thinker Max Stirner developed a more individualistic
anarchy that allowed absolute private freedom which
later developed into LIBERTARIANISM. Peter KROPOTKIN,a
Russian anarchist, advocated a communist anarchism
in which peasants and workers would cooperate. Some
anarchists blended MARXISMwith anarchism, conceiving
of a highly organized technological society without any
coercive qualities, preserving absolute individual lib-
erty. In Spain and Italy, anarcho-syndicalist movements
tried to combine trade unions with anarchist ideals.
How the anarchist freedom was to occur was not clear.
Some anarchists (especially Marxists) wanted an armed
violent revolution (like the Russian Revolution of
1917); others expected a spontaneous revolt of the
masses of people, overthrowing existing authority in
the state, the church, the family, and the economy.
Some anarchists thought violent acts (assassinating
political leaders or bombing government buildings)
would set off this sudden revolt and usher in the total
freedom of anarchism. Such acts of terrorism and vio-
lence by anarchists gave them the popular image of a
crazed idealist with a bomb under his (or her) coat.
Anarchism also seeded other movements, like FEMI-
NISM(women’s revolt against male authority), PACIFISM
(peace activists against military organizations and
war), ENVIRONMENTALISM(against corporate power and
pollution), ANIMAL RIGHTS(against human dominance
over other animals), and atheism (against the author-
ity of God, church, and religion). Each shares hostility
toward authority.
Anarchism is viewed as unrealistic in the Western
tradition of political thought and as having an inaccu-
rate view of human nature (as naturally cooperative)
and society (as capable of functioning without author-
ity). Anarchists are seen by their critics as self-
deceived and self-righteous, denying the egoism and
desire for power in their own hearts while criticizing it
in others, and identifying all evil with established
authority, rather than with inherent human weakness.
Further Readings
Bakunin, M. Bakunin on Anarchy,S. Dolgoff, ed. New York:
Knopf, 1972.
Carter, A. The Political Theory of Anarchism.New York: Harper
& Row, 1971.
De Leon, David. The American as Anarchist: Reflections on Indige-
nous Radicalism. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University
Press, 1978.
Hoffman, Robert Louis,ed. Anarchism,1st ed. New York: Ather-
ton Press, 1970.
Joll, J. The Anarchists,2nd ed. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard Uni-
versity Press, 1979.
Krimerman, L. I., and Perry, L., eds. Patterns of Anarchy.Garden
City, N.Y.: Doubleday, 1966.
Miller, D. Anarchism.London and Toronto: J.M. Dent & Sons
Ltd., 1984.
Rocker, R. Anarcho-syndicalism.Gordon Press, 1938. Reprint,
with a preface by Noam Chomsky, Boulder, Colo.: West-
view Press, 1989.
Sonn, Richard David. Anarchism.New York: Macmillan Library
Reference, 1992.
Taylor, M. Community, Anarchy and Liberty.New York: Cam-
bridge University Press, 1982.
Woodcock, G. Anarchism.Cleveland: World Pub., 1963.ancient constitution
A concept in 17th-century English legal and political
thought that claimed that Saxon England, prior to the
Norman Conquest of 1066, had a constitution guaran-
teeing individual LIBERTY, political participation, and
RIGHTS to private property. The Norman (French)
kings then imposed MONARCHY and FEUDALISM on
Britain, robbing the English of their “ancient liber-
ties.” The restoration of this ancient constitution by
Parliament in the revolution of 1688 then was seen as
a return to ancient VIRTUE and DEMOCRACY against
monarchy, decadence, and slavery.
The existence of an ancient constitution represent-
ing a golden age of English liberty was seen by royalist
historians as mythical, and the contemporary historian
J. G. A. POCOCKconfirms their view. Developed by Par-
liamentary lawyers in the 1600s to justify the deposing
of the king of England, this ancient constitution dis-
torted English political and legal history. Sir Edward
COKEand William BLACKSTONEinterpreted English com-
mon law to invent this ancient constitution to undercut
the authority of the English monarchy and to transfer
political power to the republican Parliament. By situat-
ing liberal English rights to political participation and
property in an ancient constitution that existed before
the English monarchy (which justified its sovereignty
on past heredity), the Parliamentary lawyers justified
overthrowing (or at least limiting) the monarch. The
lack of historical validity of this ancient constitution
did not prevent others, notably American colonists like
Thomas JEFFERSON, from employing it to justify Ameri-
can independence from the British government in the
1770s, claiming the right to self-government and lib-
erty from the ancient constitution. So this idea, devel-
oped by the English Parliament, was eventually used
against that same Parliament by the British colonists
who learned it studying English law in America.12 ancient constitution