Add new comment

Excluding self-described anarchists may or may not be a problem, depending on your perspective. I'm personally only concerned if the exclusion (or inclusion, for that matter) is determined in reference to some other central idea than anarchy—or if it takes forms that render that idea essentially meaningless. I exclude ideological capitalists and fascists summarily, since my focus is on some pretty robust notion of anarchy and some pretty thoroughgoing opposition to the fundamental logics and structures of the status quo, not just considerations about whether they cause disruptions to particular archic systems. In the case of capitalism, "creative destruction" is a pretty well-known principle of that system's development and the anarchist critique of merely disrupting particular governmental formations seems to be one of the few things we really share widely.

It arguably isn't very important, for various reasons, whether we attach "good" and "bad" labels to anarchism, provided we maintain enough clarity that we can say that anarchism is something distinct—at which point we can support it or its rival projects, on the basis of our own priorities.