Have one to sell?

Flip to back Flip to front

Listen Playing... Paused You're listening to a sample of the Audible audio edition.
Learn more

See this image

Follow the author

James Joll

The Anarchists Paperback – 21 Jun. 1979

by James Joll (Author)

3 ratings

See all formats and editions Hide other formats and editions

Amazon Price

New from

Used from

Hardcover

"Please retry"

£14.65

—

£14.65

Paperback

"Please retry"

£18.70

£272.00

£18.70

Paperback, 21 Jun. 1979

£13.55

—

£13.55

Arrives: Dec 26 - Jan 7 Details

Special offers and product promotions

Amazon Business : For business-exclusive pricing, quantity discounts and downloadable VAT invoices. Create a free account

Customers who viewed this item also viewed

Page 1 of 1 Start overPage 1 of 1

This shopping feature will continue to load items when the Enter key is pressed. In order to navigate out of this carousel please use your heading shortcut key to navigate to the next or previous heading.

James Joll
Hardcover
£125.00
Temporarily out of stock.
James Joll
Hardcover
4 offers from £18.43

Product details

Paperback : 320 pages
ISBN-10 : 0416722601
ISBN-13 : 978-0416722604
Publisher : Routledge; 2nd Revised edition (21 Jun. 1979)
Language: : English

Best Sellers Rank: 1,235,699 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)
- 8,622 in Political History

Customer reviews:
3 ratings

Customer reviews

5 star		52%
4 star		48%
3 star 0% (0%)		0%
2 star 0% (0%)		0%
1 star 0% (0%)		0%

How are ratings calculated?

Top reviews from United Kingdom

There was a problem filtering reviews right now. Please try again later.

d t.

... inkling about the real world and why it is like it is

Reviewed in the United Kingdom on 21 May 2017

Verified Purchase

If you have the slightest inkling about the real world and why it is like it is, this is a good starting point.

Helpful

Comment

Disorganised Politics

Reviewed in the United Kingdom on 26 December 2013

James Joll was an excellent historian whose book 'The Anarchists' traces the history of anarchism without getting bogged down in philosophical analysis. He does not ignore philosophical anarchism, but follows the movement from Godwin and Proudhon, through its development by Kropotkin and Bakunin, to its influence amongst working class movements in Europe and the United States. His conclusion is that anarchism has been an exercise in futility and represents generational outbursts of frustration with the reality of the world. The theory and practice of anarchism has 'provided a continuous and fundamental criticism of the modern concept of the state and have challenged the assumptions of nearly all schools of contemporary political thought. They have attacked, often in the most brutal and direct manner, the institutions of the established social and moral order'. Although futile, farcical and tragic, anarchist protest reflects 'a recurrent psychological need' which continues despite its failure as a serious political and social force.

Anarchism is a product of the impact of industrial society on the peasant or artisan society, thriving on the myth of the revolution of 1789. That revolution failed to produce the ideal society leading anarchists to attempt to abolish the industrialised state itself. Temperamentally, the anarchists were like heretics in Catholic Europe whose heresy was less important than the political consequences of their beliefs which identified the Church as corrupt, worldly and self-seeking. It was a revolt against control of the individual by those occupying positions of power. At the time of the Enlightenment Rousseau wrote, 'Man was born free and is everywhere in chains' which anarchists adopted within a rationalist framework and misguided belief in the goodness of mankind. William Godwin's 'Enquiry Into Political Justice' (1793) argued 'that justice and happiness are indissolubly linked' and that 'the practice of virtue is the true road to individual happiness'. This can be achieved because man is born without innate ideas which enables him to be moulded into the perfect social and political animal rather than the distorted product of a discreditable state. Mankind can flourish by voluntary cooperation rather than by clockwork uniformity.

Godwin argued government existed to suppress injustice against individuals and provide common defence against invaders. He applied the same principles to marriage which he considered subjected one personality to another, advocating that women be available to any man who wanted to have intercourse with her. He married Mary Wollstonecraft despite his opposition to the institution of marriage. He argued children would be brought up according to rational principles which is ironic given that he mistreated and hated his children claiming they were not his while the one who was not his, Fanny Imlay, committed suicide. People would not be educated but would educate themselves. Although 'Godwin unfolds a vision of man and society that remains the most complete statement of that type of anarchist doctrine which is based on unbounded confidence in the rational nature of man and the possibilities of his improvement' he consistently avoided any appeal to violence.

According to Kropotkin 'The Great French Revolution' was the source and origin of communist, anarchist and socialist conceptions. 'The blood they shed was shed for humanity' a comment which endorsed the murderous 'Republican marriages' and senseless killing of anyone perceived not to share the revolutionaries' perception of liberty, equality and fraternity. The French Revolution was, as Joll points out, 'an established myth which historians of various schools were busy interpreting for their own ends'. Yet neither decentralisation nor the abolition of property - both prerequisites of all anarchists conceptions of society - followed. This did not happen because of the revolt against the ideas of Jacques-Roux, Jean Varlet, Les Enrages and Babeuf's 'Conspiracy of Equals' all of whom were committed to violence to secure social revolution. In the early nineteenth century utopian socialists such as Saint-Simon, Fourier, Robert Owen relied on cooperation to restructure society, all failing miserably. Proudhon translated ideas into revolutionary sloganeering with "What Is Property?' and defining it as theft. Proudhon rejected reorganising society through using its existing components, arguing in favour of individual self-sufficiency and the abolition of the existing structure of credit and exchange. While seeking to discover the 'laws of society' Proudhon diverged from Marx stating 'after demolishing all a priori dogmatisms, do not let us dream of indoctrinating the people in our turn', which is precisely what Marx sought to do resulting in the schism with Bakunin.

Bakunin's passion for destruction was a consequence of his despotic mother and his sexual impotence. He advocated the virtue of violence for its own sake and spent his lifetime establishing imaginary secret societies based on strict control by himself and unconditional obedience. Baukinin argued the oppressed were naturally revolutionary and only required leadership to make them rise in revolt. He stated 'I detest communism because it is the negation of liberty'. He understood Marx and Engels demanded total commitment through centralised organisation in opposition to Bakunin's claim freedom could not emerge from an authoritarian organisation. Marx declared 'the proletariat can only act as a class by turning itself into a political party', attacking anarchism and moving the General Council to the United States. Bakunin retired from the fray but Italian followers took up the idea of 'propaganda by the deed'. Assassinations of various heads of state were based on anarchist symbolism and the misplaced belief that assassinations would result in the state withering away.

Kropotkin moved from conspirator and agitator to philosopher and prophet advocating repetitive illegality. The assassins were characteristically border-line insane, half delinquent and half fanatic. The Bolsheviks suppressed anarchism in Russia and attacked it during the Spanish civil war. Sorel's syndicalism survived in the minds of liberal academics unaffected by its violence. Anarchism flourishes in the minds of the young because of their naivety, lack of analytical intelligence and misunderstanding of human nature. Yesterday's anarchists are today's civil servants. Joll's book is as fresh as when he wrote it. Five stars.

5 people found this helpful