Add new comment

I listened to about two-thirds of this, just for the simple pleasure of listening to smart people talk about things that interest them. But this seems to be another case, like postanarchism, where the non-existence of "real anarchist philosophy" (or whatever) in "political anarchism" seems to be a premise assumed without much question. Indeed, it's sort of interesting that postanarchism itself doesn't seem to be on the radar here.

Catherine Malabou's work looks interesting. I'm a little surprised I haven't read her collaboration with Derrida. But I'm also surprised that someone who invested in Derrida's work doesn't have a clearer sense of why French intellectuals resisted the "anarchist" label. It's been years since I read it, but I think it is in his contribution to The Althusserian Legacy that Derrida discussed the pressure not to openly oppose the French communist party. This is probably why so many of the anarchistic bits in the later works are are more or less buried under layers of marxist references. It would have been fun to see Derrida actually take on a phrase like "property is theft" in the richness of its original contexts, including Proudhon's own interesting take on metaphysics. And maybe we would have got a more satisfactory encounter with Stirner in the deal.

Someone with a graduate seminar to teach and tenure to establish really ought to run with all of these teasing poststructuralist references to anarchy and anarchism—but run, for a change, in the direction of the anarchist literature. The fact that perhaps anarchism hasn't really been "philosophized" in that sense is probably just a product of the difficulties that would be involved in a more-than-teasing reconciliation of modern philosophical discourse and the various discourses of anarchist theory.