Classical philosophy When the word "anarchy" () was first defined in ancient Greece, it initially had both a positive and negative connotation, respectively referring to
spontaneous order or chaos without rulers. The latter definition was taken by the philosopher
Plato, who criticised
Athenian democracy as "anarchical", and his disciple
Aristotle, who questioned how to prevent democracy from descending into anarchy.
Ancient Greek philosophy initially understood anarchy to be a corrupted form of
direct democracy, although it later came to be conceived of as its own form of political regime, distinct from any kind of democracy. According to the traditional conception of political regimes, anarchy results when authority is derived from a majority of people who pursue their own interests.
Post-classical development During the
Middle Ages, the word "anarchia" came into use in Latin, in order to describe the
eternal existence of the
Christian God. It later came to reconstitute its original political definition, describing a society without government. Christian theologists came to claim that
all humans were inherently sinful and ought to submit to the
omnipotence of higher power, with the French Protestant reformer
John Calvin declaring that even the worst form of
tyranny was preferable to anarchy. The Scottish Quaker
Robert Barclay also denounced the "anarchy" of
libertines such as the
Ranters. In contrast,
radical Protestants such as the
Diggers advocated for anarchist societies based on
common ownership. Although following attempts to establish such a society, the Digger
Gerard Winstanley came to advocate for an
authoritarian form of
communism. During the 16th century, the term "anarchy" first came into use in the
English language. It was used to describe the disorder that results from the absence of or opposition to authority, with
John Milton writing of "the waste/Wide anarchy of Chaos" in
Paradise Lost. Initially used as a pejorative descriptor for
democracy, the two terms began to diverge following the
Atlantic Revolutions, when democracy took on a positive connotation and was redefined as a form of
elected,
representational government.
Enlightenment philosophy Political philosophers of the
Age of Enlightenment contrasted the
state with what they called the "
state of nature", a hypothetical description of stateless society, although they disagreed on its definition.
Thomas Hobbes considered the state of nature to be a "nightmare of permanent war of all against all". In contrast,
John Locke considered it to be a harmonious society in which people lived "according to reason, without a common superior". They would be subject only to
natural law, with otherwise "perfect freedom to order their actions". In depicting the "state of nature" to be a free and equal society governed by natural law, Locke distinguished between society and the state. He argued that, without established laws, such a society would be inherently unstable, which would make a
limited government necessary in order to protect people's
natural rights. He likewise argued that limiting the reach of the state was reasonable when peaceful cooperation without a state was possible. His thoughts on the state of nature and limited government ultimately provided the foundation for the
classical liberal argument for
laissez-faire.
Kant's thought experiment philosopher
Immanuel Kant, who looked at anarchy as a thought experiment to justify government
Immanuel Kant defined "anarchy", in terms of the "state of nature", as a lack of government. He discussed the concept of anarchy in order to question why humanity ought to leave the state of nature behind and instead submit to a "
legitimate government". In contrast to Thomas Hobbes, who conceived of the state of nature as a "war of all against all" which existed throughout the world, Kant considered it to be only a
thought experiment. Kant believed that
human nature drove people to not only seek out
society but also to attempt to attain a
superior hierarchical status. While Kant distinguished between different forms of the state of nature, contrasting the "solitary" form against the "social", he held that there was no means of
distributive justice in such a circumstance. He considered that, without
law, a
judiciary and means for
law enforcement, the danger of violence would be ever-present, as each person could only judge for themselves what is right without any form of arbitration. He thus concluded that human society ought to leave the state of nature behind and submit to the authority of a state. Kant argued that the threat of violence incentivises humans, by the need to preserve their own safety, to leave the state of nature and submit to the state. Based on his "
hypothetical imperative", he argued that if humans desire to secure their own safety, then they ought to avoid anarchy. But he also argued, according to his "
categorical imperative", that it is not only
prudent but also a
moral and
political obligation to avoid anarchy and submit to a state. Kant thus concluded that even if people did not desire to leave anarchy, they ought to as a matter of duty to abide by universal laws.
Defense of the state of nature In contrast,
Edmund Burke's 1756 work
A Vindication of Natural Society, argued in favour of anarchist society in a defense of the state of nature. Burke insisted that reason was all that was needed to govern society and that "artificial laws" had been responsible for all social conflict and inequality, which led him to denounce the church and the state. Burke's anti-statist arguments preceded the work of classical anarchists and directly inspired the political philosophy of
William Godwin. , an early proponent of anarchy as a political regime In his 1793 book
Political Justice, Godwin proposed the creation of a more just and free society by abolishing government, concluding that order could be achieved through anarchy. Although he came to be known as a founding father of anarchism, Godwin himself mostly used the word "anarchy" in its negative definition, fearing that an immediate dissolution of government without any prior political development would lead to disorder. Godwin held that the anarchy could be best realised through gradual evolution, by cultivating reason through education, rather than through a sudden and violent revolution. But he also considered transitory anarchy to be preferable to lasting
despotism, stating that anarchy bore a distorted resemblance to "true liberty" and could eventually give way to "the best form of human society". This positive conception of anarchy was soon taken up by other political philosophers. In his 1792 work
The Limits of State Action,
Wilhelm von Humboldt came to consider an anarchist society, which he conceived of as a community built on voluntary contracts between educated individuals, to be "infinitely preferred to any State arrangements". The French political philosopher
Donatien Alphonse François, in his 1797 novel
Juliette, questioned what form of government was best. He argued that it was passion, not law, that had driven human society forward, concluding by calling for the abolition of law and a return to a state of nature by accepting anarchy. He concluded by declaring anarchy to be the best form of political regime, as it was law that gave rise to
tyranny and anarchic revolution that was capable of bringing down bad governments. After the
American Revolution,
Thomas Jefferson suggested that a stateless society might lead to greater happiness for humankind and has been attributed the maxim "that government is best which governs least". Jefferson's political philosophy later inspired the development of
individualist anarchism in the United States, with contemporary
right-libertarians proposing that private property could be used to guarantee anarchy. ==Anarchist thought==