To what extent is an anarchist society a realistic goal
- All believe the perfect society will emerge naturally. As Proudhon argues, individuals have a moral
code which will help them work voluntarily within communities
To what extent to anarchists agree over society
All anarchists advocate that co-operation is at the basis of natural order within society, all value freedom of the
indivudal and believe a perfect society will emerge naturally – arguably Utopianism. The key tensions exist
around whether the competitive qualities of human nature are a key to societal order. Collectivist anarchists
believe humans are altruistic and cooperative and would be best organised into voluntary communities of
producers and consumers, this is because they believe humans cannot live outside of the structures of society.
Whereas Individualist anarchists advocate for individual freedom above all else and regard society as simply a
loose grouping of separate autonomous individuals, individuals must release themselves from the straitjacket of
society. Thus this essay will seek to argue that there is little coherency on society
All anarchists advocate that co-operation is at the basis of natural order, society should be liberal without any
corruptible institutions. This is because Collectivists and Individualistic anarchists are committed to a society
which can nurture and allow people to make judgements in their best interest. Seen with Proudhon who argues
that the state should not be allowed to interfere with the liberty and self-development of individuals. Society
exists for man not the other way round, to allow for humans to have widest possible freedoms though there is
no ideal society as such because all anarchists believe this will emerge naturally. All anarchists believe a future
society would be a form of decentralised federation of autonomous districts, based on voluntary cooperation
and free and equal self-governed individuals. Proudhon belives individuals have a moral code under which will
help them create voluntary cooperation. Therefore, all anarchists oppose all centralised and hierarchical forms
of government. This means in practice all anarchists have a coherent view on society as they agree that
individuality does not exist outside of society and freedom and equality are the basis for the new society (most
believe this) except (anarcho capitalists).
However, there is a stark disagreement between Collectivist anarchists and Individualistic anarchists in regards
to how society should be run. Individualists fear the power of the collective over the individual. Stirner wanted
the removal of all spooks so the individual can be autonomous and advocated for a union of egoists. Anarcho-
feminist Goldman agreed with Stirner to an extent, stating that "the personal is political", developing a critique
of everyday life that aims to erode social and political power, in pursuit of a society where each individual has
control over "their own life, and no others” - she saw uniformity and public opinion as a threat to individuals.
People should not work together as this just creates the structures previously removed and believed in egoism to
restrict opression through society. However Collectivists generally argue that natural order will emerge due to
social nature of humans and individuals can only achieve their full liberty through cooperation with others. For
example, Bakunin states '' I am truly free only when all human beings men and women are equally free'' thus
society needs to be based on self-managing commune, organised together voluntarily in a relationship of
mutual aid. Bottom up not top down. This means that in practise there is a significant disagreement over the
significance of authoritative figures and the structure of society.
Similarly, there is a stark disagreement within Collectivist anarchists concerning the liberation of humans within
society. Anarcho-communist such as Kropotkin believe people are capable of self-government. With
communes, decisions could be reached through a natural democratic process + mutal aid, that enhances the
workings of a society. On the other hand, Anarcho-feminist Goldman holds the principle that a free society is
not only achievable through the abolition of the state but through the liberation of the individual from external
constraints, such as religion or private property. As a feminist, Goldman suggests that an equal society must come
from harmony between the two sexes “Peace and harmony between the sexes and individuals does not necessarily
depend on a superficial equalization of human beings...the motto should not be: forgive one another, rather,
understand one another” whilst anarcho-communist Kropotkin advocated that an equal society would stem from a
spontaneous mass revolutionary movement which he described as, "... the taking possession by the people of all social
wealth. It is the abolition of all the forces which have so long hampered the development of Humanity" . This varies
with Individualistic anarchist who agree that a self-interested, rational and competitive qualities of human nature are
- All believe the perfect society will emerge naturally. As Proudhon argues, individuals have a moral
code which will help them work voluntarily within communities
To what extent to anarchists agree over society
All anarchists advocate that co-operation is at the basis of natural order within society, all value freedom of the
indivudal and believe a perfect society will emerge naturally – arguably Utopianism. The key tensions exist
around whether the competitive qualities of human nature are a key to societal order. Collectivist anarchists
believe humans are altruistic and cooperative and would be best organised into voluntary communities of
producers and consumers, this is because they believe humans cannot live outside of the structures of society.
Whereas Individualist anarchists advocate for individual freedom above all else and regard society as simply a
loose grouping of separate autonomous individuals, individuals must release themselves from the straitjacket of
society. Thus this essay will seek to argue that there is little coherency on society
All anarchists advocate that co-operation is at the basis of natural order, society should be liberal without any
corruptible institutions. This is because Collectivists and Individualistic anarchists are committed to a society
which can nurture and allow people to make judgements in their best interest. Seen with Proudhon who argues
that the state should not be allowed to interfere with the liberty and self-development of individuals. Society
exists for man not the other way round, to allow for humans to have widest possible freedoms though there is
no ideal society as such because all anarchists believe this will emerge naturally. All anarchists believe a future
society would be a form of decentralised federation of autonomous districts, based on voluntary cooperation
and free and equal self-governed individuals. Proudhon belives individuals have a moral code under which will
help them create voluntary cooperation. Therefore, all anarchists oppose all centralised and hierarchical forms
of government. This means in practice all anarchists have a coherent view on society as they agree that
individuality does not exist outside of society and freedom and equality are the basis for the new society (most
believe this) except (anarcho capitalists).
However, there is a stark disagreement between Collectivist anarchists and Individualistic anarchists in regards
to how society should be run. Individualists fear the power of the collective over the individual. Stirner wanted
the removal of all spooks so the individual can be autonomous and advocated for a union of egoists. Anarcho-
feminist Goldman agreed with Stirner to an extent, stating that "the personal is political", developing a critique
of everyday life that aims to erode social and political power, in pursuit of a society where each individual has
control over "their own life, and no others” - she saw uniformity and public opinion as a threat to individuals.
People should not work together as this just creates the structures previously removed and believed in egoism to
restrict opression through society. However Collectivists generally argue that natural order will emerge due to
social nature of humans and individuals can only achieve their full liberty through cooperation with others. For
example, Bakunin states '' I am truly free only when all human beings men and women are equally free'' thus
society needs to be based on self-managing commune, organised together voluntarily in a relationship of
mutual aid. Bottom up not top down. This means that in practise there is a significant disagreement over the
significance of authoritative figures and the structure of society.
Similarly, there is a stark disagreement within Collectivist anarchists concerning the liberation of humans within
society. Anarcho-communist such as Kropotkin believe people are capable of self-government. With
communes, decisions could be reached through a natural democratic process + mutal aid, that enhances the
workings of a society. On the other hand, Anarcho-feminist Goldman holds the principle that a free society is
not only achievable through the abolition of the state but through the liberation of the individual from external
constraints, such as religion or private property. As a feminist, Goldman suggests that an equal society must come
from harmony between the two sexes “Peace and harmony between the sexes and individuals does not necessarily
depend on a superficial equalization of human beings...the motto should not be: forgive one another, rather,
understand one another” whilst anarcho-communist Kropotkin advocated that an equal society would stem from a
spontaneous mass revolutionary movement which he described as, "... the taking possession by the people of all social
wealth. It is the abolition of all the forces which have so long hampered the development of Humanity" . This varies
with Individualistic anarchist who agree that a self-interested, rational and competitive qualities of human nature are
