50 | Martin Buber’s Theopolitics
(New York: Routledge, 1997), 115–116, 120–126; Shalom Ratzabi, Anarchism in “Zion”: Between
Martin Buber and Aharon David Gordon (Tel Aviv: Am Oved, 2011) [Hebrew].
- MBLY xiv.
- Gustav Landauer, Revolution and Other Writings: A Political Reader, ed. and trans. Ga-
briel Kuhn (Oakland, CA: PM Press, 2010), 175. - PU 48.
- Ibid., 16.
- Meier-Cronemeyer makes this point himself in his letter to Buber; Buber, Briefwechsel
III, 598. - Alexander S. Kohanski, “Martin Buber’s Restructuring of Society into a State of Anoc-
rac y,” Jewish Social Studies 34.1 (January 1972): 42–57; Laurence J. Silberstein, Martin Buber’s
Social and Religious Thought: Alienation and the Quest for Meaning (New York: New York Uni-
versity Press, 1990). Kohanski’s usage derives its justification from Buber’s claim that Kropot-
kin’s “‘anarchy,’ like Proudhon’s, is in reality ‘anocracy’ (ακρατία); not absence of government
but absence of domination.” PU 43. - Buber, Briefwechsel III, 598.
- Standout recent works on anarchism include Andrew Cornell, Unruly Equality: U.S.
Anarchism in the Twentieth Century (Berkeley: University of California Press, 2016); David
Graeber, Fragments of an Anarchist Anthropology (Chicago: Prickly Paradigm Press, 2004);
Maia Ramnath, Decolonizing Anarchism: An Antiauthoritarian History of India’s Liberation
Struggle (Oakland, CA: AK Press, 2011); James C. Scott, Two Cheers for Anarchism: Six Easy
Pieces on Autonomy, Dignity, and Meaning ful Work and Play (Princeton, NJ: Princeton Uni-
versity Press, 2014); Kenyon Zimmer, Immigrants against the State: Yiddish and Italian Anar-
chism in America (Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 2015). - The exact date of their meeting is difficult to establish, but it seems that it must have
immediately preceded or followed Landauer’s prison term. With reference to 1899, Buber says,
“Ich habe Landauer damals kennengelernt.” Buber, “Vorwort” to Landauer, Sein Lebensgang
in Briefen, Band I (Frankfurt: Rütten & Loening, 1929), vii. Landauer served his sentence from
August 1899 to February 1900; see Charles Maurer, Call to Revolution: The Mystical Anarchism
of Gustav Landauer (Detroit: Wayne State University Press, 1971), 47–49; GLPU 50; PC 128. - Landauer, “Der Dichter als Ankläger,” Der Sozialist, February 5, 1898; Landauer, Der
Fall Ziethen: Ein Appell an die öffentliche Meinung (Berlin: Hugo Metscher, 1898); Landauer,
“In Sachen Ziethen,” Sozialistische Monatshefte 3, 1899. - Maurer, Call to Revolution, 44.
- Selections from von Egidy’s journal Versöhnung, printed in Der Sozialist 9.2 (January
1899), cited in PC 139. - FMD 110.
- Karl Marx himself responded to the formation of the SAPD by arguing that the
Liebknecht-Bebel faction, to which he and Engels were close, had conceded too much to the
Lassalle faction to achieve the union; Marx, “Critique of the Gotha Program,” in The Marx-
Engels Reader, 2nd ed., ed. Robert C. Tucker (New York: W. W. Norton & Co., 1978), 525–541. - PC 29.
- Many studies address the creative appropriation of Nietzsche by the widest variety of
followers: Steven E. Aschheim, The Nietzsche Legacy in Germany, 1890–1990 (Berkeley: Univer-
sity of California Press, 1992); Jacob Golomb, Nietzsche and Zion (Ithaca, NY: Cornell Univer-
sity Press, 2004); John Moore, ed., with Spencer Sunshine, I Am Not a Man, I Am Dynamite!
Friedrich Nietzsche and the Anarchist Tradition (Brooklyn, NY: Autonomedia, 2004). Only in
the 1890s did the “Nietzsche craze” really begin in Germany; the young Landauer was part of
the avant-garde of his era. Aschheim, Nietzsche Legacy, 17.