It is clear, in any case, that the so-called classical anarchists reject normativity and to this extent anarchist morality is not describable in either deontojuridical or teleological terms. At the same time, it is also clear that anarchist philosophy – as reflected both in its meta-ethical investigations and its emphasis on prefiguration – is deeply historical in orientation. Like Marxists, anarchists have always appreciated the extent to which theory and practice are historically embedded and conditioned, though they categorically reject any concept of historical determinism. Kropotkin, for example, argues that systems of morality both constitute and are constituted by determinate historical contexts. Kropotkin’s argument, in turn, underwrites the concept of prefiguration, which recognizes that political tactics must be constantly revised in light of changes in historical circumstances. The only categorical limitation on tactics adopted – a limitation that is practical rather than normative – is that they must be consistent with their intended ends. Anarchism’s rejection of both normativity as well as historical materialism, which together constitute an important part of political modernity, is further evidence that it represents something altogether different, something that stands apart form, or outside, political modernity