From Freedom News UK
The recently published brochure Anarchistisch Recht explores ‘anarchist law’ as a collective term for furthering critiques of the social and legal order
~ Thom Holterman ~
Anarchism can offer an excellent framework for fundamental legal criticism. Since anarchists critique capitalist society, which relies on oppressive laws to maintain its existence, the addition of legal perspectives can allow for decisive criticisms of the present social order. The two approaches do not exclude each other; instead, anarchists can advance legal criticism without compromise.
This aligns with what is known as ‘positive anarchy’, a term borrowed from Proudhon. Fundamentally, it encompasses a view of society without oppressive power and refers to order, dynamism, and rationality, in addition to mutualism and federalism. Such views and ideas can also be found in Kropotkin and Bakunin. Here, I would like to emphasise Clara Meijer-Wichmann (1885-1922) in particular, as she was one of the first female jurists, challenging existing criminal law and the entire penitentiary system over a century ago.
What I call ‘anarchist law’ here should be understood as a collective term with plural meanings. ‘Anarchist’ refers both ideologically to ‘anti-capitalist’ and sociologically/politically to ‘without coercion’. Referring to ‘law’ as anarchist law thus places the term into a forward-looking perspective towards a libertarian society. This future-oriented focus does not imply that it is new, or without a past. Forms of anarchist law have always existed, but have remained largely unknown.
As is evident in my first contribution in the recently-published brochure Anarchistisch Recht, entitled ‘Law and Power in a Libertarian Perspective’, one of the sources of law is human co-operation. This is further elaborated in my second contribution, ‘George Gurvitch (1894-1965) and Social Law’, where his ideas of ‘social law’ and political pluralism are discussed.
The third contribution, entitled ‘State, Law, and Legitimacy’, addresses the foundations of that ‘other’, libertarian society, by French libertarian activist, anarcho-syndicalist, and historian René Berthier. The fourth contribution comes from French libertarian jurist Anne-Sophie Chambost, a university lecturer in legal history specializing in Proudhon. She demonstrates that anarchist law already has a history. Her text is titled ‘Anarchist Thoughts on Law in the 19th and 20th Centuries’.
In these first four contributions, anarchism and law are seen as converging. As already noted, this doesn’t preclude viewing the two phenomena in a divergent, mutually-opposed sense. Law that is used to maintain the existing capitalist society, which is precisely what anarchists are fighting against, is a main aspect of this opposition. The Armenian physician, activist anarchist, and author Alexander Atabekyan (1868-1933) makes clear to us that this has been the case for a long time. His contribution, the fifth, was sent to me in a German translation from Russian, published here under the title ‘Law and Supremacy’.
The apparent divergence between anarchism and law can be put into practice or worked around in various ways. In the sixth contribution, I listed some of these anarchists’ ways: ‘Apart from the Law – On Illegalists, Direct Action, Take and Eat movement’. Finally, the seventh contribution is by French libertarian jurist and anarcho-syndicalist Pierre Bance, who once again comprehensively examines the ‘question of law in anarchy’ and encourages recognising ‘anarchist law’ as a key issue.
Comments
Anarchy and law are not as…
anonymous (not verified) Tue, 12/30/2025 - 10:40
Anarchy and law are not as incompatible as one might think. But not via European & N. American reworkings of existing jurisprudence.
Law, as in a few rules that apply to all persons of maturity, and that can be enforced by all persons of maturity, is one way of thinking about law that starts from a place quite different from rules handed down from God through the King to the soldiers.
We need to break away from an anarchy based in western modes of thinking.
"western modes of thinking."…
anonymous (not verified) Tue, 12/30/2025 - 17:12
In reply to Anarchy and law are not as… by anonymous (not verified)
"western modes of thinking."
It's only in non-Western societies, these days, that you got the Law being "handed down from God through the King to the soldiers."... Are you full stupid or there's something you didn't explain clearly enough, here?
consensus or social norms…
anonymous (not verified) Wed, 12/31/2025 - 08:09
In reply to Anarchy and law are not as… by anonymous (not verified)
consensus or social norms are both the bases for further paring of the societas into in and out groups, just like the money economy. much better to relinquish any conformity or appeasement of others and live in the good faith of frequent interpersonal disagreement. thru conflict and unresolved problems, one can maintain space and ability for autonomy
Yet anarcho-Lefoids and…
anonymous (not verified) Wed, 12/31/2025 - 08:38
In reply to consensus or social norms… by anonymous (not verified)
Yet anarcho-Lefoids and their cult of Interdependency! Or how to transform everyone into a perfect mobile invisible prison...
lol, try living for 10…
anonymous (not verified) Mon, 01/05/2026 - 11:11
In reply to Yet anarcho-Lefoids and… by anonymous (not verified)
lol, try living for 10 minutes without the interdependency of human and air.
or without gut flora, or the baker or the farmer....
anarchists used to be more supple in their thought, but now it's all binaries and good v. bad.
Besides the valid…
anonymous (not verified) Wed, 12/31/2025 - 09:07
In reply to Anarchy and law are not as… by anonymous (not verified)
Besides the valid refutations above... The issue with the Lauuuu is how they are always arbitrary, as it's defined by the privileged rulers. then enforced by the police, or by the community police (same-same), or the "cop in your head".
It's not like some code of conduct defined by a club, society or group as condition to partake into... as membership in society or the state is not freely intentional and interchangeable. The state chooses, and even if you succeed at cancelling your citizenship, it might not be too friendly about your lack of status within its borders, or might not recognize you any right whatsoever.
No Gods, No Masters, No Laws
I am Makhno (not verified) Wed, 12/31/2025 - 11:46
It's pretty simple, really. Either disputes between individuals and groups are resolved through peaceful dialogue and mutual agreement, or they are resolved through coercion and threats. Laws, courts, and police are fundamentally instruments of coercion.
Yea sure, but WAIT... The…
anonymous (not verified) Wed, 12/31/2025 - 15:03
In reply to No Gods, No Masters, No Laws by I am Makhno (not verified)
Yea sure, but WAIT... The Law can be good and just if we get rid of unjustified authority that also interconnects with libertarian socialism or platformist anarcho-communism, which are the only anarchism that exists.
?? where does this say it is…
curious (not verified) Mon, 01/05/2026 - 11:32
?? where does this say it is a response to an email about advising the Democrats??
it doesn't. chisel was…
anonymous (not verified) Mon, 01/05/2026 - 13:36
In reply to ?? where does this say it is… by curious (not verified)
it doesn't. chisel was comparing one event to another, related only in the juxtaposition of concepts.
Add new comment