Rejection of the state, liberty and anarchy is order | Edexcel A-Level Politics
Updated: 1 day ago
For Specification 9PL0
Edexcel A-Level Politics | Free Revision Notes
Estimated study time:Â 50 minutes
This Rejection of the state, liberty and anarchy is order A-Level Politics revision page covers three foundations of anarchist thought: opposition to the state and political authority, the central importance of liberty, and the claim that a stateless society can produce natural social order. These principles underpin the whole Edexcel anarchism option. They also prepare you for later debates about economic freedom [Economic freedom and utopianism] and the differences between collectivist and individualist anarchism [Collectivist and individualist anarchism].
Learning Objectives 🎯
By the end of this revision page, you should be able to:
Define anarchist ideas of power, authority, the state and autonomy.
Explain why anarchists reject the state, political power and political authority.
Explain anarchist objections to political participation within state institutions.
Analyse different anarchist understandings of liberty and their relationship with human nature.
Explain why anarchists argue that social order can emerge naturally and spontaneously without the state.
Compare areas of agreement and disagreement within anarchism over liberty and the nature of a stateless society.
Revision Notes đź“š
Rejection of the state, liberty and anarchy is order: A-Level Politics revision overview
Anarchism aims to liberate people from political domination and economic exploitation. Its defining principle is the rejection of the state and all forms of political authority. Edexcel requires you to understand these ideas through their relationship with human nature, the state, society and the economy.
Three ideas are especially important:
The state is coercive, unjust and damaging to human nature.
Liberty cannot fully exist while individuals are subject to political authority.
Once coercive authority disappears, anarchists believe social order can arise naturally rather than having to be imposed by government.
These principles are closely connected. Anarchists do not simply reject the state and hope for the best. They argue that the state itself creates many of the conditions that make coercive government appear necessary.
Why anarchists reject the state
The state is understood by anarchists as a sovereign body exercising authority over individuals and groups within a defined territory.
For anarchists, the problem is not merely that particular governments sometimes use power badly. The deeper problem is the existence of political authority itself.
The state rules through coercion
Anarchists regard the state as immoral because its authority ultimately rests on physical coercion and deceit.
The state possesses instruments through which obedience can be secured. These include:
law
the police
physical coercion
political and social ideology
In the anarchist use of the term, power describes these means or instruments through which the state and other institutions secure their authority.
This distinguishes power from authority. Authority is the claimed right of a person or institution to direct or influence the behaviour of others. From an anarchist perspective, authority is commanding, controlling and corrupting.
The key logic is therefore:
State authority → power and coercion → reduced autonomy → reduced liberty
For anarchists, obedience obtained because an institution can compel people to comply is fundamentally different from voluntary co-operation between free individuals.
The state is unjust
Anarchists also reject the state because it protects and maintains economic inequality.
This connects political authority with economic power. If the state protects unequal economic relationships, then it is not a neutral institution standing above society. It helps preserve forms of inequality that limit genuine freedom.
The economic dimension is explored further in economic freedom and utopianism [Economic freedom and utopianism].
The state damages human nature
A further argument concerns the effect of political authority on human nature.
Anarchists believe coercive and compulsory relationships can distort human behaviour. Instead of allowing people to act freely, responsibly and voluntarily, hierarchy trains individuals either to command others or to obey them.
The consequence is important. Anarchists argue that behaviour created or encouraged by coercive institutions should not be taken as proof that coercive institutions are necessary.
In an exam, this creates a useful analytical chain:
The state exercises coercive authority → coercion restricts liberty and affects human nature → distorted behaviour produces conflict and disorder → the state then presents itself as necessary to control that disorder.
Anarchists therefore reverse the conventional argument for government. Rather than seeing the state as the solution to disorder, they see it as one of its causes.
State, government, power and authority
These concepts overlap, but they are not interchangeable.
Concept | Meaning in anarchism | Why anarchists reject it |
State | A sovereign body exercising authority over individuals and groups within defined geographical limits | It imposes authority and restricts individual autonomy |
Government | A particular system of rule, whether monarchy, dictatorship or liberal democracy | Changing the form of government does not remove coercive political rule |
Power | The instruments, including law, police and ideology, through which authority is secured | Power enables institutions to enforce obedience |
Authority | The claimed right of one person or institution to influence or control others | It creates commanding and controlling relationships incompatible with liberty |
The distinction between state and government is particularly useful. Anarchism does not merely demand a different government. It rejects the political authority on which government itself depends.
⚠️ This is why describing anarchism as support for a very small or minimal state is incorrect. The 2025 examiner report specifically identified this as an error made by some candidates. Anarchists reject the state rather than seeking merely to reduce its size.
Political participation and the state
Anarchist rejection of political authority also produces strong suspicion of political participation through state institutions.
Participation in conventional politics can be criticised because it operates within institutions whose authority anarchists reject. Reforming the state can therefore leave the basic relationship of ruler and ruled intact.
Emma Goldman provides a particularly clear specified example. She regarded political participation in the state and society as corrupting and futile, concluding that revolution rather than reform was required. Her arguments are developed further in Kropotkin and Goldman [Kropotkin and Goldman].
This does not mean anarchists reject political action altogether. The specification includes direct action, meaning action outside the normal legal and constitutional framework. This can range from non-violent to violent action.
The distinction is therefore between:
participation that works through existing institutions, and
action intended to challenge or move beyond those institutions.
How anarchists propose moving beyond the state
Anarchists agree that the state should disappear, but they do not all agree about how that change should occur.
The specified thinkers illustrate important differences:
Pierre-Joseph Proudhon supported the rejection and overthrow of the state through peaceful means.
Mikhail Bakunin believed propaganda by the deed could spark revolution, leading to the abolition of the state.
Peter Kropotkin supported revolution to abolish the state and private property.
Emma Goldman rejected reform in favour of revolution.
Max Stirner took a different approach based on insurrection, rather than political overthrow of the state.
You will study these differences more fully through Stirner, Proudhon and Bakunin [Stirner, Proudhon and Bakunin].
Revolution and insurrection are not the same
This distinction has repeatedly caused problems in examinations.
In the Edexcel terminology, insurrection is not another word for revolution. It is an egoistic act in which individuals elevate themselves above established institutions, allowing those institutions to decay rather than trying politically to capture or overthrow them.
By contrast, revolutionary approaches seek a wider transformation of political, economic and social relationships.
💡 Exam point: do not use revolution and insurrection interchangeably.
Liberty as a core anarchist principle
For anarchists, liberty is not simply one desirable political value among several. It is fundamental to human nature.
The specification states that liberty is incompatible with political authority in:
the state
society
the economy
This gives anarchist liberty a very broad meaning. Freedom requires more than removing direct state interference. Hierarchical and coercive relationships elsewhere in society can also prevent people from governing their own lives.
Liberty and autonomy
A closely related concept is autonomy.
Autonomy means self-government, combining freedom with responsibility. An autonomous individual is not subject to the will of the state or another person.
Anarchists therefore connect liberty with the ability of individuals to:
make their own choices
take responsibility for those choices
manage their own affairs
enter relationships voluntarily rather than through coercion
This does not necessarily mean isolation from everyone else. The major disagreement within anarchism concerns what free relationships between individuals should look like.
Different anarchist understandings of liberty
All anarchists reject coercive political authority, but individualist and collectivist anarchists differ over what liberty means in practice.
Collectivist anarchism | Individualist anarchism |
Emphasises rational, altruistic and co-operative aspects of human nature | Emphasises rational, autonomous, competitive and self-interested individuals |
Freedom can develop through voluntary co-operation with others | Freedom centres strongly on individual autonomy |
Social relationships can support liberty when they are voluntary and non-hierarchical | The individual must not become subordinate to either the state or the collective |
Order emerges through sociability, co-operation and solidarity | Order can emerge through voluntary associations between autonomous individuals |
These differences form the foundation of collectivist and individualist anarchism [Collectivist and individualist anarchism].
The important point for this lesson is that both traditions reject compulsory political authority. Their disagreement concerns what liberated individuals will do with their freedom and what kinds of voluntary relationships will emerge.
Liberty and human nature
Liberty is crucial because anarchists believe that human nature can flourish when coercive relationships disappear.
For collectivist anarchists, freedom allows the social, co-operative and altruistic potential of human beings to emerge.
For individualist anarchists, freedom permits autonomous individuals to make rational judgements in their own interests without being subordinated to political or collective authority.
This produces a significant exam argument:
Agreement:Â all anarchists see political authority as restricting the development of genuine human freedom.
Disagreement:Â they differ about what human beings will do once that authority disappears.
The 2024 mark scheme therefore identified both common ground and division. All anarchists agree that liberty is incompatible with coercive authority and central to human nature, but they disagree about the practical meaning of liberty and how differences in human nature shape it.
What does “anarchy is order” mean?
The phrase anarchy is order expresses one of anarchism's most important arguments.
In everyday language, anarchy is sometimes used to mean chaos. In anarchist thought, however, anarchy means the absence of coercive political rule.
Anarchists argue that removing the state does not necessarily remove order.
Instead:
abolition of coercive authority → greater liberty → human nature can develop freely → voluntary relationships emerge → natural and spontaneous social order
Why the state is not necessary for order
Anarchists reject the assumption that social order has to be imposed from above.
They argue that state authority can itself create disorder because it:
restricts liberty
establishes coercive relationships
maintains hierarchy
distorts human nature
protects inequality
Once these sources of coercion disappear, anarchists believe people can organise their affairs voluntarily.
The anarchist claim is therefore not:
No state means no rules of any kind.
It is instead that peaceful and stable relationships can emerge naturally and spontaneously without a sovereign political authority imposing order.
Human nature and spontaneous order
The idea of spontaneous order depends heavily on anarchist understandings of human nature.
Collectivist anarchists emphasise characteristics such as:
sociability
altruism
co-operation
solidarity
mutual aid
Individualist anarchists place greater emphasis on:
rationality
autonomy
self-interest
voluntary association
The reasoning differs, but the conclusion overlaps. Neither tradition accepts that a coercive state is required to create order.
The 2023 mark scheme summarised this common ground clearly: anarchists agree that the absence of the state can produce natural order and harmony, although they disagree about how this order emerges and exactly what a future stateless society would look like.
Collectivist explanations of order
Collectivist anarchists argue that humans have the capacity for sociability and co-operation.
Without imposed hierarchy, people can form voluntary relationships based on solidarity and mutual assistance.
For example:
Bakunin's belief in human sociability supports the argument that co-operation can replace political authority.
Kropotkin's idea of mutual aid supports the belief that co-operation allows human nature to flourish.
Proudhon's ideas support voluntary forms of social organisation rather than central state authority.
These thinkers are developed in Stirner, Proudhon and Bakunin [Stirner, Proudhon and Bakunin] and Kropotkin and Goldman [Kropotkin and Goldman].
Individualist explanations of order
Individualist anarchists reach the same broad rejection of state authority from a different understanding of human nature.
If individuals are rational and autonomous, they can judge their own interests rather than requiring a state to make decisions for them.
Social relationships can therefore arise voluntarily because individuals see benefits in association.
Stirner's future Union of Egoists, for example, represents voluntary association between self-interested individuals rather than compulsory political membership.
This produces a useful comparison:
Question | Collectivist anarchism | Individualist anarchism |
Why reject authority? | It prevents genuine co-operation and can corrupt sociable human nature | It subordinates the autonomous individual |
Why can order exist without the state? | Humans can co-operate voluntarily | Rational individuals can form voluntary associations |
What provides order? | Sociability, solidarity, mutual aid and co-operation | Autonomy, rational self-interest and voluntary association |
Key shared principle | Liberty makes natural order possible | Liberty makes natural order possible |
The relationship between the three core principles
Do not revise rejection of the state, liberty and anarchy is order as three disconnected definitions. The highest-quality political analysis shows how they form a logical argument.
1. Rejection of the state
The state uses coercive power and authority and restricts human autonomy.
2. Liberty
Removing coercive political authority allows individuals to govern their own lives and permits human nature to flourish.
3. Anarchy is order
Once human relationships are voluntary rather than imposed, anarchists believe a peaceful and stable social order can arise spontaneously.
So the overall anarchist argument is:
The state does not create genuine order. The liberty created by removing coercive authority makes genuine order possible.
That connection is central to Edexcel questions on the state, liberty and the nature of future anarchist society.
Key Words 🔑
Key word | Student-friendly definition | How it may be used in an exam |
State | A sovereign body exercising authority over individuals and groups within defined geographical limits. | Explain why anarchists reject all forms of state rather than merely favouring a smaller state. |
Power | The means, including law, police and ideology, through which the state and other institutions secure authority. | Analyse why anarchists regard the state as coercive. |
Authority | The claimed right of a person or institution to direct or influence the behaviour of others. | Explain why anarchists believe political authority is incompatible with liberty. |
Autonomy | Self-government combining freedom with responsibility, without being subject to the will of the state or another person. | Compare individualist and collectivist interpretations of liberty. |
Direct action | Political action outside the normal legal and constitutional framework, ranging from non-violent to violent activity. | Explain anarchist alternatives to conventional political participation. |
Hints from the Examiner Reports đź’ˇ
Examiner hint: Define the central idea in the question before debating it. In 2024, stronger responses on “anarchy is order” explained what the idea actually meant and linked it directly to anarchist views of human nature.
Examiner hint:Â Build paragraphs around areas of comparison rather than writing one section on collectivist anarchism and another on individualist anarchism. Examiner reports repeatedly found that comparative structures produced stronger analysis.
Examiner hint:Â Use thinkers to support arguments between strands. Do not turn the essay into a series of descriptions of what individual thinkers believed. The 2023 and 2025 reports identified this as an important distinction between stronger analytical answers and more descriptive responses.
Examiner hint: Keep returning to “to what extent”. Stronger candidates make judgements throughout the essay rather than waiting until the conclusion to decide how united or divided anarchism is.
Examiner hint:Â Use precise anarchist terminology. The 2024 and 2025 examiner reports praised confident use of concepts such as liberty, autonomy, authority and spontaneous order because specialist vocabulary allows arguments to be sharper and more focused.
Examiner hint: Know the distinction between revolution and insurrection. This has caused repeated confusion. Stirner's insurrection should not simply be described as another method of revolutionary overthrow.
Common Mistakes ⚠️
Mistake: Saying anarchists want a minimal state
Why this is incorrect: Anarchism is defined by rejection of the state and political authority. A minimal state is still a state and therefore retains political authority over individuals.
How to improve: Use precise language such as stateless society, abolition of the state and rejection of political authority.
Mistake: Assuming “anarchy” means chaos
Why this is incorrect: For anarchists, anarchy means the absence of coercive political authority. The principle of anarchy is order states that natural and spontaneous order can emerge without the state.
How to improve: Always explain the causal link: removing coercion creates liberty, liberty allows human nature to flourish, and voluntary order can emerge.
Mistake: Treating revolution and insurrection as synonyms
Why this is incorrect: The specification explicitly distinguishes Stirner's insurrection from political overthrow of the state.
How to improve: Associate insurrection with Stirner's egoistic elevation of the individual above established institutions. Keep it separate from revolutionary approaches associated with Bakunin, Kropotkin and Goldman.
Mistake: Saying all anarchists have exactly the same view of liberty
Why this is incorrect: All anarchists reject coercive authority, but collectivists and individualists disagree about what liberty means in practice and how it relates to human nature.
How to improve: Identify the common principle first, then compare collectivist emphasis on co-operation with individualist emphasis on autonomy and self-interest.
Mistake: Writing about thinkers instead of answering the debate
Why this is incorrect: Political ideas questions assess agreements and disagreements within anarchism. Simply describing one thinker after another can demonstrate knowledge but produces limited comparative analysis.
How to improve: Start each paragraph with a political debate, such as why the state is rejected, then use thinkers as supporting evidence.
Mistake: Leaving all judgement until the conclusion
Why this is incorrect: A strong answer needs a sustained line of argument. Examiner reports repeatedly stress that the final conclusion should follow naturally from judgements already made.
How to improve: End each major paragraph with a mini-judgement about how significant the agreement or disagreement is.
Exam-Style Questions ✍️
Question 1
Define autonomy from an anarchist perspective. (1 mark)
Answer: Autonomy is self-government combining freedom and responsibility, where the individual is not subject to the will of the state or another person.
Question 2
Give two reasons why anarchists reject the state. (2 marks)
Indicative answer:
Award one mark for each valid reason, including:
it rules through coercion
it relies on deceit
it protects economic inequality
it restricts liberty
it damages or corrupts human nature
Question 3
Explain the difference between power and authority from an anarchist perspective. (4 marks)
Indicative mark scheme:
A strong response should explain that:
authority is the claimed right of an institution or person to direct the behaviour of others
power refers to the means through which that authority is secured
examples of such means include law, police and ideology
anarchists reject both because they create commanding and coercive relationships that undermine autonomy
Question 4
Explain two reasons why anarchists believe liberty is incompatible with political authority. (6 marks)
Indicative mark scheme:
Credit developed explanations such as:
Political authority places individuals under the will of another person or institution, contradicting autonomy.
State authority ultimately depends on coercive power, meaning individuals cannot be fully free.
Coercive relationships can corrupt human nature, preventing individuals from developing freely.
Anarchists therefore see liberty as requiring voluntary rather than compulsory relationships.
Higher-quality answers clearly develop the connection between authority, autonomy and human nature.
Question 5
Analyse two ways in which collectivist and individualist anarchists differ in their understanding of liberty. (8 marks)
Indicative mark scheme:
Possible analysis includes:
Individualist anarchism places stronger emphasis on individual autonomy and rational self-interest.
Collectivist anarchism sees liberty as compatible with, and often dependent on, voluntary co-operation with others.
Individualists are particularly concerned about the individual becoming subordinate to a collective.
Collectivists emphasise the social and co-operative capacities of human nature.
A strong answer should also recognise the important agreement that both reject coercive political authority.
Question 6
Explain why anarchists believe that the state can be a cause of disorder rather than the source of order. (8 marks)
Indicative mark scheme:
A developed response could explain that the state:
depends on coercion and hierarchy
restricts liberty and autonomy
protects inequality
can distort or corrupt human nature
therefore produces conflict and anti-social behaviour
Anarchists argue that removing these coercive relationships allows voluntary and spontaneous forms of order to emerge.
Question 7
To what extent do anarchists agree about why the state should be rejected? (12 marks)
Indicative mark scheme:
Areas of agreement:
all anarchists reject coercive political authority
the state restricts liberty
state power damages genuine autonomy
a stateless society is necessary for anarchy as order
Areas of disagreement:
individualists emphasise the state's restriction of individual autonomy
collectivists place greater emphasis on hierarchy, inequality and the distortion of sociable human nature
anarchists differ over how the existing state should be replaced, including peaceful change, revolution and insurrection
Judgement:
A strong conclusion could argue that disagreement concerns the reasoning and method more than the fundamental objective. Rejection of the state remains a defining area of anarchist unity.
Question 8
To what extent are collectivist anarchism and individualist anarchism united over the view that anarchy is order? (24 marks)
Indicative mark scheme:
A high-level answer should demonstrate accurate knowledge, comparative analysis and sustained evaluation.
Arguments suggesting substantial agreement:
both reject the state and coercive political authority
both believe state authority restricts liberty
both believe order can exist without the state
both argue that free individuals can organise relationships voluntarily
both connect liberty with the development of human nature
Arguments suggesting important disagreement:
collectivists emphasise sociability, altruism, co-operation and solidarity
individualists emphasise autonomy, rationality and self-interest
collectivists and individualists therefore explain spontaneous order differently
they differ over the nature of voluntary organisation in a future stateless society
they also differ over routes from the existing state to anarchy, particularly revolution, peaceful change and insurrection
Use of thinkers:
Relevant specified thinkers could include Stirner, Proudhon, Bakunin, Kropotkin and Goldman. Thinkers should support the comparison between strands rather than becoming the structure of the essay.
Evaluation:
Judgements should appear throughout. A well-supported overall conclusion might argue that anarchists are strongly united on the principle that coercive government is unnecessary for order, but significantly divided over why natural order will emerge and what that order will look like in practice.
Comments