The Definition of Anarchy

Conventional definitions add to the confusion about 'anarchy' and 'anarchism'

I’ve just purchased a subscription to the Oxford English Dictionary, commonly known as the ‘OED’. I’m thrilled - and it’s not expensive. It’s a wonderful boon for any writer and fascinating in itself (I note that Werner Herzog is also a big fan). I’ve been looking up all sorts of words already. And there’s a family connection: my grandmother once contributed to the OED.

One word I was keen to look up was ‘anarchy’. It’s so often depicted as violent disorder, I wanted to find out what the OED thought. And you can see an abbreviated version of their definition below. Sure enough, the first four entries affirm that the most negative definition. Only the fifth definition captures the meaning that anarchists actually believe in - a society that functions without rulers and the absence of hierarchy.

The predominance of the former definition provides a constant obstacle in explaining the idea of self-government. On the other hand, the knee-jerk response to the word - of disorder or violence - provides a useful opportunity to explain what it can mean in reality. So the common usage is a double-edged sword that anarchists can use to their advantage. I often do just that. Indeed, I argue that both definitions are correct (as indeed the OED confirms). We might have the anarchy of disorder and violence (indeed this is what I think we’re heading into) or we might have peaceful, cooperative self-government that allows the fullest of human flourishing. Two kinds of anarchy. And this is the title of the final chapter of my forthcoming book (god, another plug), and will comprise a future essay here.

I’m going to write to the OED to tell them that their ordering is conveying an implicit bias and tell them that ‘anarchy’ in the sense of absence of authority remains in use today. And through frequent usage myself (and I hope others), I am going to try to restore that meaning to the top of OED’s list of definitions. This is perhaps a bit like manipulating the Google algorithm to get your website to the top of search lists (this is known as Search Engine Optimisation or SEO - what a phrase).

It’s ironic that the term dates back to the ancient Greeks. Because in Athens lies an example of genuine self-government - governing by citizens taking it in turns to make decisions, a demonstration that this form of social organisation can and does work (though one must note that ‘citizens’ in ancient Athens excluded women and slaves). And there are many other historical examples, detailed for instance in Graeber and Wengrow’s ‘Dawn of Everything’, refuting the lazy assumption that this kind of anarchy can ‘never’ work. In fact, arguably, self-government without centralised authority has been the dominant model of social organisation in human history, not the all-controlling, centralised government that we have today and assume unthinkingly to be the immutable norm.

Anyway, here’s the OED on anarchy:

Anarchy:

Summary

A borrowing from Latin.

Etymon: Latin anarchia.

< post-classical Latin anarchia (8th cent. in a British glossarial source; frequently from the 16th cent. in British and continental sources) < ancient Greek ἀναρχία lack of a leader, lawlessness < ἄναρχος without a chief or head (see anarch n.) + ‑ία ‑y suffix3.

Notes

Compare Spanish anarquía (late 14th cent.).

Note French anarchie (1840 in Proudhon in this sense; earlier in the senses ‘form of government in which freed slaves are able to play a role in government’ (a1374 in Middle French in an isolated attestation), ‘condition of a people which has neither a ruler nor authority, lawlessness’ (1596), and (in extended use) ‘disorder, confusion’ (1742)).

Meaning & use

1. 1539–

   As a count noun: a state of political or social disorder resulting from the absence or disregard of government or the rule of law; a society or system in which such disorder prevails.

2. 1574–

   As a mass noun: political or social disorder resulting from the absence or disregard of government or the rule of law.

3. 1876–

   historical. With the. Usually with capital initial. The period 1135–53 during the reign of Stephen, King of England, which was marked by civil war between England and Normandy and a breakdown of law and order.

4. 1580–

   More generally: absence of order or control; disorder, confusion. Also: an instance of this; a disordered profusion of something.

5. 1609–1703

   † The state or condition of having no absolute ruler or ruling authority. Also: a society or state that functions without an absolute ruler or ruling authority. Obsolete.

6. 1850–

   The organization of society on the basis of voluntary cooperation, without any form of governing authority or hierarchy; the political philosophy or movement of anarchism (anarchism n. 2). Also: a state or system organized according to anarchism.

7. 1952–

   Esp. with reference to the creative arts: the fact or condition of not conforming to prevailing rules or conventions; unrestrained behaviour or action; wildness, craziness.

As ever, words matter.