Rejection of the state is the central commitment. Two strands of anarchism share that conclusion but reach it for opposite reasons - cooperative communalism on one side, self-sovereign individualism on the other. Built around the two strands, the four sub-traditions inside them (anarcho-communism, mutualism, egoism, anarcho-capitalism) and the five Edexcel named thinkers. Three short quizzes break the tour up.
Anarchism is the political ideology built around the rejection of the state. The 9PL0 specification puts it plainly: the state is 'immoral as it rules by physical coercion and deceit, unjust in its defence of economic inequality and must be rejected due to its impact on human nature.' All anarchists agree the state has to go. They disagree about almost everything else - on why exactly the state is rejected, on what liberty means, on whether the future is communal or individual, on whether the economy is common ownership or free market. This walk-through opens with the rejection-of-the-state core, then takes you through the two strands in scrolly detail with their Edexcel named thinkers, then compares them across the four dimensions, then opens up the four sub-traditions the spec names inside the umbrellas - anarcho-communism, mutualism, egoism and anarcho-capitalism - before finishing with the five spec core ideas and the exam resources.
The foundation everything else builds on.
Anarchism is defined by two paired ideas that no other ideology shares. The first is the rejection of the state: the state rules by coercion, defends inequality and crushes human nature. It must go - and stay gone. There is no anarchist version of 'a small state' or 'a reformed state'; the state itself is the target.
The second is the anarchy is order claim: once the state is gone, social order does not collapse - it emerges naturally and spontaneously from human nature. The 9PL0 spec: 'social order occurs naturally and spontaneously, emerging from human nature, and is the key to the belief in a peaceful, stable, stateless society.' Without this second claim anarchism would be merely destructive; with it the ideology becomes a positive political project.
The deep disagreement inside anarchism is what makes order possible. Peter Kropotkin's answer is mutual aid: humans are cooperative by nature, communes self-organise. Max Stirner's answer is the Union of Egoists: rational self-interested individuals agree to cooperate only when it suits them. Same conclusion - stateless order is possible. Opposite premise about human nature.
Scroll - each strand lights with its Edexcel named thinkers and its position on the four dimensions.
The 9PL0 spec recognises two strands of anarchism: collectivist and individualist. Both reject the state. Both believe anarchy is order. They reach those positions from opposite views of human nature. The five Edexcel named thinkers - Stirner, Proudhon, Bakunin, Kropotkin and Goldman - sit across the strands. Scroll through; the figure beside you holds the two-strand summary card with the strand you are reading lit.
Collectivist and individualist anarchism both reject the state and both believe anarchy is order. They disagree on the premise: cooperative human nature vs self-sovereign individual. That premise reshapes everything that follows.
Collectivist anarchism rejects the state because it defends economic inequality and props up class power (Bakunin, Kropotkin). Liberty is realised through cooperative community - mutual aid (Kropotkin) is the natural form of human cooperation, freedom flourishes when people share rather than compete. The 9PL0 spec: collectivist anarchism is 'committed to common ownership to nurture rational, altruistic and cooperative human nature' - through anarcho-communism, mutualism and anarcho-syndicalism.
Critics (individualist) argue this subordinates the individual to the collective.
Individualist anarchism rejects the state because it crushes self-sovereign individual liberty. Stirner: the rational self-interested individual is the centre of the moral universe; no authority - state, collective or moral - has any claim over the ego. The future society is the Union of Egoists, brought about by individual insurrection, not collective overthrow. Anarcho-capitalism applies the same logic to the market: the state is unnecessary because private exchange supplies order. The 9PL0 spec: individualist anarchism is 'committed to freedom where rational, autonomous, competitive and self-interested individuals can make judgements in their own best interests.'
Critics (collectivist) argue this leaves market power and inequality intact.
Collectivist: reject the state to free cooperative human nature; common ownership; federated communes; mutual aid. Individualist: reject the state to free the self-sovereign individual; private property; Union of Egoists; market exchange.
Both agree the state must go. They disagree on the premise - cooperative human nature versus rational self-interest - and on what replaces the state - community versus the autonomous individual. The exam expects you to know which strand says what on each dimension and each spec subsection.
Scroll - each dimension lights one card per strand so you can read across.
Four dimensions: human nature, the state, society, the economy. The Paper 2 Q5 question typically lands on one of them. Strong answers hold both strands' positions clearly. Scroll through; the figure beside you shows the two strand cards with the dimension highlighted.
Human nature, the state, society, the economy. Scroll through each - the figure beside you shows the two strands with the dimension highlighted.
Agreement: Both treat the state as oppressive to human nature - so the state must go. Disagreement: Cooperative-altruistic vs rational-self-sovereign is the deepest anarchist split. The 9PL0 spec: 'differing views of liberty and human nature within anarchism.'
Agreement: Both reject the state utterly. This is the deepest area of agreement in the ideology. Disagreement: Same conclusion, different ground - economic inequality (Collectivist) versus crushing of individual liberty (Individualist).
Agreement: Both believe spontaneous order is possible without a state - 'anarchy is order.' Disagreement: Communal solidarity vs voluntary association of self-sovereign individuals. The basic image of stateless society differs sharply.
Agreement: Both reject state ownership and state regulation of the economy. Disagreement: The sharpest area of disagreement in anarchism. Common ownership and abolition of private property versus free market with private property. The 9PL0 spec captures both: economic freedom is 'a space where free individuals can manage their own affairs without state ownership or regulation' - but the form differs radically.
Pick the dimension your 24-mark question is about. Run through the two strands' positions in order. Identify what they agree on (always the rejection of the state) and what they disagree on. Reach a clear judgement. Two-strand structures often run two agreement and one disagreement paragraph - or vice versa - rather than one-per-strand.
Scroll - each sub-tradition lights with its named thinker, its key text and its distinctive claims.
The spec names four sub-traditions inside the two umbrella strands. On the collectivist side: anarcho-communism (Kropotkin) and mutualism (Proudhon), with anarcho-syndicalism as a third collectivist form. On the individualist side: egoism (Stirner) and anarcho-capitalism (no named spec thinker). Strong 24-mark answers use the sub-traditions to show disagreement inside a strand as well as between the strands - mutualists and anarcho-communists split on ownership; egoists and anarcho-capitalists split on capitalism itself. Scroll through; the figure beside you holds the four sub-tradition cards.
Anarcho-communism and mutualism sit inside the collectivist umbrella. Egoism and anarcho-capitalism sit inside the individualist umbrella. Each has its own answer to ownership, method and order - and the differences inside an umbrella are exam material in their own right.
Anarcho-communism reads human nature as cooperative, altruistic and sociable. Kropotkin offered a scientific basis for mutual aid drawn from biology and history: cooperation is the natural form of human and biological interaction, so communes self-organise without state coercion. The economy is common ownership of the means of production with distribution by need - all products at the disposal of the whole community.
The state defends economic inequality and protects private property, so the state and property must be abolished together, by revolution (Kropotkin). Goldman pushes the point furthest: all forms of political participation in the state are corrupting and futile, so revolution, not reform, is the only option. The replacement is voluntary federations of self-managing communes - the most openly utopian vision in anarchism, which Kropotkin defends as rooted in real human nature, not fantasy.
Proudhon opposed private property as a constraint on liberty - but he also opposed full collectivism. Mutualism is the middle path: possession, not property. Workers keep the fruits of their labour; property is limited to personal use; the economy is cooperative ownership and exchange among small producers. This is the point of difference with anarcho-communism inside the collectivist family: mutualists keep what they produce, anarcho-communists hold products in common.
The distinctive mutualist position is method: the state should be overthrown by peaceful means, building cooperative alternatives rather than waiting for violent revolution - a contrast with Goldman. Proudhon's slogan 'liberty is the mother of order' states the case: order arises naturally from free people cooperating. The mark schemes cite his example of the Swiss watchmakers, who based their affairs on mutual cooperation - real small producers organising fair exchange without rulers. Against the 'unachievable' charge, the mutualist points to working examples.
Stirner: each person is a sovereign ego at the centre of the moral universe, owing no allegiance to any authority - state, collective or moral. Even shared morality and duty are rejected as constraints on the ego. Egoists argue this is more realistic than the collectivist optimism about cooperation. The stateless future is the Union of Egoists: rational self-interested individuals cooperating voluntarily when it suits them, with no binding collective.
The distinctive egoist method is insurrection - individual personal refusal to obey - rather than the collective revolution favoured by anarcho-communists. The state falls one liberated ego at a time. And note the line the mark schemes draw inside individualist anarchism: egoism opposes capitalism as a system, unlike anarcho-capitalism. For Stirner no economic system, capitalist or communist, has any claim over the individual - the test is always the ego, not the market. Egoism is also the least utopian sub-tradition: the Union of Egoists is a description, not a plan.
Anarcho-capitalism holds that the state is unnecessary because the market can supply order. Private exchange, not state coercion, organises society - and even the state's residual jobs, protecting private property and enforcing contracts, are better done by private institutions. The economy is an unfettered free market with private property at its centre: the mark schemes are direct that anarcho-capitalists support capitalism and private property as central to economic freedom, whilst collectivist anarchists oppose both as exploitative.
The 2019 mark scheme draws the sharpest contrast: collectivist anarchism is a form of ultra-socialism and individualist anarchism (anarcho-capitalist) is a form of ultra-liberalism. That puts anarcho-capitalism at odds with every other anarchist sub-tradition, including egoism. Critics within anarchism argue a market with no state to check it leaves market power and inequality intact, recreating hierarchy by economic means.
The umbrellas give you the big agreement-and-disagreement frame; the sub-traditions give you precision inside it. Two internal splits are worth holding ready: ownership inside collectivism - mutualists keep the fruits of their labour, anarcho-communists hold products in common - and capitalism inside individualism - egoists oppose it as a system, anarcho-capitalists build everything on it. Naming a sub-tradition with its thinker (or flagging that anarcho-capitalism has no named spec thinker) is exactly the precision the examiner reports ask for.
Scroll - each spec idea lights with its definition and how it sits across the strands.
The 9PL0 spec lists five core ideas of anarchism: rejection of the state, liberty, anarchy is order, economic freedom, and utopian. Each Paper 2 Q5 question is built off one of these (or the four dimensions). Scroll through. The figure beside you holds all five cards with the spec idea you are reading lit.
Rejection of the state, liberty, anarchy is order, economic freedom, utopian. The figure beside you holds all five cards with the spec idea you are reading lit. Scroll through.
The 9PL0 spec: the state is 'immoral as it rules by physical coercion and deceit, unjust in its defence of economic inequality and must be rejected due to its impact on human nature.'
Strand positions: Both strands reject the state. Collectivist rejects because the state defends economic inequality and class oppression (Bakunin, Kropotkin, Goldman). Individualist rejects because the state crushes self-sovereign individual liberty (Stirner). Same conclusion, different ground - and this is the deepest agreement in the ideology.
The 9PL0 spec: liberty is 'incompatible with any form of political authority in the state, society or the economy and is critical to human nature.'
Strand positions: Collectivist treats liberty as realised through cooperative community and mutual aid (Kropotkin) - positive liberty. Individualist treats liberty as freedom from all authority including the collective (Stirner) - negative liberty. The 9PL0 spec captures the split: 'differing views of liberty and human nature within anarchism.'
The 9PL0 spec: 'social order occurs naturally and spontaneously, emerging from human nature, and is the key to the belief in a peaceful, stable, stateless society.'
Strand positions: Both strands agree anarchy is order. Collectivist explains the order through cooperative human nature: communes self-organise via mutual aid (Kropotkin). Individualist explains it through self-interest: the Union of Egoists (Stirner) or market exchange (anarcho-capitalism). Same outcome, different mechanism.
The 9PL0 spec: 'the economy should be a space where free individuals can manage their own affairs without state ownership or regulation.'
Strand positions: The sharpest area of disagreement. Collectivist requires common ownership and abolition of private property (Proudhon, Kropotkin) - through anarcho-communism, mutualism, anarcho-syndicalism. Individualist protects private property and supports a free market without state regulation (Stirner, anarcho-capitalism, egoism). The 9PL0 spec contains both within 'economic freedom.'
The 9PL0 spec: utopian covers 'the operation and benefits of an idealised society in order to develop a critique of existing society and the criticisms levelled against anarchism as unachievable and unrealistic.'
Strand positions: Collectivist anarchism embraces a positive utopian vision - federated communes living by mutual aid (Kropotkin offered a 'scientific basis for mutual aid'). Individualist anarchism is less invested in painting a future society - the focus is the moral primacy of the individual now (Stirner). The 'unachievable' charge lands harder on collectivist anarchism.
Direct links to every anarchism essay-writing resource on Panther, plus a worked answer.
The exam tests anarchism through Paper 2 Q5a and Q5b - 24 marks each. The 2019 Q5a on the economy is the standard anarchism question. Use the resources in this order: strand comparison to test your strand knowledge, then drill past questions with the agreement/disagreement framework, then the quiz to check recall.
Past 24-mark questions to practise.
Approach: Para 1 agreement - all anarchists oppose state ownership and regulation; all reject the state in all forms including the economy. Para 2 disagreement - distinct traditions: collectivist (common ownership; mutualism; anarcho-syndicalism - Proudhon, Kropotkin) versus individualist (private property; free market; anarcho-capitalism - Stirner). Para 3 disagreement - human-nature basis differs: cooperative mutual aid versus rational self-interest. Judgement: lean disagreement; the strands hold opposite economic visions.
Approach: Para 1 strong agreement - both strands reject the state utterly; the spec ('immoral, ruling by coercion'); the state must go without reform. Para 2 some disagreement - collectivist rejects because the state defends inequality (Bakunin, Kropotkin); individualist rejects because the state crushes the ego (Stirner). Para 3 agreement on stateless future - 'anarchy is order' shared but mechanism differs (communes vs Union of Egoists). Judgement: lean agreement; the state is the deepest shared ground in anarchism.
Approach: Para 1 agreement - both strands believe human nature is incompatible with state authority; without the state, human nature can flourish. Para 2 disagreement - cooperative-altruistic (Kropotkin) vs rational-self-sovereign (Stirner); the 9PL0 spec calls this 'differing views of liberty and human nature within anarchism.' Para 3 disagreement - implications for liberty: positive (community) vs negative (freedom from all authority). Judgement: disagreement greater; human nature is the deepest anarchist split.
Judgement. Anarchists agree the state has no place in the economy. That is the limit of their economic agreement. On every substantive question - ownership, distribution, exchange - the two strands hold opposite positions because they begin from opposite views of human nature. There is no single anarchist economic programme. So anarchists do not have a coherent view on the economy: the shared rejection of the state masks deeper disagreement.
Anarchy. The condition of having no state and no political authority - not chaos but a different form of social order.
Rejection of the state. The core anarchist position. The state is rejected as immoral (rules by coercion and deceit), unjust (defends economic inequality) and incompatible with human nature.
Anarchy is order. The claim that social order emerges naturally and spontaneously from human nature without a state - 'the key to the belief in a peaceful, stable, stateless society.'
Mutual aid. Kropotkin's concept - cooperation as the natural form of human and biological interaction. Used to argue that communes can self-organise without state coercion.
Mutualism. Proudhon's economic model - cooperative ownership and exchange among small producers, with property limited to personal use.
Anarcho-communism. Form of collectivist anarchism advocating common ownership and distribution by need.
Anarcho-syndicalism. Form of collectivist anarchism organised around workers' direct control of production through trade unions and federations.
Anarcho-capitalism. Form of individualist anarchism advocating a stateless free market with strong private property rights.
Egoism. Stirner's position - the rational self-interested individual is the centre of the moral universe, owes no allegiance to any authority including the collective.
Union of Egoists. Stirner's name for stateless society - rational self-interested individuals cooperating voluntarily when it suits them, with no binding collective.
Insurrection. Stirner's preferred mode of resistance - individual personal refusal to obey rather than collective revolution.
Propaganda by the deed. Bakunin's approach - a revolutionary act intended to spark wider revolution, demonstrating the possibility of resistance.
Direct action. Political action taken outside the formal state - strikes, occupations, mutual aid networks, refusal of compliance.
Utopian. An idealised future society. The 9PL0 spec lists it as a core anarchist idea - both to develop the critique of existing society and to engage with the charge that anarchism is unachievable.
Max Stirner (1806-1856). Founding individualist-anarchist thinker. The Ego and Its Own (1844). The self-interested rational individual is the centre of the moral universe; the future society is the Union of Egoists, brought about by insurrection rather than collective overthrow.
Pierre-Joseph Proudhon (1809-1865). Founding mutualist thinker. What Is Property? (1840). Opposition to private property and to collectivism alike - private property limits liberty; mutualism is the cooperative middle path. The state should be overthrown by peaceful means.
Mikhail Bakunin (1814-1876). Revolutionary collectivist thinker. Propaganda by the deed - revolutionary action would spark wider revolution; the state is oppressive and must be abolished. Strong belief in human sociability; private property must be abolished and replaced with collectivisation.
Peter Kropotkin (1842-1921). Anarcho-communist thinker. Mutual Aid (1902). Offered a scientific basis for mutual aid drawn from biology and history - cooperation is the natural form of human nature. Revolution to abolish the state and private property; utopian vision of decentralised communes where anarchy is order.
Emma Goldman (1869-1940). Anarchist and direct-action thinker. The state is 'a cold monster' - it should be rejected as immoral. All forms of political participation in the state and society are corrupting and futile; revolution, not reform, is the only option.