Paper 2 Ideology Questions
To what extent is anarchist society a realistic goal
Anarchist society is a realistic goal Anarchist society is not a realistic goal
Existence of Communes Failure on the large scale
• Anarcho-communists have • However such ideas have failed on the large
advocated that communes of self- scale
sufficient workers will be formed • The pure idea of an entire society working in
after the destruction of the liberal the idea of communes and anarcho-
state syndicalism has never been implemented
• This was the idea of Kropotkin who • The fact that it has never been implemented
had observed watchmakers in Jura, shows that an anarchist society is simply not
Switzerland who had shared their realistic as it has never been feasible to
profits to benefit everyone in the implement on such a large society
community
• Furthermore, Proudhon developed
the idea into syndicalism which saw
each trade union/commune trade
with each other through mutually
beneficial contracts
Human Nature desires an anarchist society Human Nature does not desire an anarchist society
• Anarcho-communists and • Anarcho-capitalists and egoists would
syndicalists believe that humans are vehemently disagree with anarcho-
naturally social animals communists' and their interpretation of
• This would entice them to work human nature
together in communes and/or trade • Anarcho-capitalists believe that humans are
unions where they will work in naturally self-serving and are not
cooperation with each other cooperative in nature
• Kropotkin rejected the idea of social • They believe in social Darwinism where it is
Darwinism where it was the survival the survival of the fittest and the weak will
of the fittest and compared humans perish
to animals in the wild which rely on • Friedman would argue that individuals are
each other to survive entitled to anything as long as they work for
it, therefore a human would work in their
own self-interest at all times rather than be
part of a society/commune
• However, Stirner has admitted that there
can be scope for cooperation between
people with his idea of the Union of Egoists
where people have deemed that it is in their
self-interest to work with others
Mutualism Nihilism
• The idea created by Proudhon which • However, egoists like Stirner would disagree
determined that due to the social completely
and good nature of humans, • Nihilism, the most extreme form of
everyone will try to help each other anarchism, rejects the idea of a society as a
out whole and any other form of organisation
, • It is to promote an environment of • A society requires people to work together
cooperation rather than competition for the greater good, an idea which egoism
• People won't compete for resources rejects as they believe everyone works in
but try to ration them as equally as their own self-interest, therefore there is no
possible to everyone in this greater good
anarchist society
To what extent are the views of individualist anarchists consistent
with those of collectivist anarchists
They are consistent They are not consistent
Destruction of the state Replacement of the state
• Both believe that the destruction of the • However, they disagree on the
state is necessary replacement of the state
• Collective anarchists like Kropotkin • Collectivist anarchists like Kropotkin
believe that a revolution, violent if advocates that natural communities will
necessary, will overthrow the liberal form which will be self-governed and
state and provide an anarchist society self-sufficient
• Individualist anarchists like Rothbard • Proudhon expands on the idea and says
and Friedman advocates that everything that workers will group into trade
the state provides (e.g. healthcare and unions/syndicates based on their
education) can be provided by the job/skill set
private sector, therefore there is no • This is in contrast to individualist
need for the state anarchists who believe in social
• Therefore individualists would ask for Darwinism
the state to be destroyed as well • Advocated by Friedman, everyone is
entitled to everything as long as they can
work for it
• It will be the survival of the fittest in the
eyes of individualist anarchists
Humans working together The purpose of working together
• Collectivist anarchists believe it is • However this is where they would
human nature for us to be social disagree
animals • Individualist anarchists will argue that
• This is why in anarcho-communism and humans will work together only in self-
syndicalism, people form communities interest and not for the greater good
to survive and prosper in an ideal • This is embodied best in Stirner's idea of
collectivist anarchist society a union of egoists where if people's self-
• Individualist anarchists admits that interest requires working together, they
there is scope to work together as well will do so for their own benefit
• They believe that if it is in the interest of • Anarcho-communists like Kropotkin
the individual to work together, humans argues against this and will use the
will do so example of the watch makers in Jura,
Switzerland where the workers shared
their profits amongst themselves from
selling watches to benefit the community
To what extent is anarchist society a realistic goal
Anarchist society is a realistic goal Anarchist society is not a realistic goal
Existence of Communes Failure on the large scale
• Anarcho-communists have • However such ideas have failed on the large
advocated that communes of self- scale
sufficient workers will be formed • The pure idea of an entire society working in
after the destruction of the liberal the idea of communes and anarcho-
state syndicalism has never been implemented
• This was the idea of Kropotkin who • The fact that it has never been implemented
had observed watchmakers in Jura, shows that an anarchist society is simply not
Switzerland who had shared their realistic as it has never been feasible to
profits to benefit everyone in the implement on such a large society
community
• Furthermore, Proudhon developed
the idea into syndicalism which saw
each trade union/commune trade
with each other through mutually
beneficial contracts
Human Nature desires an anarchist society Human Nature does not desire an anarchist society
• Anarcho-communists and • Anarcho-capitalists and egoists would
syndicalists believe that humans are vehemently disagree with anarcho-
naturally social animals communists' and their interpretation of
• This would entice them to work human nature
together in communes and/or trade • Anarcho-capitalists believe that humans are
unions where they will work in naturally self-serving and are not
cooperation with each other cooperative in nature
• Kropotkin rejected the idea of social • They believe in social Darwinism where it is
Darwinism where it was the survival the survival of the fittest and the weak will
of the fittest and compared humans perish
to animals in the wild which rely on • Friedman would argue that individuals are
each other to survive entitled to anything as long as they work for
it, therefore a human would work in their
own self-interest at all times rather than be
part of a society/commune
• However, Stirner has admitted that there
can be scope for cooperation between
people with his idea of the Union of Egoists
where people have deemed that it is in their
self-interest to work with others
Mutualism Nihilism
• The idea created by Proudhon which • However, egoists like Stirner would disagree
determined that due to the social completely
and good nature of humans, • Nihilism, the most extreme form of
everyone will try to help each other anarchism, rejects the idea of a society as a
out whole and any other form of organisation
, • It is to promote an environment of • A society requires people to work together
cooperation rather than competition for the greater good, an idea which egoism
• People won't compete for resources rejects as they believe everyone works in
but try to ration them as equally as their own self-interest, therefore there is no
possible to everyone in this greater good
anarchist society
To what extent are the views of individualist anarchists consistent
with those of collectivist anarchists
They are consistent They are not consistent
Destruction of the state Replacement of the state
• Both believe that the destruction of the • However, they disagree on the
state is necessary replacement of the state
• Collective anarchists like Kropotkin • Collectivist anarchists like Kropotkin
believe that a revolution, violent if advocates that natural communities will
necessary, will overthrow the liberal form which will be self-governed and
state and provide an anarchist society self-sufficient
• Individualist anarchists like Rothbard • Proudhon expands on the idea and says
and Friedman advocates that everything that workers will group into trade
the state provides (e.g. healthcare and unions/syndicates based on their
education) can be provided by the job/skill set
private sector, therefore there is no • This is in contrast to individualist
need for the state anarchists who believe in social
• Therefore individualists would ask for Darwinism
the state to be destroyed as well • Advocated by Friedman, everyone is
entitled to everything as long as they can
work for it
• It will be the survival of the fittest in the
eyes of individualist anarchists
Humans working together The purpose of working together
• Collectivist anarchists believe it is • However this is where they would
human nature for us to be social disagree
animals • Individualist anarchists will argue that
• This is why in anarcho-communism and humans will work together only in self-
syndicalism, people form communities interest and not for the greater good
to survive and prosper in an ideal • This is embodied best in Stirner's idea of
collectivist anarchist society a union of egoists where if people's self-
• Individualist anarchists admits that interest requires working together, they
there is scope to work together as well will do so for their own benefit
• They believe that if it is in the interest of • Anarcho-communists like Kropotkin
the individual to work together, humans argues against this and will use the
will do so example of the watch makers in Jura,
Switzerland where the workers shared
their profits amongst themselves from
selling watches to benefit the community
