Free Capitalist Network - Community Archive
Mises Community Archive
An online community for fans of Austrian economics and libertarianism, featuring forums, user blogs, and more.

Who was the first anarcho-capitalist?

rated by 0 users
This post has 57 Replies | 8 Followers

Top 100 Contributor
Posts 852
Points 19,800

J. Grayson Lilburne:
as far as I'm aware Rothbard became an anarcho-capitalist independently of Molinari's influence, and only discovered Molinari's work later.  Just as Aristarchus is not considered the father of heliocentrism, even though he preceded Copernicus by a millennium and a half.

Yes, I agree, with this logic and information, Rothbard could be considered the Father/Founder of ancap.

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 100 Contributor
Posts 852
Points 19,800

J. Grayson Lilburne:
as I expressed to ViennaSausage who corrected me CIVILLY.

Ad hominem attacks do nothing to further a discussion. 

The one thing I respect most about this community is that it is, for the most part, a safe and encouraging place to discuss and scrutinize the reasoning and information of each and everyone one us, in pursuit of a deeper understanding of economics and political theory.  I do not know everything, and I would venture to say none of us here do too.  All of us have a piece of this puzzle, NOT to discourage and demean, but to share and enlighten each other.

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 25 Contributor
Male
Posts 3,260
Points 61,905
ForumsAdministrator
Moderator
Staff
SystemAdministrator

ViennaSausage:
The one thing I respect most about this community is that it is, for the most part, a safe and encouraging place to discuss and scrutinize the reasoning and information of each and everyone one us, in pursuit of a deeper understanding of economics and political theory. 

Thanks to members like you.  Smile

ViennaSausage:
I do not know everything, and I would venture to say none of us here do too.  All of us have a piece of this puzzle, NOT to discourage and demean, but to share and enlighten each other.

Exactly, and the spirit of that statement was excellently exemplified in our exchange.  We both evinced humility and respect, and were thus able to find common ground, mutually aid in discovery, and mutually correct error.

"the obligation to justice is founded entirely on the interests of society, which require mutual abstinence from property" -David Hume
  • | Post Points: 5
Top 25 Contributor
Male
Posts 4,850
Points 85,810

Stranger:
And a capitalist organization has these. The difference is that under Molinari's system, you can choose which authority you are under. Under anarchy, you are alone against the world.

If you have the ability to act under your own will, free of interference apart from natural law, then I submit you are under no authority/ruler. Anarchy does not imply that everyone is forced to make their own shoes.

'Men do not change, they unmask themselves' - Germaine de Stael

 

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 25 Contributor
Posts 4,532
Points 84,495
Stranger replied on Wed, Dec 30 2009 11:17 PM

Laughing Man:

Stranger:
And a capitalist organization has these. The difference is that under Molinari's system, you can choose which authority you are under. Under anarchy, you are alone against the world.

If you have the ability to act under your own will, free of interference apart from natural law, then I submit you are under no authority/ruler. Anarchy does not imply that everyone is forced to make their own shoes.

For the anarchists, it does. This is why they will often claim that capitalism is the beast, and the state is the cage.

The problem with your view is that there is no way, in a world of capitalism, for the lone individual to act under his own will. There are organizations that can concentrate overwhelming force on him at any time for any reason. The only reason they would refrain from doing that is if this individual was protected by another organization, in effect under the organization's authority.

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 25 Contributor
Male
Posts 4,850
Points 85,810

Stranger:
For the anarchists, it does. This is why they will often claim that capitalism is the beast, and the state is the cage.

Obviously not all anarchists. We are discussing the validity of anarcho-capitalism [ free market anarchists ]. Such a statement already assumes that free market anarchists don't exist or aren't anarchists.

Stranger:
The problem with your view is that there is no way, in a world of capitalism, for the lone individual to act under his own will.

Ok so not only have you said that capitalism is an authority based system but you have also said that we cannot employ means/ends.

Stranger:
There are organizations that can concentrate overwhelming force on him at any time for any reason. The only reason they would refrain from doing that is if this individual was protected by another organization, in effect under the organization's authority.

That is pure nonsense. Who are these organizations? What is their 'force'?

'Men do not change, they unmask themselves' - Germaine de Stael

 

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 50 Contributor
Male
Posts 2,124
Points 37,405
Angurse replied on Wed, Dec 30 2009 11:58 PM

J. Grayson Lilburne:

I wholly agree.  Individualist anarchism (which fits Molinari and Spooner) is not the same thing as anarcho-capitalism.  One must have a thorough understanding of capitalism to be an anarcho-capitalist.  And the sad fact is, until Mises developed a full theory of economic calculation, NOBODY had a thorough understanding of capitalism.

Why? Why do you need to thoroughly understand capitalism to be an anarcho-capitalist? I cannot recally any definition requiring such a pre-requisite. Perhaps you can point one out to me. Suppose in 100 years the economic understanding of capitalism has radically improved even further, can they go "Actually, Rothbard wasn't a real anarcho-capitalist, he was only a market anarchist, as he didn't have a thorough understanding like we do?"

"I am an aristocrat. I love liberty, I hate equality."
  • | Post Points: 5
Top 25 Contributor
Posts 4,532
Points 84,495
Stranger replied on Thu, Dec 31 2009 9:36 AM

Laughing Man:
That is pure nonsense. Who are these organizations? What is their 'force'?

Any team of more than one person can easily take down a lone individual, no matter how many weapons he packs.

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 25 Contributor
Male
Posts 4,850
Points 85,810

Stranger:
Any team of more than one person can easily take down a lone individual, no matter how many weapons he packs.

So you are postulating that under a capitalist system, which we are talking about since the topic is whether or not capitalism is compatible with anarchism, that people are threatening violence or enacting violence in order so they may exert force for reasons you have yet to specify. 

'Men do not change, they unmask themselves' - Germaine de Stael

 

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 25 Contributor
Posts 4,532
Points 84,495
Stranger replied on Thu, Dec 31 2009 10:45 AM

Laughing Man:

Stranger:
Any team of more than one person can easily take down a lone individual, no matter how many weapons he packs.

So you are postulating that under a capitalist system, which we are talking about since the topic is whether or not capitalism is compatible with anarchism, that people are threatening violence or enacting violence in order so they may exert force for reasons you have yet to specify. 

To steal.

  • | Post Points: 35
Top 10 Contributor
Posts 7,105
Points 115,240
ForumsAdministrator
Moderator
SystemAdministrator

Stranger, your arguments only have force for the most naive of anarchists who can't tell power from liberty

Where there is no property there is no justice; a proposition as certain as any demonstration in Euclid

Fools! not to see that what they madly desire would be a calamity to them as no hands but their own could bring

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 500 Contributor
Male
Posts 318
Points 4,560

Probably Lao Tzu.

Periodically the tree of liberty must be watered with the blood of tyrants and patriots.

Thomas Jefferson

  • | Post Points: 5
Not Ranked
Female
Posts 87
Points 1,720
Htut replied on Tue, Jan 12 2010 10:05 PM

Epicurus

“Laws: We know what they are, and what they are worth! They are spider webs for the rich and mighty, steel chains for the poor and weak, fishing nets in the hands of the government.” - Proudhon

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 500 Contributor
Posts 342
Points 7,875

Stranger:

Laughing Man:

Stranger:
Any team of more than one person can easily take down a lone individual, no matter how many weapons he packs.

So you are postulating that under a capitalist system, which we are talking about since the topic is whether or not capitalism is compatible with anarchism, that people are threatening violence or enacting violence in order so they may exert force for reasons you have yet to specify. 

To steal.

What about PDAs and private courts, wouldn't they stand in the way?

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 25 Contributor
Posts 4,532
Points 84,495
Stranger replied on Tue, Jan 12 2010 10:30 PM

LvMIenthusiast:

 

What about PDAs and private courts, wouldn't they stand in the way?

Only if they have authority in the dispute. That means organization, hierarchy, and so on.

You don't seem to realize what the anarchist argument is. They believe that without the state no man would ever be evil, we would all live in communism and there would be a superabundance of all goods.

  • | Post Points: 35
Top 500 Contributor
Posts 342
Points 7,875

Are we talking about An-Cap or An-Syndicalism here?

 

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 10 Contributor
Male
Posts 11,343
Points 194,945
ForumsAdministrator
Moderator
SystemAdministrator

Stranger:
They believe that without the state no man would ever be evil, we would all live in communism and there would be a superabundance of all goods.

They is who?  Source this please.

"When you're young you worry about people stealing your ideas, when you're old you worry that they won't." - David Friedman
  • | Post Points: 5
Top 25 Contributor
Posts 4,532
Points 84,495
Stranger replied on Tue, Jan 12 2010 10:49 PM

LvMIenthusiast:

Are we talking about An-Cap or An-Syndicalism here?

 

About anarchists as de Molinari would have known them.

  • | Post Points: 5
Page 2 of 2 (58 items) < Previous 1 2 | RSS