Osgood on "Scientific Anarchism"


Suverans2's picture

Can an anarchist "banish all forms of authority" for everyone, (even for those desiring a ruler), or can an anarchist "banish all forms of authority" for himself only?

"You must be the change you wish to see in the world." ~ Mahatma Gandhi

To be (walk the talk) or not to be (talk the walk), that is the question.

Samarami's picture

The best treatment of anarchy I've seen is a paper by John Hasnas and was posted on STR by Anthony Gregory over a year ago (PDF):


He also wrote The Myth of the Rule of Law, which compliments the anarchy column.

Labels delineating "types" of anarchists or "types" of libertarians are superfluous, IMHO (which is not humble by any means). Either I am free or I am not free. Either I believe I (or anybody else) "could or should have power" to banish this, that or some other non aggressive behavior on your part, or I do NOT so believe. Either I believe you have a natural right to be left alone or I do not believe you have that natural right. That is the sole delimiter that makes or breaks me as an anarchist or a libertarian.

"Scientific Anarchism" is an interesting characterization. I'll have to add it to the list I posted a couple weeks ago that consisted of between 40 and 50 different "flavors" of libertarianism and/or anarchy I had come across since signing onto the internet five or six years ago. Osgood wrote this in 1889, which shows that things were not much different then than they are now.

Folks will wring their hands and roll their eyes in attempt to avoid becoming truly free and to limit yours and my quests for freedom. That's what labels are all about. Sam