In Defense of Anarchism

This work of anarchist scholarship defends individualist anarchism. The premise is that individual autonomy state authority are mutually exclusive , as individual autonomy is inalienable, the state's moral legitimacy collapses. Published by Harper Row in 1970 as In Defense of Anarchism: With a Reply to Jeffrey H. Reiman's In Defense of Political Philosophy, it's run to five editions.

It's in three parts, opening with "The Conflict between Authority Autonomy," which posits as modern political philosophy's essence "how the moral autonomy of the individual can be made compatible with the legitimate authority of the state." What follows is about authority, Kantian autonomy their incompatibility.

"The Solution of Classical Democracy" investigates representative, majoritarian unanimous direct democracy, drawing on Rawls' arguments for consensus decisionmaking's practicality. Wolff claims consensus is limited by requirements that participants are generally rationally altruistic communities aren't large. He critiques democratic representation, noting that representatives don't obey constituents' wishes. It's impossible not to distinguish between rulers ruled in such systems.

"Beyond the Legitimate State" arrives at a foreshadowed conclusion that because autonomy the legitimacy of state power are incompatible, one must either embrace anarchism or surrender autonomy to whichever authority seems strongest. In this schema, democracy is a priori no better than dictatorship as both require foresaking autonomy.