When avowed Popperians and perennial critics of radical anthropology acknowledge, like Jarvie (1975, p. 261), that a definite crisis exists (nevertheless resisting pessimism and radicalism) or admit, as does Kaplan (1974, p. 830), that anthropology would be impoverished without a radical perspective (yet labelling its contemporary representatives narcissists and solipsists), we may be in for a meta-crisis: establishmentarians may institutionalise and legitimise critical anthropology.¹