Anaethism: An Analysis Of Emma Goldman's Anarchism

In the essay titled “Anarchism,” Emma Goldman provides a defense of anarchism and attempts to persuade skeptics of the philosophy 's efficacy. Specifically, Goldman attempts to convince the reader that, contrary to the skeptics’ arguments, anarchism is functional in practice and not just an abstract idea. Goldman argues that the current capitalist social structure is inherently exploitative and dominating, particularly of the working class, and an anarchistic future is the most practical solution to the ills of society. While Goldman dismisses the critics that argue that anarchism is a nice idea in theory but is not practical, I disagree with Goldman’s assessment. Although anarchism has worthwhile qualities and, in theory, would provide solutions

Goldman first argues that critics have viewed the definition of practicality incorrectly, and under a proper definition, the practicality of anarchism will become apparent. According to Goldman, practicality is “not whether the latter can keep intact the wrong or foolish; rather it is whether the scheme has vitality enough to leave the stagnant waters of the old, and build, as well as sustain, new life” (49). Even using this definition, however, anarchism still fails to remain a viable and practical philosophy. Anarchism may be able to do away with the wrong or foolish aspects of an exploitative capitalist system, but the new, anarchistic system is not devoid of any errors itself. If we were to embrace Goldman’s anarchism, we would simply be trading in old problems for new, likely unforeseen, problems. It is true that with

All people, whether under anarchism or capitalism, must satisfy their basic needs for food, shelter and clothing. The reason that many working class people work at low paying, demeaning jobs is that they have no other means of providing for their necessities otherwise. If these workers had other ways of surviving, they likely would not be working exploitative jobs. This desperation does not in any way justify employers for treating their employees poorly. All employers should treat their workers with basic human dignity and respect and the exploitation Goldman criticizes should be rectified. However, what this example illustrates is that people in the end must satisfy their basic needs for survival and must occasionally do work that they do not wish to do. With anarchism, these basic needs do not instantly disappear. A person will either have to provide for herself everything she needs to survive or work with others to trade goods or services in some way. Since anarchism is based on free, voluntary association with no overarching structure, there is no guarantee that people will be able to consistently rely on each other for such ends. It also may be that a person will have to perform a service that they do not want to do in order to meet their basic needs, in which case they are arguably no