Add new comment

There might not be much point in responding to what seem like rote criticisms of "old stuff," but part of the argument here was that if you want to avoid narrow conceptions of what counts as a meaningful individuality, you're better off focusing on very early anarchist and slightly pre-anarchist sources than on the late-19th century material associated with anarchism's emergence as a movement and ideology. Anarchism avant la lettre lends itself fairly easily to conversations and projects that recognize the widest range of actors. If we don't get it right, we can't blame the dead folks.