LiberaPisano Anarchic Scepticism: Language, Mysticism and Revolution in Gustav Landauer Even for the anarchist, language is the rope of the law bound aroundhis neck; even the most free philosopher thinks with the wordsofphilosophical language.¹ GustavLandauer (1870 – 1919), aGerman-Jewish anarchist and aradical thinker,was brutallymurdered by the Freikorps in Munich. He was an almost forgotten figure for along time, even though his ideas exerted acrucial influenceonthe development of twentieth century Jewishthoughtand philosophy, particularlyregarding the rehabil- itation of utopian, messianic, anarchical and mystical elements. Landauer was one of very few Jewish authorspermitting the word ‘scepticism’ to be included in the title of one of his works—namely Skepsisund Mystik²—in my view this very termis the fil rouge running through all his political and philosophicalthought.However, this feature has not receivedthe proper attention by scholars, which focus mainly on Landauer’ssingular account of anarchism and mysticism, alongside his concep- tion of revolution and community. In this essay, Iwill attempt to shed light on the connection between Fritz Mauth- ner’s(1849–1923)linguistic critique and Landauer’sanarchy, showing the political implications of sceptical thought. To this end, Iwill focus on the sceptical features of Landauer’sanarchist socialism by analysingthe connection between scepticism and mysticism, the role playedbyscepticism in his thought of community and in his account of revolution, history and time, and the definition of his anti-political at- titude as sceptical Lebensform. 1Anarchy as (Anti)political Epoché There is an affinitybetween anarchism and scepticism, even if this binomial has not yetreceivedproper attention. One can define anarchism as an (anti)political attitude whose main features are aradical critique towards authorities and achallengetothe system of representations, while scepticism could be broadlydefined as amethod as well as an attitude, which criticizes dogmatic assumptions and leads to asuspension of judgment. If anarchism could be interpreted as arejection of political representa- tion, it is possibletoextend these particular critiques to anygeneral forms of label- Cf. Fritz Mauthner, Beiträgezueiner Kritik der Sprache,2nd edition, vol. 1(Stuttgart and Berlin: J.G. Cotta’sche Buchhandlung,1913), 221: ‘Die Sprache legt auch dem Anarchisten den Strick des Gesetzes um den Hals und auch der freiestePhilosoph denkt mit den Worten der philosophischen Sprache.’ GustavLandauer, Skepsis und Mystik. Versuche im Anschluss an MauthnersSprachkritik,inidem, Ausgewählte Schriften,vol. 7, ed. Siegbert Wolf (Lich/Hessen: Edition AV,2011). OpenAccess. ©2018 Libera Pisano, published by De Gruyter. This work is licensed under the Creative CommonsAttribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 License. https://doi.org/10.1515/978-3-11-057768-6-013 252 Libera Pisano ling representation or to anydogmatic systems of rule.³ Anarchyand scepticism share this ongoingcriticism the aim of which is not aconcrete systematisation trans- forming them into their contraries with anarchybecominganinstitutionalframework and scepticism turning into dogmatism. Indeed, the transformation of these terms into their contrariesis, in both cases, aslipperyslope. Is it possible to define athink- er,inthe midstofanongoing criticism not accepting anyassumption, as beingadog- matic sceptic?Conversely, are we to define an anarchist,embedded in his criticism towards the state and the system, as representativeofanother form of authority and power?These open questions mayhelp us to shedlight on the special and con- troversial affinities between scepticism and anarchy. As is well known, the etymologyof‘anarchy’ is ‘absenceofgovernment’ or ‘of leader’ (archos), but at the same time it is alack of ‘arche’,which is one of the key words of Greek ancient philosophy. ‘Arche’ has adouble meaning:onthe one hand, it means ‘origin’, ‘beginning’ and ‘principle of action’,onthe other, ‘power’, ‘command’, ‘authorities’.Ifthe word ‘arche’ connects atemporal dimension to the authority,one can saythat an anarchic thought par excellence has to take into ac- count time and power,asLandauer did. Anarchyisnot just an overthrowingof the ‘arche’,but starts with aprocess of doubting and calling into question the status quo. As anarchydeniesall forms of systematisation, it is akind of suspension of au- thority,which, in my view,seems to be aform of (anti)political epoché. 2Gustav Landauer at the Crossroad of Several Paths As apolitical activist and writer,journalist and translator,Landauer was one of the most important thinkers combiningJewish messianism with anarchy, politics with mysticism, and aromantic philosophyofhistory with abelief in the urgency of change. His works comprises manyarticles, translations, fragments,reviews,and anumber of discourses; important milestones are DieRevolution and Aufruf zumSo- zialismus,but his onlycompletephilosophicalstudy, on which he worked for two years following his release from prison earlyin1900,isSkepsisund Mystik. The complicated intrigue of Landauer’sanarchyconcerns the conjunction of two levels: the mystical experience and the political action. The weave of these elements positions his thoughtatacrossroads of several paths, something quite unique in the history of philosophy. At least threereasons demonstrate how he is to be considered acomplex thinker:firstly, his works are unsystematic; secondly, he mixes up differ- ent and—apparently—opposite elements; and thirdlyhegives asingular definition to some key concepts. Scholars have usedmanyadjectives in attemptingtodefine his political socialist anarchism: mystical, anarchical, regressive, Gemeindesozialismus See Jesse S. Cohn, Anarchism and the Crisis of Representation: Hermeneutics,Aesthetics,Politics (Se- linsgrove: SusquehannaUniversity Press,2006). Anarchic Scepticism: Language, Mysticismand Revolution in Gustav Landauer 253 to name but afew.His particularidea of socialism is based on an anarchic opposi- tion towardany form of authority including political,social, ethical, and religious articulation of power.Itisatthe same time aproject of liberation from all the forms of enslavement,interior and external, and ashowing of the path required to take one from isolation to community—from theory to praxis. At this point,Ifeelitpertinent to consider Landauer’sbiography. Born, 7th April, 1870,toasecular Jewishfamily in Karlsruhe,southern Germany, he studied German and English literature,philosophyand art history in Heidelberg, Strasbourgand Ber- lin. However,hecompleted none of these studies as his political militancy had him banned from all German universities. Stirner,Nietzsche, Ibsen, Spinoza and Schopenhauerare just afew of the manyphilosophershewas impressed by in that time. His first political commitments sawhim rise to the top of German anarchist circles duringthe 1890s.⁴ This political activity and anarchist commitment,led to his acquaintancewith prominent activists such as Peter Kropotkin, Max Nettlau, and Er- rico Malatesta.⁵ His biographer Ruth Link-Salinger tells us this period was devoted ‘to asystematic definition of what anarchism was to be and was not to be,’⁶ and this was arrivedatalso duetohis collaboration with Fritz Mauthner. In the first decade of 1900,Landauer withdrew almost entirelyfrom public activ- ity to engageinprivatestudy. He wastofavour amore inner,philosophical and mys- tical idea of anarchism to the political manifestations of the time. This introspection was spurred by his translation of Meister Eckhart in prison and adeep affinity with the Mauthner’s Sprachskepsis.⁷ This new vein of Landauer’sthoughtissourced his “Durch Absonderung zur Gemeinschaft,” aspeech givenatameetingofthe newly foundedcircle Neue Gemeinschaft—wherehemet Martin Buber and Erich Mühsam —and later wastoserve as thefirst chapter of his Skepsis und Mystik. During these years Landauer and his second wife (the poet and translator,HedwigLachmann, whom he married in 1903) were extremelyactive translatingPeter Kropotkin, Oscar Wilde, Walt Whitman, and Rabindranath Tagore. In the 1893heparticipated in the Zurich congress of the second International as an anarchist del- egate. The congress, dominated by German social democrats, expelled him along with the other an- archists.August Bebel—the leader of the social democrats—accused him of beingapoliceinformer. When Landauer returned to Berlin, he spent almost one year in prison for the writings he published in Der Sozialist. ForLandauer’slife, cf. Charles B. Maurer, Call to Revolution: TheMystical Anarchism of Gustav Landauer (Detroit: Wayne StateUniversity Press, 1971); Eugene Lunn, Prophet of Community: TheRomantic Socialism of Gustav Landauer (Berkeley:University of CaliforniaPress,1973); Ruth Link- Salinger, Gustav Landauer:Philosopher of Utopia (Indianapolis: Hackett PublishingCo., 1977): 74 – 76. He travelled as aanarchist delegatetoasecond international congress in London wherethe anar- chists were—oncemore—excluded and organised for themselvesanother conference.Landauer pre- pared areport for the occasion FromZurich to London, which became his most translatedpieceatthat time. Link-Salinger, Gustav Landauer:Philosopher of Utopia,48. Between 1893and 1900 he spent atotal of 18 months in prison on various chargesoflibel and def- amation. 254 Libera Pisano In 1906,Buber became editor in chief of abook seriescalled Die Gesellschaft and asked his friend Landauer to write abook on the intriguingtopic of revolution. Lan-