Emma Goldman: “Anarchism: What It Really Stands For”

Explanation and Analysis of the Document

In her introduction to this essay, Goldman identifies anarchism as a progressive idea that is opposed by traditional society, which would choose to block a new dawn for humankind. It is worth noting that although Goldman was a champion of women's emancipation, in her language she employs the word man in a universal sense. Referring to anarchism as revolutionary and innovative, Goldman concludes that opposition to the philosophy was based upon the misperception that anarchism was beautiful but impractical or that it represented violence and destruction. Refuting the misunderstanding, Goldman argues that anarchism is the most practical of all philosophies, for it is based upon “building and sustaining new life.” As for the assertion that anarchism encouraged only destruction and violence, Goldman maintains that anarchism attacks the influence of ignorance and seeks only to destroy the parasitic institutions—the weeds in the garden of society.

Goldman then proceeds to offer a definition of anarchism as “the philosophy of a new social order based on liberty unrestricted by man-made law; the theory that all forms of government rest on violence, and are therefore wrong and harmful, as well as unnecessary.” She goes on to argue that mankind has been unable to attain the free social order envisioned by anarchism owing to the false dichotomy between the individual and social instincts. Goldman insists that out of free individuals comes a renewed sense of social cohesion. Goldman maintains that anarchism offers freedom for man and the blending of individual and social instincts by attacking the three major influences enslaving mankind: religion, property, and government.

Although she devotes far more attention to the denunciation of property and the state, Goldman supports the conclusion of Karl Marx that religion is the opiate of the masses. Referring to religion as a black monster, Goldman calls upon man to assert his supremacy over the false image of a supreme being. In this regard Goldman's thoughts are similar to Marx's argument that religion is a social construction by the ruling class to render the masses subservient.

The anarchist writer provides greater analysis of the role played by property in enslaving mankind, agreeing with Joseph Proudhon that ownership of property is theft. Writing with an angry flourish, Goldman describes property possession as fostering a lust for wealth and power while robbing workers of the product produced by their labor. But Goldman goes beyond the condemnation of monopolistic power concentrated in the hands of American captains of industry by addressing the alienation of labor, which is an important component in the Marxist critique of capitalism. Goldman describes the centralization of property in the factory system as limiting workers to dull and repetitious activities devoid of beauty and creativity. Anarchism, Goldman maintains, envisions a society in which the individual is free to select his or her working conditions and mode of labor. Accordingly, Goldman argues that in order to unleash labor as a creative force, economic arrangements must be governed by the actions of voluntary productive and distributive associations. Such voluntary associations, however, are prohibited by the forces of property backed by the coercive powers of the state.

Goldman thus concludes her powerful essay with a condemnation of the state. It is here that Goldman gains a degree of separation from Marxism, as she has little patience for a dictatorship of the proletariat or a withering away of the state. Goldman agrees with the American philosopher Ralph Waldo Emerson that “all government in essence is tyranny.” In quoting Emerson and Henry David Thoreau, whom she describes as the “greatest American anarchist,” Goldman is making an effort to place anarchism within the American strain and not construe it simply as an alien European ideology. She asserts that whether it is a monarchy or an ostensibly representative republic such as the United States, government has the goal of subordinating the individual to the powers of the state. To control the individual and protect property, the state employs legal and police terror because there is no social harmony in a society where property is held only by a few. Rather than preventing crime, Goldman proclaims that the state encourages criminal activity by perpetuating a system in which the individual is deprived of the opportunity to fully express joy and creativity in labor. She believes that anarchism promises “an order that will guarantee to every human being free access to the earth and full enjoyment of the necessities of life, according to individual desires, tastes, and inclinations.”

The liberating possibilities of anarchism, however, will not be achieved through electoral politics. Instead, Goldman proclaims that anarchy assumes rebellion against the traditional order. She hedges, however, on calling for violent revolution. She concludes that in more mature political systems, such as that which exists in the United States, it may be possible to bring about an anarchist society through the direct action of labor organization or the general strike.