The Political Philosophy of Poststructuralist Anarchism [Paperback]

Todd May (Author)

Book Description

Publication Date: July 1, 1994

This tactical reading of Lyotard, Deleuze, and Foucault accomplishes a lot. May provides something most of us did not expect by now-a truly fresh understanding of the energies and ethical concerns of some of the most important thinkers of this century.-Thomas L. Dumm, Amherst College The political writings of the French poststructuralists have eluded articulation in the broader framework of general political philosophy primarily because of the pervasive tendency to define politics along a single parameter: the balance between state power and individual rights in liberalism and the focus on economic justice as a goal in Marxism. What poststructuralists like Michel Foucault, Gilles Deleuze, and Jean-François Lyotard offer instead is a political philosophy that can be called tactical: it emphasizes that power emerges from many different sources and operates along many different registers. This approach has roots in traditional anarchist thought, which sees the social and political field as a network of intertwined practices with overlapping political effects. The poststructuralist approach, however, eschews two questionable assumptions of anarchism, that human beings have an (essentially benign) essence and that power is always repressive, never productive.After positioning poststructuralist political thought against the background of Marxism and the traditional anarchism of Bakunin, Kropotkin, and Proudhon, Todd May shows what a tactical political philosophy like anarchism looks like shorn of its humanist commitments-namely, a poststructuralist anarchism. The book concludes with a defense, contra Habermas and Critical Theory, of poststructuralist political thought as having a metaethical structure allowing for positive ethical commitments.

Editorial Reviews

About the Author

Todd May is Associate Professor of Philosophy at Clemson University and author of Between Genealogy and Epistemology: Psychology, Politics, and Knowledge in the Thought of Michel Foucault (Penn State, 1993).

Product Details

• Paperback: 176 pages
• Publisher: Pennsylvania State University Press (July 1, 1994)
• Language: English
• ISBN-10: 0271028890
• ISBN-13: 978-0271028897
• Product Dimensions: 8.7 x 6 x 0.6 inches
• Shipping Weight: 6.4 ounces (View shipping rates and policies)
• Average Customer Review: 5.0 out of 5 stars  See all reviews (2 customer reviews)
• Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #1,320,080 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

14 of 14 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars An attempt at uniting two powerful movements, December 3, 2006

By 

M. Ghazal "A Reader" (USA) - See all my reviews
(REAL NAME)   

This review is from: The Political Philosophy of Poststructuralist Anarchism (Paperback)

Todd May proposes to unify two movements (more accurately, strands of two movements), namely, poststructuralism and anarchism. Poststructuralism, for May, is in need of a framework in order to articulate its politics, and anarchism's commitments to humanism and its views of power as strictly negative and repressive are long overdue; thus, the marriage of poststructuralism and anarchism, producing what some call post-anarchism.

May begins with an explanation of his notion of 'tactical political philosophy', contrasting it with `strategic' political thought, for example, Marx and Liberalism. Rather than deal with economics (Marx) or the powers of the state (liberalism), tactical political philosophy is against such reductionism, and recognizes power's origination on many lines and conglomeration at many intersections of these lines. He then discusses the failures of Marxism - in reducing everything to economic problem and class struggle, it overlooks many sites and points of power.

Then May enters a primer in and critique of anarchism. He introduces the general ideas and concepts, including notions of society as a network, theories of federalism and social organisation, particularly in the thoughts of Bakunin, Proudhon, Kropotkin, and Colin Ward. His criticism rises from Anarchisms commitment to humanism (in its assumption that human beings are essentially good) and its view that power is strictly negative. This moment sets the departure into adopting the poststructuralist thoughts on humanism and power (using Foucault, Deleuze and Lyotard). At the end of this, he presents sketches of what a poststructuralist anarchism may look like, hinting at its tool of investigation par excellence - Geneology, and some methods of intervention, ex., experimentation, valorization of subjugated knowledges, Deleuze's 'becoming minor'. He ends with attempting to base the poststructuralist anarchist theory on ethical discourse, replying to the accusations of Habermas and the critical theorists.

Its an excellent read if your curious of ways to create a politic out of poststructuralism. Other great reads regarding this: Saul Newman and his many writings on Max Stirner and modern/contemporary philosophy.

3 of 3 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars In Praise of PRACTICES, not PRACTICE, July 11, 2009

By 

Jomo K "Educator" (DC) - See all my reviews

This review is from: The Political Philosophy of Poststructuralist Anarchism (Paperback)

The previous reviewer is spot on - this book is GREAT, and on so many levels. So, you ask, why another review? Because May's Political Philosophy of Postructural Anarchism is THAT good. In this slim but dense volume, May manages to articulate a very serious and mature poststructural impulse that has, consciously or not, created in me a postmodern schizophrenia, if you will: although I have always been drawn to both Marxist and Anarchist thought at the philosophical level, I hardly find them exhaustive in a political sense.

This begs an essential question: does the embracement of poststructual analysis render one politically toothless?

I don't think so. May clearly and confidently articulates importance of iconoclastic "micropolitics" - the TACTICAL analysis of practices pulsating through society - versus (an arguably) anachronisitic "macropolitics" - the embracement of a particular STRATEGIC practice, say, Marxism. In Marxist ideology, for example, May points out, "power" is always negative; that is, "power" is treated as a material and historical "top down" entity, viz. a malicious bourgeois stomping on the toes of the laboring proletariat. While Anarchists basically agree with this "top down" articulation of power, they push the proverbial envelope by seeking to eliminate the State completely. In this way, they firmly believe in the "goodness" or pristine "essence" of selfhood.

It is this last point, however, that marks the fundamental departure of poststructual analysis (and my own thinking) from both Marxism and Anarchism, and forms the crux of May's fourth chapter (my favorite): "The Positivity of Power and the End of Humanism." What a title! Basically, May charts the deconstruction of "top down" power, starting with historical development of postwar humanism in the thought of Sartre, esp. his zealous embracement of a Cartesian "self." While structuralists countered Sartre's "essence" and claimed that the modern Cartesian "subject" is essentially more PRODUCED than PRODUCING, May nimbly shifts the conversation to the poststructuralist mistrust of this traditional view of a "top down" power oppressing a Cartesian "self."

The bottom line, I think, is twofold: first, the existence of a staid Cartesian "self" is problematic; and second, that "power" can be POSITIVE and come from the "bottom up" in a radical way. Here, tactical political practices - say, Foucault's genealogical project - are (arguably) a better response to acting politically in the modern world than the dogmatic embracement of a single, definitive strategic practice - say, Foucault's early archaeology project.

Simply put, this book is outstanding and a joy to read. Some of the vocabulary can be tough, so at least a superficial knowledge of Marx, Foucault, and Deleuze is helpful, of course. Lastly, if you find this text interesting, I strongly recommend the contemporary Japanese thnker Karatani Kojin, whose New Associationist Movement (NAM) is appealing on a pragmatic level, along with his outstanding "transcritique" of traditional Marxism and Capitalism.