Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Anti-statism


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep. (non-admin closure) Ifnord (talk) 05:19, 15 December 2018 (UTC)

Anti-statism

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

This page is unnecessary and a violation of WP:SOAP

The sole purpose of this article is to gerrymander the scope of the term anarchism so as to exclude right-wing anarchism. Yes, I get it that anarchism originally, i.e. social anarchism, was leftist, libertarian socialist and anti-capitalist, but anarchism expanded since then in a continuum toward the right through the writings of Godwin, Warren, Thoreau, Stirner, Tucker… till we got to Rothbard and Hoppe. Even Proudhon, the patriarch of anarchism, moved toward the right later in life! (when he wrote Pornocracy, for instance) Social anarchists may not agree with them — and they don't have to! — but that doesn't mean they aren't anarchists too, in their own logic. After all, the reason why social anarchists are anti-capitalists is because, ultimately, they see capitalism as an extension of the state. So even to them, anarchism = anti-statism (if that's even a word!). WisdomTooth3 (talk) 11:27, 1 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep: A Google Scholar search turns up multiple articles on the topic. The article is poorly referenced, but it should not be deleted, it should be edited. Citrivescence (talk) 20:41, 1 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Philosophy-related deletion discussions. Bakazaka (talk) 23:20, 1 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. Bakazaka (talk) 23:20, 1 December 2018 (UTC)


 * Before this page is deleted, wouldn't we want to, where any difference by dictionary definition can be specified? That would seem to be the best course, unless there are sources that cover this topic independently from that of anarchism. czar  07:17, 4 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Another possible target is state (polity). (Statism is just as poorly sourced as this would be and should be merged as well.) Not sure how other editors would like to see "anti-statism" covered as more than a dictionary definition. The phrase "anti-state" can describe variety of beliefs, from any one act of dissent against government to a more concerted effort/philosophy to reduce its powers to abolish it completely. But is it a discrete concept that can support encyclopedic breadth? Or would our article just be a glossary of every time Google Books has mentioned the phrase? Note that Britannica, SEP, and other encyclopedias of political philosophy have no unified entry on statism/anti-statism because they aren't unified positions less descriptors of being for or against the state. In any event, this is a discussion for the talk page since there isn't a case for deleting the term from WP outright. (not watching, please )  czar  17:31, 8 December 2018 (UTC)
 * The sources I have listed below are much more than "a glossary of every time Google Books has mentioned the phrase". They all have substantial coverage. Friedberg's book is entirely about the topic (although limited to American anti-statism).  Nash has it as a section heading.  Gallaher has it as a chapter heading.  Anarchism, socialism, communism, capitalism, and liberalism are all broad churches that have "a variety of beliefs", but that is not an obstacle to them having articles.  SpinningSpark 17:55, 8 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Not really. Friedberg's book is not about "anti-statism" but how suspicion of state power worked to the USA's benefit during the Cold War. It doesn't go into the philosophical underpinnings of an abstract idea called anti-statism. He uses the term as a shortcut for anti-government currents in American society. You could write an article that combined that and Jeffersonian democracy but it would be a POV fork of other articles. The book jacket doesn't call Friedberg a revisionist account for nothing. To use your analogy, it would be like splitting out pro-communism/anti-communism or pro-capitalism/anti-capitalism articles. Sure, the term appears, and there is plenty to say, but an encyclopedia article would just be a collection of arguments localized by region, not a coherent body of study.
 * Nash himself advises viewing statism and anti-statism as a combined continuum rather than a duality with its own principles. Everything he quotes is commentary on the role of the state, a topic that should be covered within the polity article. And Gallaher's chapter says very little about "anti-statism"—it's essentially about how neoliberalism is anti-state because it hollows out government, with examples and a focus on the US. That the term appears in chapter titles is not itself an indicator that there is a body of literature ready for paraphrase. czar  21:18, 8 December 2018 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Keep widely used concept in the literature, distinct from anarchism in all but attack materials. Stuartyeates (talk) 23:20, 6 December 2018 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Sandstein   14:06, 8 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep. It looks to me that sources generally make a firm distinction between anti-statism and anarchism.  In fact, in this field, it looks like it's about the only thing they do agree on.
 * Friedberg, In the Shadow of the Garrison State: America's Anti-Statism and Its Cold War Grand Strategy, defines anti-statism as "the body of ideas and arguments used by those who have opposed efforts to increase the size and strength of the executive branch of the federal government". This is different from wanting to abolish the state or government altogether.
 * Nash, Freedom, Justice, and the State, defines two types of anti-statism: radical and moderate. Radicals oppose all states while moderates oppose only some types of state.  According to Nash, even the radicals are not always (but often are) anarchists.  The moderates are quite distinct from anarchists.
 * Gallaher et al., Key Concepts in Political Geography says "Anti-statist movements want to limit the influence of any state".  They may, or may not, want to eliminate it altogether.
 * Cox, & Stokes, US Foreign Policy, says "Anti-statism and the fear of despotism led the American founders to create a state structure that is fragmented, decentralized, and accountable." Their following discussion of American anti-statism is entirely focused on it wanting to limit the power of the state, not abolish it.
 * Clark, Living Without Domination: The Possibility of an Anarchist Utopia, explicitly states that anarchism is not synonymous with anti-statism; "So, anti-statism is not a distinguishing characteristic of anarchism."
 * SpinningSpark 16:18, 8 December 2018 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.