Kline wrote a very interesting book called The Individualist Anarchists and it does have some useful information that can improve understanding of the philosophy of the 19th century Individualist Anarchists. He mentions Stephen Pearl Andrews, Lysander Spooner, William Greene, Benjamin Tucker and others and portrays them in an accurate light. He correctly refers to them as Voluntary Socialists or Socialists as he states:

“…but Voluntary Socialists were in unanimity concerning the issue of monopolies in general…”[i]

He also stated Tucker considered Josiah Warren, who was an Individualist Anarchist, to be a Socialist.[ii]

However in a very interesting (and confusing) twist he considers the Individualists Anarchists to be liberals rather than what they truly are: socialists. He refers to the Individualist Anarchist philosophy as liberal many times. Some examples include:

“The brand of liberalism to which these libertarians adhered had some uncommon strengths and weaknesses.”[iii]

“The point is that the Individualist Anarchists challenged not the premises of the Classical Liberal tradition, but only those practical aspects which they considered to be perversions or distortions of the values at the core at that tradition.”[iv]

“Though they were a radical variant of the predominant liberal tradition in America, rather than a radical alternative…”[v]

It seems to me Kline considers any market system as liberal whether it is actually socialist or not.

Of course Kline’s view on markets does not reflect reality. Markets can be socialist. Kline would have to ignore the entire socialist movement when making such a claim.

For instance, Proudhon, the first to call himself an anarchist, spoke of a socialist system of Mutualism based on co-operatives in a competitive market. Many individualist anarchists would agree with Proudhon and his view of co-operatives in a competitive market. Would Kline consider Proudhon a liberal? It appears it could be so if his definition of liberalism is any system that contains competitive markets.

So what is Liberalism? Liberalism is a philosophy that encourages property and free markets, as Kline rightly claims, but Liberalism contains a specific type of market, more specifically capitalist free markets. Hence, Proudhon distinguished between property and possession in his What is Property?[vi]—in other words, the difference between capitalist markets and non-capitalist competitive markets with possession instead of property.

Kline points out correctly that profit and usury are essential aspects of capitalism which he points out are what the Individualist Anarchists critique.[vii] Kline, however, does not consider the fact that it is precisely that critique that makes the Individualist Anarchists Socialist.

As Marx states, the essential aspect of Capitalism is called Surplus Value, or what amounts to making an income without working for it. Surplus Value (called usury) is unearned profit, interest and rent. However, even landlordism, while a form of surplus value, is not capitalist but a form of feudalism. What specifically distinguishes Capitalism from other market systems, such as Mutualism and Individualist Anarchist socialist markets, is that within Capitalism employers pay their employees less than the full value of their labor and there is not equality of opportunity on the market.

Within Capitalism labor in general is not factored into the price of the product. Within the market socialism of the Individualist Anarchists labor is in general factored into the prices of products and there is equality of opportunity on the market through mutual banks, which would offer credit at a price of 1% or less to cover overhead. The low rates offered by mutual banks would ensure that people would have the option of going into business for themselves. Therefore, employers would have to raise their wages to entice workers to work for them. Hence, wages would rise to the full product of a worker’s labor.[viii]

This is what distinguishes market socialism from capitalism.

As Marx states:

“The working day of 12 hours is represented in a monetary value of, for example, 6 shillings. There are two alternatives. Either equivalents are exchanged, and then the worker receives 6 shillings for 12 hours of labour; the price of his labour would be equal to the price of his product. In that case he produces no surplus-value for the buyer of his labour, the 6 shillings are not transformed into capital, and the basis of capitalist production vanishes.”[ix]

The unearned income is called Surplus Value. Markets do not equate capitalism which is why different market systems like market socialism and Mutualism exist.

Tucker’s way of organizing business would be similar to a capitalist business with employers and employees. However, the difference between a capitalist business and Tucker’s Individualist Anarchist business would be that in the Individualist Anarchist business, employers and employees would be paid the full value of their labor depending on the going rate of the occupation on the Individualist Anarchist market at the time. In addition, the Individualist Anarchist market would have equality of opportunity on the market due to the Mutual Banks.[x]

Tucker agreed with Marx on his theory of surplus value which can be seen in his article ‘Karl Marx Friend and Foe.’[xi] This is why Benjamin Tucker who supported non-exploitive employers (and whom Kline labeled the representative of Individualist Anarchism[xii]) called himself correctly an Anarchist-Socialist.[xiii]

While Kline gives a very good and accurate historical overview of Individualist Anarchist theory, at the same time, for reasons I am not aware of, he chooses to ignore socialist history and socialist theory (including that of Marx). Instead, he dismisses market socialism and Individualist Anarchist theory in general by labeling the Individualist Anarchists incorrectly as liberal rather than what they truly are: market socialists.



[i] Kline, Wm Gary, The Individualist Anarchists. University Press of America. (1987) p 72

[ii] Ibid, p 72

[iii] Ibid, p 93

[iv] Ibid. p 104

[v] Ibid, p 104

[vi] Proudhon, Pierre-Joseph, What is Property?

[vii] Marx, Karl, The Communist Manifesto

[viii] Tucker, Benjamin, State Socialism and Anarchism.

[ix] Marx, Karl, Capital Volume 1. England: Penguin Classics (reprint). (1990) p 676

[x] Tucker, Benjamin, Instead of a Book. Forgotten Books. (2012) p 3-18

[xi] Ibid, p 477

[xii] Kline, Wm Gary, The Individualist Anarchists. University Press of America. (1987) p 1

[xiii] Tucker, Instead of a Book.