Postanarchism: A critical assessment1

  1. My thanks to Lesley Stevenson, Stuart Hanscomb, David Graeber and the anonymous reviewer for their careful reading and pertinent suggestions, and to the members of the SSGA and participants at the PSA Conference (2006) for their supportive advice.

Abstract

Post-modernism has had a significant influence on anarchism, notably in the interrelation between the theoretical positions of libertarianism and post-structuralism (a set of theories and philosophies strongly identified with, but not identical to, post-modernism). This has generated a subset of anarchist thinking referred to as postanarchism. Postanarchism, like anarchism, is a fluid assemblage of political concepts that alters according to geographic and historical context. Within this paper, some of its key theorists, principal terms, and some of the structures that coordinate its central principles, are identified and assessed. The paper then concentrates on the apparent differences between postanarchism and more traditional anarchisms, arguing that rather than regarding postanarchism as a transcendence of anarchism, as some of its proponents maintain, it is more appropriate to regard postanarchism as representing a particular, historically specific constellation of practices, which consequently prioritizes particular discourses, agencies and tactics that are peculiar to these locations.

Notes

  1. My thanks to Lesley Stevenson, Stuart Hanscomb, David Graeber and the anonymous reviewer for their careful reading and pertinent suggestions, and to the members of the SSGA and participants at the PSA Conference (2006) for their supportive advice.

  2. Alan Brown, Modern Political Philosophy: Theories of the just society (Harmondworth: Penguin, 1986), p. 14, considers political philosophy to differ from political theory, as the first concerns finding rational grounds for accepting the latter, and thus leaves open the possibility that political theories are merely irrational assemblages. This, however, mistakes the practice of political theorizing, which also prioritizes rational analysis, for the object being studied. Michael Freeden Ideologies and Political Theory: A conceptual approach (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1996) argues that whilst political theory and philosophy have a large degree of overlap, the latter is primarily concerned with ‘evaluating […] validity, and […] offering ethical prescriptions’ (p. 6) whilst the first is more wide-ranging as it includes the study of ideologies, which involves identifying the interrelationships of core and peripheral concepts, and to locate these concepts spatially and temporally, exploring the cultural as well as rational controls on their adoption and development. However, as Freeden acknowledges, these criticisms of the absences in political philosophy are specific to the Anglo-American, analytic versions of political philosophy, rather than the canon of political philosophy as a whole. Consequently, Paul Kelly's account is possibly more accurate; he argues that the distinction between political philosophy and political theory is ‘an institutional one: political philosophers are political theorists employed by philosophy departments and political theorists are political philosophers employed within government or political science departments’ (P. Kelly, ‘Political Theory—The State of the Art’, Politics, 26 (1) (2006), p. 47).

  3. For instance C.E.M. Joad's 1924 text, Introduction to Modern Political Theory (Oxford: Clarendon), covers anarchism in as much detail as other forms of communism, and has a significant section on syndicalism. By the 1950s, 1960s, 1970s and 1980s, however, anarchism was either limited to free market liberalism, relegated to a few marginal remarks or entirely absent. See for instance texts such as Alan Gewirth, Political Philosophy (London: Collier MacMillan, 1965), Anthony Quinton (Ed.), Political Philosophy (Oxford: Clarendon 1985, [1967]), D.D. Raphael Problems of Political Philosophy, Revised edition (London: MacMillan, 1976) Brown, op. cit., Ref. 2.

  4. The growth of more general interest in anarchism in Britain and North America, in particular, predates November 1989.

  5. See for instance Urban 75s ‘Is post-anarchism a good idea?’, < http://www.urban75.net/vbulletin/showthread.php?t = 141865&highlight = postanarchism>, last accessed, 26 March, 2006 and the debates on postmodernism and anarchism found on Libcom.org, < http://www.libcom.org/forums/viewtopic.php?t = 8814>, last accessed 26 March, 2006 and the The Postanarchism Listserv at < http://groups.yahoo.com/group/postanarchism>, last accessed 26 March, 2006.

  6. R. Creagh, ‘Specialist Group for the Study of Anarchism’, Research on Anarchism Forum, Institutes and Research Centers, < http://raforum.apinc.org/article.php3?id_article = 3482&lang = en>, last accessed 20 March, 2006.

  7. Specialist Group for the Study of Anarchism, < http://www.sgsa.org.uk/>, last accessed 1 June, 2006.

  8. Anonymous₁, ‘What is Post-Anarchism?’, < http://www.geocities.com/ringfingers/postanarchism2.html>, last accessed March 20, 2006.

  9. See J. Adams, Non-Western Anarchisms: Rethinking the Global Context (Johannesburg, South Africa: Zabalaza books nd < 2004e>), see too B. Anderson, Under Three Flags: Anarchism and the Anti-colonial Imagination (London: Verso, 2005).

 10. An account of ‘ideology’ based on Freeden, op. cit., Ref. 2, p. 53–54.

 11. The question could arise as to whether Green anarchism is a hybrid of environmentalism and anarchism. Freeden's account of hybridity and the absence of absolute boundaries is useful here; anarchism, like other ideologies, is fluid and green anarchism shares many of the histories as well as core concepts of non-prefaced anarchism. Freeden, ibid., pp. 87–88.

 12. P. McLaverty, ‘Socialism and Libertarianism’, Journal of Political Ideologies, 10 (2), (2005), 185–198, 186.

 13. M. Freeden, op. cit., Ref. 2, pp. 4, 18–19.

 14. E. Heathcoat Amory, ‘Can you Imagine a more hypocritical song than this?’, Daily Mail, March 6, 2002, p. 12.

 15. T. Ali, ‘Why They Happened: The London bombings’, CounterPunch, < http://www.counterpunch.org/tariq07082005.html>, last accessed 21 March, 2006 and Ghannoushi, S. (2005), ‘Al-Qaida: The wrong answers’, Friday 29 July, 2005, Aljazeera.Net, < http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/25D45C98-471B-4A36-8253-F2120BEA180F.htm>, last accessed, March 16, 2006.

 16. See M. Bookchin, Social Anarchism or Lifestyle Anarchism: An Unbridgeable Chasm (Edinburgh, Scotland: AK Press, 1995) and N. Chomsky, ‘Interview with Barry Pateman’, in B. Pateman (Ed.), Chomsky on Anarchism (Edinburgh, Scotland: AK Press, 2005 [2004]), pp. 235–236.

 17. J. Quail, The Slow Burning Fuse (London: Paladin, 1978), p. x.

 18. Anonymous₂ (2006) ‘The Anti-Racist History of Anarchism’, < recollectionbooks.com/bleed/Encyclopedia/ArchiveMirror/antiraci.pdf>, last accessed March 20, 2006. See too < www.zabalaza.net/pdfs/leafs/antiracisthistory.pdf>. The account of libertarian socialism stands in contrast to the interpretation of ‘libertarian socialism’, in McLaverty's article, which is based on a liberal possessive individualist account of the ‘self’. McLaverty, op. cit. Ref. 12.

 19. See B. Franks, ‘The Direct Action Ethic’, Anarchist Studies, 11 (1) (2003), pp. 13–41, pp. 18–19; J. Purkis and J. Bowen, ‘Conclusion: How Anarchy Matters’; J. Purkis and J. Bowen (Eds), Changing Anarchism: Anarchist Theory and Practice in a Global Age (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 2004), pp. 213–229, p. 220.

 20. See for instance W. Fishman, East-End Jewish Radicals 1874–1914 (London: Duckworth, 1975); R. Rocker, Anarcho-Syndicalism (London, Phoenix Press), nd < 1990e> [1938], pp. 63–65 and pp. 75–76.

 21. T. Brown, Syndicalism, (London: Phoenix Press, 1990 [1943]).

 22. See for instance Class War, No. 91, Winter 2006, p. 11; Organise! For Revolutionary Anarchism, No. 64, Spring 2005, p. 28.

 23. J. Simons (Ed.), ‘Introduction’, Contemporary Critical Theorists: From Lacan to Said (Edinburgh, Scotland: Edinburgh University Press, 2002), p. 16.

 24. T. Eagleton, After Theory (Harmondsworth: Penguin, 2004), p. 13.

 25. See the title of T. May's book The Political Philosophy of Poststructuralist Anarchism (Pennsylvania, PA: The Pennsylvania State University Press, 1994); S. Newman's comments in his book, From Bakunin to Lacan: Anti-authoritarianism and the Dislocation of Power (Oxford: Lexington Books, 2001), pp. 14–15. Call's preference is for the term ‘postmodernism’, which he uses to stand for ‘the philosophical or critical movement’ as against the wider cultural ‘postmodern condition’, L. Call, Postmodern Anarchism (Oxford: Lexington Books, 2002), p. 13. See too J. Purkis, ‘Towards an Anarchist Sociology’, in J. Purkis and J. Bowen (Eds), Changing Anarchism: Anarchist Theory and Practice in a Global Age (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 2004), pp. 39–54, pp. 50–51.

 26. Adams cites Foucault, Deleuze and Guattari and Paul Virilio; May prioritizes Deleuze, Foucault and Lyotard; Newman stresses Derrida, Deleuze and Guattari, Foucault and Lacan; Call focuses primarily on Foucault and Baudrillard. J. Adams, ‘Postanarchism in a Nutshell’, Interactivist InfoExchange, < http://info.interactivist.net/article.pl?sid = 03/11/11/1642242>, last accessed 30 May, 2006. Also called ‘Postanarchism in a Bombshell’, Aporia Journal, Issue 2, < http://aporiajournal.tripod.com/postanarchism.htm>, last accessed 1 June, 2006; May, op. cit., Ref. 25; Newman, op. cit., Ref. 25.

 27. Eagleton, op. cit., Ref. 24, pp. 13, 16, 117–119.

 28. Simons, op. cit., Ref. 23, p. 10.

 29. C. Jencks, What is Post-Modernism? (Chichester: Academy, 1996), p. 30; J. Hughes, ‘After Non-Plan: Retrenchment and Reassertion’, in J. Hughes and S. Sadler (Eds), Non-Plan: Essays on Freedom, Participation and Change in Modern Architecture and Urbanism (London: Architectural Press, 2000), p. 166.

 30. D. Harvey, The Condition of Postmodernity (Oxford: Blackwell, 1996), pp. 9, 82–83.

 31. Jencks, op. cit., Ref. 29, p. 16.

 32. J. Bowen and J. Purkis, ‘Introduction: Why Anarchism Still Matters’, in J. Purkis and J. Bowen (Eds), Changing Anarchism: Anarchist Theory and Practice in a Global Age (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 2004), pp. 1–22, p. 5.

 33. S. Newman, ‘The Politics of Postanarchism’, Institute of Anarchist Studies (2003) < http://www.anarchist-studies.org/article/articleprint/1/-1/1/>, last accessed 20, March, 2006. 2003.

 34. S. Sim (Ed.), ‘Introduction: Spectres and Nostalgia: Post-Marxism/Post-Marxism’, Post-Marxism: A Reader (Edinburgh, Scotland: Edinburgh University Press, 1998) pp. 2, 6.

 35. Sim, ibid., pp. 2, 6–7.

 36. See for instance N. Geras, ‘Post-Marxism?’, in S. Sim (Ed.), Post-Marxism: A Reader (Edinburgh, Scotland: Edinburgh University Press, 1998), pp. 46, 54.

 37. Sim, op. cit., Ref. 34, pp. 8–9.

 38. Geras, op. cit., Ref. 36, pp. 51–54.

 39. See Freeden, op. cit., Ref. 2, pp. 86–87.

 40. May, op. cit., Ref. 25, p. 49.

 41. S. Newman, ‘Is There a Postanarchist Universality? A Reply to Michael Glavin’, Institute of Anarchist Studies (2004), < http://www.anarchist-studies.org/article/articleprint/87/-1/9>, last accessed 31, March 2006.

 42. R. Dewitt, ‘Poststructuralist Anarchism: An Interview with Todd May’, Institute of Anarchist Studies (2000), < http://perspectives.anarchist-studies.org/8may.htm>, 31 March, 2006.

 43. J. Welsh and J. Purkis, ‘Redefining Anarchism for the Twenty-First Century: Some modest beginnings’, Anarchist Studies, 11 (1) (2003), pp. 5–12; G. Chesters, ‘Shape Shifting: Civil Society, Complexity and Social Movements’, Anarchist Studies, 11 (1) (2003), pp. 42–65; G. Chesters and I. Welsh, ‘Complexity and Social Movement(s): Process and Emergence in Planetary Action’, Theory Culture & Society, 22 (5) (2005), pp. 187–211.

 44. See for instance Morland, who, like Newman (op. cit., Ref. 41), views ‘postanarchism’ as both a reapplication of key anarchist themes to the contemporary setting, but also as an ‘evolution’; that is to say postanarchisms are more higher developed variants, which junk an inappropriate Marxism (D. Morland, ‘Anti-capitalism and Poststructuralist Anarchism’, in J. Purkis and J. Bowen (Eds), Changing Anarchism: Anarchist Theory and Practice in a Global Age (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 2004), pp. 23–38, pp. 24–25). Such confusion may be because the main intent of the text is not to theoretically locate postanarchism, but to concentrate on describing the main features or applications of postanarchisms to assist practical struggles.

 45. Adams, op. cit., Ref. 26.

 46. Adams, ibid.

 47. S. Villon, ‘Post-Anarchism or Simply Post-Revolution’ (2003) originally found at < http://www.geocities.com/kk_ab%20acus/other/postanarc%20hism.html> link no longer operative and J. Cohn and S. Wilbur, ‘What's Wrong With Postanarchism?’, Institute for Anarchist Studies (2003), < http://www.anarchist-studies.org/article/articleview/26/2/1/>, last accessed 20 March, 2006.

 48. Zabalaza Anarchist Communist Federation of Southern Africa, ‘Sucking the Golden Egg: A Reply to Newman’, Inter Activist Information Exchange (2003), < http://slash.autonomedia.org/article.pl?sid = 03/10/10/1220218> also available at the Institute of Anarchist Studies, http://www.anarchist-studies.org/forum/message/6>, last accessed 20 March, 2006.

 49. Newman, op. cit., Ref. 33.

 50. Newman, ibid.

 51. Newman, ibid. and Newman, op. cit. Ref. 25, pp. 38–49.

 52. May, op. cit., Ref. 25, pp. 63–65.

 53. Newman, op. cit., Ref. 25, pp. 47–48 and Villon op. cit. Ref. 47.

 54. Newman, op. cit. Ref. 25, pp. 23–29.

 55. Villon, op. cit., Ref. 47; Cohn and Wilbur contribute to this critique of Newman (but also extend it to May and Call) by arguing that the selection of theorists is too narrow, omitting those authors like Gustav Laudauer and Emma Goldman who do not fit neatly into the postanarchist framework for earlier ‘anarchism’ (Cohn and Wilbur, op. cit. Ref. 47).

 56. Cohn and Wilbur, ibid. (emphasis added).

 57. J. Gore, ‘In the Eye of the Beholder—Child, Mad or Artist’, in J. Purkis and J. Bowen (Eds), Changing Anarchism: Anarchist Theory and Practice in a Global Age (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 2004), pp. 145–161, pp. 156 and 146.

 58. D. Gribble, ‘Good News for Francisco Ferrer—How Anarchist Ideals in Education Have Survived Around the World’, in J. Purkis and J. Bowen (Eds), Changing Anarchism: Anarchist Theory and Practice in a Global Age (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 2004), pp. 181–198, p. 183.

 59. Q. Graeber and K. Goaman, ‘The Anarchist Travelling Circus: Reflections on Contemporary Anarchism, Anti-capitalism and the International Scene’, in J. Purkis and J. Bowen (Eds), Changing Anarchism: Anarchist Theory and Practice in a Global Age (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 2004), pp. 164–180, p. 165.

 60. Adams, op. cit., Ref. 26; Bowen and Purkis, op. cit., Ref. 32, p. 14; Call, op. cit., Ref. 25, p. 1 and pp. 123–124; Chesters and Welsh op. cit., Ref. 43, pp. 192–193 and p. 196; U. Gordon, Anarchism and Political Theory: Contemporary Problems, Mansfield College, Oxford University, D. Phil. Thesis, 2005: May, op. cit., Ref. 25, pp. 96–97; Newman, op. cit., Ref. 25, pp. 105–107; Purkis, op. cit., Ref. 25, p. 50.

 61. G. Deleuze and F. Guattari, A Thousand Plateaus: Capitalism and Schizophrenia (London: Continuum, 1998).

 62. May, op. cit., Ref. 25, pp. 20–23.

 63. May, op. cit., Ref. 25, p. 43; Morland, op. cit., Ref. 44, p. 37; Newman, op. cit., Ref. 25, pp. 106–109; Purkis, op. cit., Ref. 25, p. 50. For an example of the state-centred approach look at Alan Carter, ‘Analytical Anarchism: Some Conceptual Foundations’, Political Theory, 28 (2) (2000), pp. 230–253, whilst for an example of an anarchist class-centred analysis see E. Yaroslavsky, ‘History of Anarchism in Russia’ [1937], < http://dwardmac.pitzer.edu/anarchist_archives/bakunin/graphicstable.htmlhttp://dwardmac.pitzer.edu/anarchist_archives/worldwidemovements/anarchisminrussia6.html>, last accessed March 28, 2006.

 64. E. Goldman, ‘The Traffic in Women’, Anarchism and Other Essays (New York, USA: Dover, 1969 [1911]), pp. 177–194; Fishman, op. cit., Ref. 20.

 65. P. Kropotkin, ‘Syndicalism and Anarchism’, Black Flag, No. 210, pp. 24–27; see for example M. Bookchin, ‘Social Ecology’, The Murray Bookchin Reader (London: Cassell, 1997), pp. 31–36.

 66. Q.J. Grave, in D. Miller (Ed.), Anarchism (London: J.M. Dent and Sons, 1984), p. 131.

 67. See for instance the Anarchist Federation of Great Britain and Ireland's self-description ‘Another important principle of the AF is that it is not just class exploitation and oppression that needs to be abolished. Though we do not necessarily use the concept of patriarchy, we believe that the oppression of women predates capitalism and will not automatically disappear with its end’. ‘Thought and Struggle’, Anarkisto Debato: Magazine of IAF, No. 0 (2006), p. 16.

 68. Zabalaza Anarchist Communist Federation of Southern Africa, op. cit., Ref. 48.

 69. H. Bey, TAZ: The Temporary Autonomous Zone, Ontological Anarchy, Poetic Terrorism, 2nd edition (Brooklyn, USA: Autonomedia, 2003 [1990]), pp. 62–63; B. Black, Anarchy after Leftism (Columbia, USA: Columbia Alternative Library, 1997).

 70. J. Bowen, ‘Moving Targets: Rethinking Anarchist Strategies’, in J. Purkis and J. Bowen (Eds), Changing Anarchism: Anarchist Theory and Practice in a Global Age (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 2004), p. 118.

 71. Gordon, op. cit., Ref. 60, p. 76.

 72. Call, op. cit., Ref. 25, p. 21.

 73. S. Jeppesen, ‘Seeing Past the Outpost of Post-Anarchism. Anarchy: Axiomatic’, Institute for Anarchist Studies, < http://www.anarchist-studies.org/article/articleview/55/1/1>, last accessed March 26, 2006. See too B. Black, ‘The Abolition of Work’, in Vague, No. 20 (1988).

 74. A term used by Alan Carter in his account of ‘analytical anarchism’ to describe the influence and direction of particular forms of state interest; these vectors intersect to create ‘a parallelogram of forces’, Carter, op. cit., Ref. 63, p. 244.

 75. G. Rhys, ‘Class War's Rough Guide to the Left’, Class War: The Heavy Stuff, No. 2, (nd < 1988e>), p. 26. See too Call's comments about the symbolic importance for postmodern anarchism to avoid the language of ‘bourgeois political economy’, in contrast to Marxism and classical anarchism, Call, op. cit., Ref. 25, p. 23).

 76. K. Goaman, ‘Active Currents’, Anarchist Studies, 3 (2), (1995), pp. 165–168.

 77. See for instance Newman, op. cit. Ref. 25, p. 33 and May, op. cit., Ref. 25, p. 18n.

 78. See for instance Jeppesen's claims that it is an unquestioning axiom of postanarchism to reject Marxism in any and all forms., Jeppesen, op. cit., Ref. 73.

 79. K. Marx, Early Writings (Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1992).

 80. K. Marx, Capital, Vol. 1 (Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1976), pp. 126–128.

 81. F. Shortall, The Incomplete Marx (Aldershot: Avebury, 1994), available online at < http://libcom.org/library/incomplete-marx-felton-c-shorthall>, last accessed January 25, 2007.

 82. Q. Marx and F. Engels, (1977) [1888], ‘Preface to the English Edition of 1888’, in K. Marx and F. Engels (Eds), Manifesto of the Communist Party, (Moscow, Russia [USSR]: Progress. 1977 [1888]), p. 20.

 83. Deleuze and Guattari, op. cit., Ref. 61, p. 15.

 84. Fishman, op. cit. Ref. 20.

 85. Fishman, ibid. and R. Rocker, translated by Joseph Leftwick, London Years (London: Robert Anscombe and Co. Ltd/Rudolf Rocker Book Committee, 1956).

 86. Anderson, op. cit., Ref. 9.

 87. For instance in Adams, op. cit., Ref. 26; Bowen and Purkis, op. cit., Ref. 32, p. 2; Chesters and Welsh, op. cit., Ref. 43, p. 195, Goaman, op. cit., Ref. 59, p. 165; Gordon, op. cit., Ref. 60, pp. 82, 95–96 and 199 and Newman in S. Evren, K. Kiziltug and E. Kosova, ‘Interview with Saul Newman’, Siyahi Interlocal Journal of Postanarchist Theory, Culture and Politics (2005), < http://community.livejournal.com/siyahi>, last accessed 1 June, 2006.

 88. See for instance M. Verter's ‘Historical Background’ to C. Bufe and M. Verter (Eds), Dreams of Freedom: A Rocardo Flores Magón reader (Edinburgh, Scotland: AK Press, 2005), p. 26 and Magón's own writings, especially pp. 182–194.

 89. M. Brinton, For Workers Power (Edinburgh, Scotland: AK Press, 2004), 167.

 90. Bey, op. cit., Ref. 69, p. 128; Call, op. cit. Ref. 25, p. 128 and Jeppesen, op. cit., Ref. 73.

 91. Bey, ibid., 126; Call, ibid, p. 24 and Jeppesen, ibid.

 92. Robert Young criticizes Deleuze and Guattari's idea of nomadism, because such landless existences, rather than being an indication of liberation and transgression, are often an identity forced upon people by oppression and dispossession, Postcolonialism: A Very Short Introduction (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2003), p. 53.

 93. R. Braidotti, ‘Discontinuous Becomings. Deleuze on the Becoming-Woman of Philosophy’, The Journal of the British Society of Phenomenology, 24 (1) (1993), p. 49.

 94. F. Brooks, ‘American Individualist Anarchism: What it was and Why it Failed’, Journal of Political Ideologies, 1 (1) (1996), p. 85.

 95. One of the criticisms of postanarchism, because of its reliance on poststructural theory, has been that it privileges those already with high degrees of cultural capital (see the discussion ‘Is post-anarchism a good idea?’, Urban 75, < http://www.urban75.net/vbulletin/showthread.php?t = 141865&highlight = postanarchism>, last accessed, 26 March, 2006).

 96. S. Tormey, Anti-Capitalism (Oxford: Oneworld, 2004), pp. 34–35.

 97. My thanks to my friend, the architectural historian Simon Sadler for highlighting this coincidence.

 98. See for instance the architecture journalist Marcus Binney's account of changes to the architect's (Rogers Partnership) design of the Welsh Assembly building wrought by the requirements for greater ‘security’ and ‘safety’ after September 11, 2001 (M. Binney, ‘A vision of sea, sky and cedar’, The Times, Monday 13, March 2006, p. 58) and the redesign demanded of Daniel Libeskind's Freedom Tower project, at the site of the former World Trade Center, in order to ensure that ‘the buildings as finally drawn are as safe from attack as possible’ (D. Usborne, ‘New York divided over memorial: absolutely zero; it has been four years since the world trade centre was destroyed’, The Independent, Thursday, June 2, 2005, pp. 24–25. Libeskind too uses a similar discourse in connection to his new structure: ‘You cannot escape it because a building celebrates continuity. It's the one stability we have in an accelerating world’. Q. Libeskind, Andrew Billen, ‘Every day there's a new crisis’, The Times, Times 2, September 7, 2004, p. 6.

 99. Bey, op. cit. Ref. 69, p. 132.

100. See for instance the discussion by Chuck Tilby of Eugene (Oregon) Police Department and academic Randy Borum, detailing appropriate state strategies to deal with anti-capitalists (R. Borum and C. Tilby, ‘Anarchist Direct Actions: A Challenge for Law Enforcement’, Studies in Conflict and Terrorism, No. 28, (2005), pp. 201–233, pp. 218–220 and Haracio R. Trujillio's study for the Rand Corporation, which provides analysis and proposes solutions for state and corporate bodies to deal with ‘threats’, that places radical environmentalists and anti-capitalists alongside statist terrorist groups such as Aum Shinrikyo, Hizballah and Jemaah Islamiyah (H. Trujillio, ‘The Radical Environmental Movement’, in Jackson, B., Baker, J., et al. (Eds), Aptitude for Destruction: Case Studies of Organizational Learning in Five Terrorist Groups, Vol. 2 (Santa Monica, USA: Rand, 2005), available online at < www.rand.org/pubs/monographs/2005/RAND_MG332.pdf>, last accessed, 31 May, 2006.).

101. Newman, op. cit., Ref. 33 and Newman, op. cit., Ref. 41.

102. Bey, op. cit., Ref. 69, pp. 130–132; Newman, op. cit., Ref. 25, pp. 99–100.

103. Although it should be noted that there are some examples of highly perceptive postanarchist analyses of state techniques and strategies, see for instance A. Antliff and W. Milwright, ‘The Public Humiliation of Saddam Hussein’, Anarchist Studies, 13 (1) (2005), pp.78–82; S. Evren, ‘Abu Ghraib: The Spectacle of Torture’, Anarchist Studies, 13 (1) (2005), pp.70–78; and S. Gemie, ‘Occupation and Insurrection in Iraq, 2003–04’, Anarchist Studies, 13 (1) (2005), pp. 61–70.

104. G. Grindon, ‘Carnival Against Capital: A Comparison of Bakhtin, Vaneigem and Bey’, Anarchist Studies, 12 (2) (2004), pp. 147–161, pp. 158–159.