Anarchism: Left, Right and Green [Paperback]

Ulrike Heider (Author), Ulrike Bode (Translator)

Book Description

Publication Date: July 1994

German scholar on leading US anarchist theorists

Editorial Reviews

Language Notes

Text: English (translation)
Original Language: German

Product Details

• Paperback: 153 pages
• Publisher: City Lights Publishers (July 1994)
• Language: English
• ISBN-10: 0872862895
• ISBN-13: 978-0872862890
• Product Dimensions: 8.9 x 5.9 x 0.5 inches
• Shipping Weight: 8.8 ounces
• Average Customer Review: 2.3 out of 5 stars  See all reviews (3 customer reviews)
• Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #582,522 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)

More About the Author

Discover books, learn about writers, read author blogs, and more.

Customer Reviews

Most Helpful Customer Reviews

7 of 7 people found the following review helpful:

2.0 out of 5 stars A Nice Idea, June 11, 2003

By 

David Schaich "David Schaich" (Boulder, Colorado) - See all my reviews
(REAL NAME)   

This review is from: Anarchism: Left, Right and Green (Paperback)

"Anarchism: Left, Right and Green" is a nice idea and could have been an excellent book. In it Ulrike Heider attempts a brief survey of three major strands of Anarchism in the United States:

(1) Anarcho-syndicalism (Left Anarchism)
(2) Libertarianism (Right Anarchism, Anarcho-capitalism)
(3) Eco-anarchism (Green Anarchism)

In each of these three sections, Heider discusses the writings of important contemporary figures (such as Sam Dolgoff, Noam Chomsky and Murray Bookchin) as well as interviews that she conducted with many of them in the late 1980s. She also provides a bit of historical and theoretical background in each section. In the introduction, Heider stresses that criticism, especially self-criticism, is necessary in order for any philosophy to adapt and evolve. She therefore adopts a critical approach to her subjects - an approach which I can appreciate in the abstract.

Although this is a nice idea, "Anarchism: Left, Right and Green" falls flat. There are many things that I didn't like about it, and I will try to hit on the most important ones. First of all, the book was crippled by its shocking brevity. At ~150 pages, Heider is obviously not going into very much detail at all, considering the vast and interesting topics she is addressing. Most of her biographies of historical figures such as Bakunin and Kropotkin are only a few pages long. Noam Chomsky gets about 10 pages, Sam Dolgoff about 15, Murray Bookchin has about 40, far less than is needed for a thorough introduction to their respective philosophies and writings.

This brevity has even worse effects on her critical approach. Heider, a German Anarcho-syndicalist, seems determined to criticize everything in the Right and Green sections of the book - she does criticize the Left Anarchists, but to a lesser degree. However, her criticisms are usually superficial, and occasionally degenerate into nothing more than snide remarks and name-calling. At several points, she subtly denounces her targets as Fascists by (for instance) noting that their words sound "frighteningly familiar" when translated into German. Constructive criticism is all well and good, but there is very little serious analysis or discussion in the book that that can be put to any useful purpose.

Murray Bookchin was so outraged by Heider's treatment of him that he wrote a response, "A Meditation on Anarchist Ethics" (available online at the Anarchy Archives), defending himself. In it, he accused Heider of selectively quoting his work out of context, misrepresenting his statements and writings, slandering and caricaturing him, and even flat-out lying. This was the first thing I had ever read by Bookchin (being syndicalist myself), and I'm relieved I stumbled across it. It prompted me to increase my suspicions of Heider's criticisms and conclusions and not be so quick to adopt her caricatures of various figures.

In addition, several authors have criticized Heider's scholarship, claiming that her footnotes and citations are often incorrect and she occasionally misspells important names that she should know perfectly if she has done any research whatsoever. I have not checked her citations myself, but have little reason to doubt these accusations.

I have other, less important criticisms, but will end at this point, in the interest of space and time. I'll conclude by suggesting that "Anarchism: Left, Right and Green" be read at a library (if possible), if at all. In its place, I suggest Guerin's "Anarchism" and "No Gods, No Masters," which I have not yet read, but have heard good things about. Rocker's "Anarcho-syndicalism" (which I have read) is also useful, although dated.

4 of 4 people found the following review helpful:

1.0 out of 5 stars A gross misrepresentation, August 1, 2008

By 

Laissez Faire Books (Baltimore, MD) - See all my reviews

This review is from: Anarchism: Left, Right and Green (Paperback)

Heider misquotes and misrepresents people continuously. In some cases she attributes positions to them that were the complete opposite of what they said. She misspells names and gets basic facts wrong. She claimed, for instance, that Malthus was the first to apply Darwin's theory of evolution to social issues. Malthus wrote his book before Darwin was born and was dead before Darwin wrote his first work on evolution. Her research was shoddy and amateurish and she quite blantantly distorts and falsifies positions taken by people. One of the worst books on the topic and virtually worthless. It can not be trusted even in basic facts.

2 of 2 people found the following review helpful:

4.0 out of 5 stars Not Great, But Worth It, January 7, 2004

By A Customer

This review is from: Anarchism: Left, Right and Green (Paperback)

For the person who wants a pretty good overview of anarchism, this is definitely the book with which to start. Yes, it is way too short, but there are so many books on anarchism that one can afford a brief introduction to the subject. However, there are a few unacceptable aspects to this text which I shall go into now. First of all, Heider sacrifices obectvivity for a critical stance. This is especially the case when it comes to the section on right-wing anarchist thought (libertarianism, objectivism (Randianism), anarcho-capitalism). Now, I am not an rightist anarchist but, in all fairness, Heider treats the subject with less than scholarly precision. I may not be a follower of Rand or Rothbard, but I still would like to know what they think without all the petty sarcasm. Lastly, Heider ignores council communism and amazing thinkers like Pannekoek and Gorter who were all but against "the State." Also, a critique of Lenin's theory of a vanguard party as opposed to the so-called spontanaiety of the working class would have been an excellent addition. Still, you should get the book.