To what extent are Anarchists united in their views on Society? (24)

Agree state should be abolished to achieve liberty

• Anarchists fundamentally agree liberty is incompatible with existence of the state, which must be abolished. All view state as coercive institution that imposes authority through laws, police and punishment, denying individuals of free will. Emma Goldman the state = “cold monster” and even democratic states create an illusion of freedom “if voting changed anything, they’d make it illegal 

• Individualist anarchists, Max Stirner, share this opposition, seeing state as ultimate form of domination. Stirner “I am free in no state” reflects belief that liberty only exists without external authority

• Collectivist anarchists Kropotkin argue state corrupts natural cooperation - replaces mutual aid with greed & inequality

• Thus, united in absolute rejection of state, seeing it as primary obstacle to human freedom & individual & collective flourishing

Disagree on the nature of society after abolition of the state

• Anarchists fundamentally disagree over what society should look like once the state is abolished.

• Individualist anarchists envision a society centred on personal autonomy and voluntary cooperation for self-interest. Stirner’s believed individual “ego” is centre of all moral value & cooperation should occur only when it benefits individual, forming temporary “Unions of Egoists.” Stirner rejected all fixed institutions that limit individual autonomy, stating collective ideals become new forms of tyranny. His “Union of Egoists” would dissolve once ceased to serve its members’ interest, ensuring individual remains sovereign.

• Collectivists argue for cooperative, communal structures that prioritise equality. Bakunin declared “liberty can only exist in solidarity” advocating communal ownership and DD in worker collectives where production and distribution are managed according to need, not profit. Anarcho-syndicalists such as Proudhon (in his more mutualist form) added further nuance, proposing cooperative worker-run trade unions.

Disagree on how useful imagined, Utopian Anarchist societies are

• Anarchists disagree on whether imagining utopian anarchist societies is useful for achieving anarchist goals

• Collectivists - utopian visions valuable for inspiring support & showing anarchist society possible. Proudhon theory of mutualism, he described voluntary small collectives where workers own their tools and land, demonstrating a society without hierarchy while protecting individual autonomy. Visions counters critiques that anarchism = impractical/destined for chaos

• Individualists - sceptical of utopian planning. Stirner argued imagining ideal societies risks creating “spooks” - abstract ideas that dominate individuals by demanding loyalty to collective ideals. Goldman rejected blueprints for anarchist society, warning rigid utopian visions could replicate structures of domination. Instead, Stirner proposed a Union of Egoists, a temporary, voluntary association existing solely for self-interest of its members, prioritising individual autonomy over collective design

.

.