add site
services
publishers
database
health videos
toolbar
stats
live show
health store
more stuff
JOIN/LOGIN
| advertise add site services publishers database health videos
| | about toolbar stats live show health store more stuff JOIN/LOGIN |
Individualist anarchism refers to several traditions of thought within the anarchist movement that emphasize the individual and his/her will over any kinds of external determinants such as groups, society, traditions, and ideological systems.[1][2] Individualist anarchism is not a single philosophy but refers to a group of individualistic philosophies that sometimes are in conflict. Early influences in individualist anarchism were the thought of William Godwin[3], Henry David Thoreau (transcendentalism)[4], Josiah Warren ("sovereignty of the individual"), Lysander Spooner ("natural law"), Pierre Joseph Proudhon (mutualism), Herbert Spencer ("law of equal liberty")[5] and Max Stirner (egoism).[6] From there it expanded through Europe and the United States. Benjamin R. Tucker, a famous 19th century individualist anarchist, held that "if the individual has the right to govern himself, all external government is tyranny."[7]
[edit] OverviewEarly individualist anarchists include William Godwin, Pierre-Joseph Proudhon and Max Stirner.[3][6] Individualist anarchism of different kinds have a few things in common. These are: 1. The concentration and elevation on the individual and his/her over any kind of social or exterior reality or construction such as morality, ideology, social custom, religion, metaphysics, ideas or the will of others.[8][9] 2. The rejection or reservations on the idea of revolution seeing it as a time of mass uprising which could bring about new hierarchies. Instead they favor more evolutionary methods of bringing about anarchy through alternative experiences and experiments and education which could be brought about today[10][11]. This also because it is not seen desirable for individuals the fact of having to wait for revolution to start experiencing alternative experiences outside what is offered in the current social system[12]. 3. The view that relationships with other persons or things can only be of one's own interest and can be as transitory and without compromises as desired since in individualist anarchism sacrifice is usually rejected. In this way Max Stirner recommended associations of egoists[13][14]. Individual experience and exploration therefore is emphazised. As such differences exist. In regards to economic questions there are adherents to mutualism (Proudhon, Emile Armand, early Benjamin Tucker), egoistic disrespect for "ghosts" such as private property and markets (Stirner, John Henry Mackay, Lev Chernyi, later Tucker), and adherents to anarcho-communism (Albert Libertad, illegalism). The egoist form of individualist anarchism, derived from the philosophy of Max Stirner, supports the individual doing exactly what he pleases – taking no notice of God, state, or moral rules.[15] To Stirner, rights were spooks in the mind, and he held that society does not exist but "the individuals are its reality" – he supported property by force of might rather than moral right.[16] Stirner advocated self-assertion and foresaw "associations of egoists" drawn together by respect for each other's ruthlessness.[17] An important tendency within individualist anarchist currents emphasizes individual subjective exploration and defiance of social conventions. As such Murray Bookchin describes a lot of individualist anarchism as people who "expressed their opposition in uniquely personal forms, especially in fiery tracts, outrageous behavior, and aberrant lifestyles in the cultural ghettos of fin de sicle New York, Paris, and London. As a credo, individualist anarchism remained largely a bohemian lifestyle, most conspicuous in its demands for sexual freedom ('free love') and enamored of innovations in art, behavior, and clothing."[18]. In this way free love[19][20] currents and other radical lifestyles such as naturism[21][20] had popularity among individualist anarchists. [edit] People[edit] William GodwinMain article: William Godwin  William Godwin can be considered an individualist anarchist[22] and philosophical anarchist who was influenced by the ideas of the Age of Enlightenment,[23]and developed what many consider the first expression of modern anarchist thought.[3] Godwin was, according to Peter Kropotkin, "the first to formulate the political and economical conceptions of anarchism, even though he did not give that name to the ideas developed in his work."[24][25] Godwin advocated extreme individualism, proposing that all cooperation in labor be eliminated.[26] Godwin was a utilitarian who believed that all individuals are not of equal value, with some of us "of more worth and importance' than others depending on our utility in bringing about social good. Therefore he does not believe in equal rights, but the person's life that should be favored that is most conducive to the general good.[27] Godwin opposed government because it infringes on the individual's right to "private judgement" to determine which actions most maximize utility, but also makes a critique of all authority over the individual's judgement. This aspect of Godwin's philosophy, minus the utilitarianism, was developed into a more extreme form later by Stirner.[28]  Godwin's individualism was to such a radical degree that he even opposed individuals performing together in orchestras, writing in Political Justice that "everything understood by the term co-operation is in some sense an evil."[26] The only apparent exception to this opposition to cooperation is the spontaneous association that may arise when a society is threatened by violent force. One reason he opposed cooperation is he believed it to interfere with an individual's ability to be benevolent for the greater good. Godwin opposes the idea of government, but wrote that a minimal state as a present "necessary evil"[29] that would become increasingly irrelevant and powerless by the gradual spread of knowledge.[3] He expressly opposed democracy, fearing oppression of the individual by the majority (though he believed it to be preferable to dictatorship). Godwin supported individual ownership of property, defining it as "the empire to which every man is entitled over the produce of his own industry."[29] However, he also advocated that individuals give to each other their surplus property on the occasion that others have a need for it, without involving trade (e.g. gift economy). Thus, while people have the right to private property, they should give it away as enlightened altruists. This was to be based on utilitarian principles; he said: "Every man has a right to that, the exclusive possession of which being awarded to him, a greater sum of benefit or pleasure will result than could have arisen from its being otherwise appropriated."[29] However, benevolence was not to be enforced, being a matter of free individual "private judgement." He did not advocate a community of goods or assert collective ownership as is embraced in communism, but his belief that individuals ought to share with those in need was influential on the later development of anarchist communism. Godwin's political views were diverse and do not perfectly agree with any of the ideologies that claim his influence; writers of the Socialist Standard, organ of the Socialist Party of Great Britain, consider Godwin both an individualist and a communist;[30] anarcho-capitalist Murray Rothbard did not regard Godwin as being in the individualist camp at all, referring to him as the "founder of communist anarchism";[31] and historian Albert Weisbord considers him an individualist anarchist without reservation.[32] Some writers see a conflict between Godwin's advocacy of "private judgement" and utilitarianism, as he says that ethics requires that individuals give their surplus property to each other resulting in an egalitarian society, but, at the same time, he insists that all things be left to individual choice.[3] Many of Godwin's views changed over time, as noted by Kropotkin. [edit] Pierre-Joseph Proudhon Main article: Pierre-Joseph Proudhon Pierre-Joseph Proudhon (1809–1865) was the first philosopher to label himself an "anarchist."[33] Some consider Proudhon to be an individualist anarchist,[34][35][36] while others regard him to be a social anarchist.[37][38] Some commentators do not identify Proudhon as an individualist anarchist due to his preference for association in large industries, rather than individual control.[39] Nevertheless, he was influential among some of the American individualists; in the 1840s and 1850s, Charles A. Dana,[40] and William B. Greene introduced Proudhon's works to the United States. Greene adapted Proudhon's mutualism to American conditions and introduced it to Benjamin R. Tucker.[41] Proudhon opposed government privilege that protects capitalist, banking and land interests, and the accumulation or acquisition of property (and any form of coercion that led to it) which he believed hampers competition and keeps wealth in the hands of the few. Proudhon favoured a right of individuals to retain the product of their labor as their own property, but believed that any property beyond that which an individual produced and could possess was illegitimate. Thus, he saw private property as both essential to liberty and a road to tyranny, the former when it resulted from labor and was required for labor and the latter when it resulted in exploitation (profit, interest, rent, tax). He generally called the former "possession" and the latter "property." For large-scale industry, he supported workers associations to replace wage labour and opposed the ownership of land. Proudhon maintained that those who labor should retain the entirety of what they produce, and that monopolies on credit and land are the forces that prohibit such. He advocated an economic system that included private property as possession and exchange market but without profit, which he called mutualism. It is Proudhon's philosophy that was explicitly rejected by Joseph Dejacque in the inception of anarchist-communism, with the latter asserting directly to Proudhon in a letter that "it is not the product of his or her labor that the worker has a right to, but to the satisfaction of his or her needs, whatever may be their nature." An individualist rather than anarchist communist,[42][43][44] Proudhon said that "communism...is the very denial of society in its foundation..."[45] and famously declared that "property is theft!" in reference to his rejection of ownership rights to land being granted to a person who is not using that land. After Dejacque and others split from Proudhon due to the latter's support of individual property and an exchange economy, the relationship between the individualists, who continued in relative alignment with the philosophy of Proudhon, and the anarcho-communists was characterised by various degrees of antagonism and harmony. For example, individualists like Tucker on the one hand translated and reprinted the works of collectivists like Mikhail Bakunin, while on the other hand rejected the economic aspects of collectivism and communism as incompatible with anarchist ideals. [edit] Thought[edit] MutualismMain article: Mutualism (economic theory)  Mutualism is an anarchist school of thought which can be traced to the writings of Pierre-Joseph Proudhon, who envisioned a society where each person might possess a means of production, either individually or collectively, with trade representing equivalent amounts of labor in the free market.[46] Integral to the scheme was the establishment of a mutual-credit bank which would lend to producers at a minimal interest rate only high enough to cover the costs of administration.[47] Mutualism is based on a labor theory of value which holds that when labor or its product is sold, in exchange, it ought to receive goods or services embodying "the amount of labor necessary to produce an article of exactly similar and equal utility".[48] Some mutualists believe that if the state did not intervene, as a result of increased competition in the marketplace, individuals would receive no more income than that in proportion to the amount of labor they exert.[49] Mutualists oppose the idea of individuals receiving an income through loans, investments, and rent, as they believe these individuals are not laboring. Some of them argue that if state intervention ceased, these types of incomes would disappear due to increased competition in capital.[50] Though Proudhon opposed this type of income, he expressed: "... I never meant to ... forbid or suppress, by sovereign decree, ground rent and interest on capital. I believe that all these forms of human activity should remain free and optional for all."[51] Insofar as they ensure the workers right to the full product of their labor, mutualists support markets and private property in the product of labor. However, they argue for conditional titles to land, whose private ownership is legitimate only so long as it remains in use or occupation (which Proudhon called "possession.")[52] Proudhon's Mutualism supports labor-owned cooperative firms and associations[53] for "we need not hesitate, for we have no choice. . . it is necessary to form an ASSOCIATION among workers . . . because without that, they would remain related as subordinates and superiors, and there would ensue two . . . castes of masters and wage-workers, which is repugnant to a free and democratic society" and so "it becomes necessary for the workers to form themselves into democratic societies, with equal conditions for all members, on pain of a relapse into feudalism."[54] As for capital goods (man-made, non-land, "means of production"), mutualist opinions differs on whether these should be commonly managed public assets or private property. Mutualists, following Proudhon, originally considered themselves to be libertarian socialists. However, "some mutualists have abandoned the labor theory of value, and prefer to avoid the term "socialist." But they still retain some cultural attitudes, for the most part, that set them off from the libertarian right."[55] Mutualists have distinguished themselves from state socialism, and don't advocate social control over the means of production. Benjamin Tucker said of Proudhon, that "though opposed to socializing the ownership of capital, [Proudhon] aimed nevertheless to socialize its effects by making its use beneficial to all instead of a means of impoverishing the many to enrich the few...by subjecting capital to the natural law of competition, thus bringing the price of its own use down to cost."[56] [edit] Egoism Main articles: Egoist anarchism and Philosophy of Max Stirner Max Stirner's philosophy, sometimes called "egoism," is the most extreme[57] form of individualist anarchism. Max Stirner was a Hegelian philosopher whose "name appears with familiar regularity in historically-orientated surveys of anarchist thought as one of the earliest and best-known exponents of individualist anarchism."[6] In 1844, his The Ego and Its Own (Der Einzige and sein Eigentum which may literally be translated as The Unique Individual and His Property[58]) was published, which is considered to be "a founding text in the tradition of individualist anarchism."[6] Stirner does not recommend that the individual try to eliminate the state but simply that they disregard the state when it conflicts with one's autonomous choices and go along with it when doing so is conducive to one's interests.[59] He says that the egoist rejects pursuit of devotion to "a great idea, a good cause, a doctirine, a system, a lofty calling," saying that the egoist has no political calling but rather "lives themselves out" without regard to "how well or ill humanity may fare thereby."[60] Stirner held that the only limitation on the rights of the individual is his power to obtain what he desires.[61] He proposes that most commonly accepted social institutions—including the notion of State, property as a right, natural rights in general, and the very notion of society—were mere spooks in the mind. Stirner wants to "abolish not only the state but also society as an institution responsible for its members."[62] He advocated self-assertion and foresaw "associations of egoists" where respect for ruthlessness drew people together.[22] Even murder is permissible "if it is right for me."[63] For Stirner, property simply comes about through might: "Whoever knows how to take, to defend, the thing, to him belongs property." And, "What I have in my power, that is my own. So long as I assert myself as holder, I am the proprietor of the thing." He says, "I do not step shyly back from your property, but look upon it always as my property, in which I respect nothing. Pray do the like with what you call my property!".[64] His concept of "egoistic property" not only a lack of moral restraint on how own obtains and uses things, but includes other people as well.[65] His embrace of egoism is in stark contrast to Godwin's altruism. Stirner was opposed to communism, seeing it as a form of authority over the individual. This position on property is much different from the native American, natural law, form of individualist anarchism, which defends the inviolability of the private property that has been earned through labor[66] and trade. However, in 1886 Benjamin Tucker rejected the natural rights philosophy and adopted Stirner's egoism, with several others joining with him. This split the American individualists into fierce debate, "with the natural rights proponents accusing the egoists of destroying libertarianism itself."[67] Other egoists include James L. Walker, Sidney Parker, Dora Marsden, John Beverly Robinson, and Benjamin Tucker (later in life). In Russia, individualist anarchism inspired by Stirner combined with an appreciation for Friedrich Nietzsche attracted a small following of bohemian artists and intellectuals such as Lev Chernyi, as well as a few lone wolves who found self-expression in crime and violence.[68] They rejected organizing, believing that only unorganized individuals were safe from coercion and domination, believing this kept them true to the ideals of anarchism.[69] This type of individualist anarchism inspired anarcho-feminist Emma Goldman[68] Though Stirner's philosophy is individualist, it has influenced some libertarian communists and anarcho-communists. "For Ourselves Council for Generalized Self-Management" discusses Stirner and speaks of a "communist egoism," which is said to be a "synthesis of individualism and collectivism," and says that "greed in its fullest sense is the only possible basis of communist society."[70] Forms of libertarian communism such as Situationism are influenced by Stirner.[71] Anarcho-communist Emma Goldman was influenced by both Stirner and Peter Kropotkin and blended their philosophies together in her own, as shown in books of hers such as Anarchism And Other Essays.[72] [edit] Free LoveMain article: Free love  An important current within individualist anarchism is Free love[19]. Free love advocates sometimes traced their roots back to Josiah Warren and to experimental communities, viewed sexual freedom as a clear, direct expression of an individual's self-ownership. Free love particularly stressed women's rights since most sexual laws discriminated against women: for example, marriage laws and anti-birth control measures[19]. The most important American free love journal was Lucifer the Lightbearer (1883-1907) edited by Moses Harman and Lois Waisbrooker[73]but also there existed Ezra Heywood and Angela Heywood's The Word (1872-1890, 1892-1893)[19]. Also M. E. Lazarus was an important american individualist anarchist who promoted free love[19]. In Europe the main propagandist of free love within individualist anarchism was Emile Armand[74]. He proposed the concept of la camaraderie amoureuse to speak of free love as the possibility of voluntary sexual encounter between consenting adults. He was also a consistent proponent of polyamory[74]. [edit] Anarcho-naturismMain articles: Naturism and Green anarchism  Another important current especially within French and Spanish individualist anarchist groups was naturism[20]. Naturism promoted an ecological worldview, small ecovillages, and most prominently nudism as a way to avoid the artificiality of the industrial mass society of modernity[21]. Naturist individualist anarchists saw the individual in his biological, physical and psychological aspects and avoided and tried to eliminate social determinations [21]. An early influence in this vein was Henry David Thoreau and his famous book Walden[20]. Important promoters of this were Henri Zisly and Emile Gravelle who collaborated in La Nouvelle Humanité followed by Le Naturien, Le Sauvage, L'Ordre Naturel, & La Vie Naturelle [75] Their ideas were important in individualist anarchist circles in France but also in Spain where Federico Urales (pseudonym of Joan Montseny), promotes the ideas of Gravelle and Zisly in La Revista Blanca (1898 – 1905)[20]. [edit] American individualist anarchismSee also: Anarchism in the United States Henry David Thoreau (1817-1862) was an important early influence in individualist anarchist thought in the United States and Europe[11]. Thoreau was an American author, poet, naturalist, tax resiste, development critic , surveyor, historian, philosopher, and leading transcendentalist. He is best known for his book Walden, a reflection upon simple living in natural surroundings, and his essay, Civil Disobedience, an argument for individual resistance to civil government in moral opposition to an unjust state. His thought is an early influence on green anarchism but with an emphasis on the individual experience of the natural world influencing later naturist currents,[4]Simple living as a rejection of a materialist lifestyle[4] and self-sufficiency were Thoreau's goals, and the whole project was inspired by transcendentalist philosophy. The American version of individualist anarchism has a strong emphasis on the non-aggression principle and individual sovereignty.[76] Some individualist anarchists, such as Thoreau[77][78], do not speak of economics but simply the right of "disunion" from the state, and foresee the gradual elimination of the state through social evolution. His anarchism not only rejects the state but all organized associations of any kind, advocating complete individual self reliance.[79] An early individualist anarchist who was very influential was Josiah Warren, who had participated in a failed collective "utopian socialist" experiment headed by Robert Owen called "New Harmony" and came to the conclusion that such a system is inferior to one that respects the "sovereignty[80] of the individual" and his right to dispose of his property as his own self-interest prescribes. [edit] The "Boston Anarchists" Another form of individualist anarchism was found in the United States, as advocated by the "Boston anarchists."[68] By default American individualists didn't have any problem that "one man employ another" or that "he direct him," in his labor but demanded that "all natural opportunities requisite to the production of wealth be accessible to all on equal terms and that monopolies arising from special privileges created by law be abolished."[81] They believed state monopoly capitalism (defined as a state-sponsored monopoly)[82] prevented labor from being fully rewarded. Voltairine de Cleyre, summed up the philosophy by saying that the anarchist individualists "are firm in the idea that the system of employer and employed, buying and selling, banking, and all the other essential institutions of Commercialism, centered upon private property, are in themselves good, and are rendered vicious merely by the interference of the State."[83] Even among the nineteenth century American individualists, there was not a monolithic doctrine, as they disagreed amongst each other on various issues including intellectual property rights and possession versus property in land.[84][85][86] A major schism occurred later in the 19th century when Tucker and some others abandoned their traditional support of natural rights -as espoused by Lysander Spooner- and converted to an "egoism" modeled upon Stirner's philosophy.[85] Some "Boston anarchists", including Benjamin Tucker, identified themselves as "socialists" which in the 19th century was often used in the broad sense of a commitment to improving conditions of the working class (i.e. "the labor problem").[87] By the turn of the 20th century, the heyday of individualist anarchism had passed,[88] although the individualist anarchist tradition was later revived with modifications by Murray Rothbard and his anarcho-capitalism in the mid-twentieth century, as a current of the broader libertarian movement.[68][89] [edit] Anarcho-capitalism Main article: Anarcho-capitalism 19th century individualist anarchists espoused the labor theory of value. Some believe that the modern movement of anarcho-capitalism is the result of simply removing the labor theory of value from ideas of the 19th century American individualist anarchists: "Their successors today, such as Murray Rothbard, having abandoned the labor theory of value, describe themselves as anarcho-capitalists."[90] As economic theory changed, the popularity of the labor theory of classical economics was superseded by the subjective theory of value of neo-classical economics. According to Kevin Carson (himself a mutualist), "most people who call themselves "individualist anarchists" today are followers of Murray Rothbard's Austrian economics."[91] Murray Rothbard, a student of Ludwig von Mises, combined the Austrian school economics of his teacher with the absolutist views of human rights and rejection of the state he had absorbed from studying the individualist American anarchists of the nineteenth century such as Lysander Spooner and Benjamin Tucker.[92] In the mid-1950s Rothbard wrote an article under a pseudonym, saying that "we are not anarchists...but not archists either...Perhaps, then, we could call ourselves by a new name: nonarchist," concerned with differentiating himself from communist and socialistic economic views of other anarchists (including the individualist anarchists of the nineteenth century).[93] However, Rothbard later chose the term "anarcho-capitalism" for his philosophy and referred to himself as an anarchist. [edit] AgorismMain article: Agorism Agorism is a radical left-libertarian[δ] form of anarchism, developed from anarcho-capitalism in the late 20th-century by Samuel Edward Konkin III (a.k.a. SEK3). The goal of agorists is a society in which all "relations between people are voluntary exchanges – a free market."[94] Agorists are propertarian market anarchists who consider that property rights are natural rights deriving from the primary right of self-ownership and are not opposed in principle to collectively held property if individual owners of the property consent to collective ownership by contract or other voluntary mutual agreement. However, Agorists are divided on the question of intellectual property rights.[δ] [edit] European individualist anarchismMain article: European individualist anarchism Individualist anarchism was one of the three categories of anarchism in Russia, along with the more prominent anarchist communism and anarcho-syndicalism.[95] The ranks of the Russian individualist anarchists were predominantly drawn from the intelligentsia and the working class.[95] European individualist anarchists include Max Stirner, Albert Libertad, Shmuel Alexandrov, Anselme Bellegarrigue, Émile Armand, Enrico Arrigoni, Lev Chernyi, John Henry Mackay, Han Ryner, Renzo Novatore, Miguel Giménez Igualada, and currently Michel Onfray. Two influential authors in European individualist anarchists are Friedrich Nietzche (see Anarchism and Friedrich Nietzsche) and Georges Palante. European individualist anarchism proceeded from the roots laid by William Godwin, Pierre Joseph Proudhon and Max Stirner. [edit] FranceFrom the legacy of Proudhon and Stirner there emerged a strong tradition of French individualist anarchism. An early important individualist anarchist was Anselme Bellegarrigue. He participated in the French Revolution of 1848, was author and editor of 'Anarchie, Journal de l'Ordre and Au fait ! Au fait ! Interprétation de l'idée démocratique' and wrote the important early Anarchist Manifesto in 1850. Later this tradition continued with such intellectuals as Albert Libertad, André Lorulot, Emile Armand, Victor Serge, Zo d'Axa and Rirette Maitrejean developed theory in the main individualist anarchist journal in France, L’Anarchie in 1905. Outside this journal, Han Ryner wrote Petit Manuel individualiste (1903). Later appeared the journal L'EnDehors created by Zo d'Axa in 1891. French individualist anarchist exposed a diversity of positions (per example, about violence and non-violence). For example Emile Armand rejected violence and embraced mutualism while becoming an important propagandist for free love, while Albert Libertad and Zo d’Axa was influential in violentists circles and championed violent propaganda by the deed while adhering to communitarianism or anarcho-communism [96] and rejecting work. Han Ryner on the other side conciled anarchism with stoicism. Nevertheless French individualist circles had a strong sense of personal libertarianism and experimentation. Naturism and free love contents started to have a strong influence in individualist anarchist circles and from there it expanded to the rest of anarchism also appearing in Spanish individualist anarchist groups[20]. "In this sense, the theoretical positions and the vital experiences of french individualism are deeply iconoclastic and scandalous, even within libertarian circles. The call of nudist naturism, the strong defence of bith control methods, the idea of "unions of egoists" with the sole justification of sexual practices, that will try to put in practice, not without difficulties, will establish a way of thought and action, and will result in symphathy within some, and a strong rejection within others."[20] [edit] IllegalismMain article: Illegalism  Illegalism[97] is an anarchist philosophy that developed primarily in France, Italy, Belgium, and Switzerland during the early 1900s as an outgrowth of Stirner's individualist anarchism[98]. Illegalists usually did not seek moral basis for their actions, recognizing only the reality of "might" rather than "right"; for the most part, illegal acts were done simply to satisfy personal desires, not for some greater ideal[99], although some committed crimes as a form of Propaganda of the deed [100]. The illegalists embraced direct action and propaganda by the deed[101]. Influenced by theorist Max Stirner's egoism as well as Proudhon (his view that Property is theft!), Clément Duval and Marius Jacob proposed the theory of la reprise individuelle (Eng: individual reclamation) which justified robbery on the rich and personal direct action against exploiters and the system.[102], Illegalism first rose to prominence among a generation of Europeans inspired by the unrest of the 1890s, during which Ravachol, Émile Henry, Auguste Vaillant, and Caserio committed daring crimes in the name of anarchism[103], in what is known as propaganda of the deed. France's Bonnot Gang was the most famous group to embrace illegalism. [edit] ItalyIn Italy individualist anarchism had a strong tendency towards illegalism and violent propaganda by the deed similar to French individualist anarchism but perhaps more extreme[104]. In this respect we can consider notorious magnicides carried out or attempted by individualists Giovanni Passannante, Sante Caserio, Michele Angiolillo, Luigi Luccheni, Gaetano Bresci who murdered king Umberto I. Caserio lived in France and coexisted within French illegalism and later assassinated French president Sadi Carnot. The theoretical seeds of current Insurrectionary anarchism were already laid out at the end of 19th century Italy in a combination of individualist anarchism criticism of permanent groups and organization with a socialist class struggle worldview[105].During the rise of fascism this thought also motivated Gino Lucetti, Michele Schirru and Angelo Sbardellotto in attempting the assassination of Benito Mussolini. During the early 20th century it is important the intellectual work of individualist anarchist Renzo Novatore which was influenced by Stirner, Friedrich Nietzsche, Georges Palante, Oscar Wilde, Henrik Ibsen, Arthur Schopenhauer and Charles Baudelaire. He collaborated in numerous anarchist journals and participated in futurism avant-garde currents. In his thought he adhered to stirnerist disrespect to private property only recognizing property of one's own spirit.[106]. Novatore collaborated in the individualist anarchist journal Iconoclasta! alongside the young stirnerist illegalist Bruno Filippi[107] [edit] SpainSpain received the influence of American individualist anarchism but most importantly it was related to the French currents. At the turn of the century individualism in Spain takes force through the efforts of people such as Dorado Montero, Ricardo Mella, Federico Urales and J. Elizalde who will translatre French and American individualists[20]. Important in this respect were also magazines such as La Idea Libre, La revista blanca, Etica, Iniciales, Al margen and Nosotros. The most influential thinkers there were Max Stirner, Emile Armand and Han Ryner. Just as in France, the spreading of Esperanto had importance just as naturism and free love currents[20]. Later Armand and Ryner themselves will start writing in the Spanish invidualist press. The concept of Armand of amorous chamaraderie had an important role in motivating polyamory as realization of the individual[20]. An important Spanish individualist anarchist was also Miguel Giménez Igualada who wrote the lengthy theory book called Anarchism espousing his individualist anarchism[108]. Recently spanish historian Xavier Diez has dedicated extensive research on spanish individualist anarchism as can be seen in his books El anarquismo individualista en España: 1923-1938[109] y Utopia sexual a la premsa anarquista de Catalunya. La revista Ética-Iniciales(1927-1937) (which deals with free love thought as present in the spanish individualist anarchist magazine Iniciales)[110]. [edit] GermanyIn Germany the Scottish-german John Henry McKay became the most important propagandist for individualist anarchist ideas. He fused stirnerist egoism with the positions of Benjamin Tucker and actually translated Tucker into german. Two semi-fictional writings of his own Die Anarchisten and Der Freiheitsucher contributed to individualist theory through an updating of egoist themes within a consideration of the anarchist movement. English translations of these works arrived in the United Kingdom and in individualist American circles lead by Tucker[111]. McKay is also known as an important European early activist for LGBT rights. Using the pseudonym Sagitta, Mackay wrote a series of works for pederastic emancipation, titled Die Buecher der namenlosen Liebe (Books of the Nameless Love). This series was conceived in 1905 and completed in 1913 and included the Fenny Skaller, a story of a pederast.[112] Under the same pseudonym he also published fiction, such as Holland (1924) and a pederastic novel of the Berlin boy-bars, Der Puppenjunge (The Hustler) (1926). From 1906, the writings and theories of Mackay had a significant influence on Adolf Brand's organisation Gemeinschaft der Eigenen. Mackay was also a key populariser of the work of Max Stirner (1806-1856) outside Germany, writing a biography of the philosopher which also added greatly to the understanding of the work of Friedrich Nietzsche in the English-speaking world.[citation needed] [edit] RussiaIn Russia, Lev Chernyi was an important individualist anarchist involved in resistance against the rise to power of the Bolchevik Party. He adhered mainly to Stirner and the ideas of Benjamin Tucker. In 1907, he published a book entitled Associational Anarchism, in which he advocated the "free association of independent individuals."[113]. On his return from Siberia in 1917 he enjoyed great popularity among Moscow workers as a lecturer. Chernyi was also Secretary of the Moscow Federation of Anarchist Groups, which was formed in March 1917[113]. He died after being accused of participation in an episode in which this group bombed the headquarters of the Moscow Committee of the Communist Party. Although most likely not being really involved in the bombing, he might have died of torture[113]. Chernyi advocated a Nietzschean overthrow of the values of bourgeois Russian society, and rejected the voluntary communes of anarcho-communist Peter Kropotkin as a threat to the freedom of the individual.[114][115][116] Scholars including Avrich and Allan Antliff have interpreted this vision of society to have been greatly influenced by the individualist anarchists Max Stirner, and Benjamin Tucker.[117] Subsequent to the book's publication, Chernyi was imprisoned in Siberia under the Russian Czarist regime for his revolutionary activities.[118] [edit] Criticisms See also: Criticisms of anarchism Prior to abandoning anarchism, libertarian socialist Murray Bookchin criticized individualist anarchism for its opposition to democracy and its embrace of "lifestylism" at the expense of class struggle.[119] Bookchin claimed that individualist anarchism supports only negative liberty and rejects the idea of positive liberty.[120] Anarcho-communist Albert Meltzer proposed that individualist anarchism differs radically from revolutionary anarchism, and that it "is sometimes too readily conceded 'that this is, after all, anarchism'." He claimed that Benjamin Tucker's acceptance of the use of a private police force (including to break up violent strikes to protect the "employer's 'freedom'") is contradictory to the definition of anarchism as "no government."[121] Meltzer opposed anarcho-capitalism for similar reasons, arguing that since it supports "private armies", it actually supports a "limited State." He contends that it "is only possible to conceive of Anarchism which is free, communistic and offering no economic necessity for repression of countering it."[122] According to Gareth Griffith, George Bernard Shaw initially had flirtations with individualist anarchism before coming to the conclusion that it was "the negation of socialism, and is, in fact, unsocialism carried as near to its logical conclusion as any sane man dare carry it." Shaw's argument was that even if wealth was initially distributed equally, the degree of laissez-faire advocated by Tucker would result in the distribution of wealth becoming unequal because it would permit private appropriation and accumulation.[123] According to academic Carlotta Anderson, American individualist anarchists accept that free competition results in unequal wealth distribution, but they "do not see that as an injustice."[124] Tucker explained, "If I go through life free and rich, I shall not cry because my neighbor, equally free, is richer. Liberty will ultimately make all men rich; it will not make all men equally rich. Authority may (and may not) make all men equally rich in purse; it certainly will make them equally poor in all that makes life best worth living."[125] There is also criticism between contemporary individualist anarchism currents. American mutualist Joe Peacott has criticized anarcho-capitalists for trying to hegemonize the label "individualist anarchism" and make appear as if all individualist anarchists are pro-capitalism[126]. He has stated that "some individualists, both past and present, agree with the communist anarchists that present-day capitalism is based on economic coercion, not on voluntary contract. Rent and interest are mainstays of modern capitalism, and are protected and enforced by the state. Without these two unjust institutions, capitalism could not exist."[127] In this way he adheres to mutualist anti-capitalism. [edit] See also[edit] Footnotesα^ The term "individualist anarchism" is often used as a classificatory term, but in very different ways. Some sources, such as An Anarchist FAQ use the classification "social anarchism / individualist anarchism". Some see individualist anarchism as distinctly non-socialist, and use the classification "socialist anarchism / individualist anarchism" accordingly.[128] Other classifications include "mutualist/communal" anarchism.[129] [edit] References
[edit] External links
|
| ↑ top of page ↑ | about thumbshots |
