Anarchism and the Problem of
Political Philosophy
Loughborough University Anarchist Studies Seminar
Benjamin Franks
University of Glasgow: Dumfries
2009
Introduction
•
Talk the basis of an article/chapter which should be finished by
late 2010/early 2011.
Mutual Suspicion
1.
–
–
2.
Institutional prejudice
Activist suspicion
Institutional practice
–
–
3.
Particular forms of teaching, research and imagery (Le Doeuff)
Privileging particular audiences and thereby subjects
Disciplinary Features
–
–
–
Argumentation (and universal account of reason)
Necessary and sufficient conditions
Limited, straw man approach to particular subjects especially
philosophy
•
•
•
Exclusions
Trivial definitions
Naïve essentialism
Mutual Suspicion
1. Institutional prejudice
•
•
Significant acceptance of popular
social stereotypes of anarchism
Separate off (and construct) a
separate body of ‘anarchist thought’
unconnected with contemporary
anarchist theory and practice
2. Activist suspicion
–
–
Universities as hierarchical and elitist
bodies
Intellectual colonisation of popular
movements
2. Institutional Practice
•
•
Mainstream academic philosophy is a
discipline – as such it has a set norms,
and resources which govern the
production of social good (based on
Alasdair MacIntyre’s account of
‘practices’)
– These institutional norms limit access
– Particular types of ‘good’
Privileges particular audiences and
thereby subjects
Responses and their limits
• Mutual Suspicion
– Not necessarily bad if anarchists have a
sceptical attitude towards academics.
• Institutional practice
– Some social ‘goods’ still produced in
academia
– Develop alternative research practices inside
and outside the academy
3. Disciplinary Features
–
1.
Applies largely to the Anglo-American tradition
Argumentation: based on a universal account of
reason)
Identification: Necessary and sufficient conditions
drawn from canonical texts
Conceptual clarity: seeking decontested terms
2.
3.
These lead to a limited, straw man approach to
particular subjects especially philosophy
–
–
–
Exclusions
Trivial definitions
Naïve essentialism
Strengths of the Anglo-American
approach to political philosophy
1.
2.
3.
4.
Disciplinary identity
Rigour
‘Politically-useful’
Some degree of difference
Example of Political Philosophy
–
‘I contend that philosophy is an argumentative process about
anything and everything. Consequently, philosophy is not
distinguished by its subject matter (though certain subjects – such as
the nature of argumentation itself – are of special interest to
philosophers) but by its argumentative mode of thought. This does
not mean that non-philosophers do not argue in pursuit of their
intellectual goals, but that argumentation does not distinguish their
pursuits [….] A further distinguishing feature of the argumentative
process that is philosophy is its quest for conceptual clarity. The
basic components of argumentation are concepts, and philosophical
argumentation can only hope to advance to the extent that such
clarity is achieved (or to the extent that we know what our concepts
mean, that we know what we are talking about)’ (Paul McLaughlin,
2009, see McLaughlin, 2007: 16).
–
–
–
Attempts to be ‘value-free’
Uncontaminated by ‘ideology’ or power
Fundamentally based on Reason
Michael Freeden’s conceptual
approach
• Regards political movements or ideologies as
constellations of concepts
• These concepts take particular forms
(structures/shapes) in particular, historical
conditions
• Core and peripheral concepts
• These define each other
• These might alter in different periods/contexts
• Freeden’s examples are drawn from Liberalism,
Socialism and Conservatism
Michael Freeden: Criticisms of
Political Philosophy
– Some of this based on his criticisms of
political theory:
•
Liberal universalist bias of Political
Philosophy.
1. Analysis concentrates on necessary and
sufficient conditions or family resemblances
2. Universalist, rationalist analysis leads to
distortions
3. Seeks conceptual clarity – and thus
overlooks distinction between ambiguity and
indeterminacy
Anarchism: The Philosophical
Definition.
• Anarchism ‘plea for the autonomy of the individual’ –
contrasted with authoritarian’s claim for the power of the
state (Wolff, 2).
• Scepticism about the state and ‘Philosophical
anarchism… the highest duty of mankind [is] to act
autonomously’ (Knowles, 2002: 253). See too David
Keyt (2005)
• Single universal principle: Absence of coercion
• Area of internal debate: does this reject or support
private property rights:
– Most philosophical anarchists become synonymous with
anarcho-capitalism (David Friedman, Murray Rothbard)
– Some either ambivalent or reject property rights (McLaughlin,
2007 and Vallentine & Steiner, 2001)
Freeden’s Analysis Applied to
Philosophical Treatments of Anarchism
1. Philosophers look for logically rigorous
texts and dismiss – out-of-hand,
communicative forms that differ:
•
Results in highly selective canon
2. Analysis of texts is simplistic:
•
•
Looks for universal features – (and thus
essentialisms) – and thus simplistic account
Identifies logical inconsistencies where none
might be present
Main Problems of Philosophical
Anarchism:
• Inaccuracy due to methodological
shortcomings
– Decontextualises concept of coercion
– Inaccurate: significant occasions where
anarchists accept or support coercive
behaviour
– State of Nature challenge
– Can only be maintained by the ‘straw man’
(or woman) of a benign essentialism
Weakness of essentialism
• Benign essentialism required to support the philosophical account of
anarchism – but leads to a
• ‘Straw men’:
– Easy to disprove: acts of selfishness; challenge of the existence of the
state)
– Absurd consequences: anarchism requires universal consensus – no
rotten apples (Wolff; p.30-31 – see too R. Wolff, 1976)
– That ‘individual conscience’ becomes the only moral guide (J. Wolff,
2006: 46-47).
– Marginalisation of anarchism as a philosophical position
• However
– Not based on anarchist writings (indeed quotation, from Kropotkin, used
by Wolff to illustrate anarchism position actually says the opposite, 29).
– Unnecessary for a coherent anarchism as not based on single universal
precept.
Solutions
• View anarchism as a practice based movement.
• Core principles (but non-universal):
–
–
–
–
Contestation of hierarchies
Prefiguration
Anti-mediation
Productive of shared, internal social goods
• Which define through and across each other
seeking a coherent equilibrium – like the virtues.
• Also involve contesting the institutional
arrangements that form philosophical practices.
Questions?
If you have any queries please contact
Benjamin Franks
at the
University of Glasgow: Dumfries
b.franks@crichton.gla.ac.uk
Bibliography
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Eagleton, T. (2003), After Theory, Harmondsworth: Penguin.
Freeden, M. (1996), Ideologies and Political Theory: A conceptual approach, Oxford:
Oxford University Press.
_____ (2003), Ideology: A very short introduction, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
_____ (2005), ‘What Should the ‘Political’ in Political Theory Explore’, the Journal of
Political Philosophy, Vol. 13, No. 2, pp.113-34.
Keyt, D. (2005), ‘Aristotle and Anarchism’ in Richard Kraut and Steven Skultety, eds.,
Aristotle’s Politics (Oxford: Rowan and Littlefield, 2005), pp. 203-22: 204.
Knowles, D. (2002), Political Philosophy, London: Routledge.
Kropotkin, P. (1992), Ethics, Montreal, Canada: Black Rose
Le Doeuff, M. (2002) [1977], ‘Long Hair, Short Ideas’ in The Philosophical Imaginary,
London: Continuum.
MacIntyre, A. (2006), After Virtue, Second edition, London: Duckworth.
McLaughlin, P. (2007), Anarchism and Authority: A philosophical introduction to
classical anarchism, Aldershot: Ashgate.
_____ (2009), ‘In Defence of Philosophical Anarchism’, publication forthcoming.
Nozick, R. (1988), Anarchy State and Utopia, Oxford: Blackwell.
Vallentyne, P. and H. Steiner (2001), eds., Left-Libertarianism and Its Critics,
Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan.
Wellman, C. (1996), ‘Liberalism, Samaritanism, and Political Legitimacy’, Philosophy
and Public Affairs, Vol. 25, No. 3 (Summer, 1996), pp. 211-237.
Wolff, J. ((2006), An Introduction to Political Philosophy, Oxford: Oxford University
Press.
Wolff, R. (1976), In Defence of Anarchism, London: Harper Torchbooks.