Abstract
This chapter focuses on libertarian social democracy in the cultural realm. I begin by addressing the possibility of revolutionary cultural change, followed by a discussion on the democratic transitionary society and, more specifically, views toward the social contract (specifically, when it should be accepted or rejected). Next, the goal of maximizing self-government is taken up, concentrating on intersectionality (i.e., different sources of domination), anarchist views toward decentralization, and civic participation. Finally, the chapter addresses the topic of the international community, emphasizing the importance of collective security as a prerequisite to decentralization.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
Sometimes distinct cultures are found within sub-national autonomous zones. For example, the Christiania neighborhood adjacent to Copenhagen, “along with others like it, aims to foster a counterculture that opposes and undermines the logic of capitalist accumulation and national boundaries” (Nielsen, 2020, p. 155).
- 2.
This understanding of culture overlaps with that expressed by other authors. For instance, according to Reagan (2021, p. 21), “Cultural factors are things that are generated in the mind, things such as ideology, language, or assumed social practices and systems of meaning.” Chartier (2020, p. 30) describes culture as “roughly speaking, a relatively large group of people linked by history (and perhaps ancestry) and united by values, habits, attitudes, and a big-picture understanding of the world.” Meanwhile, Fukuyama (1992, p. 219) sees the following factors as constituting the culture of a people: a sense of national identity, religion, social equality, the propensity for civil society, and the historical experience of liberal institutions. While some understandings of culture emphasize its reflection in the arts, I will here focus more on its relevance to social affairs.
- 3.
Public Broadcasting Service. (n.d.). Philly D.A., Episode 8 [Video]. Retrieved May 22, 2021, from https://www.pbs.org/video/part-8-philly-da-episode-8-nh0jj0/
- 4.
It is important to emphasize the distinction between genuine support for a free and equal society (which would prevail after a successful cultural revolution) and the feigned support that seems to prevail today in some liberal democratic contexts, such as the United States. Consistent with this observation, in his book Why Americans Hate Politics, E.J. Dionne mentions that “voters increasingly look for ways to protest the status quo without risking too much change” (quoted in Solomon, 1994, p. 55).
- 5.
Crash Course. (2019, October 8). The French Revolution: Crash Course European History #21 [Video; 9:15–15:28]. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5fJl_ZX91l0&list=PL8dPuuaLjXtMsMTfmRomkVQG8AqrAmJFX&index=22
- 6.
Similarly, Michael Reagan (2021, p. 113, paraphrasing Stuart Hall) notes that “even the deep material and cultural structure of society can be altered with concerted activity.” As an example, “in the space of a few years Sweden moved from the most extreme hyper-inegalitarian proprietarian system, which survived until 1909–1911, to a quintessential egalitarian social-democratic society once the [social democratic party] came to power in the 1920s” (Piketty, 2020, p. 188).
- 7.
From the perspective of Inglehart’s evolutionary modernization theory, it might be predicted that the rise in inequality in recent decades will make it more difficult to achieve a culture of tolerance and non-domination, to the extent that the precarities associated with neoliberalism foster zero-sum competitive mindsets toward others. Such an effect may already be reflected in the rise of right-wing populist parties in the West. However, we might also contrast that prediction with, say, Kropotkin’s argument in Mutual Aid: A Factor of Evolution (1902) that the struggle to survive promotes cooperation and positive-sum interactions. Which outcome prevails would seem to depend, crucially, on the extent to which elites (and some right-wing populists) succeed in directing people’s anger toward immigrants or other lower-class scapegoats and away from the upper socioeconomic classes.
- 8.
Similarly, Lawson (2019, p. 40) refers to “the question of whether revolutions are the result of intentional action by purposeful agents or of broader constellations – demographic changes, patterns of class conflict, processes of modernization, and so on – that take place seemingly out of the reach of revolutionary participants.” For Lawson, revolutionary change is facilitated by macro-level patterns as well as the concerted actions of revolutionary actors (p. 44).
- 9.
- 10.
The concept of contingency is also central to Acemoglu and Robinson’s (2012) explanation of democratization and economic development in Why Nations Fail. Specifically, they argue that at critical junctures in history, minor institutional differences can set countries on radically different (and unexpected) evolutionary paths. Przeworski (2019, p. 73) also emphasizes the importance of contingency, for instance, observing that “the survival of democracy in France may have been a historical accident, as was its failure in Nazi Germany.”
- 11.
For example, I find revolutionary inspiration in Judaism, which I interpret as the historical quest to achieve equality before the law. For instance, in the movie The Ten Commandments, after Moses comes down the mountain with the stone tablets and encounters a scene of anomie in which people are worshipping a golden calf, he declares, “there is no freedom without the law!” A similar idea was later echoed by Enlightenment philosophers such as Kant, Rousseau, and Hegel, who argued that freedom is obedience to laws we give ourselves (i.e., just laws we voluntarily abide by).
- 12.
As was implied by the philosophy of history described in Chap. 1, this book’s argument is republican in the sense that it focuses on optimal ways to organize a unified, single society – the demos. Roughly corresponding with that view, in his book Just Freedom, Philip Pettit (2014, p. 6) describes the meaning of the term republic in the context of Ancient Rome as follows: “A republic, as it came to be conceptualized, is nothing more and nothing less than a community organized around these ideas of equality before and equality over the law.” However, as was stressed in the Introduction, the essential difference between libertarian social democracy and liberal republicanism is the former’s willingness to take the risks associated with progressive decentralization in pursuit of a fuller realization of equal liberty.
- 13.
It is possible that, if self-government was sufficiently diffused during the social revolution, establishing formal governance at a sub-national (rather than national) level would be equal liberty maximizing. However, at least as a starting point, gradualist anarchism should aim for social revolution at the prevailing level of sovereignty – today, the nation-state level. If we lived in a world of city states, then it would be optimal to focus our revolutionary efforts at that level, and so on.
- 14.
A potential critique of this vision is that it would be difficult for a democratic polity to act swiftly and collectively to make numerous political decisions concerning the level of decentralization and other important matters affecting society. A strong emphasis on civic participation in the democratic transitionary society (discussed below) would, of course, help to overcome that challenge. To some extent, that concern can also be addressed in the design of political institutions. For instance, a unicameral-parliamentary (rather than a bicameral-presidential) system might help expedite collective decisions among the demos (political institutions are discussed in Chap. 7).
- 15.
There are, of course, some note-worthy aspects of decentralization found in classical republican social contract theory. For instance, in On the Social Contract, Rousseau favored city-states about the size of Geneva as an appropriate setting for direct democracy and a realization of the General Will. One might note that, like libertarian social democracy, contemporary liberal-republicanism also favors decentralization in the form of subsidiarity and devolution (e.g., in the UK). However, liberal-republicanism still views the nation-state as a permanent fixture of the political landscape. Summarizing Rousseau’s view, Treisman (2007, pp. 288-9) concludes that “decentralization was never more than a distant second best,” and that “the arrangement [Rousseau] describes sounds like one of centralized representative government, with strong protections built in for the provinces.”
- 16.
This notion of loyal opposition corresponds roughly with Mouffe’s idea of agonistic politics, while revolutionary opposition is more antagonistic in nature, seeking to challenge the system itself. With antagonistic conflict, “the combatants promote their own identity in uncompromising ways and seek to crush their opponents – [and this] tends to destroy the democratic conversation that builds on mutual respect” (summarized by Ansell & Torfing, 2021, p. 20).
- 17.
Fadi Akil. (2022, Sep. 30). Thomas Hobbes | In Our Time [BBC 2005] [Video; 36:30–41:25]. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vYYo_5rq1ro
- 18.
Hume, D. (1748). Of the Original Contract. Home Page - Chad Vance. Retrieved January 20, 2023, from https://rintintin.colorado.edu/~vancecd/phil215/Hume.pdf
- 19.
Like Hume, market anarchists are skeptical that a state can achieve the status of a social contract with full popular consent. For instance, Chartier (2020, p. 129) argues that “In fact, monopolistic governments are illegitimate, because they don’t rest on the consent their supporters often claim they do.”
- 20.
As was mentioned in Chap. 2, with essential contestation, reasonable parties acting in good faith (i.e., from behind a veil of ignorance) disagree over which outcome is more conducive to the public good, not to be confused with situations where groups seeking to advance their own private interests engage in strategic opposition. In the contemporary neoliberal era, most politics (at least in the USA) seems to be driven by strategic opposition rather than essential contestation. Indeed, one could plausibly argue that, in the contemporary US, politics itself is basically a conservative strategy to put the brakes on social progress. As Krugman (2020, p. 3) observes, “given the realities of money and power, in modern America, most of the politicization of everything reflects pressure from the right.” In contrast to Marxism, however, libertarian social democracy does not see class-driven strategic opposition as an inevitable characteristic of politics.
- 21.
Earlier examples of intersectional analysis can be found as well. For instance, in 1948, Communist Party member Elizabeth Gurley Flynn argued that Black women were caught in a “triple jeopardy” of racism, class exploitation, and patriarchy (Davis, 1981, p. 165).
- 22.
Similarly, Merriam-Webster’s dictionary defines intersectionality as “the complex, cumulative way in which the effects of multiple forms of discrimination (such as racism, sexism, and classism) combine, overlap, or intersect, especially in the experiences of marginalized individuals or groups.” Merriam-Webster. (n.d.). Intersectionality. Retrieved January 20, 2023, from https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/intersectionality
- 23.
Wikipedia. (n.d.). Persecution of Jews during the Black Death. Retrieved July 1, 2022, from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persecution_of_Jews_during_the_Black_Death
- 24.
However, Marx and Engels also “saw the need for the working class to ally itself with other oppressed and exploited groups in order to further their cause” (Price, 2013, p. 120).
- 25.
Making a similar point in his book Intersectional Class Struggle, Reagan (2021, p. 54) notes that “The lessons of Bacon’s Rebellion [of 1676] for the ruling elite were that racial hatred could be used politically to stem conflict rooted in the class system.” According to Wetzel (2022, p. 73), during Bacon’s rebellion, “the last group to surrender were an armed force of English and African bond servants who were fighting together. This was a nightmare for the colonial elite. To solve their labor-control problem, the American elite decided on a ‘divide and conquer’ strategy – to divide the Black and white laborers. Through a series of laws passed by the colonial legislatures between about 1690 and 1725, the elite began to define a new system of racialized slavery.” Fast-forwarding a bit, “In the 1890s, both North and South experienced growing class tensions. In both regions, elites had long used racial and ethnic enmities to divide the have-nots from the have-almost-nothings” (Hacker & Pierson, 2020, p. 38). For example, around the turn of the twentieth century, certain “race riots,” including the 1898 massacres in Wilmington and Phoenix, South Carolina, “were orchestrated precisely in order to heighten the tensions and antagonism within the multiracial working class” (Davis, 1981, p. 124).
- 26.
Why are some democratic capitalist countries more egalitarian than others today? In their explanation of why the US and Europe have such vastly different welfare systems (with the USA tending to have a far less generous system and European countries tending to have a more generous system and better public health outcomes), Alesina and Glaeser (2004) trace the explanation back to three exogenous factors (i.e., first causes): Large geographic size (which makes revolutionary movements more remote from and less threatening to the center of power), ethnic diversity (which makes it easier for elites to divide and conquer the working class), and the lack of a major defeat in war (as such defeats can spark revolutionary upheavals leading to a more egalitarian society). While this is a plausible explanation, this outcome is not necessarily permanent; the USA can still get on an egalitarian path, or so this book argues.
- 27.
As was noted in Chap. 2, a key question asks: Who would have the final say regarding which laws are equal liberty maximizing? Or, applied to the present topic: Who should get to determine the equal liberty maximizing level of political decentralization? The short answer to both questions is: The people, in a democratic society, from behind a veil of ignorance. We thus encounter a sort of chicken-egg dilemma: In the democratic transitionary society, the demos have the right to establish just institutions (including the level of decentralization) from behind a veil of ignorance, but just institutions are needed to create that veil of ignorance-like situation.
This dilemma resembles that identified in the concluding discussion in Chap. 3: How can societies transition from the current vicious cycle (where social conditions encourage the pursuit of self-interest, and self-interested behavior, in turn, reinforces such conditions) to a virtuous cycle (where conditions conducive to the advancement of equal liberty promote a public spiritedness among the people, and that public spiritedness, in turn, reinforces those ideal conditions)? While there is no simple solution, in Part II, it will be argued that such a transition will require a successful social revolution in the political, economic, and cultural realms.
- 28.
As was emphasized in Chap. 1, the libertarian social democratic society can be distinguished from the liberal society precisely by the former’s greater collective willingness to take such risks in pursuit of a deeper realization of equal liberty.
- 29.
As was implied in Chap. 2, Malatesta’s gradualism was consistent with the prefigurative principle (which I dubbed prefigurative gradualism), in contrast to the gradualist anarchism promoted in this book, which is more open to the possibility that a democratic transitionary state can be equal liberty-maximizing.
- 30.
This spectrum of anarchist thought corresponds with the assertion made in Chap. 2 that anarchist theory and praxis are best understood as spanning a continuum from prefigurative to gradualist. With regards to the two-dimensional ideological space, composed of left-right and libertarian-authoritarian dimensions, the spectrum of anarchist perspectives on the centralization question (from prefigurative to gradualist) corresponds with the libertarian wing of the libertarian-authoritarian dimension.
- 31.
The terms “cautious gradualists” and “radical anarchists” are adopted from Evans (2020, pages 20 and 2, respectively). Evans describes radical anarchists as “those members of the movement committed to pushing the revolution forward and resisting the encroachments of the state.”
- 32.
Revolutionary success in the cultural realm might be defined more precisely as an outcome where, in the frequency distribution of views on the centralization question, the median voter falls within the spectrum of libertarian perspectives. Even in that ideal scenario, it is likely that most individuals will not explicitly describe themselves as anarchists. Thus, as Malatesta advises, “[Anarchists] must find ways of living among nonanarchists, as anarchistically as possible” (quoted in Price, 2013, pp. 170–1).
- 33.
As evidence for this assertion, preliminary results from one of my (not yet published) empirical studies find that lower socio-economic status Florida voters are more stimulated to vote by county-level referenda advancing institutional reforms (which are more transformative in nature) than by referenda advancing social or fiscal policy reforms (which are more like partisan “politics as usual”).
- 34.
This chapter’s present focus on international aggression is somewhat narrow. A fuller realization of state sovereignty would also require achieving consensus on just international laws in other domains (such as the environment) and sustaining voluntary cooperation in the collective provision of international public goods (such as industrial emissions reductions, and collective security). I will focus here primarily on security to simplify the argument.
- 35.
It makes sense to draw examples from US policy, as we have been living in a moment of US unipolarity in world politics at least since the fall of the Soviet Union around 1990. This point also forms part of my justification for focusing primarily on the US in Part II (see the introduction to Chap. 6).
- 36.
Social capital is defined by the Oxford English Dictionary as “The networks of relationships among people who live and work in a particular society, enabling that society to function effectively.” Oxford Dictionary. (n.d.). Definition of social capital in English. Retrieved August 18, 2021, from https://www.lexico.com/en/definition/social_capital. This concept can be scaled up to the international level as a level of shared political will among nations to provide international public goods such as collective security.
- 37.
I am here using the term informal institutions loosely to include all international norms and laws. While some may regard international laws as formal (in that they are written in international treaties, declarations, and covenants), I here refer to them as informal in the sense that there is no global sovereign state to enforce them.
- 38.
A plausible rival explanation for the democratic peace is the “capitalist peace.” For example, some studies have found that, once financial market openness is added to statistical models of peace between countries, the democracy variable becomes statistically insignificant (Gartzke, 2007; Mousseau, 2013). This is not surprising, considering that, for instance, during the Cold War, the USA consistently sought to undermine both democratic and autocratic governments that pursued a socialist economic system. (Although some of those interventions might not be counted as wars, which are required to have at least 1000 battle deaths in conventional measures of inter-state war [Frieden, et al., 2019, p. 91]).
- 39.
As was mentioned in Chap. 2, the term progressive decentralization here refers to the advancement of decentralization in the hopes that the anarchic/decentralized condition will yield a higher net level of equal liberty than its statist counterfactual (i.e., a “good anarchy” outcome).
- 40.
Expected benefits are the perceived probability of some outcome multiplied by the benefit anticipated from that outcome. Conversely, expected costs are the perceived probability of some outcome multiplied by the costs anticipated from that outcome.
- 41.
Like Kropotkin, “[Malatesta’s] goal was libertarian communism, but he was willing to see progress toward his goal go through various paths” (Price, 2013, p. 176).
- 42.
Of course, UN Security Council approval does not necessarily imply that the cause is just. For example, although the Persian Gulf War of 1991 is often viewed as a “textbook case” of collective security, there are some reasons to be skeptical about this view. For instance, according to the UN Charter, the use of force should always be a last resort. However, in their statement to the Security Council on Nov. 29, 1990 (the day Resolution 678 was passed authorizing military force), the Yemeni representative argued that the embargo would work if given time (since Iraq was cut off from resources) and that the US was pushing ahead too quickly. Wikipedia. (n.d.). United Nations Security Council Resolution 678. Retrieved October 24, 2021, from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Security_Council_Resolution_678
- 43.
The doctrine of Responsibility to Protect (R2P) was first established by the International Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty in September 2000, spurred by the failure of the international community to prevent the Rwandan genocide of 1994. In April 2006, the UN Security Council affirmed R2P, recognizing it as a new international norm. R2P remains an international norm (rather than international law) because it violates the principle of state sovereignty (which remains the primary unifying principle of international law) (Frieden, et al., 2019, pp. 464–6). However, “the doctrine [of R2P] remains a threat to dictators contemplating brutality” (Guriev & Treisman, 2022, pp. 202–3).
- 44.
As an example of the free movement of persons, in March 2021, the presidents of Serbia and Albania signed a deal allowing for passport-free movement between the countries. European Travel Information and Authorization System. (2021, March 19). Mini-Schengen: what does this accord mean for the EU? https://www.etiasvisa.com/etias-news/mini-schengen-balkans
- 45.
As an imperfect example, within the State of California, “In cases where one entity, such as a city, cannot or will not deliver a service, new districts or governing boards have been created without regard to centralized planning. Their abundance reflects historically high demands for services, citizens’ general unwillingness to pay higher taxes for them, and a strong desire to maintain control over local matters, or what’s known as self-rule. Bottom-up solutions are thus joined to state and federal mandates in a functionally segmented system” (Van Vechten, 2017, p. 93).
- 46.
Referring again to the State of California as an example, there are nearly 4700 special districts – “geographic areas governed by an autonomous board for a single purpose, such as running an airport or providing a community with street lighting or a cemetery.” Unlike most other California governments, special districts “may cover only a portion of a city or stretch across several cities or counties.” Other types of services delivered by California’s special districts include hospitals, rat and mosquito control, trash disposal, fire protection, irrigation and water delivery, bus and rail transit, and utility districts (Van Vechten, 2017, p. 103).
- 47.
More generally, Ferretti, Ince, and White’s argument, emphasizing the need for “thinking beyond the state and statist framings of democracy,” could be consistent with libertarian social democracy, to the extent that their perspective allows for transitionary state contributions to anarchism.
- 48.
For example, state legislatures within the USA usually define their own electoral district boundaries. However, since the 1980s, Iowa’s political maps have been drawn by the nonpartisan Legislative Services Agency. The agency “uses computer software to draw one hundred House districts and fifty Senate districts according to rules that keep population as equal as possible from district to district, avoid splitting counties, and keep the districts compact. […] Largely as a result, partisan control of the Iowa legislature has flipped just about every ten years since the agency was created” (Smith & Greenblatt, 2014, p. 215).
- 49.
Alerting us to the urgency of the issue, an Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) report released in August 2021 warned that the goal of limiting the rise in global temperatures to below 1.5 °C (recognized in the 2015 Paris Accords) would not be achieved this century unless huge cuts in carbon emissions take place. McGrath, M. (2021, August 9). Climate change: IPCC report is “code red for humanity.” British Broadcasting Corporation. https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-58130705
- 50.
Jamie Waters. (2021, May 30). Overconsumption and the environment: Should we all stop shopping? The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2021/may/30/should-we-all-stop-shopping-how-to-end-overconsumption
References
Acemoglu, D., & Robinson, J. A. (2012). Why nations fail: The origins of power, prosperity, and poverty. Crown Business.
Acemoglu, D., & Robinson, J. A. (2019). The narrow corridor: States, societies, and the fate of liberty. Penguin Press.
Alesina, A., & Glaeser, E. L. (2004). Fighting poverty in the US and Europe: A world of difference. Oxford University Press.
Ansell, C., & Torfing, J. (2021). Public governance as co-creation: A strategy for revitalizing the public sector and rejuvenating democracy. Cambridge University Press.
Best, S. (2009). Rethinking revolution: Total liberation, alliance politics, and a prolegomena to resistance movements in the twenty-first century. In R. Amster et al. (Eds.), Contemporary anarchist studies (pp. 189–199). Routledge.
Bookchin, M. (2005). The ecology of freedom: The emergence and dissolution of hierarchy. AK Press.
Buchanan, J. M. (2000 [1975]). The limits of liberty: Between anarchy and leviathan. Liberty Fund.
Caplan, B., & Weinersmith, Z. (2019). Open borders: The science and ethics of immigration. First Second.
Chartier, G. (2020). A good life in the market: An introduction to business ethics. American Institute for Economic Research.
Clark, J. P. (2019). Between earth and empire: From the Necrocene to the beloved community. PM Press.
Condit, S. (2019). Anarchism in local governance: A case study from Finland. Anthem Press.
Davis, A. Y. (1981). Women, race & class. Vintage Books.
Dirik, D. (2020). Only with you, this broom will fly: Rojava, magic, and sweeping away the state inside us. In C. Milstein (Ed.), Deciding for ourselves: The promise of direct democracy (pp. 199–230). AK Press.
Evans, D. (2020). Revolution and the state: Anarchism in the Spanish civil war, 1936–1939. AK Press.
Ferretti, F., Ince, A., & White, R. J. (2020). Malatesta in Brexitland: Toward post-statist geographies of democracy. Theory in Action, 13(1), 137–160.
Franks, B. (2020). Four models of anarchist engagements with constitutionalism. Theory in Action, 13(1), 32–69.
Frieden, J. A., Lake, D. A., & Schultz, K. A. (2019). World politics: Interests, interactions, institution (4th ed.). W. W. Norton &.
Fukuyama, F. (1992). The end of history and the last man (2006 paperback ed.). Free Press.
Gartzke, E. (2007). The capitalist peace. American Journal of Political Science, 51(1), 166–191.
Graeber, D., & Wengrow, D. (2021). The dawn of everything: A new history of humanity. Farrar, Straus and Giroux.
Guriev, S., & Treisman, D. (2022). Spin dictators: The changing face of tyranny in the 21st century. Princeton University Press.
Hacker, J. S., & Pierson, P. (2020). Let them Eat Tweets: How the Right Rules in an Age of Extreme Inequality. Liveright Publishing Corporation.
Hasnas, J. (2008). The obviousness of anarchy. In R. T. Long & T. R. Machan (Eds.), Anarchism/Minarchism: Is a government part of a free country? (pp. 111–132). Ashgate.
Hobbes, T. (1994 [1651]). Leviathan. Hackett Publishing Company, Inc.
Inglehart, R. F. (2018). Cultural evolution: People’s motivations are changing, and reshaping the world. Cambridge University Press.
Jacobs, L. R., & Shapiro, R. Y. (2000). Politicians don’t pander: Political manipulation and the loss of democratic responsiveness. The University of Chicago Press.
Jencks, C. (1990). Varieties of Altruism. In J. Mansbridge (Ed.), Beyond self interest (pp. 54–67). The University of Chicago Press.
Kant, I. (2019 [1795]). Perpetual peace. In K. A. Mingst, J. L. Snyder, & H. E. McKibben (Eds.), Essential readings in world politics (7th ed., pp. 24–26). Norton & Company.
Kinna, R. (2019). The government of no one: The theory and practice of anarchism. Penguin Random House.
Kropotkin, P. (2015 [1892]). The conquest of bread. Penguin Books.
Krugman, P. (2020). Arguing with zombies: Economics, politics, and the fight for a better future. W. W. Norton & Company.
Laursen, E. (2021). The operating system: An anarchist theory of the modern state. AK Press.
Lawson, G. (2019). Anatomies of revolution. Cambridge University Press.
Locke, J. (2003 [1689]). Second treatise of government. In D. Wootton (Ed.), John Locke: Political writings. Hackett Publishing Company, Inc.
Magone, J. M. (2019). Contemporary European politics: A comparative introduction (2nd ed.). Routledge.
Mandeville, B. (1992 [1714]). The fable of the bees: Or private vices, Publick benefits. Liberty Fund.
Markell, P. (2003). Bound by recognition. Princeton University Press.
May, T. (1994). The political philosophy of poststructuralist anarchism. Pennsylvania State University Press.
Mearsheimer, J. J. (2014). The tragedy of great power politics. W. W. Norton & Company, Inc.
Mouffe, C. (2013). Agonistics: Thinking the world politically. Verso.
Mousseau, M. (2013). The democratic peace unraveled: It’s the economy. International Studies Quarterly, 57(1), 186–197.
Nau, H. (2019). Perspectives on international relations: Power, institutions, ideas (6th ed.). CQ Press.
Nielsen, A. (2020). Christiania: A free city in the City of Copenhagen. In C. Milstein (Ed.), Deciding for ourselves: The promise of direct democracy (pp. 135–160). AK Press.
Pettit, P. (2014). Just freedom: A moral compass for a complex world. W.W. Norton & Company, Inc.
Piketty, T. (2020). Capital and ideology. The Belknap Press.
Price, W. (2012). The anarchist method: An experimental approach to post-capitalist economics. In D. Shannon, A. J. Nocella II, & J. Asimakopoulos (Eds.), The accumulation of freedom: Writings on anarchist economics (pp. 313–325). AK Press.
Price, W. (2013). The value of radical theory: An anarchist introduction to Marx’s critique of political economy. AK Press.
Prichard, A. (2016). Anarchy. In F. Berenskoetter (Ed.), Concepts in world politics. Sage Publishing.
Przeworski, A. (2019). Crises of democracy. Cambridge University Press.
Raekstad, P., & Gradin, S. S. (2020). Prefigurative politics: Building tomorrow today. Polity Press.
Rawls, J. (1971). A theory of justice (revised ed.). Belknap Press.
Reagan, M. B. (2021). Intersectional class struggle: Theory and practice. AK Press.
Rousseau, J. J. (1987 [1762]). The basic political writings. Hackett Publishing Co.
Shannon, D. (2012). Chopping off the invisible hand: Internal problems with markets and anarchist theory, strategy, and vision. In D. Shannon, A. J. Nocella II, & J. Asimakopoulos (Eds.), The accumulation of freedom: Writings on anarchist economics (pp. 276–290). AK Press.
Skoble, A. J. (2008). Radical freedom and social living. In R. T. Long & T. R. Machan (Eds.), Anarchism/Minarchism: Is a government part of a free country? (pp. 87–102). Ashgate.
Solomon, N. (1994). False hope: The politics of illusion in the Clinton era. Common Courage Press.
Smith, K. B., & Greenblatt, A. (2014). Governing states and localities (4th ed.). CQ Press.
Treisman, D. (2007). The architecture of government: Rethinking political decentralization. Cambridge University Press.
Van Vechten, R. (2017). California politics: A primer (4th ed.). CQ Press.
Ward, C. (2011). Autonomy, solidarity, possibility: The Colin Ward reader. AK Press.
Wetzel, T. (2022). Overcoming capitalism: Strategy for the working class in the 21st century. AK Press.
White, M. (2016). The end of protest: A new playbook for revolution. Penguin Random House.
Williams, B. D. (2020). Early voting, direct democracy, and voter mobilization. The Social Science Journal, 57(3), 334–349.
Wolin, S. S. (2008). Democracy incorporated: Managed democracy and the specter of inverted totalitarianism. Princeton University Press.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2023 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Williams, B. (2023). Anarchism in the Cultural Realm. In: Anarchism and Social Revolution . Contributions to Political Science. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-39462-1_4
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-39462-1_4
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-031-39461-4
Online ISBN: 978-3-031-39462-1
eBook Packages: Political Science and International StudiesPolitical Science and International Studies (R0)