A Marxist lesson for terrorists 3

July 22, 2005

Apart from being enlightened and entertained, as usual, by the many insights and felicities of thought and expression in Terry Eagleton's piece, I am saddened that he has used the word "anarchy" (and related terms: anarchic, anarchist, anarchism) in only one of its two meanings.

This promotes, by implication, that long-standing myth that "anarchists" support a state of social being without rule or order. The root word and its applications have two, very different, senses: a state of social being without rulers, and a state of social being without rule or order.

Most anarchists whose work I am familiar with would support the former but not the latter, and would condemn violence, asserting that the desired ends do not justify methods that contradict these goals in practice.

Mo Dodson

London Metropolitan University

You've reached your article limit.

Register to continue

Registration is free and only takes a moment. Once registered you can read a total of 3 articles each month, plus:

  • Sign up for the editor's highlights
  • Receive World University Rankings news first
  • Get job alerts, shortlist jobs and save job searches
  • Participate in reader discussions and post comments
Register

Have your say

Log in or register to post comments