oct/30/iceland-elections-ruling-centre-right-party-pirate-party|title=Iceland elections leave ruling centre-right party in driving seat|first=Jon|last=Henley|date=30 October 2016|work=The Guardian|access-date=2 April 2018}}</ref> have stood for and won elections to national legislative bodies. American [[Individualist anarchism|individualist anarchist]] [[Lysander Spooner]] argued that voting was a legitimate means of self-defense against the state and noted that many supporters of the state consider both [[voting]] and [[abstention]] to be acknowledgments of the state's legitimacy.<ref>Spooner, Lysander, ''No Treason'', no. 2, part 1.</ref> Spooner's essay "No Treason"<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.lysanderspooner.org/notreason.htm|title=No Treason|access-date=21 July 2006|url-status=dead|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20021004072643/http://www.lysanderspooner.org/notreason.htm|archive-date=4 October 2002}}</ref> offers an individualist anarchist rebuttal to the argument that existing democratic governments are justified by majority consent.

During the [[2014 Scottish independence referendum]], there was debate within anarchist circles about whether to take an [[Abstentionism|abstentionist]] position, vote for [[independence]],<ref name=":0">{{Cite web|url=http://bellacaledonia.org.uk/2014/09/16/the-anarchist-vote/|title=The Anarchist Vote|date=16 September 2014|publisher=Bella Caledonia|access-date=19 December 2016}}</ref> or to vote to remain in the United Kingdom, thus anarchists rarely fitted into the easy binary of Yes/No voters of the referendum,<ref name=":4">{{cite web|url=http://libcom.org/library/independent-free-glasgow-anarchists-take-scottish-independence|title=Independent and free? A Glasgow anarchist's take on Scottish independence|website=Libcom.org|access-date=19 December 2016}}</ref> with all seeking to go beyond the choices offered at the ballot box. There was also a debate about what [[Scottish independence]] would mean for the anarchist movement and social struggle.<ref name=":2">{{cite web|url=https://libcom.org/blog/some-quick-thoughts-scottish-independence-20062012|title=Some quick thoughts on Scottish independence|website=Libcom.org|access-date=19 December 2016}}</ref> Groups like the [[Anarchist Federation (Britain and Ireland)|Anarchist Federation]] in Scotland (mainly in Edinburgh and Glasgow) took a critical stance skeptical of the benefits of Scottish independence.<ref name=":4"/><ref name=":3">{{cite web|url=https://scotlandaf.wordpress.com/2014/09/19/dont-mourn-organise-edinburgh-anarchist-statement-on-the-referendum-result/|title=Don't Mourn. Organise. {{!}} Edinburgh anarchist statement on the referendum result|date=19 September 2014|publisher=AFed Scotland|access-date=19 December 2016}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://edinburghanarchists.noflag.org.uk/2014/09/appeal-to-yes-voters-for-direct-action/|title=Appeal to Yes Voters for Direct Action|publisher=Edinburgh Anarchist Federation|access-date=19 December 2016|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20161220183932/http://edinburghanarchists.noflag.org.uk/2014/09/appeal-to-yes-voters-for-direct-action/|archive-date=20 December 2016|url-status=dead}}</ref>

Within the United Kingdom, there was considerable debate around the [[2016 United Kingdom European Union membership referendum|Brexit vote]] in 2016. Anarchists are traditionally opposed to the European Union, yet the vote was seen as one imposed by two factions of the [[right-wing]].<ref>{{cite web|url=https://libcom.org/news/14-observations-brexit-lexit-uk-eu-membership-referendum-23062016|title=14 observations on Brexit and Lexit in the UK EU membership referendum|website=Libcom.org|access-date=19 December 2016}}</ref> Yet again, there was debate about whether to vote to Remain in the European Union, abstain (some [[Left communism|left communists]] argued for abstaining)<ref>{{cite web|url=https://libcom.org/news/brexit-vote-another-sign-global-capitalisms-deepening-crisis-29062016|title=Brexit vote: another sign of global capitalism's deepening crisis|website=Libcom.org|access-date=19 December 2016}}</ref> or vote to Leave since the United Kingdom government (the [[Conservative Party (UK)|Conservative Party]]) was mostly in favour of remain while [[UK Independence Party]] and [[Far-right politics|far-right]] parties favoured Leave. There was also debate within the left amongst anarchists and those who considered themselves to have a [[Lexit]] (Left Exit position).<ref>{{cite web|url=https://libcom.org/news/brexit-tanks-eu-working-class-12062016|title=Brexit for tanks? The EU and the working class|website=Libcom.org|access-date=19 December 2016}}</ref> The victory of the Leave side united anarchists, whether voters or abstainers, against the racist incidents and rise of [[right-wing populism]] and [[neo-nationalism]] which was considered to have happened following the result of the vote.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://libcom.org/news/making-sense-brexit-tide-reaction-reality-racist-vote-andrew-flood-27062016|title=Making sense of the Brexit tide of reaction and the reality of the racist vote – Andrew Flood|publisher=Libcom.org|access-date=19 December 2016}}</ref> Many anarchists and [[Anti-authoritarianism|anti-authoritarian]] [[Left-wing politics|leftists]] argue that [[Brexit]] was negative for social struggles and migrants in particular<ref>{{cite web|url=https://libcom.org/library/brexit-means%E2%80%A6-what-hapless-ideology-practical-consequences|title=Brexit means… what? Hapless ideology and practical consequences|website=libcom.org|access-date=19 December 2016}}</ref> and considerable efforts were made to analyze why the Leave result happened.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://libcom.org/library/taking-leave-their-senses-%E2%80%93-what-does-brexit-vote-mean-mouvement-communiste-kolektivn%C4%9B-p|title=Taking Leave of their senses – What does the Brexit vote mean? – Mouvement Communiste and Kolektivně proti kapitálu|website=Libcom.org|access-date=19 December 2016}}</ref>

=== Democracy in anarchism ===
For [[individualist anarchists]], "the system of democracy, of majority decision, is held null and void. Any impingement upon the natural rights of the person is unjust and a symbol of majority tyranny".<ref>[[Irving Louis Horowitz|Horowitz, Irving Louis]] (2005). ''The Anarchists''. Aldine Transaction. p. 49.</ref> [[Libertarian municipalism|Libertarian municipalist]] [[Murray Bookchin]] criticized individualist anarchists for opposing [[Direct democracy|democracy]]<ref>Bookchin, Murray. [http://dwardmac.pitzer.edu/anarchist_archives/bookchin/CMMNL2.MCW.html The Democratic Dimensions of Anarchism]</ref> and said [[majority rule]] is consistent with anarchism.<ref>Bookchin, Murray. [http://dwardmac.pitzer.edu/anarchist_archives/bookchin/soclife.html "Social Anarchism or Lifestyle Anarchism: An Unbridgeable Chasm"].</ref> While preferring the term [[Popular assembly|assembly]] rather than democracy, Bookchin has in turn been accused of municipal statism, i.e. non-anarchism.<ref>Black, Bob. [http://lemming.mahost.org/library/municipalstatist.htm "Anarchy after Leftism"]. Chapter 5.</ref> Later, Bookchin renounced anarchism to identify himself as an advocate of [[Communalism (political philosophy)|communalism]].

=== Violence and non-violence ===
{{main|Anarchism and violence}}
Anarchists have often been portrayed as dangerous and violent due mainly to a number of high-profile violent acts including riots, assassinations and insurrections involving anarchists. However, the use of terrorism and assassination is condemned by most anarchist ideology, although there remains no consensus on the legitimacy or utility of violence. Some anarchists have opposed [[coercion]] while others have supported it, particularly in the form of violent revolution on the path to [[anarchy]].<ref>Fowler, R. B. ''The Western Political Quarterly'', Vol. 25, No. 4. (December 1972), pp. 743–744.</ref>

Some anarchists share [[Leo Tolstoy]]'s [[Christian anarchism|Christian anarchist]] belief in nonviolence. These anarcho-pacifists advocate [[nonviolent resistance]] as the only method of achieving a truly anarchist revolution. They often see violence as the basis of government and coercion and argue that as such violence is illegitimate, no matter who is the target. Some of [[Pierre-Joseph Proudhon]]'s French followers even saw [[strike action]] as coercive and refused to take part in such traditional socialist tactics.

Other anarchists advocate [[Marshall Rosenberg]]'s [[Nonviolent Communication]] that relates to peoples fundamental needs and feelings using strategies of requests, observations and empathy yet providing for the use of protective force while rejecting pacifism as a compromising strategy of the left that just perpetuates violence.

Other anarchists such as [[Mikhail Bakunin]] and [[Errico Malatesta]] saw violence as a necessary and sometimes desirable force. Malatesta took the view that it is "necessary to destroy with violence, since one cannot do otherwise, the violence which denies [the means of life and for development] to the workers" (''[[Umanità Nova]]'', number 125, 6 September 1921).<ref>[http://flag.blackened.net/revolt/anarchists/malatesta/rev_haste.html "The Revolutionary "Haste"]. {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20030210201006/http://flag.blackened.net/revolt/anarchists/malatesta/rev_haste.html|date=10 February 2003}}</ref>

Between 1894 and 1921, individual anarchists assassinated numerous heads of state, including:
* [[President of France|French President]] [[Marie François Sadi Carnot|Sadi Carnot]] (1894)
* [[Prime Minister of Spain|Spanish Prime Minister]] [[Antonio Cánovas del Castillo]] (1897)
* Empress consort [[Elisabeth of Bavaria|Elisabeth of Austria]] (1898)
* King [[Umberto I of Italy]] (1900)
* [[President of the United States|United States President]] [[William McKinley]] (1901)
* [[Prime Minister of Spain|Spanish Prime Minister]] [[José Canalejas y Méndez|José Canalejas]] (1912)
* [[Prime Minister of Spain|Spanish Prime Minister]] [[Eduardo Dato Iradier]] (1921)

Such [[propaganda of the deed]] was not popular among anarchists and many in the movement condemned the tactic. President William McKinley's assassin [[Leon Czolgosz]] claimed to be a disciple of [[Emma Goldman]]. Goldman disavowed the act, although she did not condemn Czolgosz's motivations in doing it. Goldman included in her definition of anarchism the observation that all governments rest on violence and this is one of the many reasons they should be opposed. Goldman herself did not oppose tactics like assassination until she went to Russia, where she witnessed the violence of the Russian state and the [[Red Army]]. From then on, Goldman condemned the use of terrorism, especially by the state, but she still supported most other forms of revolutionary violence throughout her life. In a debate with a pacifist five years before her death, she countered that "the organized force used against the followers of Gandhi has finally forced them to use violence, much to the distress of Gandhi" and concluded that "as a method of combating the complex social injustices and inequalities, non-resistance cannot be a decisive factor" (non-resistance was the term for nonviolence used by Tolstoy and other early 20th century pacifists). Goldman at this time was an information officer for the anarchist militias of the [[Spanish Revolution of 1936|Spanish Revolution]] which were committed to armed struggle.<ref>Porter, David, ed. (2006). [http://zinelibrary.info/files/Goldman%20-%20Vision%20on%20Fire%20-%20Emma%20Goldman%20on%20the%20Spanish%20Revolution.pdf ''Vision on Fire: Emma Goldman on the Spanish Revolution''] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20131107152315/http://zinelibrary.info/files/Goldman%20-%20Vision%20on%20Fire%20-%20Emma%20Goldman%20on%20the%20Spanish%20Revolution.pdf |date=2013-11-07 }}. AK Press. p. 226–228.</ref>

Depictions in the press and popular fiction (for example, a malevolent bomb-throwing anarchist in [[Joseph Conrad]]'s ''[[The Secret Agent]]'') helped create a lasting public impression that anarchists are violent terrorists. This perception was enhanced by events such as the [[Haymarket affair|Haymarket riot]], where anarchists were blamed for throwing a bomb at police who came to break up a public meeting in [[Chicago]]. More recently, anarchists have been involved in protests against [[World Trade Organization]] (WTO) and [[International Monetary Fund]] (IMF) meetings across the globe which the media has described as violent or riots. Traditionally, [[May Day]] in [[London]] has also been a day of marching, but in recent years the [[Metropolitan Police]] have warned that a "hardcore of anarchists" are intent on causing violence. Anarchists often respond that it is the police who initiate violence at these demonstrations, with anarchists who are otherwise peaceful sometimes forced to defend themselves. The anarchists involved in such protests often formed [[black bloc]]s at these protests and some engaged in [[Property damage|property destruction]], [[vandalism]], or in violent conflicts with [[police]], although others stuck to non-violent principles. Those participating in black blocs distinguish between violence and property destruction as they claim that violence is when a person inflicts harm to another person while property destruction or property damage is not violence, although it can have indirect harm such as financial harm. Most anarchists do not consider the destruction of property to be violent as do most activists who believe in non-violence.

==== Pacifism ====
{{see also|Anarcho-pacifism}}
[[File:Fight the state, not wars.jpg|thumb|Anarchist protesters in [[Boston]] opposing state-waged war]]
Most anarchists consider opposition to [[militarism]] to be inherent in their philosophy. Some anarchists take it further and follow [[Leo Tolstoy]]'s belief in non-violence (note that these [[anarcho-pacifists]] are not necessarily [[Christian anarchists]] as Tolstoy was), advocating [[nonviolent resistance]] as the only method of achieving a truly anarchist revolution.

Anarchist literature often portrays war as an activity in which the state seeks to gain and consolidate power, both domestically and in foreign lands. Many anarchists subscribe to [[Randolph Bourne]]'s view that "war is the health of the state".<ref>{{cite web|url=http://struggle.ws/hist_texts/warhealthstate1918.html|title=War Is the Health of the State by Randolph Bourne|website=Struggle.ws|access-date=2 April 2018}}</ref> Anarchists believe that if they were to support a war, they would be strengthening the state—indeed, [[Peter Kropotkin]] was alienated from other anarchists when he expressed support for the [[Allies of World War I|Allies]] in [[World War I]].<ref>{{cite encyclopedia|encyclopedia=[[Encyclopedia Britannica]]|url=https://www.britannica.com/biography/Peter-Alekseyevich-Kropotkin|last1=Avrich|first1=Paul|last2=Miller|first2=Martin A.|date=July 20, 1998|access-date=May 9, 2024|title=Peter Alekseyevich Kropotkin}}</ref>

=== Individualism vs. collectivism ===
While some anarchists favour [[Common ownership|collective property]] or [[Unowned property|no property]], others such as some [[American individualist anarchists]] like [[Benjamin Tucker]] and [[Lysander Spooner]] support a form of [[private property]] while opposing property titles to unused land. Tucker argues that collectivism in property is absurd: "That there is an entity known as the [[community]] which is the rightful owner of all land, [...] I maintain that the community is a non-entity, that it has no existence".<ref>Martin, James J. ''Men Against the State''. p. 220.</ref> He was particularly adamant in his opposition to [[communism]], even to the point of asserting that those who opposed private property were not anarchists: "Anarchism is a word without meaning, unless it includes the liberty of the individual to control his product or whatever his product has brought him through exchange in a free market—that is, private property. Whoever denies private property is of necessity an Archist".<ref name="The New Freewoman">''The New Freewoman'', p. 218.</ref> Similarly, [[Albert Meltzer]] argued that since [[individualist anarchists]] like Tucker promote the idea of private armies, they actually support a "limited State", contending that it "is only possible to conceive of Anarchism which is free, communistic and offering no economic necessity for repression of countering it".<ref name="Meltzer">{{cite book|last=Meltzer|first=Albert|title=Anarchism: Arguments For and Against|publisher=[[AK Press]]|year=2000|page=[https://archive.org/details/anarchism00albe/page/50 50]|isbn=978-1873176573|url=https://archive.org/details/anarchism00albe/page/50}}</ref> Anarcho-communists reject the criticism, pointing to the principle of voluntary association that underpins their theory and differentiates it from state communism.<ref name="anarchistFAQ">[http://www.infoshop.org/faq/secA3.html#seca31 "A.3.1 What are the differences between individualist and social anarchists?"]. ''[[An Anarchist FAQ]]''. {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080922025342/http://www.infoshop.org/faq/secA3.html|date=22 September 2008}}</ref> Some individualist anarchists are willing to recognize such communism as a legitimate form. [[Kevin Carson]] writes that "free market, libertarian communist, syndicalism, and other kinds of collectivist anarchists must learn to coexist in peace and mutual respect today, in our fight against the corporate state, and tomorrow, in the [[panarchy (political philosophy)|panarchy]] that is likely to succeed it".<ref name="carson">[[Kevin A. Carson|Carson, Kevin]]. [http://mutualist.org/id107.html "Mutualist FAQ: Getting There"].</ref>

Some forms of anarcho-communism such as [[insurrectionary anarchism]] are strongly influenced by [[Egoist anarchism|egoism]] and radical [[individualism]], believing anarcho-communism is the best social system for the realisation of [[individual freedom]].<ref name="Stirner: The Ego and His Own"/> Hence, most anarcho-communists view anarcho-communism itself as a way of reconciling the opposition between the [[individual]] and [[society]].<ref name="Communism and Anarchy"/> Furthermore, [[post-left anarchists]] like [[The Abolition of Work|Bob Black]] went as far as to argue that "communism is the final fulfillment of individualism. [...] The apparent contradiction between individualism and communism rests on a misunderstanding of both. [...] Subjectivity is also objective: the individual really is subjective. It is nonsense to speak of "emphatically prioritizing the social over the individual," [...]. You may as well speak of prioritizing the chicken over the egg. Anarchy is a "method of individualization." It aims to combine the greatest individual development with the greatest communal unity".<ref>[[The Abolition of Work|Black, Bob]] (2010). [http://www.theanarchistlibrary.org/HTML/Bob_Black__Nightmares_of_Reason.html#toc22 "Nightmares of Reason"].</ref> [[Max Baginski]] has argued that [[property]] and the [[free market]] are just other "spooks", what Stirner called to refer mere illusions, or ghosts in the mind, writing: "Modern Communists are more individualistic than Stirner. To them, not merely religion, morality, family and State are spooks, but property also is no more than a spook, in whose name the individual is enslaved — and how enslaved! [...] Communism thus creates a basis for the liberty and Eigenheit of the individual. I am a Communist because I am an Individualist. Fully as heartily the Communists concur with Stirner when he puts the word take in place of demand — that leads to the dissolution of property, to expropriation. Individualism and Communism go hand in hand".<ref>[[Max Baginski|Baginki, Max]] (May 1907). [http://dwardmac.pitzer.edu/anarchist_archives/goldman/ME/mev2n3.html#142 "Stirner: The Ego and His Own"]. ''[[Mother Earth (magazine)|Mother Earth]]'' (2: 3).</ref> [[Peter Kropotkin]] argued that "Communism is the one which guarantees the greatest amount of individual liberty — provided that the idea that begets the community be Liberty, Anarchy [...]. Communism guarantees economic freedom better than any other form of association, because it can guarantee wellbeing, even luxury, in return for a few hours of work instead of a day's work".<ref>[[Peter Kropotkin|Kropotkin, Peter]] (1901). [http://www.theanarchistlibrary.org/HTML/Petr_Kropotkin__Communism_and_Anarchy.html "Communism and Anarchy"].</ref> ''[[Dielo Truda]]'' similarly argued that "[t]his other society will be libertarian communism, in which social solidarity and free individuality find their full expression, and in which these two ideas develop in perfect harmony".<ref>[http://www.theanarchistlibrary.org/HTML/Dielo_Truda__Workers__Cause___Organisational_Platform_of_the_Libertarian_Communists.html "Organisational Platform of the Libertarian Communists"] (1926). ''[[Dielo Truda]]''.</ref> In "My Perspectives" of ''Willful Disobedience'' (2: 12), it was argued as such: "I see the dichotomies made between individualism and communism, individual revolt and class struggle, the struggle against human exploitation and the exploitation of nature as false dichotomies and feel that those who accept them are impoverishing their own critique and struggle".<ref>[https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/various-authors-willful-disobedience-volume-2-number-12#toc18 "My Perspectives"]. ''Willful Disobedience'' (2: 12).</ref>

''[[The Right to Be Greedy]]'' is a book published in 1974 by an American [[Situationist International|Situationist]] collective called For Ourselves: Council for Generalized Self-Management which Black describes it in its preface as an "audacious attempt to synthesize a collectivist social vision of left-wing origin with an individualistic (for lack of a better word) ethic usually articulated on the right".<ref name="black">[[The Abolition of Work|Black, Bob]] (1974). [http://www.primitivism.com/greedy.htm "Preface to ''The Right to be Greedy'' by For Ourselves"] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20091102165756/http://www.primitivism.com/greedy.htm |date=2009-11-02 }}.</ref> Its authors say that "[t]he positive conception of egoism, the perspective of communist egoism, is the very heart and unity of our theoretical and practical coherence".<ref name="greedy">[http://libcom.org/library/right-be-greedy-theses-practical-necessity-demanding-everything ''The Right To Be Greedy: Theses On The Practical Necessity Of Demanding Everything''].</ref> The book was highly influenced by the work of [[Max Stirner]], with Black humorously suggesting that it was a synthesis of [[Marxism]] and [[Philosophy of Max Stirner|Stirner's philosophy]] which may be called Marxism–Stirnerism just as he wrote an essay on [[Groucho]]-Marxism,<ref name="groucho marx">{{cite web|url=http://sniggle.net/Manifesti/groucho.php|title=Theses on Groucho Marxism|first=David|last=Gross|access-date=2 November 2009|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100405215039/http://sniggle.net/Manifesti/groucho.php|archive-date=5 April 2010|url-status=live}}</ref> writing in the preface to ''The Right to be Greedy'': "If Marxism-Stirnerism is conceivable, every orthodoxy prating of freedom or liberation is called into question, anarchism included. The only reason to read this book, as its authors would be the first to agree, is for what you can get out of it".<ref name="black"/>

Although commonly misconcepted, Marxism rejected [[egalitarianism]] in the sense of greater equality between classes, clearly distinguishing it from the socialist notion of the abolition of classes based on the division between workers and owners of productive property.{{refn|group=note|In reality, [[Karl Marx]] and [[Friedrich Engels]] rejected equality as a social ideal and as a permanent yardstick against which social arrangements should be judged. This can be seen in their reaction to the [[Gotha Program|programme]] of the [[Social Democratic Workers' Party of Germany]] (SDAP).<ref>Marx, Karl (1875). [https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1875/gotha/ "Critique of the Gotha Program"].</ref><br><br>In March 1875, Engels complained in a letter to [[August Bebel]] (one of the founders and leaders of the SDAP which in 1875 merged with the [[General German Workers' Association]] into the [[History of the Social Democratic Party of Germany|Socialist Workers' Party of Germany]]) that the programme mistakenly advocated "[t]he elimination of all social and political inequality" rather than "the abolition of all class distinctions". For Engels, the goal of total social equality was impossible and represented the ambitions of an underdeveloped form of socialism, arguing and making the following point as an example:
<blockquote>As between one country, one province and even one place and another, living conditions will always evince a certain inequality which may be reduced to a minimum but never wholly eliminated. The living conditions of Alpine dwellers will always be different from those of the plainsmen. The concept of a socialist society as a realm of equality is a one-sided French concept deriving from the old "liberty, equality, fraternity," a concept which was justified in that, in its own time and place, it signified a phase of development, but which, like all the one-sided ideas of earlier socialist schools, ought now to be superseded, since they produce nothing but mental confusion, and more accurate ways of presenting the matter have been discovered.<ref>Engels, Friedrich (1875). [https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1875/letters/75_03_18.htm "Engels to August Bebel In Zwickau"].</ref></blockquote>

In ''[[Philosophy and Real Politics]]'' (2008), [[Raymond Geuss]] argues that Marx makes two main points about equality in his 1875 ''[[Critique of the Gotha Programme]]''. Firstly, Marx claims that it makes no sense to speak of equality in the abstract because we can only understand what it means for x to be equal or unequal with y if we first specify the dimensions along which they are being compared. For x to be equal to y is for them to be equal in a particular concrete respect. If x and y are people then they can only be judged equal relative to particular criteria such as their height, how many shoes they own, or how much cake they have eaten. Therefore, one can only be in favour of equality along specific dimensions such as equality of cake consumption and never equality as an abstract ideal. Secondly, Marx claims that advocating equality along one dimension such as everyone in a society earning the same amount of money per hour worked will lead to inequality along other dimensions. If everyone earning an equal amount per hour of work would lead to those who work more having more money than those who work less. As a result, those unable to work a large amount, if at all, such as disabled people, old people, or women who are expected to do the majority of housework, will be unequal with those who can work more such as the able-bodied, young people, or men. Those doing manual labour and so unable to work long hours due to fatigue will be unequal to those who engage in non-manual labour and so can work more hours. If a society decides to instead ensure equality of income by paying all workers the same daily wage, then there would still be inequality along other dimensions. Workers who do not have to provide for a family with their wage will have more disposable income than workers with families. Therefore, Geuss argues that we can never reach full equality, but merely move equality and inequality around along different dimensions.<ref>Geuss, Raymond (2008). [https://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt24hr9j ''Philosophy and Real Politics'']. pp. 76–80.</ref>

In ''Marx on Equality'' (2014), Allen Woods similarly argued that "Marx thinks the idea of equality is actually a vehicle for [[bourgeois]] class oppression, and something quite different from the communist goal of the abolition of classes. [...] A society that has transcended class antagonisms, therefore, would not be one in which some truly universal interest at last reigns, to which individual interests must be sacrificed. It would instead be a society in which individuals freely act as the truly human individuals they are. Marx's radical communism was, in this way, also radically individualistic".<ref name="Woods">Woods, Allen (2014). ''The Free Development of Each: Studies on Freedom, Right, and Ethics in Classical German Philosophy''. [https://www.oxfordscholarship.com/view/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199685530.001.0001/acprof-9780199685530-chapter-11 "Marx on Equality"]. pp. 253, 266.</ref>}} Marx and Engels believed that an [[Proletarian internationalism|international]] [[proletarian revolution]] would bring about a [[Socialist mode of production|socialist society]] which would then eventually give way to a communist stage of social development which would be a classless, stateless, moneyless, humane society erected on common ownership. However, Marx's view of classlessness was not the subordination of society to a universal interest (such as a universal notion of equality), but it was about the creation of the conditions that would enable individuals to pursue their true interests and desires, making his notion of [[communist society]] radically individualistic.<ref name="Woods"/> Marx was a proponent of two principles, the first ("[[To each according to his contribution]]") applied to socialism and the second ("[[From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs|From each according to their ability, to each according to their needs]]") to an advanced communist society. Although his position is often confused or conflated with distributive egalitarianism in which only the goods and services resulting from production are distributed according to a notional equality, Marx eschewed the entire concept of equality as abstract and bourgeois in nature, preferring to focus on more concrete principles such as opposition to exploitation on materialist grounds and economic logic.<ref name="Rejecting Egalitarianism, 1987">Nielsen, Kai (August 1987). "Rejecting Egalitarianism". ''Political Theory'' (15: 3). pp. 411–423.</ref> He is a believer in human freedom and human development. For Marx, the "true realm of freedom" consists in the "development of human powers as an end in itself".<ref>Marx 1991, p. 959.</ref> He conceives of a communist society as one in which "the full and free development of every individual forms the ruling principle".<ref>Marx 1990, p. 739.</ref> Marx justified the forms of equality he did advocate such as the communal ownership and control of the economy on the grounds that they led to human freedom and human development rather than simply because they were egalitarian, writing that in such a society there are "[u]niversally developed individuals, whose social relations, as their own communal relations, are hence also subordinated to their own communal control". This communal control includes "their subordination of their communal, social productivity as their social wealth".<ref>Marx 1993, p. 158, p. 162.</ref>

== Civil Liberties and Civil Rights ==
=== Gender ===
{{see also|Anarcha-feminism|Ecofeminism}}
[[File:Portrait Emma Goldman.jpg|thumb|upright|[[Emma Goldman]]]]
[[Anarcha-feminism]] is a kind of [[radical feminism]] that espouses the belief that [[patriarchy]] is a fundamental problem in society, but it was not explicitly formulated as such until the early 1970s during the [[Second-wave feminism|second-wave]] [[feminist movement]].<ref>[http://www.anarcha.org/sallydarity/Anarcho-FeminismTwoStatements.htm "Anarcho-Feminism – Two Statements – Who we are: An Anarcho-Feminist Manifesto"]. {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20061011013823/http://www.anarcha.org/sallydarity/Anarcho-FeminismTwoStatements.htm|date=11 October 2006}}</ref>

Early [[first-wave feminist]] [[Mary Wollstonecraft]] held proto-anarchist views and [[William Godwin]] is often considered a feminist anarchist precursor. Early [[Feminism in France|French feminists]] such as [[Jenny d'Héricourt]] and [[Juliette Adam]] also criticised the [[misogyny]] in the anarchism of [[Pierre-Joseph Proudhon]] during the 1850s. While most anarchists of the period did not take these ideas seriously, others such as [[Florence Finch Kelly]] and [[Moses Harman]] held [[gender equality]] as a topic of significant importance.<ref>Marsh, Margaret S. ''Anarchist Women, 1870–1920''. Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 1981.</ref> Anarcha-feminism garnered further attention through the work of early 20th-century authors and theorists including [[Emma Goldman]]<ref>Marshall, p. 409.</ref><ref>''Intimate'', p. 94.</ref> and [[Voltairine de Cleyre]].<ref>Presley, 1979.</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://dwardmac.pitzer.edu/Anarchist_Archives/bright/cleyre/presley.html|title=Libertarian Feminist Heritage Series: Voltairine de Cleyre|last=Presley|first=Sharon|date=18 February 2000|publisher=Anarchy Archives|access-date=17 December 2016}}</ref><ref>Falk 2003, p. 195.</ref>

In the [[Spanish Civil War]], an anarcha-feminist group called [[Mujeres Libres]] organized to defend both anarchist and feminist ideas.<ref>{{cite web|author=O'Carroll, Aileen|title=Mujeres Libres: Women anarchists in the Spanish Revolution|work=Workers Solidarity|url=http://flag.blackened.net/revolt/ws98/ws54_mujeres_libres.html|access-date=27 September 2005|url-status=dead|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150926095452/http://flag.blackened.net/revolt/ws98/ws54_mujeres_libres.html|archive-date=26 September 2015}}</ref>

=== Ethnicity ===
{{see also|Black anarchism|Postcolonial anarchism}}
[[Black anarchism]] opposes the existence of a [[State (polity)|state]], [[capitalism]] and subjugation and domination of [[people of color]] and favors a non-hierarchical organization of society.<ref>Ribeiro, Pedro. ''Senzala or Quilombo: Reflections on APOC and the fate of Black Anarchism''.</ref><ref>[http://www.anarchistpanther.net/node/17 "Black Anarchism"]. ''Anarchist Panther''. {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080313085929/http://www.anarchistpanther.net/node/17|date=13 March 2008}}</ref><ref>''@narchist Panther Zine'' (October 1999). 1st ed. Vol. 1.</ref><ref>{{cite book|last1=Samudzi|first1=Zoé |author-link1=Zoé Samudzi |last2=Anderson|first2=William C.|last3=Kaba|first3=Mariame|title=As Black As Resistance: Finding the Conditions for Liberation|date=5 June 2018|publisher=AK Press|location=Chico, California|isbn=9781849353168}}</ref>

Theorists include [[Ashanti Alston]], [[Lorenzo Komboa Ervin]] and [[Sam Mbah]]. Some of these theorists have had past experiences with the [[Black Panther Party]] and came to anarchism after they became critical of the Black Panther Party's brand of [[Marxist–Leninism]]. [[Anarchist People of Color]] (APOC) was created as a forum for non-white anarchists to express their thoughts about racial issues within the anarchist movement, particularly within the United States. [[Anti-Racist Action]] is not an anarchist group, but many anarchists are involved. It focuses on publicly confronting [[Antisemitism|antisemites]], [[Racism|racists]], [[Supremacism|supremacists]] and others such as the [[Ku Klux Klan]], [[Neo-Nazism|neo-Nazi]] groups and the like.

Most modern and historical anarchists describe themselves as [[Anti-racism|anti-racists]]. Many early anarchists, notably [[Lucy Parsons]] (a person of color and formerly an [[Slavery in the United States|enslaved]] American), viewed [[racism]] as one of many negative side-effects of capitalism and expected that it would vanish in a [[Post-capitalism|post-capitalist]] world. However, among modern anarchists anti-racism plays a more prominent role and racism is typically viewed as one of several forms of social hierarchy and stratification which must be destroyed. No anarchist organizations has ever included racism as part of its platform and many—particularly modern formations—include explicit anti-racism, with the [[national-anarchist movement]] being rejected as part of anarchism for his perceived racism, among other reasons. For instance, [[Anarchism in the United States|American anarchists]] were alone in opposing racism against [[Anarchism in China#Anarchism as a mass movement|Chinese]] and [[Anarchism in Mexico|Mexican]] workers in the late 19th century and early 20th century. Since the late 1970s, anarchists have been involved in fighting the rise of neo-fascist groups. In Germany and the United Kingdom, some anarchists worked within [[Post-World War II anti-fascism|militant]] [[Anti-fascism|anti-fascist]] groups alongside members of the [[Marxism|Marxist]] left. They advocated directly combating [[fascists]] with physical force rather than relying on the state. Since the late 1990s, a similar tendency has developed within anarchism in the United States.

[[Anti-Racist Action]] is one of the largest grassroots anti-fascist and anti-racist organizations in North America today and counts many anarchists among its members. Their tactics, centered around directly confronting [[Neo-fascism|neo-fascist]] and [[White supremacy|white-supremacist]] groups, are considered controversial both within the anarchist movement (where they are sometimes portrayed as well-intentioned, but ineffective) and in mainstream society (where they are often portrayed as violent and disruptive).

Many anarchists also oppose the concept of [[Race (human categorization)|race]] itself, arguing that it has no biological basis in science and is a social construction designed to divide the [[working class]] and preserve capitalism.

A minority of historically prominent anarchists have been accused of racism, e.g. [[Pierre-Joseph Proudhon]]<ref name="Schapiro">{{cite journal|author=[[J. Salwyn Schapiro|Schapiro, J. Salwyn]]|year=1945|title=Pierre Joseph Proudhon, Harbinger of Fascism |journal=[[American Historical Review]]|volume=50|issue=4|pages=714–737|doi=10.2307/1842699|publisher=The American Historical Review, Vol. 50, No. 4|jstor=1842699}}</ref> and [[Mikhail Bakunin]].<ref>Bakunin quoted by [[Shlomo Avineri]] in ''Radical Theology, the New Left, and Israel'', p. 245–246. "An article in Auschwitz. Beginning of a New Era? Reflections on the Holocaust", edited by Eva Fleishner, KTAV Publishing House, Inc.; The Cathedral Church of St. John Divine; Anti-Defamation League of B'nai B'rith, 1977, p. 241–254.</ref>

=== Religion ===
{{main|Anarchism and religion}}
{{see also|Buddhist anarchism|Christian anarchism|Islam and anarchism|Jewish anarchism|l3=Islamic anarchism}}
From [[Pierre-Joseph Proudhon]] and [[Mikhail Bakunin]] to the Spanish [[Anarcho-syndicalism|anarcho-syndicalists]], most anarchists have questioned or opposed [[organized religion]], believing that most organized religions are hierarchical or authoritarian and more often than not aligned with contemporary power structures like the [[State (polity)|state]] and [[Capital (economics)|capital]].<ref name=":212">{{Cite book |last=Black |first=Jeremy |title=World History |last2=Brewer |first2=Paul |last3=Shaw |first3=Anthony |last4=Chandler |first4=Malcolm |last5=Cheshire |first5=Gerard |last6=Cranfield |first6=Ingrid |last7=Ralph Lewis |first7=Brenda |last8=Sutherland |first8=Joe |last9=Vint |first9=Robert |publisher=Parragon Books |year=2003 |isbn=0-75258-227-5 |location=[[Bath, Somerset]] |pages=340 |author-link=Jeremy Black (historian)}}</ref> Nonetheless, others reconcile anarchism with [[religion]].<ref name=":212" />

[[Christian anarchists]] believe that there is no higher authority than [[God]] and oppose earthly authority such as government and established churches. They believe that [[Jesus]]' teachings and the practice of the [[Early Christianity|early Church]] were clearly anarchistic. Some of them feel that the teachings of the [[Nazarene (sect)|Nazarene]]s and other early groups of followers were corrupted by contemporary religious views, most notably when [[Theodosius I]] declared [[Nicene Creed|Nicene]] [[Christianity]] the official religion of the Roman Empire. Christian anarchists who follow Jesus' directive to [[turn the other cheek]] are usually strict [[Pacifism|pacifists]], although some believe in a limited justification of defense, especially defense of others. The most famous advocate of Christian anarchism was [[Leo Tolstoy]], author of ''[[The Kingdom of God Is Within You]]'', who called for a society based on compassion, nonviolent principles and freedom. Christian anarchists tend to form experimental communities (such as the [[Catholic Worker]]). They also occasionally [[tax resistance|resist taxation]].

[[Buddhist anarchism]] originated in the influential [[Anarchism in China|Chinese anarchist movement]] of the 1920s. [[Taixu]], one of the leading thinkers and writers of this school, was deeply influenced by the work of Christian anarchists like Tolstoy and by the ancient Chinese [[well-field system]]. In the late 19th century, the [[Indian Rebellion of 1857|Ghadar]] movement in India (see [[Har Dayal]]), influenced by [[Buddhism|Buddhist]] thought and by [[Swami Dayananda Saraswati]] (founder of [[Arya Samaj]]), saw anarchism as a way of propagating the ancient culture of the [[Aryan|Arya]] (not to be confused with the much later appropriation of Aryan identity by [[Nazism]]).<ref>''Ghadar Movement: Ideology, Organisation and Strategy'', Harish K. Puri, Guru Nanak Dev University Press, Amritsar: "The only account of Hardayal's short stay in that island [[Martinique]], comes from [[Bhai Parmanand]], a self exiled Arya Samajist missionary from [[Lahore]], who stayed a month with him there. Har Dayal used that time, says Parmanand, to discuss plans to found a new religion: his model was the Buddha. He ate mostly boiled grain, slept on the bare floor and spent his time in meditation in a secluded place. [[Guy Aldred]], a famous English radical and friend, tells us of Hardayal's proclaimed belief at that time in the coming republic "which was to be a Church, a religious confraternity ... its motto was to be: atheism, cosmopolitanism and moral law' Parmamand says that Har Dayal acceded to his persuasion to go to the USA and decided to make New York a centre for the propagation of the ancient culture of the Aryan." (p. 55) and "the ideal social order would be the one which approximated to the legendary Vedic period of Indian history because, as Har Dayal affirmed, practical equality existed only in that society, where there were no governors and no governed, no priests and no laymen, no rich and no poor." (p. 112), referencing ''The Social Conquest of the Hindu Race and Meaning of Equality''.</ref> Buddhist anarchism was later revived in the 1960s by writers such as [[Gary Snyder]]; an incarnation of this school of thought was popularized by [[Jack Kerouac]] in his book ''[[The Dharma Bums]]''.

With its focus on the environment and equality along with its often decentralized nature, [[Neopaganism]] has led to a number of Neopagan anarchists. One of the most prominent is [[Starhawk]], who writes extensively about both [[spirituality]] and [[activism]].

Discussing the anarchist movement in Britain in 2002, Adam K. has argued that it "has an especially ignorant and hegemonistic perception of the Muslim community" which he attributed to "the [A]nglo-centric nature of the movement". Quoting the statement that "[[Islam]] is an enemy of all freedom loving people" from an anarchist magazine, he argues that this is "no different to the bigoted rhetoric of [[George W. Bush|George Bush]] or even [[British National Party|BNP]] leader [[Nick Griffin]]".<ref>[http://mostlywater.org/node/4205 "Anarchist Orientalism and the Muslim Community in Britain"]. Retrieved 3 May 2007.</ref>

== Capitalism ==
{{main|Anarchism and capitalism}}
{{see also|Anarcho-capitalism}}
Throughout all of its history, anarchism has been defined by its proponents in [[Criticism of capitalism|opposition to capitalism]] which they believe can be maintained only by state violence.<ref>Fernandez, Frank (2001). ''Cuban Anarchism: The History of a Movement''. See Sharp Press. p. 6.</ref> Anarchists generally follow [[Pierre-Joseph Proudhon]] in opposing ownership of workplaces by capitalists and aim to replace [[wage labor]] with workers' associations. These anarchists also agree with [[Peter Kropotkin]]'s comment that "the origin of the anarchist inception of society [lies in] the criticism [...] of the hierarchical organisations and the authoritarian conceptions of society" rather than in simple opposition to the state or government.<ref>''Anarchism'', p. 158.</ref> They argue that the [[Wage slavery|wage system]] is hierarchical and authoritarian in nature and consequently [[capitalism]] cannot be anarchist.<ref>Morris, Brian, ''Anthropology and Anarchism,'' "Anarchy: A Journal of Desire Armed" (no. 45); Mckay, Iain, ''The legacy of Voltairine De Cleyre'', ''Anarcho-Syndicalist Review'', no. 44; L. Susan Brown, ''The Politics of Individualism''.</ref> Conversely, [[anarcho-capitalists]] generally support wage labor and oppose [[workplace democracy]] which most anarchists support, claiming that wage labor is voluntary. However, most anarchists argue that certain capitalist transactions, including wage labor, are not voluntary and that maintaining the class structure of a capitalist society requires coercion which violates both anarchist principles and anarcho-capitalism's [[non-aggression principle]] itself.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://infoshop.org/page/AnarchistFAQSectionF|title=Section F – Is "anarcho"-capitalism a type of anarchism?|work=[[An Anarchist FAQ]]|publisher=[[Infoshop.org]]|access-date=3 December 2011|last=McKay|first=Iain|date=21 January 2010|display-authors=etal|url-status=dead|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20111205172644/http://www.infoshop.org/page/AnarchistFAQSectionF|archive-date=5 December 2011}}</ref> Anarchists who support wage labor do so as long as the employers and employees are paid equally for equal hours worked<ref>Cheyney, Ryan C. (November 1980). "Social Justice and the Right to the Labor Product". ''Political Theory'' (8: 4). p. 506.</ref> and neither party has authority over the other. By following this principle, no individual profits from the labor of another. Those anarchists describe the wages received in such an employer-employee relationship as the individual laborer's full product and generally envisione that in such a society every worker would be self-employed and own their own private means of production, free to walk away from employment contracts.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://flag.blackened.net/daver/anarchism/tucker/tucker37.html|title=Individual Liberty: Labor and Its Pay|access-date=11 August 2005|url-status=dead|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20050407014846/http://flag.blackened.net/daver/anarchism/tucker/tucker37.html|archive-date=7 April 2005}}</ref>

Some supporters argue that anarcho-capitalism is a form of [[individualist anarchism]].<ref name="marx">{{cite book|last=Bottomore|first=Tom|chapter=Anarchism|page=[https://archive.org/details/dictionarymarxis00bott/page/n22 21]|title=A Dictionary of Marxist Thought|url=https://archive.org/details/dictionarymarxis00bott|url-access=limited|publisher=Blackwell Reference|location=Oxford|year=1991|isbn=0-63118082-6}}</ref><ref name="outhwaite">Outhwaite, William. The Blackwell Dictionary of Modern Social Thought, Anarchism entry, [[Blackwell Publishing]], 2003, p. 13: "Their successors today, such as Murray Rothbard, having abandoned the labor theory of value, describe themselves as anarcho-capitalists".</ref><ref name="accounts">See the following sources:
* Bullosk, Alan; Trombley, Stephen (ed.) (1999). ''The Norton Dictionary of Modern Thought''. W. W. Norton & Company. p. 30.
* Barry, Norman (2000). ''Modern Political Theory''. Palgrave, p. 70.
* Adams, Ian (2002). ''Political Ideology Today''. Manchester University Press. {{ISBN|0-7190-6020-6}}, p. 135.
* Grant, Moyra (2003). ''Key Ideas in Politics''. Nelson Thomas. p. 91. {{ISBN|0-7487-7096-8}}.
* Heider, Ulrike (1994). ''Anarchism: Left, Right, and Green''. City Lights. p. 3.
* [[Paul Avrich|Avrich, Paul]] (1996). ''[[Anarchist Voices: An Oral History of Anarchism in America]]''. Abridged paperback edition. p. 282.
* Tormey, Simon (2004). ''Anti-Capitalism'', One World. pp. 118–119.
* [[Ralph Raico|Raico, Ralph]] (2004). ''Authentic German Liberalism of the 19th Century''. École Polytechnique, Centre de Recherche en Épistémologie Appliquée, Unité associée au CNRS.
* Busky, Donald (2000). ''Democratic Socialism: A Global Survey''. Praeger/Greenwood. p. 4.
* Heywood, Andrew (2002). ''Politics: Second Edition''. Palgrave. p. 61.
* Offer, John (2000). ''Herbert Spencer: Critical Assessments''. Routledge. p. 243.</ref> However, most early individualist anarchists considered themselves "fervent [[anti-capitalists]] [who see] no contradiction between their individualist stance and their rejection of capitalism".<ref>Brown, Susan Love, The Free Market as Salvation from Government: The Anarcho-Capitalist View, Meanings of the Market: The Free Market in Western Culture, edited by James G. Carrier, Berg/Oxford, 1997, p. 107 and p. 104)</ref> Many defined themselves as [[socialists]]. These early individualist anarchists defined capitalism in various ways, but it was often discussed in terms of [[usury]]: "There are three forms of usury, interest on money, rent on land and houses, and profit in exchange. Whoever is in receipt of any of these is a usurer".<ref>James J. Martin. ''Men against the State''. p. 208.</ref> Excluding these, they tended to support free trade, free competition and varying levels of private property such as [[Mutualism (economic theory)|mutualism]] based on [[Usufruct|occupation and use]] property norms.<ref name="Madison">{{cite journal|author=Madison, Charles A.|year=1945|title=Anarchism in the United States|journal=Journal of the History of Ideas|volume=6|issue=1|pages=46–66|doi=10.2307/2707055|jstor=2707055}}</ref><ref name="Madison2">{{cite journal|author=Madison, Charles A.|year=1943|title=Benjamin R. Tucker: Individualist and Anarchist|journal=New England Quarterly|volume=16|issue=3|pages=444–467|doi=10.2307/361029|publisher=The New England Quarterly, Vol. 16, No. 3|jstor=361029}}</ref><ref>Non-capitalist market anarchists support private possession along Warren's, Proudhon's, or similar lines. In contrast, anarcho-capitalists support private property along Lockean or similar lines.</ref> It is this distinction which has led to the rift between [[Anarchism and capitalism#Anarchism and anarcho-capitalism|anarchism and anarcho-capitalism]]. Historically, anarchists considered themselves socialists and opposed to capitalism, therefore anarcho-capitalism is considered by many anarchists today as not being a form of anarchism.<ref>As [[Peter Marshall (author)|Peter Marshall]] notes in his history of anarchism, "few anarchists would accept the 'anarcho-capitalists' into the anarchist camp since they do not share a concern for economic equality and social justice." ''[[Demanding the Impossible]]'', p. 565.</ref>

Furthermore, terms like anarcho-socialism or socialist anarchism are rejected by most anarchists since they generally consider themselves socialists of the [[Libertarianism|libertarian tradition]], but they are nevertheless used by anarcho-capitalism theorists and scholars who recognize anarcho-capitalism to differentiate between the two.<ref>{{cite book|title=Democratic Socialism: A Global Survey|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=3joQKjDtn4wC|publisher=Greenwood Publishing Group|date=1 January 2000|isbn=9780275968861|first=Donald F.|last=Busky|quote=The same may be said of anarchism: social anarchism—a nonstate form of socialism—may be distinguished from the nonsocialist, and, in some cases, procapitalist school of individualist anarchism.|page=2}}</ref><ref name="Ostergaard p. 14" /><ref>Byldun, Per (19 March 2019). [https://mises.org/library/trouble-socialist-anarchism "The Trouble With Socialist Anarchism"]. [[Mises Institute]]. Retrieved 31 March 2019.</ref> Ultimately, anarcho-capitalist author [[Murray Rothbard]], who coined the term itself and developed such philosophy through the 1970s, stated that individualist anarchism is different from capitalism due to the individualist anarchists retaining the [[labor theory of value]]<ref name="Are Libertarians 'Anarchists'">Rothbard, Murray. [http://archive.lewrockwell.com/rothbard/rothbard167.html "Are Libertarians 'Anarchists'?"]. LewRockwell.com.</ref> and many writers deny that anarcho-capitalism is a form of anarchism at all,<ref name="Capitalism" /><ref name="David 2005" /> or that [[Anarchism and capitalism|capitalism itself is compatible with anarchism]].<ref name="Capitalism" /><ref name="Doyle, Kevin 2002 pp. 447" /> seeing it instead as a form of [[New Right]] [[Right-libertarianism|libertarianism]].<ref name="Capitalism" />

Anarchist organisations such as the [[Confederación Nacional del Trabajo]] (Spain) and the [[Anarchist Federation (British Isles)|Anarchist Federation]] (Britain and Ireland) generally take an explicitly anti-capitalist stance. In the 20th century, several economists began to formulate a form of radical [[Libertarianism in the United States|American libertarianism]] known as anarcho-capitalism. This has met resistance from those who hold that capitalism is inherently oppressive or statist and many anarchists and scholars do not consider anarcho-capitalism to properly cohere with the spirit, principles, or [[history of anarchism]].<ref>Peter Marshall, [[Demanding the Impossible]]; John Clark, ''The Anarchist Moment''; Albert Meltzer, ''Anarchism: Arguments for and Against''; Noam Chomsky, ''Understanding Power'', David Weick, ''Anarchist Justice''; Brian Morris, "Anthropology and Anarchism," ''Anarchy: A Journal of Desire Armed'' (no. 45); Peter Sabatini, ''Libertarianism: Bogus Anarchy''; Donald Rooum, ''What is Anarchism?''; Bob Black, ''Libertarian as Conservative''</ref> While other anarchists and scholars regard anarchism as referring only to opposition to the non-privatisation of all aspects of the state and do consider anarcho-capitalism to be a form of anarchism,<ref>1) Perlin, Terry M. Contemporary Anarchism. Transaction Books, New Brunswick, NJ 1979, p. 7. 2) [[Richard Sylvan|Sylvan]], Richard. ''Anarchism''. A Companion to Contemporary Political Philosophy, editors Goodin, Robert E. and Pettit, Philip. Blackwell Publishing, 1995, p.231.</ref> [[Gary Chartier]]<ref>Chartier, Gary (2009). ''Economic Justice and Natural Law''. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.</ref> has joined [[Kevin Carson]],<ref>Carson, Kevin A. (2008). ''Organization Theory: A Libertarian Perspective''. Charleston, SC:BookSurge.</ref><ref>Carson, Kevin A. (2010). ''The Homebrew Industrial Revolution: A Low-Overhead Manifesto''. Charleston, SC: BookSurge.</ref> Roderick T. Long,<ref>Long, Roderick T. (2000). ''Reason and Value: Aristotle versus Rand''. Washington, DC:Objectivist Center</ref><ref>Long, Roderick T. (2008). "[http://en.liberalis.pl/2008/01/04/interview-with-roderick-long/ An Interview With Roderick Long]"</ref> Charles W. Johnson,<ref>Johnson, Charles W. (2008). "[http://radgeek.com/gt/2010/03/02/liberty-equality-solidarity-toward-a-dialectical-anarchism/ Liberty, Equality, Solidarity: Toward a Dialectical Anarchism]." ''Anarchism/Minarchism: Is a Government Part of a Free Country?'' In Long, Roderick T. and Machan, Tibor Aldershot: Ashgate pp. 155–88.</ref> [[Sheldon Richman]]<ref>Richman, Sheldon (23 June 2010). "[http://sheldonfreeassociation.blogspot.com/2006/07/why-left-libertarian.html Why Left-Libertarian?]" ''The Freeman''. Foundation for Economic Education.</ref><ref>Richman, Sheldon (18 December 2009). "[http://www.thefreemanonline.org/columns/tgif/workers-of-the-world-unite Workers of the World Unite for a Free Market"] {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140722145233/http://www.thefreemanonline.org/columns/tgif/workers-of-the-world-unite|date=22 July 2014}}." Foundation for Economic Education.</ref><ref name="LibertarianLeft">Sheldon Richman (3 February 2011). "[http://www.theamericanconservative.com/blog/libertarian-left/ Libertarian Left: Free-market anti-capitalism, the unknown ideal] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120509201621/http://www.theamericanconservative.com/blog/libertarian-left/ |date=2012-05-09 }}." ''The American Conservative''. Retrieved 5 March 2012.</ref> and [[Chris Matthew Sciabarra]]<ref>Sciabarra, Chris Matthew (2000). ''Total Freedom: Toward a Dialectical Libertarianism''. University Park, PA:Pennsylvania State University Press.</ref> in maintaining that because of its heritage and its emancipatory goals and potential [[Left-wing market anarchism|radical market anarchism]] should be seen by its proponents and by others as part of the [[History of socialism|socialist tradition]] and that [[market anarchists]] can and should call themselves socialists, echoing the language of [[libertarian socialists]] like [[American individualist anarchists]] [[Benjamin Tucker]] and [[Lysander Spooner]] and British [[Thomas Hodgskin]].<ref name="c4ss.org">See Gary Chartier, "Advocates of Freed Markets Should Oppose Capitalism," "Free-Market Anti-Capitalism?" session, annual conference, [[Association of Private Enterprise Education]] (Cæsar's Palace, Las Vegas, NV, April 13, 2010); Gary Chartier, [http://c4ss.org/content/1738 "Advocates of Freed Markets Should Embrace 'Anti-Capitalism'"]; Gary Chartier, [http://invisiblemolotov.wordpress.com/2009/09/12/socialist-ends-market-means/ ''Socialist Ends, Market Means: Five Essays'']. Cp. Tucker, "Socialism."</ref>

In particular, Chartier has argued that proponents of a genuinely free market, termed [[freed market]] to distinguish them from the common conception which these [[left-libertarians]] (referred to as left-wing market anarchists<ref>Chartier, Gary; Johnson, Charles W. (2011). ''Markets Not Capitalism: Individualist Anarchism Against Bosses, Inequality, Corporate Power, and Structural Poverty''. Brooklyn, NY:Minor Compositions/Autonomedia. pp. 1–16.</ref> or market-oriented left-libertarians)<ref name="LibertarianLeft" /> believe to be riddled with statist and capitalist privileges,<ref name="marketsnotcap">Gillis, William (2011). "The Freed Market." In Chartier, Gary and Johnson, Charles. ''Markets Not Capitalism''. Brooklyn, NY: Minor Compositions/Autonomedia. pp. 19–20.</ref> should explicitly reject capitalism and identify with the global anti-capitalist movement while emphasizing that the abuses the anti-capitalist movement highlights result from state-tolerated violence and state-secured privilege rather than from voluntary cooperation and exchange. Indeed, proponents of this approach strongly affirm the [[History of liberalism#Classical liberalism|classical liberal]] ideas of [[self-ownership]] and [[free market]]s while maintaining that taken to their logical conclusions these ideas support anti-capitalist, [[Anti-corporatism|anti-corporatist]], [[Social hierarchies|anti-hierarchical]] and [[pro-labor]] positions in economics; [[anti-imperialism]] in foreign policy; and thoroughly radical views regarding such cultural issues as gender, sexuality and race.<ref>Gary Chartier and Charles W. Johnson (eds). ''Markets Not Capitalism: Individualist Anarchism Against Bosses, Inequality, Corporate Power, and Structural Poverty''. Minor Compositions; 1st edition (November 5, 2011</ref><ref name="c4ss.org" />

One major issue and divide between anarchism and anarcho-capitalism are the terms capitalism and socialism themselves. For anarcho-capitalists, capitalism means the free market rather than [[actually existing capitalism]] (of which they are critics, arguing that the problem rests on [[corporatism]] and [[state capitalism]], a term coined by German socialist [[Wilhelm Liebknecht]],<ref>{{cite journal|first=Wilhelm|last=Liebknecht|author-link=Wilhelm Liebknecht|title=Our Recent Congress|journal=Justice|year=1896|url=http://www.marxists.org/archive/liebknecht-w/1896/08/our-congress.htm|access-date=31 May 2007}}</ref> but whose concept can be traced back to anarchists like [[Mikhail Bakunin]]<ref>Gouldner, A. W. (November 1982). "Marx's Last Battle: Bakunin and the First International". ''Theory and Society''. (11: 6). pp. 853–884. Gouldner argues that Bakunin formulated an original critique of Marxism as "the ideology, not of the working class, but of a new class of scientific intelligentsia—who would corrupt socialism, make themselves a new elite, and impose their rule on the majority" (pp. 860–861).</ref><ref>''Slavic Review'' (50: 1) (Spring 1991). pp. 127–143.</ref> and [[Jan Wacław Machajski]],<ref>Bottomore, Thomas B. (1964). ''Elites and Society'' p. 54.</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://geocities.com/cordobakaf/cont.html|title=Jan Waclaw Machajski: A Radical Critic Of The Russian Intelligentsia And Socialism|last=Shatz|first=Marshall S.|access-date=26 October 2009|url-status=bot: unknown|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20091026180626/http://geocities.com/cordobakaf/cont.html|archive-date=26 October 2009}}</ref><ref name="Fox - Ante Ciliga">{{cite web|first=Michael S.|last=Fox|url=http://geocities.com/cordobakaf/ciliga_trotsky.pdf|title=Ante Ciliga, Trotskii and State Capitalism: Theory, Tactics and Reevaluation during the Purge Era, 1935–1939|access-date=27 October 2009|url-status=bot: unknown|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20091027132653/http://geocities.com/cordobakaf/ciliga_trotsky.pdf|archive-date=27 October 2009}}</ref><ref>[http://www.infoshop.org/faq/secH3.html#sech313 "Why is state socialism just state capitalism?"]. {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20091219024910/http://www.infoshop.org/faq/secH3.html#sech313|date=19 December 2009}}</ref> rather than capitalism itself) as advocated by anti-capitalists<ref>Makdisi, Saree; Casarino, Cesare; Karl, Rebecca E. (1996). ''Marxism Beyond Marxism''. Routledge. p. 198.</ref><ref>Sayers, Sean (1998). ''Marxism and Human Nature''. Routledge. p. 105.</ref> and socialism is conflated with [[state socialism]] and [[Marxist–Leninist state]]s. However, the term socialism originally included any opponent of capitalism, a term coined in the 18th century to mean a construed [[political system]] built on [[Privilege (law)|privileges]] for the owners of [[Capital (economics)|capital]].<ref>"L'Angleterre a-t-elle l'heureux privilège de n'avoir ni Agioteurs, ni Banquiers, ni Faiseurs de services, ni Capitalistes ?". In Clavier, Étienne (1788). ''De la foi publique envers les créanciers de l'état : lettres à M. Linguet sur le n° CXVI de ses annales'' (in French). [https://books.google.com/books?id=ESMVAAAAQAAJ&pg=PA19 p. 19].</ref><ref>Braudel, Fernand (1979). ''The Wheels of Commerce: Civilization and Capitalism 15th–18th Century''. Harper and Row.</ref><ref>Hodgson, Geoffrey (2015). ''Conceptualizing Capitalism: Institutions, Evolution, Future''. University of Chicago Press. [https://books.google.com/books?id=S5XICQAAQBAJ&dq=what+i+call+%27capitalism%27+that+is+to+say+the+appropriation+of+capital+by+some+to+the+exclusion+of+others&pg=PA252 p. 252].</ref>

Contra anarcho-capitalists, anarchists argue that capitalism necessarily rests on the [[State (polity)|state]] to survive and state capitalism is seen as the inevitable result of both capitalism and state socialism. Furthermore, the free market itself for [[classical economists]] such as [[Adam Smith]] did not necessarily refer to a market free from government interference as it is now commonly assumed or how anarcho-capitalists see it, but rather free from all forms of economic privilege, monopolies and artificial scarcities, implying that [[economic rent]]s, i.e. profits generated from a lack of [[perfect competition]], must be reduced or eliminated as much as possible through free competition.<ref name="Popper 1994">{{cite book|last=Popper|first=Karl|title=The Open Society and Its Enemies|publisher=Routledge Classics|year=1994|isbn=978-0-415-61021-6}}</ref> While anarcho-capitalists who argue for [[private property]] which supports absentee and [[Absentee landlord|landlordism ownership]] rather than occupation and use property norms as well as the [[homestead principle]] are considered right-libertarians rather than anarchists (this is due to anarchism generally viewing any absentee ownership and ownership claims on land and natural resources as immoral and illegitimate<ref name="wendymcelroy">[[Wendy McElroy|McElroy, Wendy]] (1995). [http://www.libertarian.co.uk/lapubs/libhe/libhe014.htm "Intellectual Property: The Late Nineteenth Century Libertarian Debate"] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210102150720/http://www.libertarian.co.uk/lapubs/libhe/libhe014.htm |date=2021-01-02 }}. ''Libertarian Heritage'' (14). {{ISBN|1-85637-281-2}}. Retrieved 24 June 2005.</ref> and seeing the idea of perpetually binding original appropriation as advocated by some anarcho-capitalists as anathema to traditional schools of anarchism as well as to any moral or economic philosophy that takes equal natural rights to land and the Earth's resources as a premise),<ref name="Libertarian Alliance">{{cite journal|last=Birch|first=Paul|author-link=Paul Birch (writer)|title=Anarcho-capitalism Dissolves Into City States|journal=Libertarian Alliance|year=1998|number=28|series=Legal Notes|page=4|url=http://www.libertarian.co.uk/lapubs/legan/legan028.pdf|access-date=5 July 2010|issn=0267-7083|archive-date=5 November 2010|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20101105101941/http://libertarian.co.uk/lapubs/legan/legan028.pdf|url-status=dead}}</ref> other anarcho-capitalists are closer to mutualism and are considered part of free-market anarchism which argue that a true free-market or ''[[laissez-faire]]'' system would be best served under socialism rather than capitalism.<ref>Nick Manley (7 May 2014). [http://c4ss.org/content/27009 "Brief Introduction To Left-Wing Laissez Faire Economic Theory: Part One"]. Center for a Stateless Society. Retrieved 23 April 2019.</ref><ref>Nick Maley (9 May 2014). [https://c4ss.org/content/27062 "Brief Introduction To Left-Wing Laissez Faire Economic Theory: Part Two". Center for a Stateless Society Retrieved 29 April 2019.]</ref>

As a whole, anarchism is seen part of the socialist tradition, with the main divide being between anti-market anarchists (most [[social anarchists]], including [[anarcho-communists]], [[anarcho-syndicalists]] and [[collectivist anarchists]]) who support some form of [[Decentralized planning (economics)|decentralised]] [[economic planning]] and pro-market anarchists (certain individualist anarchists, including free-market anarchists and mutualists) who support [[Market socialism|free-market socialism]]. As such, Chartier has argued that anarcho-capitalists should reject capitalism and call themselves free-market advocates,<ref>[https://c4ss.org/content/1738 "Advocates of Freed Markets Should Embrace "Anti-Capitalism"].</ref> writing that "it makes sense for [freed-market advocates] to name what they oppose "capitalism." Doing so calls attention to the freedom movement's radical roots, emphasizes the value of understanding society as an alternative to the state, underscores the fact that proponents of freedom object to non-aggressive as well as aggressive restraints on liberty, ensures that advocates of freedom aren't confused with people who use market rhetoric to prop up an unjust status quo, and expresses solidarity between defenders of freed markets and workers—as well as ordinary people around the world who use "capitalism" as a short-hand label for the world-system that constrains their freedom and stunts their lives".<ref name="LibertarianLeft"/>

Another major issue and divide within anarchism and anarcho-capitalism is that of [[property]], more specifically the issues of private property. By property, or private property, ever since Proudhon's book ''[[What is Property?]]'', published in 1840, anarchists meant [[Possession (law)|possession]] (or what other socialists, including [[Marxists]] and [[communists]], distingue as [[personal property]]) which he considered as liberty ("Property is liberty") versus [[productive property]] (such as land and infrastructure, or what Marxists terms the [[means of production]] and the [[means of labor]]) which he considered as theft ("[[Property is theft]]"), causing him to also say "Property is impossible".<ref>Proudhon, Pierre-Joseph (1840). ''What is Property? Or, an Inquiry into the Principle of Right and of Government''.</ref>

Individualist anarchists like Tucker started calling possession as property, or private property. Anarcho-capitalists generally make no such distinction. Such distinction is extremely important to anarchists and other socialists because in the [[Capitalist mode of production (Marxist theory)|capitalist mode of production]] private and personal property are considered to be exactly equivalent. They make the following distinctions:

* Personal property, or possession, includes items intended for personal use (e.g. one's toothbrush, clothes, homes, vehicles and sometimes money).<ref>{{cite book|last1=Friedland|first1=William H.|author1-link=William H. Friedland|last2=Rosberg|first2=Carl G.|title=African Socialism|page=25|publisher=Stanford University Press|year=1965|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=pjasAAAAIAAJ|isbn=978-0804702034}}</ref> It must be gained in a socially fair manner and the owner has a distributive right to exclude others.
* Anarchists generally agree that private property is a social relationship between the owner and persons deprived (not a relationship between person and thing), e.g. artifacts, factories, mines, dams, infrastructure, natural vegetation, mountains, deserts and seas. In this context, private property and ownership means ownership of the means of production, not personal possessions.
* To anarchists and socialists alike, the term private property refers to [[Capital (economics)|capital]] or the means of production while personal property refers to [[Consumer goods|consumer]] and non-capital [[goods]] and [[Service (economics)|services]].<ref>{{cite web|url=http://anarchism.pageabode.com/afaq/secB3.html#secb31|title=B.3 Why are anarchists against private property?|work=[[An Anarchist FAQ]]|access-date=29 April 2018|url-status=live|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20171114010322/http://anarchism.pageabode.com/afaq/secB3.html#secb31|archive-date=14 November 2017}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.jacobinmag.com/2016/02/socialism-marxism-private-property-person-lennon-imagine-kenny-loggins/|title=End Private Property, Not Kenny Loggins|work=[[Jacobin (magazine)|Jacobin]]|access-date=29 April 2018|url-status=live|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20171026190844/https://www.jacobinmag.com/2016/02/socialism-marxism-private-property-person-lennon-imagine-kenny-loggins/|archive-date=26 October 2017}}</ref>

=== Globalization ===
Many anarchists are actively involved in the [[anti-globalization movement]], seeing [[corporate globalization]] as a neocolonialist attempt to use economic coercion on a global scale, carried out through state institutions such as the [[World Bank]], [[World Trade Organization]], [[Group of Eight]] and the [[World Economic Forum]]. [[Globalization]] is an ambiguous term that has different meanings to different anarchist factions. Many anarchists use the term to mean [[neocolonialism]] and/or [[cultural imperialism]] (which they may see as related). Others, particularly [[anarcho-capitalists]], use globalization to mean the worldwide expansion of the [[division of labor]] and [[trade]] which they see as beneficial so long as governments do not intervene. Anarcho-capitalists and [[market anarchists]] also see the worldwide expansion of the division of labor through trade (globalization) as a boon, but they oppose the regulation and cartelization imposed by the World Bank, World Trade Organization and "managed trade" agreements such as the [[North American Free Trade Agreement]] (NAFTA) and the [[Central America Free Trade Agreement]] (CAFTA). Many also object to [[fiat money]] issued by central banks and resulting debasement of money and confiscation of wealth. Groups such as [[Reclaim the Streets]]<ref>[http://www.rte.ie/news/features/new_world_disorder/reclaim.html "Reclaim the Streets"] Donnacha DeLong, RTÉ News Online 2002. Retrieved 5 September 2006.</ref> were among the instigators of the so-called anti-globalization movement.<ref>[http://newleftreview.org/A2368 "The New Anarchists"], Graeber, David, ''New Left Review'' 13, January–February 2002. Retrieved 6 September 2006.</ref>

The [[Carnival Against Capitalism]] on 18 June 1999 is generally regarded as the first of the major anti-globalization protests.<ref>[http://www.rte.ie/news/features/new_world_disorder/action2.html "G8 Summit – J18: Global Carnival Against Corporate Tyranny, London, England"], C. L. Staten, EmergencyNet News journalist, writing for [[RTÉ]]'s website in 2002. Retrieved 5 September 2006</ref> Anarchists such as the [[WOMBLES]] have on occasion played a significant role in planning, organising and participating in subsequent protests.<ref name="BBC News 2003">{{cite web | title=May Day demonstrations: Who's who | website=BBC News | date=2003-04-28 | url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/2983167.stm | access-date=2020-04-02}}</ref> The protests tended to be organised on anarchist direct action principles with a general tolerance for a range of different activities ranging from those who engage in [[tactical frivolity]] to the [[black bloc]]s.<ref>[http://www.thrall.orcon.net.nz/21scapegoat.html "Anarchism as a Scapegoat of the 21st century: violence, anarchism and anti-globalisation protests"] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20071021200758/http://thrall.orcon.net.nz/21scapegoat.html |date=2007-10-21 }}, Thrall issue #21, 2001. Retrieved 5 September 2006.</ref>

=== Left and right anarchism ===
The term ''left anarchism'', or ''left-wing anarchism'', has been occasionally used to distinguish [[social anarchism]] from [[anarcho-capitalism]] and anti-state [[right-libertarian]] philosophies.<ref>Paul, Ellen Frankel. Miller, Fred Dycus. Paul, Jeffrey. 1993. (''no title listed'') Cambridge University Press. p. 115.</ref><ref>[[Noam Chomsky|Chomsky, Noam]] (2003). ''Chomsky on Democracy & Education''. Routledge. p. 398.<br>Chomsky, Noam. ''Language and Politics''. [[AK Press]]. p. 153.</ref> "Left anarchists" refer to [[political philosophies]] which posit a future society in which [[private property]] is replaced by [[Reciprocity (cultural anthropology)|reciprocity]] and non-[[Social stratification|hierarchical]] society.<ref>Peacock, Adrian. 1999. ''Two Hundred Pharaohs, Five Billion Slaves''. Ellipsis London.</ref><ref>Goodwin, Barbara (2007). ''Using Political Ideas''. John Wiley & Sons.</ref> The term ''left anarchism'' is sometimes used synonymously with ''[[libertarian socialism]]'',<ref name=brooks>Brooks, Thom (2002). Book Reviews. ''[[Journal of Applied Philosophy]]''. 19 (1). 75–90. {{doi|10.1111/1468-5930.00206}}.</ref> ''[[left-libertarianism]]'', or ''social anarchism''.<ref name=thagard/> Anarchists typically discourage the concept of [[left-wing]] theories of [[anarchism]] on grounds of redundancy and that it lends legitimacy to the notion that anarchism is compatible with [[Anarchism and capitalism|capitalism]]<ref name=AFAQV1>{{cite book|last=McKay|first=Iain|title=[[An Anarchist FAQ]], Volume I|year=2007|publisher=[[AK Press]]|isbn=978-1-902593-90-6|chapter-url=http://www.akpress.org/2007/items/ananarchistfaqakpress|chapter=Section F.7.3 - Can there be a 'right-wing' anarchism?|url-status=dead|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120128135116/http://www.akpress.org/2007/items/ananarchistfaqakpress|archive-date=28 January 2012}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|title=Section F.7.3 - Can there be a 'right-wing' anarchism?|url=http://infoshop.org/page/AnarchistFAQSectionF7#secf73|work=[[An Anarchist FAQ]]|publisher=[[Infoshop.org]]|access-date=21 January 2012|author=McKay, Iain|date=21 January 2010|display-authors=etal|url-status=dead|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20111117031933/http://infoshop.org/page/AnarchistFAQSectionF7#secf73|archive-date=17 November 2011}}</ref> or [[Anarchism and nationalism|nationalism]].<ref name=AFAQV1D6>{{cite book|last=McKay|first=Iain|title=[[An Anarchist FAQ]], Volume I|year=2007|publisher=[[AK Press]]|isbn=978-1-902593-90-6|chapter-url=http://www.akpress.org/2007/items/ananarchistfaqakpress|chapter=Section D.6 - Are anarchists against Nationalism?|url-status=dead|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120128135116/http://www.akpress.org/2007/items/ananarchistfaqakpress|archive-date=28 January 2012}}</ref><ref name=AFAQinfoshopD6>{{cite web|title=Section D.6 - Are anarchists against Nationalism?|url=http://www.infoshop.org/page/AnarchistFAQSectionD6|work=[[An Anarchist FAQ]]|publisher=[[Infoshop.org]]|access-date=22 January 2012|author=McKay, Iain|date=21 January 2010|display-authors=etal|url-status=dead|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120303150454/http://www.infoshop.org/page/AnarchistFAQSectionD6|archive-date=3 March 2012}}</ref>

Syndicalist Ulrike Heider categorized anarchism into left anarchism, right anarchism and [[green anarchism]].<ref>Heider, Ulrike. ''Anarchism: Left, Right and Green''. San Francisco: City Lights Books. 1994.</ref> The term ''right anarchism'', or ''right-wing anarchism'', has been used to refer to schools of thoughts which are not generally considered part of anarchism, including anarcho-capitalism<ref name="Capitalism"/><ref name="Doyle, Kevin 2002 pp. 447"/> and [[national-anarchism]].<ref>Griffin 2003; Goodrick-Clarke 2003; Macklin 2005; Sykes 2005; Sunshine 2008; Sanchez 2009.</ref>

== Nationalism ==
{{main|Anarchism and nationalism}}
{{see also|National-anarchism|Postcolonial anarchism}}
Anarchism has a long history of opposing [[imperialism]], both in the [[Core countries|core nations]] (the colonizers) and the [[Periphery countries|periphery nations]] (the colonized). In general, anarchists have preferred to focus on building revolutions at home and doing solidarity work for comrades in other countries, e.g. [[Guy Aldred]] was jailed for printing [[Shyamji Krishnavarma]]'s ''[[The Indian Sociologist]]''. Another example of this was [[Rudolf Rocker]], a prominent [[Anarchism in Germany|German anarchist]] and [[anti-fascist]] who was particularly active amongst Jewish workers. In his ''[[Nationalism and Culture]]'', he argued for a "federation of European peoples" which would include Jews. Rejecting biological theories of race and the concept of nation, he argued that since it was European states that had conquered and colonized the rest of the world, successful libertarian organization amongst Europeans was "the first condition for the creation of a world federation which will also secure the so-called [[Colonialism|colonial]] peoples the same rights for the pursuit of happiness. Many modern anarchists and other [[anti-imperialists]] share this approach.<ref>[https://web.archive.org/web/20201127120615/https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2007/4/14/323276/- "Precarity, or Why 69 is Pink (w/Mondo Foti!)"]. Daily Kos. Retrieved 5 July 2023.</ref>

Historically, anarchism was supportive of the [[Anationalism|anationalist]] movement as well as of the [[Esperanto]] language,<ref>Firth, Will. [http://www.nodo50.org/esperanto/anarkiismo.htm "Esperanto kaj anarkiismo"]. "Anarkiistoj estis inter la pioniroj de la disvastigo de Esperanto. En 1905 fondiĝis en Stokholmo la unua anarkiisma Esperanto-grupo. Sekvis multaj aliaj: en Bulgario, Ĉinio kaj aliaj landoj. Anarkiistoj kaj anarki-sindikatistoj, kiuj antaŭ la Unua Mondmilito apartenis al la nombre plej granda grupo inter la proletaj esperantistoj, fondis en 1906 la internacian ligon Paco-Libereco, kiu eldonis la Internacian Socian Revuon. Paco-libereco unuiĝis en 1910 kun alia progresema asocio, Esperantista Laboristaro. La komuna organizaĵo nomiĝis Liberiga Stelo. Ĝis 1914 tiu organizaĵo eldonis multe da revolucia literaturo en Esperanto, interalie ankaŭ anarkiisma. Tial povis evolui en la jaroj antaŭ la Unua Mondmilito ekzemple vigla korespondado inter eŭropaj kaj japanaj anarkiistoj. En 1907 la Internacia Anarkiisma Kongreso en Amsterdamo faris rezolucion pri la afero de internacia lingvo, kaj venis dum la postaj jaroj similaj kongresaj rezolucioj. Esperantistoj, kiuj partoprenis tiujn kongresojn, okupiĝis precipe pri la internaciaj rilatoj de la anarkiistoj".</ref><ref name="naturismo">{{cite web|url=http://www.nodo50.org/ekintza/article.php3?id_article%3D310|title=El Movimiento naturista|access-date=3 June 2014|url-status=dead|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120320014704/https://www.nodo50.org/ekintza/article.php3?id_article=310|archive-date=20 March 2012}} "Proliferarán así diversos grupos que practicarán el excursionismo, el naturismo, el nudismo, la emancipación sexual o el esperantismo, alrededor de asociaciones informales vinculadas de una manera o de otra al anarquismo. Precisamente las limitaciones a las asociaciones obreras impuestas desde la legislación especial de la Dictadura potenciarán indirectamente esta especie de asociacionismo informal en que confluirá el movimiento anarquista con esta heterogeneidad de prácticas y tendencias. Uno de los grupos más destacados, que será el impulsor de la revista individualista ''[[Iniciales|Ética]]'' será el Ateneo Naturista Ecléctico, con sede en Barcelona, con sus diferentes secciones la más destacada de las cuales será el grupo excursionista Sol y Vida."; {{cite web|url=http://www.acracia.org/1-23a58lainsumision.pdf|title=La insumisión voluntaria. El anarquismo individualista español durante la Dictadura y la Segunda República (1923–1938)|access-date=6 May 2011|url-status=dead|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130618051019/http://www.acracia.org/1-23a58lainsumision.pdf|archive-date=18 June 2013}}</ref> a language constructed to serve as a politically and ethnically neutral international language. After the [[Spanish Civil War]], [[Francoist Spain]] persecuted [[Anarchism in Spain|anarchists]] and [[Catalan nationalism|Catalan nationalists]], among whom the use of Esperanto was extensive.<ref name="Del Barrio">del Barrio, Toño; Lins, Ulrich. [http://www.nodo50.org/esperanto/artik68es.htm ''La utilización del esperanto durante la Guerra Civil Española'']. Paper for the International Congress on the Spanish Civil War (Madrid, 27–29 November 2006).</ref> The so-called [[national-anarchist movement]] is not recognized as part of anarchism by anarchists and scholars due to anarchism opposition to [[nationalism]], the [[nation state]], [[tribalism]] and [[neo-tribalism]] and national-anarchism's perceived [[racism]] and [[sexism]], arguing that it represents a further evolution in the thinking of the [[Radical right (Europe)|radical right]] rather than an entirely new dimension.<ref>Griffin 2003.</ref><ref>Goodrick-Clarke 2003.</ref><ref>Macklin 2005.</ref><ref>Sykes 2005.</ref> Some accuse national-anarchists of being [[White nationalism|white nationalists]] who promote [[Separatism|ethnic and racial separatism]] while others argue they want the [[Radical chic#Terrorist chic|militant chic]] of calling themselves anarchists without the historical and philosophical baggage that accompanies such a claim.<ref>Sunshine 2008.</ref><ref>Sanchez 2009.</ref>

During the [[2014 Scottish independence referendum]], there was debate within anarchist circles about whether to take an [[Abstentionism|abstentionist]] position, vote for [[independence]],<ref name=":0"/> or to vote to remain in the United Kingdom,<ref name=":4"/> therefore anarchists rarely fitted into the easy binary of Yes/No voters of the referendum,<ref>{{cite web|url=https://scotlandaf.wordpress.com/2014/09/18/referendum-rant-from-an-immigrant/|title=Referendum rant from an immigrant|last=Afedscotland|date=18 September 2014|website=AFed Scotland|access-date=19 December 2016}}</ref> with all seeking to go beyond the choices offered at the ballot box. There was also a debate about what Scottish independence would mean for the anarchist movement and social struggle.<ref name=":2"/> Groups like the [[Anarchist Federation (Britain and Ireland)|Anarchist Federation]] in Scotland (mainly in Edinburgh and Glasgow) took a critical stance skeptical of the benefits of Scottish independence.<ref name=":4"/><ref name=":3"/> Scottish anarchists argued that [[Scottish independence]] and [[Scottish nationalism]] diverted energy away from grassroots struggles and that the movement for Scottish independence sucked people towards Scottish nationalism and electoral politics.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://afed.org.uk/the-snp-scottish-nationalism-and-the-class-struggle-yesterday-today-and-tomorrow/|title=The SNP, Scottish Nationalism, and the Class Struggle: Yesterday, Today, and Tomorrow|publisher=AFed Scotland|access-date=19 December 2016|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20161220143258/https://afed.org.uk/the-snp-scottish-nationalism-and-the-class-struggle-yesterday-today-and-tomorrow/|archive-date=20 December 2016|url-status=dead}}</ref>

== Environment ==
{{see also|Anarcho-primitivism|Ecofeminism|Green anarchism|Green syndicalism|Social ecology (theory)|l5=Social ecology}}
The [[Environmental quality|environment]] and [[sustainability]] have been an issue for anarchists from at least as far back as [[Peter Kropotkin]]'s 1899 book ''[[Green Anarchist|Fields, Factories and Workshops]]'', but since the late 1970s anarchists in English-speaking world and European countries have been agitating for the natural environment. [[Eco-anarchism|Eco-anarchists]] or [[Green anarchism|green anarchists]] often embrace [[deep ecology]], a worldview that strives to cultivate [[biodiversity]] and [[sustainability]]. Eco-anarchists often use [[direct action]] against what they see as Earth-destroying institutions. Of particular importance is the [[Earth First!]] movement that takes action such as [[tree sitting]]. The more militant [[Earth Liberation Front]] which grew out of Earth First! also has connections with the anarchist movement. Another important component is [[ecofeminism]] which sees the domination of nature as a metaphor for the domination of women.

[[Murray Bookchin]]'s work on [[Social ecology (theory)|social ecology]], [[David Watson (anarchist)|David Watson]]'s work with ''[[Fifth Estate (periodical)|Fifth Estate]]'' magazine, [[Steve Booth]]'s work in the United Kingdom publication ''[[Green Anarchist]]'' and [[Graham Purchase]]'s writings on [[green syndicalism]] have all contributed to the broad variety and scope of green anarchist/eco-anarchist thought and action. Green anarchism also involves a critique of [[History of capitalism|industrial capitalism]] and for some green anarchists (including [[anarcho-primitivists]]) [[civilization]] itself.

== Relations with the left ==
{{quote box|quote=On May 1937 the President of [[Republican Spain]], [[Manuel Azaña]], then living in the parliament house in Exposition Park, talked by telephone to the President of Catalonia, [[Luis Companys]], who was in his office in the Palace of the Generalitat. The conversation had been going on for some time, when it was sharply interrupted by an anarchist in the Telefónica who said: "This conversation will have to stop. We have more interesting things to do than listen to your stupid conversations." The line was then broken.|source=—[[Jaume Miravitlles]]<ref>{{cite book|editor=[[Clifford Harper|Harper, Clifford]]|title=Prolegomena: To a Study of the Return of the Repressed in History|publisher=Rebel Press|location=London|year=1994|isbn=0-946061-13-0}}</ref>|width=30%|align=right}}
While many anarchists (especially those involved in the [[anti-globalization movement]]) continue to see themselves as a [[Left-wing politics|leftist movement]], some thinkers and activists believe it is necessary to re-evaluate anarchism's relationship with the traditional left. Like many radical ideologies, most [[anarchist schools of thought]] are to some degree [[sectarian]]. There is often a difference of opinion within each school about how to react to, or interact with, other schools. Many anarchists draw from a wide range of political perspectives, such as the [[Zapatista Army of National Liberation]], the [[Situationist International|Situationists]], [[Ultra-leftism|ultra-leftists]], [[Autonomism|autonomist Marxism]] and various [[indigenous culture]]s.

A movement called [[post-left anarchy]] seeks to distance itself from the traditional left—[[Communism|communists]], [[Socialism|socialists]], [[Social democracy|social democrats]] and the like—and to escape the confines of [[ideology]] in general. Post-leftists argue that anarchism has been weakened by its long attachment to contrary leftist movements and single issue causes ([[anti-war]], [[anti-nuclear]] and so on). It calls for a synthesis of anarchist thought and a specifically anti-authoritarian revolutionary movement outside of the leftist milieu. Important groups and individuals associated with post-left anarchy include [[CrimethInc.]], the magazine ''[[Anarchy: A Journal of Desire Armed]]'' and its editor [[Jason McQuinn]], [[The Abolition of Work|Bob Black]], [[Hakim Bey]] and others.

The term [[post-anarchism]] was originated by [[Saul Newman]], first receiving popular attention in his book ''[[From Bakunin to Lacan]]'', a synthesis of classical anarchist theory and [[poststructuralist]] thought. Subsequent to Newman's use of the term, it has taken on a life of its own and a wide range of ideas including [[autonomism]], [[post-left anarchy]], [[Situationism]], [[postcolonialism]] and [[Zapatismo]]. By its very nature, post-anarchism rejects the idea that it should be a coherent set of doctrines and beliefs. Key thinkers nonetheless associated with [[post-anarchism]] include Saul Newman, [[Todd May (philosopher)|Todd May]], [[Gilles Deleuze]] and [[Félix Guattari]].<ref>[http://www.postanarchism.org/ "Post anarchist clearing house"].</ref>

Some activists calling themselves [[insurrectionary anarchists]] are critical of formal anarchist labor unions and federations and advocate informal organization, carrying out acts of resistance in various struggles. Proponents include Wolfi Landstreicher and [[Alfredo M. Bonanno]], author of works including ''Armed Joy'' and ''The Anarchist Tension''. This tendency is represented in the United States in magazines such as ''Willful Disobedience'' and ''Killing King Abacus''.

=== Communism ===
While [[communism]] is proposed as a form of social and economic organisation by many anarchists, other anarchists consider it a danger to the liberty and free development of the individual.<ref>[[Peter Kropotkin|Kropotkin, Peter]], [http://www.zabalaza.net/texts/txt_com&anok_pk.htm "Communism and Anarchy"] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20051020043722/http://www.zabalaza.net/texts/txt_com%26anok_pk.htm |date=2005-10-20 }}.</ref> Most [[Anarchist schools of thought|schools of anarchism]] have recognized a distinction between [[libertarian]] and [[authoritarian]] forms of communism.<ref>''Liberty (Not the Daughter but the Mother of Order) (1881–1908)''; 3 September 1881; 1, 3; APS Online, p. 3; Tucker uses the terms "voluntary" and "compulsory" communisms. Some market anarchists reject the distinction.</ref> [[Pierre-Joseph Proudhon]] said of communism that "whether of the utopian or the Marxist variety, that it destroyed freedom by taking away from the individual control over his means of production",<ref>[https://www.britannica.com/ebi/article-9276558 "Proudhon, Pierre-Joseph"] (2006). ''[[Encyclopædia Britannica]]''.</ref> adding: "Communism is exploitation of the strong by the weak".<ref>Pierre-Joseph Proudhon. "What Is Property?" {{ISBN|1-4191-9353-8}} p. 221.</ref> [[Mikhail Bakunin]] stated: "I hate Communism because it is the negation of liberty and because for me humanity is unthinkable without liberty. I am not a Communist, because Communism concentrates and swallows up in itself for the benefit of the State all the forces of society, because it inevitably leads to the concentration of property in the hands of the State".<ref>Quoted in Paul Thomas, ''Karl Marx and the Anarchists'', Routledge (1980), p. 303.</ref> However, Bakunin was speaking of [[Authoritarian socialism|authoritarian]] and [[statist]] forms of [[State communism|communism]] and [[State socialism|socialism]] as verified by the last line which mentions state property—[[anarcho-communists]] explicitly reject state property and authority, especially centralized authority—and famously proclaimed: "We are convinced that freedom without Socialism is privilege and injustice, and that Socialism without freedom is slavery and brutality".<ref>Maximov, G. P., ed. (1953).''The Political Philosophy of Bakunin''. New York: The Free Press. p. 269.</ref> Even [[American individualist anarchist]] [[Benjamin Tucker]], who insisted on the voluntary nature of all association and opposed communism along with [[majority rule]], [[organized religion]] and the institution of [[marriage]] due to their compulsory nature,<ref name="Madison, Charles A.">Madison, Charles A. "Anarchism in the United States". ''Journal of the History of Ideas'', Vol 6, No 1, January 1945, [https://www.jstor.org/stable/2707055?read-now=1&seq=11#page_scan_tab_contents p. 56].</ref> argued: "Whoever denies private property is of necessity an Archist. This excludes from Anarchism all believers in compulsory Communism. As for the believers in voluntary Communism (of whom there are precious few), they are of necessity believers in the liberty to hold private property, for to pool one's possessions with those of others is nothing more or less than an exercise of proprietorship".<ref name="The New Freewoman"/>

[[Karl Marx]]'s [[communist society]] is actually based on [[Free association (Marxism and anarchism)|free association]] which he called a community of freely associated individuals.<ref>Marx, Karl (1846). [https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1845/german-ideology/index.htm ''The German Ideology'']. "It follows from all we have been saying up till now that the communal relationship into which the individuals of a class entered, and which was determined by their common interests over against a third party, was always a community to which these individuals belonged only as average individuals, only insofar as they lived within the conditions of existence of their class — a relationship in which they participated not as individuals but as members of a class. With the community of revolutionary proletarians, on the other hand, who take their conditions of existence [...] under their control, it is just the reverse; it is as individuals that the individuals participate in it. [...] Communism differs from all previous movements in that it overturns the basis of all earlier relations of production and intercourse, and for the first time consciously treats all natural premises as the creatures of hitherto existing men, strips them of their natural character and subjugates them to the power of the united individuals. Its organization is, therefore, essentially economic, the material production of the conditions of this unity; it turns existing conditions into conditions of unity. The reality, which communism is creating, is precisely the true basis for rendering it impossible that anything should exist independently of individuals, insofar as reality is only a product of the preceding intercourse of individuals themselves".</ref> Marx's communist society is one in which "the full and free development of every individual forms the ruling principle" and "the free development of each is the condition for the free development of all".<ref>Marx, Karl (1848). ''[[The Communist Manifesto]]''. [https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1848/communist-manifesto/ch02.htm "Chapther II. Proletarians and Communists"].</ref> Hence, Marx justified the forms of equality he did advocate such as the communal ownership and control of the economy on the grounds that they led to human freedom and human development, arguing that "the realm of freedom actually begins only where labor which is determined by necessity and mundane considerations ceases; thus in the very nature of things it lies beyond the sphere of actual material production.<ref>Marx, Karl (1894). ''[[Capital, Volume III]]''. [https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1894-c3/ch48.htm "Part VII. Revenues and their Sources"].</ref> According to Allen Woods, a communist society is one that has transcended class antagonisms and "would not be one in which some truly universal interest at last reigns, to which individual interests must be sacrificed. It would instead be a society in which individuals freely act as the truly human individuals they are", making Marx's communist society radically individualistic.<ref name="Woods" />

Although [[Peter Kropotkin]], one of the leading proponents of anarcho-communism while also opposing statist communism, argued for an economic model of free distribution between all individuals, many [[individualist anarchists]] oppose communism in all its forms on the grounds that voluntary communism is not practicable. Individualist anarchists such as Benjamin Tucker, [[Victor Yarros]] and [[Henry Appleton (anarchist)|Henry Appleton]] have denied that communism is a genuine form of anarchism.<ref>For instance, Benjamin Tucker says: "Yes, genuine Anarchism is consistent [[Manchesterism]], and Communistic or pseudo-Anarchism is inconsistent Manchesterism". Tucker, Benjamin. [http://flag.blackened.net/daver/anarchism/tucker/tucker37.html "Labor and Its Pay"]. {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20050407014846/http://flag.blackened.net/daver/anarchism/tucker/tucker37.html |date=2005-04-07 }}. From Individual Liberty: selections from the writings of Benjamin T. Tucker); [[Victor Yarros]] says: "There is no logical justification, no rational explanation, and no scientific reasoning has been, is, will be, or can be advanced in defence of that unimaginable impossibility, Communistic Anarchism". Yarros, Victor S. [http://www.againstpolitics.com/market_anarchism/yarros_princely.html "A Princely Paradox"]. {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20070927002707/http://www.againstpolitics.com/market_anarchism/yarros_princely.html|date=27 September 2007}}. ''Liberty''. Vol 4. No. 19. Saturday, 9 April 1887, whole number 97. [[Henry Appleton (anarchist)|Henry Appleton]] says: "All Communism, under whatever guise, is the natural enemy of Anarchism, and a Communist sailing under the flag of Anarchism is as false a figure as could be invented". Appleton, Henry. [http://praxeology.net/HA-ATF.htm "Anarchism, True and False"]. Liberty 2.24. no. 50. 6 September 1884. p. 4.; [[Clarence Lee Swartz]] says: "One of the tests of any reform movement with regard to personal liberty is this: Will the movement prohibit or abolish private property? If it does, it is an enemy of liberty. For one of the most important criteria of freedom is the right to private property in the products of ones labor. State Socialists, Communists, Syndicalists and Communist-Anarchists deny private property". Swartz, Clarence Lee. [http://www.panarchy.org/swartz/mutualism.index.html "What is Mutualism?"].</ref> They rejected its strategies and argued that it is inherently authoritarian.<ref name="Brooks">Brooks, Frank H. (ed) (1994) ''The Individualist Anarchists: An Anthology of Liberty (1881–1908)'', Transaction Publishers, p. 76.</ref> In the opinion of Appleton, "Communism, being opposed to natural law, must necessarily call upon unnatural methods if it would put itself into practice" and employ "pillage, brute force, and violence".<ref>Appleton, Henry. [http://www.againstpolitics.com/market_anarchism/appleton_boston.htm "The Boston Anarchists"]. {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20051214233855/http://www.againstpolitics.com/market_anarchism/appleton_boston.htm |date=2005-12-14}}. Liberty, Vol. 4, No. 3, May 26, 1886, Whole No. 81.</ref> As a response, [[Albert Meltzer]] argued that since individualist anarchists like Tucker promote the idea of private armies, they actually support a "limited State", contending that it "is only possible to conceive of Anarchism which is free, communistic and offering no economic necessity for repression of countering it".<ref name="Meltzer"/> Anarcho-communists also reject the criticism, pointing to the principle of voluntary association that underpins their theory and differentiates it from statist communism.<ref name="anarchistFAQ"/> Some individualist anarchists are willing to recognize such communism as a legitimate form. [[Kevin Carson]] writes that "free market, libertarian communist, syndicalism, and other kinds of collectivist anarchists must learn to coexist in peace and mutual respect today, in our fight against the corporate state, and tomorrow, in the [[panarchy (political philosophy)|panarchy]] that is likely to succeed it".<ref name="carson"/>

As a response, there emerged in the 1980s United States the tendency of [[post-left anarchy]] which was influenced profoundly by egoism in aspects such as the critique of ideology. [[Jason McQuinn]] says that "when I (and other anti-ideological anarchists) criticize ideology, it is always from a specifically critical, anarchist perspective rooted in both the skeptical, individualist-anarchist philosophy of Max Stirner".<ref name="Cuchuflito">"What is Ideology?" by [[Jason McQuinn]]</ref> [[The Abolition of Work|Bob Black]] and Feral Faun/Wolfi Landstreicher also strongly adhere to Stirnerist egoism. A reprinting of ''[[The Right To Be Greedy: Theses On The Practical Necessity Of Demanding Everything|The Right to be Greedy]]'' in the 1980s was done with the involvement of Black who also wrote the preface to it.<ref name="black"/> In the book's preface, Black has humorously suggested the idea of "[[Marxist]] [[Stirnerism]]" just as he wrote an essay on "[[groucho]]-marxism",<ref name="groucho marx"/> writing: "If Marxism-Stirnerism is conceivable, every orthodoxy prating of freedom or liberation is called into question, anarchism included. The only reason to read this book, as its authors would be the first to agree, is for what you can get out of it".<ref name="black"/>

[[Hakim Bey]] has said: "From [[Max Stirner|Stirner]]'s "[[Union of egoists|Union of Self-Owning Ones]]" we proceed to [[Nietzsche]]'s circle of "Free Spirits" and thence to [[Charles Fourier]]'s "Passional Series", doubling and redoubling ourselves even as the Other multiplies itself in the eros of the group".<ref>Bey, Hakim (1994). [http://www.left-bank.org/bey/default3.htm ''Immediatism'']. AK Press. p. 4. {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20091205152300/http://www.left-bank.org/bey/default3.htm|date=5 December 2009}}</ref> Bey also wrote: "The Mackay Society, of which Mark & I are active members, is devoted to the anarchism of Max Stirner, Benj. Tucker & [[John Henry Mackay]]. [...] The Mackay Society, incidentally, represents a little-known current of individualist thought which never cut its ties with revolutionary labor. [[Dyer Lum]], [[Ezra Heywood|Ezra]] & Angela Haywood represent this school of thought; [[Jo Labadie]], who wrote for Tucker's ''[[Liberty (1881-1908)|Liberty]]'', made himself a link between the American "plumb-line" anarchists, the "philosophical" individualists, & the syndicalist or communist branch of the movement; his influence reached the Mackay Society through his son, Laurance. Like the Italian Stirnerites (who influenced us through our late friend [[Enrico Arrigoni]]) we support all anti-authoritarian currents, despite their apparent contradictions".<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.theanarchistlibrary.org/HTML/Hakim_Bey__An_esoteric_interpretation_of_the_I.W.W._preamble.html|title=An esoteric interpretation of the I.W.W. preamble|publisher=The Anarchist Library|access-date=3 October 2011|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20111007043352/http://theanarchistlibrary.org/HTML/Hakim_Bey__An_esoteric_interpretation_of_the_I.W.W._preamble.html|archive-date=7 October 2011|url-status=dead}}</ref>

=== Marxism ===
Anarchism has had a strained relationship with [[Marxism]] since [[Karl Marx]]'s life. The dispute between Marx and [[Mikhail Bakunin]] highlighted the differences between anarchism and Marxism, with Bakunin criticizing Marx for his authoritarian bent.<ref>{{cite book|author-last=Bakunin |author-first=Mikhail |author-link=Mikhail Bakunin |chapter=Letter to ''La Liberté'' |title=Bakunin on Anarchy |translator-first1=Sam |translator-last1=Dolgoff |editor-first1=Sam |editor-last1=Dolgoff |date=1971 |orig-date=5 October 1872 |url=https://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/bakunin/works/1872/la-liberte.htm |via=Marxists Internet Archive |access-date=8 September 2009}}</ref> Bakunin also argued—against certain ideas of a number of Marxists—that not all revolutions need to be violent. For instance, he strongly rejected Marx's concept of the [[dictatorship of the proletariat]], a concept that [[Leninism|vanguardist socialism]], including [[Marxist–Leninism]], would use to justify one-party rule from above by a party representing the proletariat.<ref name=GW158>{{cite book|author-first=George |author-last=Woodcock |author-link=George Woodcock |orig-date=1962 |date=1975 |title=Anarchism |pages=158 |location=Harmondsworth, England |publisher=Penguin Books |isbn=0-14-020622-1}}.</ref> Bakunin insisted that revolutions must be led by the people directly while any "enlightened elite" must only exert influence by remaining "[[Invisible dictatorship|invisible]] [...] not imposed on anyone [...] [and] deprived of all official rights and significance".<ref>{{cite book|author-last=Bakunin |author-first=Mikhail |author-link=Mikhail Bakunin |title=Michael Bakunin: Selected Writings |year=1973 |editor-last=Lehning |editor-first=Arthur |editor-link=Arthur Lehning |pages=191–192 |isbn=0-224-00893-5 |publisher=Evergreen |url=https://libcom.org/files/Michael%20Bakunin%20-%20Selected%20Writings.pdf |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200803235048/https://libcom.org/files/Michael%20Bakunin%20-%20Selected%20Writings.pdf |archive-date=3 August 2020}}</ref> He held that the state should be immediately abolished because all forms of government eventually lead to oppression.<ref name=GW158/>

Bakunin has sometimes been called the first theorist of the concept of a [[new class]], meaning that a class of intellectuals and bureaucrats running the state in the name of the people or the proletariat—but in reality in their own interests alone. Bakunin argued that the "State has always been the patrimony of some privileged class: a priestly class, an aristocratic class, a bourgeois class. And finally, when all the other classes have exhausted themselves, the State then becomes the patrimony of the bureaucratic class and then falls—or, if you will, rises—to the position of a machine". Bakunin also had a different view as compared to Marx's on the revolutionary potential of the [[lumpenproletariat]] and the [[proletariat]]. As such, "[b]oth agreed that the proletariat would play a key role, but for Marx the proletariat was the exclusive, leading revolutionary agent while Bakunin entertained the possibility that the [[peasants]] and even the lumpenproletariat (the unemployed, common criminals, etc.) could rise to the occasion".<ref>{{cite web|author-last=Robertson |author-first=Ann |url=http://workerscompass.org/pubs/marxism_anarchism_roberston.pdf |title=Marxism and Anarchism: The Philosophical Roots of the Marx-Bakunin Conflict – Part Two |website=Workerscompass.org |access-date=1 April 2018}}</ref> Bakunin "considers workers' integration in capital as destructive of more primary revolutionary forces. For Bakunin, the revolutionary archetype is found in a peasant milieu (which is presented as having longstanding insurrectionary traditions, as well as a communist archetype in its current social form—the peasant commune) and amongst educated unemployed youth, assorted marginals from all classes, brigands, robbers, the impoverished masses, and those on the margins of society who have escaped, been excluded from, or not yet subsumed in the discipline of emerging industrial work. [...] [I]n short, all those whom Marx sought to include in the category of the lumpenproletariat".<ref>{{cite book|author-last=Thoburn |author-first=Nicholas |url=https://www.routledge.com/Deleuze-Marx-and-Politics/Thoburn/p/book/9780415753845 |chapter=The Lumpenproletariat and the Proletarian Unnamable |title=Deleuze, Marx and Politics |publisher=Routledge |isbn=9780415753845 |date=2003}}</ref>

Anarchists, especially [[Social anarchism|social anarchists]], believe that the classless, stateless society should be established by the [[direct action]] of the masses, culminating in [[social revolution]] and refusing any intermediate stage such as the dictatorship of the proletariat on the basis that such a dictatorship will become a self-perpetuating fundament. However, [[Libertarian Marxism|libertarian Marxists]] argue that Marx used the phrase to mean that the worker control at the point of production and not a party would still be a state until society is reorganized according to socialist principles. For Bakunin, the fundamental contradiction is that for the Marxists "anarchism or freedom is the aim, while the state and dictatorship is the means, and so, in order to free the masses, they have first to be enslaved".<ref>{{cite book|author-last=Bakunin |author-first=Mikhail |author-link=Mikhail Bakunin |chapter=Statism and Anarchy |title=Bakunin on Anarchy |translator-first1=Sam |translator-last1=Dolgoff |editor-first1=Sam |editor-last1=Dolgoff |date=1971 |orig-date=1873 |url=http://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/bakunin/works/1873/statism-anarchy.htm |via=Marxists Internet Archive |access-date=8 September 2009}}</ref> One divide between anarchism and Marxism is therefore between [[decentralisation]] and [[centralisation]], with anarchists favouring decentralisation and Marxists arguing that due to the [[Industrial Revolution]] and [[Fourth Industrial Revolution#History|later stages of the Industrial Revolution]] a certain degree of authority and centralisation has become necessary or inevitable.<ref>{{cite book|author-last=Engels |author-first=Friedrich |author-link=Friedrich Engels |editor-last=Tucker |editor-first=Robert C. |title=The Marx-Engels reader |edition=2nd |chapter=On Authority |year=1978 |orig-year=1874 |publisher=Norton |location=New York |isbn=978-0-393-05684-6 |oclc=318414641 |lccn=77016635 |chapter-url=https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1872/10/authority.htm |access-date=18 March 2019 |via=Marxists Internet Archive |url=https://archive.org/details/marxengelsreader00tuck}}</ref>

Anarchists and many non-Marxist [[libertarian socialists]] reject the need for a transitory state phase, claiming that socialism can only be established through decentralized, non-coercive organization. The phrases barracks socialism or [[barracks communism]] became a shorthand for this critique, evoking the image of citizens' lives being as regimented as the lives of [[conscript]]s in a [[barracks]].<ref>{{cite book|author-last=Sperber |author-first=Jonathan |year=2013 |title=Karl Marx: A Nineteenth-Century Life |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=hBpSh9JYAKcC |publisher=W.W. Norton & Co |isbn=9780871403544}}</ref> Ironically, the term barracks communism<ref name=bse>{{cite encyclopedia|url=http://bse.sci-lib.com/article057568.html |title=Казарменный коммунизм |language=ru |trans-title=Barracks Communism |encyclopedia=[[Great Soviet Encyclopedia]]}}</ref> ({{lang|de|Kasernenkommunismus}})<ref>{{cite book|author-last=Duncan |author-first=Graeme Campbell |date=December 1976 |title=Marx and Mill: Two Views of Social Conflict and Social Harmony |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=VlA7AAAAIAAJ&pg=PA194 |pages=194 |publisher=Cambridge University Press |isbn=9780521291309}}</ref> was coined by Marx himself<ref name="books.google.co.uk">{{cite book|author-last=Lenin |author-first=Vladimir |author-link=Vladimir Lenin |title=Marxism versus Anarchism |date=2001 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=Ta_u2zKfLIkC&pg=PA89 |pages=88 |publisher=Resistance Books|isbn=9781876646035 }}</ref> to refer to a crude, [[Authoritarianism|authoritarian]], forced [[Collectivism and individualism|collectivism]] and [[communism]] where all aspects of life are bureaucratically regimented and communal. Originally, Marx used the expression to criticise the vision of [[Sergey Nechayev]] outlined in "The Fundamentals of the Future Social System"<ref name="books.google.co.uk"/><ref>''Glavnyye osnovy budushchego obshchestvennogo stroya'' (Главные основы будущего общественного строя). According to Marx, it was printed in the second issue of ''Narodnaya rasprava'' available in [[Geneva]] in December 1869, but it was labelled "St.Petersburg, winter 1870".</ref> which had a major influence on other Russian revolutionaries like [[Pyotr Tkachev]] and [[Vladimir Lenin]].<ref>{{cite journal|author-last=McClellan |author-first=Woodford |title=Nechaevshchina: An Unknown Chapter |journal=Slavic Review |volume=32 |issue=3 |pages=546–553 |doi=10.2307/2495409 |issn=0037-6779 |jstor=2495409 |year=1973 |doi-access=free}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal|author-last=Mayer |author-first=Robert |date=1993 |title=Lenin and the Concept of the Professional Revolutionary |journal=History of Political Thought |volume=14 |issue=2 |pages=249–263 |issn=0143-781X |jstor=26214357}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.researchgate.net/publication/254624250 |title=The Influences of Chernyshevsky, Tkachev, and Nechaev on the political thought of V.I. Lenin |access-date=25 March 2019}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=https://finam.info/blog/43949786224/Sergey-Nechayev:-%C2%ABtemnyiy-chulanchik%C2%BB-russkoy-revolyutsii |title=Сергей Нечаев: "темный чуланчик" русской революции |trans-title=Sergei Nechaev: the "dark closet" of the Russian revolution |website=МирТесен – рекомендательная социальная сеть |language=ru |access-date=25 March 2019}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal|author-last=Kimball |author-first=Alan |title=The First International and the Russian Obshchina |journal=Slavic Review |volume=32 |issue=3 |pages=491–514 |doi=10.2307/2495406 |issn=0037-6779 |jstor=2495406 |year=1973|s2cid=164131867 }}</ref><ref>{{Cite book |last1=Read |first1=Christopher |title=[[Lenin: A Revolutionary Life]] |date=2005 |language=English |isbn=978-0-415-20649-5 |publisher=Routledge |location=London }}</ref>{{Excessive citations inline|date=February 2022}} The term barracks here does not refer to [[military barracks]], but to the workers' barracks-type primitive dormitories in which industrial workers lived in many places in the [[Russian Empire]] of the time.<ref name=bm>Busgalin, Alexander; Mayer, Günter (2008). [http://www.inkrit.de/e_inkritpedia/e_maincode/doku.php?id=k:kasernenkommunismus "Kasernenkommunismus"]. ''Historisch-kritisches Wörterbuch des Marxismus''. 7: I. Spalten. pp. 407–411 ([http://guentermayer.files.wordpress.com/2009/09/kasernenkommunismus-hkwm-7-i1.pdf PDF text])</ref> Later, political theorists of the [[Soviet Union]] applied this term to [[China]] under [[Mao Zedong]].<ref name=bse/> Still later during the Soviet [[perestroika]] period, the term was used to apply to the [[history of the Soviet Union]] itself.<ref name=bm/>

[[Noam Chomsky]] is critical of Marxism's dogmatic strains and the idea of Marxism itself, but he still appreciates Marx's contributions to political thought. Unlike some anarchists, Chomsky does not consider [[Bolshevism]] "Marxism in practice", but he does recognize that Marx was a complicated figure who had conflicting ideas. While acknowledging the latent authoritarianism in Marx, Chomsky also points to the libertarian strains that developed into the [[council communism]] of [[Rosa Luxemburg]] and [[Anton Pannekoek]]. However, his commitment to libertarian socialism has led him to characterize himself as an [[Political positions of Noam Chomsky|anarchist with radical Marxist leanings]]. As a response to those critiques, libertarian Marxism refers to a broad scope of economic and political philosophies that emphasize the [[anti-authoritarian]] aspects of Marxism. Early currents of libertarian Marxism, known as [[left communism]], emerged in opposition to Marxism–Leninism<ref>[[Herman Gorter|Gorter, Herman]]; [[Anton Pannekoek|Pannekok, Anton]]; [[Sylvia Pankhurst|Pankhurst, Sylvia]]; Ruhl, Otto (2007). ''Non-Leninist Marxism: Writings on the Workers Councils''. Red and Black.</ref> and its derivatives such as [[Stalinism]] and [[Maoism]], among others. Libertarian Marxism is also often critical of [[reformist]] positions, such as those held by [[social democrats]]. Libertarian Marxist currents often draw from Marx and [[Friedrich Engels]]' later works, specifically the ''[[Grundrisse]]'' and ''[[The Civil War in France]]'',<ref>[[Ernesto Screpanti|Screpanti, Ernesto]] (2007). ''Libertarian Communism: Marx Engels and the Political Economy of Freedom''. London: Palgrave Macmillan.</ref> emphasizing the Marxist belief in the ability of the [[working class]] to forge its own destiny without the need for a revolutionary [[Political party|party]] or [[Sovereign state|state]] to mediate or aid its liberation.<ref>[[Hal Draper|Draper, Hal]] (1971). [https://jps.library.utoronto.ca/index.php/srv/article/view/5333 "The Principle of Self-Emancipation in Marx and Engels"]. {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110723070247/https://jps.library.utoronto.ca/index.php/srv/article/view/5333|date=23 July 2011}} ''Socialist Register'' (4).</ref> Along with anarchism, libertarian Marxism is one of the main currents of libertarian socialism.<ref>[[Noam Chomsky|Chomsky, Noam]]. [http://chomsky.info/audionvideo/19700216.mp3 "Government In The Future"]. {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20101121062818/http://chomsky.info/audionvideo/19700216.mp3|date=21 November 2010}} Lecture at the Poetry Center of the New York YM-YWHA.</ref>

== Historiography ==

=== North Atlantic bias ===
[[Lucien van der Walt]] has criticised the tendency among many historians of anarchism (such as [[George Woodcock]], [[Daniel Guérin|Daniel Guerin]] and [[Peter Marshall (author)|Peter Marshall]]) to overlook the influence of anarchism and syndicalism in much of the colonial and postcolonial world. Van der Walt argues that powerful anarchist movements in places such as [[Anarchism in Argentina|Argentina]], [[Anarchism in Brazil|Brazil]], [[Anarchism in Cuba|Cuba]], [[Anarchism in Mexico|Mexico]] and [[Anarchism in Portugal|Portugal]] have been overlooked.<ref>{{Cite book |last=van der Walt |first=Lucien |title=Anarchism and Syndicalism in the Colonial and Postcolonial World, 1870–1940 |publisher=Brill |year=2010 |language=English}}</ref>

== See also ==
* [[Anarchism and issues related to love and sex]]

== Explanatory notes ==
{{reflist|group=note}}

== References ==
{{reflist|colwidth=35em}}

== Further reading ==
* {{cite book|last=Gordon|first=Uri|author-link=Uri Gordon (anarchist)|title=[[Anarchy Alive!: Anti-Authoritarian Politics from Practice to Theory]]|publisher=Pluto Press|location=Sydney|year=2007|oclc=154769337|isbn=978-0-7453-2683-2}}
* [[Uri Gordon (anarchist)|Gordon, Uri]] (2007). [http://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/uri-gordon-anarchism-and-political-theory-contemporary-problems "Anarchism and Political Theory: Contemporary Problems"]. The Anarchist Library. Retrieved 4 May 2019.
* Kerl, Eric (July–August 2010). [http://isreview.org/issue/72/contemporary-anarchism "Contemporary anarchism"]. ''International Socialist Review'' (72). Retrieved 4 May 2019.

== External links ==
* {{Commons category-inline}}

{{DEFAULTSORT:Issues in Anarchism}}
[[Category:Issues in anarchism| ]]