≡ Menu

Michael Malice’s The Anarchist Handbook: Supplemental Readings

Michael Malice has an excellent new compendium out, The Anarchist Handbook, excerpting key writings of a number of important anarchist thinkers. They are, in order:

  • Peter Kropotkin
  • William Godwin
  • Leo Tolstoy
  • Max Stirner
  • Alexander Berkman
  • Pierre-Joseph Proudhon
  • Voltairine de Cleyre
  • Herbert Spencer
  • Emma Goldman
  • Josiah Warren
  • Charles Robert Plunkett
  • Mikhail Bakunin
  • Linda and Morris Tannehill
  • Lysander Spooner
  • David Friedman
  • Johann Most
  • Murray Rothbard
  • Louis Lingg
  • John Hasnas
  • Benjamin R. Tucker
  • Michael Malice

His selections are of course not comprehensive, but while going over his list a few other important anarchist thinkers occurred to me who are not included. I offer this eclectic list as a supplement for those looking for further readings along the lines of Malice’s collection. My list is also not comprehensive; it is mostly some of my personal favorites or influences. Readers are invited to submit other possible important works I have missed.

Update: Keith Knight’s recent The Voluntaryist Handbook (2022) actually includes some of the works that I suggest below, plus many others.

Honorable Mention

Other Useful Works and Resources

{ 5 comments… add one }
  • Dennis Nezic May 20, 2021, 8:52 am

    Hmm, yet again, “He Who Shall Not Be Mentioned” isn’t mentioned. The principled ancap who’s powerful writings basically crystalized my foundations. I’m genuinely curious why you don’t find the relationship based arguments (eg. the “Against Me” argument) more compelling – they’re very similar to Argumentation Ethics, but they actually acknowledge our emotional dimension, which is arguably more powerful than our logical one.

    • JD Bertron May 22, 2021, 7:20 am

      Who would that be? I was thinking Larken Rose.

    • Stephan Kinsella May 23, 2021, 12:58 pm

      Not sure who you mean–perhaps my friend Stefan Molyneux? My list is not meant to be comprehensive, but more my own favorites and influences, and he didn’t influence me at all, nor did “Larken Rose”, nor am I aware of any of their arguments that are not just repeats of, reformulations of, or cumulative with others’ material.

  • Dennis Nezic May 23, 2021, 2:56 pm

    Nobody on your list explored the implications of actually integrating the NAP (morality) into real life, into our personal relationships, etc. They all kept things in abstract-land, in theory-land, far away from messy uncomfortable reality. Personal relationship-based arguments, like the so-called “Against Me” argument are far more useful than any legal treatise.

    Out of curiosity, is Hoppe’s wife an ancap? I know many ancaps who’s wives are “apolitical” or don’t give a shit about actual morality. What’s the point of any of this, if we can’t even get those closest to us to give a shit?

    • Stephan Kinsella May 11, 2023, 1:25 pm

      You say “he who shall not be named.” Why don’t you mention a name? I am not blocking anything. I assume you mean Stefan Molyneux. Why the vague insinuations? Be plain and clear.

      And your question here is weird–what business is Hoppe’s marriage of yours? You sound like a wannabe Randian cultist. Go mind your own business.

Leave a Reply

© 2012-2024 StephanKinsella.com CC0 To the extent possible under law, Stephan Kinsella has waived all copyright and related or neighboring rights to material on this Site, unless indicated otherwise. In the event the CC0 license is unenforceable a  Creative Commons License Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License is hereby granted.

-- Copyright notice by Blog Copyright