Add new comment

Thanks again for the feedback. I was interested in the "history vs. philosophy" discussion. Just for the record, my formal education was focused on intellectual history and interdisciplinary cultural studies, which may or may not just be a reflection of a character combining equal parts obsessive curiosity and restlessness. There is a fairly well-elaborated "post-Foucault" element to my own thought, but it almost always seems one layer too many in anarchist circles. You'll find, I think, that "power" is a concept almost entirely absent from my work, but that references to "force" (one of Proudhon's keywords) and, to a lesser extent, "might" (with a nod to Stirner) cover much of the same ground. Part of that is a habit born from the need to distinguish between force and authority (terms often conflated in discussions of "power") in so many of the anarchist conversations I'm part of. The argument I was making as far back as the Great Postanarchism Wars is that there are significant similarities between anarchist thought (and the philosophy and social science it could draw on) post-'68 and pre-"anarchism" (say prior to the death of Bakunin in 1876.)

As for the Kropotkin story, one of these days I'll get the presentation right. In theory, it's a story with something for everyone—or at least everyone willing to think about "ignorance and confusion woven into the fabric of anarchist tradition." In practice, half of the folks it's addressed to aren't likely to want to hear bad things about Kropotkin, while the rest don't care much about Kropotkin at all. I think that one useful, if obviously provocative point is that the anarchist past is full of interactions between anarchists that would be clearly identifiable as entryism if they happened between figures or factions more obviously on different sides of the archy/anarchy divide.

"On Order" also functions as a very early example of "anarchist history," which I can't help thinking has always struggle[d] to rid itself of an sectarian ideological character. But there are limits to how much of that argument, the focus of "Our Lost Continent," can easily be folding into this comparatively breezy survey.