Comments Elsewhere

On the reasons for calling for “anarchy,” even though many people immediately think that this means calling for chaos or violence: “Now, as to the right of promulgators of new thought to choose their own nomenclature. Mr. Tillinghast says it is ‘usurpation,’ and that ‘new systems should have new names.’ Well, that’s according to circumstances. If a writer, simply by using a word in its primitive rather than its derivative meaning, can call attention to his thought and thereby spread it more rapidly, he seems to me perfectly justified. For who, in the present case for instance, is confused? Not those who habitually think; they see the point at once, and accept or reject according to the dictates of reason. Not those who can think, but do not; they are aroused to think, and then fall into the first category; there’s the advantage of the policy. Only those who cannot think; they, horrified in their ignorance, oppose the new doctrine. What writer would not prefer them as enemies? If some alluring word were used as a trap to catch the unwary, then the case would be different, and Mr. Tillinghast’s objection would be a good one. But if the word is one that repels those whom it deceives, and, by first astonishing, attracts only those who study and understand it, where’s the harm? Why, the plan works to perfection! … “… Speaking of Proudhon, see what he has accomplished by this policy. He was the first to use the word ANARCHY in its new, or rather old, sense …. In 1840, he launched upon the world these two phrases, PROPERTY IS ROBBERY and SOCIETY TENDS TOWARDS ANARCHY. If he had said Liberty and Equality, which are precisely what he meant, nobody would have listened to him for years. But a perfect hornet’s nest swarmed about his ears, and now an army of Proudhonians is organized in Europe so vast that tyrants on their thrones are COMBINING to destroy it; and again, following Jacques Danton’s advice a second time, ‘at the feet of the coalesced kings of Europe has been thrown, as a gage of battle, the head of a king.’ The great economist’s prediction seems likely to be verified….” – Benjamin Tucker, “Anarchism or Anarchy? A Discussion between William H. Tillinghast and Benj. R. Tucker.” (May 1881) http://books.google.com/books?id=hLEFihOcajcC&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false