Anarchism: A Legacy of Postmodernism

Abstract

This study has made the implicit links between postmodernism and anarchism explicit in order to uncover the philosophical origins of terrorism in the postmodern society. This study deals with the Anarchists’ philosophical background and how Postmodernism fanned it. Anarchists’ approach mainly whirls around a single point agenda, and that is, they are against the state or existence of states’ borders. I mention again what Researcher have already mentioned, the state and all other international institutions emerged after a rational approach as stated by Hegel. Postmodernism denied that reality in every contour, whether those are institutions or anything else. Anarchism brought this concept into a broader paradigm and started denying the existence of the state. So, both postmodernists and anarchists have denied the reality in their own capacities, but the grounds and arguments are the same. Anarchism paved the way for multiple active terrors based centrifugal movements throughout the world.

Key Words: Postmodernism, Anarchism, Neoconservatives, Leo Strauss, Nietzsche, Iraq, Weapons of Mass Destruction

Introduction

It is very much doable to understand postmodernism from different events than through reams of text. Once a person asked St Augustine that what literature is? He replied, until the moment you didn’t ask me, I knew what literature is (Sahar 2020–21). The same is the problem with postmodernism, too. We don’t have any sort of definition of postmodernism, neither subjective nor universal. According to Norman K. Denzin,” Postmodernism is an impenetrable jargon (Delaney, 2014).” In the jurisdiction of social sciences, the erudite faction defines everything subjectively. The genuine yarn behind this approach is that the source of episteme or knowledge in social sciences is not purely empirical but a rational, unlike natural sciences, where we define different concepts objectively.

The same is the case with postmodernism; too, everyone has defined it according to his capacity, approach, and level of knowledge.” Postmodernism is when you put everything in question marks (Palmer, 2014).” Secondly, in social sciences, we define different concepts in a comparative manner. As it is very explicit from history than whenever we try to define modernism, we compare it with the dark ages because both act as a thesis and anti-thesis. This comparative analysis of different theories and approaches makes it much easy to define different concepts very explicitly but, postmodernism has deprived itself of this sort of analysis because postmodernism has rejected and has tried to demolish the very foundation of modernism and all its margins which whirl around the modernism. Postmodernism is trying to define itself in a personal capacity without taking help from existing episteme for which postmodernism acts as an anti-thesis. Now when it is doesn’t take help from alien concepts to define it, we have an alternative way, too, to define this jargon.

Literature Review

Nietzschean anarchy should not be seen as isolated, unimportant political oddities. As a result, I would suggest that Nietzsche’s anarchist tendencies should be viewed as part of the broader framework for understanding the development and collapse of rationalist political humanism. Using an overly simplified diagram, this web might look something like this: At one end is European Enlightenment political and intellectual order, the great liberal revolutions of late 18^th century, the liberal states that emerged from those revolutions, and all of the epistemological and representational assumptions that underlie such states (Call, 2002).

At the cease of the 19^th century, everyone wasprone and vulnerable to terrorism. At the very endof the 19^th century, a state denying personassassinated French executive. Another heart-wrenching incident of the late 19^th century was theassassination of Austria’s Queen along with thebrutal murder of Spanish PM. At the dawn of the20th century, if we examine the agendas of thepoliticians, police, journalists, and writers; terrorismwas at the top of the list (Laqueur, 1996), Laqueur,W. (1996).

But with the rise of postmodern philosophies, the pre-established ideas of faith, ethics, and reason became uncertain, which blurred the construct of meaning. The similar tendency can be seen in the decline of a militant fundamentalism from its following of very basic religious truths to the detaching of any ethical construct it was associated with previously. ISIS can undoubtedly be added to the list of postmodern, neo- fundamentalist ideologies that are the harbors of violence, and it is very clear that militant fundamentalism grows out of such places that are generically chaotic. (Rasheed,2018).

Postmodernism is a versatile concept. Apart from adding fuel to the ongoing terrorism in the world, it owns aesthetics, art, and many more wings. The Postmodern terrorist factions such as ISIS, AQ, and many more don’t represent postmodernism completely. Postmodernism has its contribution to the domain of art, Philosophy, Poetry, and Literature. Making it notorious phenomena on the basis of its certain peripheries would not be justice (Lloyd 2016).

Since ancient times, religion instituted meaning in human consciousness through its spiritual injunctions, ethical distinction of right from wrong as well as restrictions on the bestial and carnal instincts. With the coming of European enlightenment, rationalism and science set new standards of personal, societal, and universal values. However, with the rise of postmodern philosophies, certitude in established institutions of faith, ethics, and even reason started to crumble and thereby the very construct of meaning began to blur. A similar trend is perceptible in the descent of militant fundamentalism from its avowed pursuance of essential religious truths to a near-complete breakdown of any ethical construct it claimed to cling to (Rasheed 2018).

Postmodernist Philosophical Background of Anarchists and how they fanned the Terror in the world?

French Revolution and the Emergence of Anarchism?

Enlightenment acts as a commencement point for the anarchism. The basic objectives of the french revolution were Freedom, and equality. These breeds of the revolution backed Anarchists to question the revolutions’ objectives. If we examine anarchism generally, we can say that anarchism is something in which one becomes reluctant and uncertain about many sensitive and established truths such as state, International institutions, and even about the religious beliefs (Ibañez 2008). If we intensely and deeply dissect anarchism and its foundations, it becomes clear that they do not want any sort of extraneous regime or authority; even they oppose the existence of state. This denying of reality is the basic aim and one of the postulates of the anarchism. Actually they fight with a stance and that is based on the argument that which is a superior phenomenon, whether Authority and state or Individuals’ freedom and autonomy (Marshal 2010).

The whole philosophy of anarchism and even all of its peripheries whirl around one thing and that is Freedom. It is very much important to contextualize and understand the word “authority” from the anarchists’ perspective. They have included Well informed and Well named people, along with the one who inborn power holder in the domain and jurisdiction of the authority. According to some of the expert in this field of study, that they don’t have any problem with the authority as long as it doesn’t interfere in activities of the common masses and the freedom of the common heads remain safe (Critchley, 2012).”

Entente between Anarchism and Postmodernism

This study will make the links between postmodern philosopher Nietzsche and the anarchism explicit. We will also make this thing clear that whether this entente between the two is a direct one or it exists in an unconscious form. Simple as that, the main objective of this part is to demonstrate the existence of links between Anarchists’ values and Nietzsche’s work. Finding these ties between the two isn’t possible without following the analogical method in order to compare Nietzsche’s philosophy and the epistemological paradigm established by him with that of the Anarchists. It can be seen that Nietzsche was a stern opponent of anarchism but still his words matter. Despite the fact that he has denounced anarchism, but his blunt writing has paved the way for such an active state denying movement. Simply we can say that Nietzsche’s writings and his philosophy are compatible with anarchists’ postulates, aims, and sayings.

We have few points where Nietzsche has accused, denounced, and alleged the anarchists. But at the same time, Nietzsche has alienated himself from reality seekers, too. This dual nature of his philosophy puts one in an imbroglio. Oscillating in limbo after studying Nietzsche is natural thing. But the dominancy of his pro-anarchists’ writings makes it doable to put him in faction and calibrators of the anarchism. His philosophy of “God is dead” and the concept of “superman” both is actually denying reality in their own capacities. Denying or ignoring reality is the point of compatibility between postmodernists and especially Nietzsche and Anarchists (Iliopoulos, 2019).

This technique may help solve some of the historiography’s problems expressed by Jacques Derrida, who has stated that “the centre accepts multiple forms or names successfully and in a controlled way.” Metaphysical history, like Western history, is the history of metaphors and metonymies. Its matrix determines Being as presence in all senses of the word.” Derrida is correct to be wary of the centered “metaphysics of presence” that has dominated Western thinking since Plato because presence implies absence, and any fixed center must rely on an excluded periphery for its very existence. The matrix I want to suggest, however, is the polar opposite of the “matrix” of Western metaphysics described by Derrida above because the postmodern matrix has no core (Call, 2002). Taking the centerless, hypertextual matrix as our model and postmodern philosophy as our topic of inquiry, we might then proceed as follows.

Postmodern Anarchism in Contemporary Political Scenario/World

First, let me underline that postmodern anarchism is simply one strain of current anarchism, a fascinating and essential strain, to be sure, but only one strain. Anarchism of the postmodern sort would incorporate classic critiques of capital and state, but it would also go far beyond these critiques to build a political philosophy that is suited to the postmodern era. One, postmodern anarchism asserts, beginning with Nietzsche, an anarchy of the subject, in contrast to traditional anarchism’s strangely unified subject. The postmodern subject is and must remain multifarious, scattered, and schizophrenic, as Deleuze would put it. Within the postmodern enterprise, this anarchy of the subject supports the preservation and growth of difference and Otherness. This anarchy of the subject limits the possibility of a totalitarian subjectivity like that of the Leninist vanguard by stressing that all subjectivities must be absolutely provisional and promoting the formation of numerous strands of subjectivity within a single “person.” Nietzschean philosophy offers comparable anarchy of being to ensure that this anarchy of the subject has the status of a perpetual revolution. In the Nietzschean approach, a postmodern anarchist must be constantly conquering himself. The Nietzschean anarchist avoids the danger that her subjectivity would recrystallize in a totalizing manner by continually radicalising the subject, by constantly immersing the “self” in the river of becoming.

Secondly, keeping in view the status and nature of power, the Anarchists are divided in two different cadres. We have classical as well as postmodern anarchists. The view of the postmodern ones is far broader, technical, and jargonistic in nature. Foucault, too, represents the postmodern faction. Foucault diminished classicalism or traditionl’s approach and drags power out of just fiscal and regime setup, and left it with broader understanding. It left Foucault naked to a critique about the division of power and resistance. According to Foucault, Power shrinks and entails resistance. Power acts as a cause for the resistance. Where power exists, resistance must be there. This concept of Foucault is extremely pragmatic in nature. The use of power against many movements in the West has further boomed those movements. We have the examples of Gay movement, lesbian’s movement, and many more.

Philosophical Background of Anarchism

The philosophical and epistemological background of anarchism is very explicit from the above-stated literature, and more precisely, in Nietzsche’s context. The ending part of this question deals with the atrocious activities of the anarchists during different hours of the history. There are ample cases in which the anarchists have carried out their brutal activities, which portray how active this movement is.

It was religion that had trapped humans’ minds and had tried to socialize them according to the revealed scriptures, which was consisted of the universal and defined nature of good and evil.

Religion, before the enlightenment epoch, used to ban the rational approaches of any sort. The renaissance promoted positivism or rational methodology through which human beings started questioning and doubting any sort of established concept and this thing, in the long run, further cleaned that path for the growth of postmodern attitude.

ISIS and Al-Qaeda’s Dissection in the Context of Anarchism

As stated by Strauss about noble lie, same was/is the case with militant organizations like AQ and ISIS. They, in their foggy contour, has tried to portray their type of struggle in the veil of religion to make people assume that they are trying and tussling according to the religious scriptures and pursuing the truth. But the reality was different. Their struggle was not against social evils like poverty etc. The only aim was to spread terror in the world and to grab political power in the world as stated by the ISIS’s leader in a letter to Osama that the only difference between you and us is that we want to catch the attention through horror and heart-wrenching activities.

Terror, the only way AQ had followed in order to get what they wanted. This was the point where they deviated from religion for the sake of their ends. As religion stops the fighters from the genocide of the innocent one but the case is different when we examine AQ and ISIS’s activities and their atrocities against the innocent masses. It becomes clear and doable to exclude ISIS and AQ from the religious jihadist list and add them to the postmodern list (Rasheed, 2018).

We have a huge amount of literature about AQ and Osama’s way of jihad; little has been written about bin Laden’s thoughts as influenced by European Marxist postmodernism. In reality, al Qaeda’s doctrine owes as much too harmful tendencies in Western philosophy as it does to a distortion of Muslim principles in justifying its acts of violence. Osama bin Laden’s terror philosophy is partially a product of the West. To understand this, one must return to the intellectual brew that formed Third World socialism’s ideology in the 1960s (Newell, Postmodern Jihad 2001).

The Link between Terrorism and Anarchism

Yes. When we dissect the scenario of the last days of the 19^th century, it portrays that everyone was prone and have left vulnerable to terrorist attacks, means no one was guarded against these atrocious activities. Many famous and well known names were assassinated during those days. From France, Austria, Spain, and many more countries people had assassinated. The heart wrenching incidents of the late 19^th century were included the assassination of Austria’s Queen along with the brutal murder of Spanish PM. At the dawn of the 20^th century, if we examine the agendas of the politicians, police, journalists, and writers, terrorism was at the top of the list. In this light, the current uptick in terrorist activities isn’t very alarming.

Conclusion

This research examines the conceptual basis of anarchists and how postmodernism fueled their flame. Anarchism revolves mostly on a single objective, which is that they oppose the state or the establishment of state borders in the first place. The state and all other international institutions arose as a result of Hegel’s logical approach. From institutions to everything else, the postmodernists repudiated that reality in every way. Anarchism expanded on this idea and began to reject the existence of a state. There are certain similarities between the ways in which the postmodernists and anarchists deny reality. Multiple terror-based centrifugal movements, such as ISIS, Al-Qaida, etc., were born out of anarchism. There was no regard for international institutions when these organizations began their campaign throughout the world, following the lead of their postmodern and anarchist masters. In the above-mentioned literature, and more specifically in Nietzsche’s context, the philosophical and epistemological basis of anarchism is quite evident. Anarchists’ atrocities over different periods of history are the subject matter of the final section of this inquiry. Numerous examples of anarchists’ violent actions show how active this movement is.

This study deals with the Anarchists’ philosophical background and how Postmodernism fanned it. Anarchism’s approach mainly whirls around a single point agenda, and that is, they are against the state or existence of states’ borders. I mention again what Researcher has already mentioned, the state and all other international institutions emerged after a rational approach as stated by Hegel. Postmodernism denied that reality in of every contour whether those are institutions or anything else. Anarchism brought this concept into a broader paradigm and started denying the existence of the state. So, both postmodernists and anarchists have denied the reality in their own capacities, but the grounds and arguments are the same. The anarchism paved the way for multiple active terrors based centrifugal movements throughout the world, i.e., The ISIS, The AL-QAEDA, etc. These groups started their campaign around the world and ignored all the international institutions that followed the footings of their postmodern and anarchists masters. The philosophical and epistemological background of anarchism is very explicit from the above stated literature, and more precisely in Nietzsche’s context. The ending part of this question deals with the atrocious activities of the anarchists during different hours of the history. There are ample cases in which the anarchists have carried out their brutal activities, which portray how active this movement is.

This study will diagnose and will try to detect the links between postmodern philosopher Nietzsche and anarchism. We will also make this thing clear that whether this entente between the two is a direct one or it exists in an unconscious form. Simple as that, the main objective of this part is to demonstrate the existence of links between Anarchists’ values and Nietzsche’s work. Finding these ties between the two isn’t possible without following the analogical method in order to compare Nietzsche’s philosophy and the epistemological paradigm established by him with that of the Anarchists. It can be seen that Nietzsche was a stern opponent of anarchism but still, his words matter. Despite the fact that he has denounced anarchism but his blunt writing has paved the way for such an active state denying movement. Simply we can say that Nietzsche’s writings and his philosophy is compatible with anarchists’ postulates, aims, and sayings. We have a few points where Nietzsche has accused, denounced, and alleged the anarchists. But at the same time, Nietzsche has alienated himself from reality seekers, too. This dual nature of his philosophy puts one in an imbroglio. Oscillating in limbo after studying Nietzsche is natural thing. But the dominancy of his pro-anarchists’ writings makes it doable to put him in faction and calibrators of the anarchism. His philosophy of “God is dead” and the concept of “superman” both is actually denying reality in their own capacities. Denying or ignoring reality is the point of compatibility between postmodernists and especially Nietzsche and Anarchists.

Shaukat, Fakhr ul Munir and Muhammad Hamza

References

Shaukat, Department of Political Science, Abdul Wali Khan University Mardan, KP, Pakistan.

Fakhr ul Munir, Demonstrator, Department of Political Science, Abdul Wali Khan University Mardan, KP, Pakistan.

Muhammad Hamza, M.Phil. Scholar, Department of Political Science, GC University, Lahore, Punjab, Pakistan.