Model Anarchism

This paper constitutes a radical departure from the existing philosophical literature on models, modeling-practices, and model-based science. I argue that the various entities and practices called 'models' and 'modeling-practices' are too diverse, too context-sensitive, and serve too many scientific purposes and roles, as to allow for a general philosophical analysis. From this recognition an alternative view emerges that I shall dub model anarchism

(Tory) anarchy in the UK: The very peculiar practice of tory anarchism

The idea of ‘Tory Anarchism’ is reasonably well known but largely unanalysed in either popular or academic literature. Tory Anarchism refers to a group of apparently disparate figures in English popular and political culture whose work has, in part, satirised key British institutions and social relations. At the same time they also provide interesting insights into questions of British, though predominantly English, identity, by focusing upon issues of class, empire and nation. This article examines tory anarchism by focusing upon four representative figures: Evelyn Waugh, George Orwell, Peter Cook and Chris Morris

Organizing otherwise: translating anarchism in a voluntary sector organization

Although foundational texts in Critical Management Studies (CMS) pointed to the empirical significance of anarchism as an inspiration for alternative ways of organizing (Burrell, 1992), relatively little work of substance has been undertaken within CMS to explore how anarchists organize or how anarchist principles of organization might fare in other contexts. This paper addresses this gap by reporting on the experiences of a UK Voluntary Sector Organization (VSO) seeking to adopt non-hierarchical working practices inspired by anarchism. The paper analyses this process of organizational change by examining how ideas and practices are translated and transformed as they travel from one context (direct action anarchism) to another (the voluntary sector). Whilst the onset of austerity and funding cuts created the conditions of possibility for this change, it was the discursive translation of 'anarchism' into 'non-hierarchical organizing' that enabled these ideas to take hold. The concept of 'non-hierarchical' organization constituted an open space that was defined by negation and therefore capable of containing a multiplicity of meanings. Rather than having to explicitly embrace anarchism, members were able to find common ground on what they did not want (hierarchy) and create a discursive space for democratically determining what might replace it

Book Review: \u3cem\u3eDalit Theology and Christian Anarchism\u3c/em\u3e

A review of Dalit Theology and Christian Anarchism by Keith Hebden

Postanarchisms: a critical assessment

Post-modernism has had a significant influence on anarchism, notably in the interrelation between the theoretical positions of libertarianism and post-structuralism (a set of theories and philosophies strongly identified with, but not identical to, post-modernism). This has generated a subset of anarchist thinking referred to as postanarchism. Postanarchism, like anarchism, is a fluid assemblage of political concepts that alters according to geographic and historical context. Within this chapter, some of its key theorists, principal terms, and some of the structures that coordinate its central principles, are identified and assessed. The chapter then concentrates on the apparent differences between postanarchism and more traditional anarchisms, arguing that rather than regarding postanarchism as a transcendence of anarchism, as some of its proponents maintain, it is more appropriate to regard postanarchism as representing a particular, historically specific constellation of practices, which consequently prioritizes particular discourses, agencies and tactics that are peculiar to these locations

George Orwell: The English dissident as Tory anarchist

This is the author's accepted manuscript. The final published article is available from the link below. Copyright @ 2012 The Author.This article examines the nature of George Orwell's Tory anarchism, a term that he used to describe himself until his experiences in Spain in 1936. The argument developed here says that the qualities that Orwell felt made him a Tory anarchist remained with him throughout his life, even after his commitment to democratic socialism. In fact, many of those qualities (fear of an all-powerful state, respect for privacy, support for common sense and decency, patriotism) connect the two aspects of his character. The article explains what the idea of a Tory anarchist means, describing it as a practice rather than a coherent political ideology, and moves on to examine the relationship between Eric Blair, the Tory anarchist, and George Orwell, the democratic socialist. It makes the case for his Tory anarchism by drawing out recurring themes in his work that connect him to other Tory anarchist figures such as his contemporary Evelyn Waugh. Thus Tory anarchism is presented as a conservative moral critique of the modern world that can connect figures who hold quite radically different political beliefs

Individual Interest and Political Legitimicy

Criticism of contract theory has always played an important role in Hartmut Kliemt's writings on political philosophy. Notwithstanding his objections to a consent-based justification of the state he has never subscribed to an anarchist position. In Hartmut Kliemt's view, a minimal state which protects the basic liberties of its citizens has to be considered legitimate. The article begins with a brief restatement of the most influential objections that have been raised against the various forms of contract theory. Thereafter interestbased accounts of political legitimacy are critically examined; it is argued that individual interests fail to provide a justification for any kind of political authority. Finally, philosophical anarchism is suggested as a possible alternative to contract theory and interest theory. Although philosophical anarchism holds that no state has a moral right to rule, it can be reconciled with the view that it is in the individual's interest to create and maintain a minimal state.consent, contract-theory, contractarianism, anarchism

DYNAMITE: ANARCHISM, MODERNISM, AESTHETICS

This book argues for the intersection of anarchist theory, modernist writers, and aesthetic innovations under the sign of "the bomb." Individual chapters concern such figures as Joseph Conrad, Richard Wagner, Henry Adams, Andrei Bely, Edna St. Vincent Millay, Upton Sinclair, John Dos Passos, and Katherine Ann Porter, as well as collectivities like the Surrealists and the Dadaists. Anarchists such as Peter Kropotkin, Emma Goldman, and Michael Bakunin are also important to the text. The original version of this text was produced as a dissertation at the University of California Berkeley. Committee members were Carolyn Porter, Ann Banfield, and the late Michael Rogin. Three chapters--those on Conrad, Wagner, and the Sacco-Vanzetti case--were published in refereed academic journals. A synopsis of the argument was published in The Turn of the Century, Walter Pape, editor (Berlin and New York: Walter de Gruyter) 1995. Dynamite had been approved for publication in the Atopia series of Stanford University Press when major changes at the press resulted in the abolition of the series

Direct action ethic

Direct action has long been associated with European anarchism, from the industrial sabotage espoused by nineteenth and twentieth century anarcho-syndicalists to the anti-Poll tax activists and the "DiY culture" of more recent British movements. A particular ethic is identified within anarchist direct action, which has two features: the first requires that means be in accordance with ends (prefiguration); the second the identities of the subjects involved in the act. prefiguration distinguished direct action from both Leninist consequentialism and the deontological approaches of liberal and anrcho-capitalist traditions. The identities of the agents involved and created through direct action illustrate important differences between anarchist direct action and that of more conservative groupings. The paper not only clarifies direct action but also considers whether a prefigurative ethic necessitates non-violence. Additionally, the paper answers the question of why direct action is embraced by the anti-hierarchical anarchist tradition, explaining the attractions of such methods to contemporary movements and illustrating parallels between contemporary anarchism and politically-engaged post-structuralisms. Examples are drawn from actions from the 1990s to early 2000s' the publicity and discussion materials of contemporary groupings and their critics as well as texts more centrally located within the academy

The pervasive nature of heterodox economic spaces at a time of neoliberal crisis: towards a “postneoliberal” anarchist future

Re-reading the economic landscape of the western world as a largely non-capitalist landscape composed of economic plurality, this paper demonstrates how economic relations in contemporary western society are often embedded in non-commodified practices such as mutual aid, reciprocity, co-operation and inclusion. By highlighting how the long-overlooked lived practices in the contemporary world of production, consumption and exchange are heavily grounded in the very types and essences of non-capitalist economic relations that have long been proposed by anarchistic visions of employment and organization, this paper displays that such visions are far from utopian: they are embedded firmly in the present. Through focusing on the pervasive nature of heterodox economic spaces in the UK in particular, some ideas about how to develop an anarchist future of work and organization will be proposed. The outcome is to begin to engage in the demonstrative construction of a future based on mutualism and autonomous modes of organization and representation. © 2012 The Authors. Antipode© 2012 Antipode Foundation Ltd.