
Source: The Revolution of Nihilism: Warning to the West (1939), p. 27
Source: Lenin and Philosophy and Other Essays (1968), "Ideology and Ideological State Apparatuses", p. 95
Source: The Revolution of Nihilism: Warning to the West (1939), p. 27
Source: Anarchy, State, and Utopia (1974), Ch. 1 : Why State of Nature Theory?; Political Philosophy, p. 6
Context: Some anarchists have claimed not merely that we would be better off without a state, but that any state necessarily violates people's moral rights and hence is intrinsically immoral. Our starting point then, though nonpolitical, is by intention far from nonmoral. Moral philosophy sets the background for, and boundaries of, political philosophy. What persons may and may not do to one another limits what they may do through the apparatus of a state, or do to establish such an apparatus.
On the British government's decision to build the Singapore Naval Base, in an article for the Westminster Gazette (13 October 1923)
The Problems of Leninism
Darwin's Dangerous Disciple: An Interview by Frank Miele (1995)
De Abaitua interview (1998)
“Maintain the same state of mind in every moment of thought, in every phase of mental activity”
Source: Hsiu-hsin yao lun (Treatise on the Essentials of Cultivating the Mind), p. 126.
Context: Do not try to search outside yourself, which [only] leads to the suffering of saṃsāra. Maintain the same state of mind in every moment of thought, in every phase of mental activity.
Letter to Philipp Van Patten http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1883/letters/83_04_18.htm (18 April 1883)
The Ethics of Freedom (1973 - 1974)
Context: No society can last in conditions of anarchy. This is self-evident and I am in full agreement. But my aim is not the establishment of an anarchist society or the total destruction of the state. Here I differ from anarchists. I do not believe that it is possible to destroy the modern state. It is pure imagination to think that some day this power will be overthrown. From a pragmatic standpoint there is no chance of success. Furthermore, I do not believe that anarchist doctrine is the solution to the problem of organization in society and government. I do not think that if anarchism were to succeed we should have a better or more livable society. Hence I am not fighting for the triumph of this doctrine.
On the other hand, it seems to me that an anarchist attitude is the only one that is sufficiently radical in the face of a general statist system.
p. 396