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

Is 'Anarcho'-Capitalism a type of Anarchism?

This post has 28 Replies | 9 Followers

Top 150 Contributor
Male
Posts 696
Points 12,900
AnonLLF Posted: Sun, Feb 27 2011 9:41 AM

http://www.infoshop.org/page/AnarchistFAQSectionF

Simple answer: No!

I don't really want to comment or read anything here.I have near zero in common with many of you.I may return periodically when there's something you need to know.

Near Mutualist/Libertarian Socialist.

 

Top 100 Contributor
Male
Posts 917
Points 17,505

Who cares?

I will break in the doors of hell and smash the bolts; there will be confusion of people, those above with those from the lower depths. I shall bring up the dead to eat food like the living; and the hosts of dead will outnumber the living.
  • | Post Points: 20
Top 75 Contributor
Male
Posts 1,289
Points 18,820
MaikU replied on Sun, Feb 27 2011 10:55 AM

TL;DR, but then who really cares what some website clasifies?

It's "anarchist" enough for statists so they are scared of ancaps as hell, trololol.

"Dude... Roderick Long is the most anarchisty anarchist that has ever anarchisted!" - Evilsceptic

(english is not my native language, sorry for grammar.)

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 500 Contributor
Male
Posts 244
Points 5,455
Felipe replied on Sun, Feb 27 2011 11:04 AM

 

Yes it is.

"Anarcho-collectivism" on the other hand....

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 50 Contributor
Male
Posts 1,899
Points 37,230

I mean, if you go by what most people think of anarchism as ([chaos and warlordism] post breakdown of the central government), then yes.  But then, feudalism could be seen as a form of anarchism in relation to Roman imperialism.

If you're talking about anti-authoritarianism and the breakdown of heirarchy and class sytems, then no.

In States a fresh law is looked upon as a remedy for evil. Instead of themselves altering what is bad, people begin by demanding a law to alter it. ... In short, a law everywhere and for everything!

~Peter Kropotkin

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 50 Contributor
Posts 2,417
Points 41,720
Moderator
Nielsio replied on Sun, Feb 27 2011 11:15 AM

In a word, no. While "anarcho"-capitalists obviously try to associate themselves with the anarchist tradition by using the word "anarcho" or by calling themselves "anarchists" their ideas are distinctly at odds with those associated with anarchism. As a result, any claims that their ideas are anarchist or that they are part of the anarchist tradition or movement are false.

"Anarcho"-capitalists claim to be anarchists because they say that they oppose government. As noted in the last section, they use a dictionary definition of anarchism. However, this fails to appreciate that anarchism is a political theory. As dictionaries are rarely politically sophisticated things, this means that they fail to recognise that anarchism is more than just opposition to government, it is also marked a opposition to capitalism (i.e. exploitation and private property). Thus, opposition to government is a necessary but not sufficient condition for being an anarchist -- you also need to be opposed to exploitation and capitalist private property. As "anarcho"-capitalists do not consider interest, rent and profits (i.e. capitalism) to be exploitative nor oppose capitalist property rights, they are not anarchists.

 

Their argument:

Anarchism = against capitalism, therefore anarcho-capitalism is not anarchism.

 

Are bananas a kind of fruit?

Fruits are red or green, therefore bananas are not fruit.

 

fail.

  • | Post Points: 20
Not Ranked
Male
Posts 99
Points 1,465

"An" means not or without. "Archos" means ruler, master, or governance.

By definition, anarcho-capitalism is anarchist. You can argue with the word, but I don't think the Greeks can hear you.

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 75 Contributor
Male
Posts 1,008
Points 19,520
Eric080 replied on Sun, Feb 27 2011 11:26 AM

It depends on how you want to define anarchism.  Some see it as without a state (i.e., territorial monopoly on the provision of law and defense) and others see it as against authority structures (i.e., some on the Left view capitalism as a class-driven authority system).  Under definition one, of course it is anarchism.  Under definition two, it isn't.

 

Regardless, it is just bickering about a word.  We know what "anarcho-capitalism" means, so let's debate the merit of the system rather than the definition behind it.

"And it may be said with strict accuracy, that the taste a man may show for absolute government bears an exact ratio to the contempt he may profess for his countrymen." - de Tocqueville
  • | Post Points: 5
Top 100 Contributor
Male
Posts 917
Points 17,505

Epicurus ibn Kalhoun:

I mean, if you go by what most people think of anarchism as ([chaos and warlordism] post breakdown of the central government), then yes.  But then, feudalism could be seen as a form of anarchism in relation to Roman imperialism.

If you're talking about anti-authoritarianism and the breakdown of heirarchy and class sytems, then no.

Feudalism is quasi-anarchistic, it's warlordish; not statist.

Anti-authoritarianism and anti-heirarchy are moronic nonsense. And lol@'class system'.

I will break in the doors of hell and smash the bolts; there will be confusion of people, those above with those from the lower depths. I shall bring up the dead to eat food like the living; and the hosts of dead will outnumber the living.
  • | Post Points: 20
Top 500 Contributor
Male
Posts 244
Points 5,455
Felipe replied on Sun, Feb 27 2011 11:44 AM

The Mises Institute should make an official refutation of that FAQ.

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 100 Contributor
Male
Posts 907
Points 14,795

The Mises Institute should make an official refutation of that FAQ.

Double points if done by Block :)

The Voluntaryist Reader - read, comment, post your own.
  • | Post Points: 5
Top 50 Contributor
Male
Posts 2,255
Points 36,010
Moderator
William replied on Sun, Feb 27 2011 1:27 PM

throw me in the not caring camp

"I am not an ego along with other egos, but the sole ego: I am unique. Hence my wants too are unique, and my deeds; in short, everything about me is unique" Max Stirner
  • | Post Points: 20
Top 100 Contributor
Male
Posts 917
Points 17,505

William:

throw me in the not caring camp

I am thinking apathy is the ideal way to respond to these left-anarchists. I've certainly heard it all before, and if they want to complain about the evil bossism they can go rant on C4SS where someone gives a chit.
I will break in the doors of hell and smash the bolts; there will be confusion of people, those above with those from the lower depths. I shall bring up the dead to eat food like the living; and the hosts of dead will outnumber the living.
  • | Post Points: 5
Top 75 Contributor
Posts 1,189
Points 22,990

"http://www.infoshop.org/page/AnarchistFAQSectionF

Simple answer: No!"

-Says the guy with a yellow anarchy is order picture. Anyone see any irony or confusion here?

Freedom has always been the only route to progress.

Post Neo-Left Libertarian Manifesto (PNL lib)
  • | Post Points: 20
Not Ranked
Posts 4
Points 110
Mocky replied on Sun, Feb 27 2011 3:04 PM

I get the jist of his argument. The FAQ states that, "Anarcho Capitalism" does apply to the dictionary definition of the term "Anarchism," and the author thinks that is a misleading distinction. He says that Anarchism as an ideology which both rejects the state and all forms of hierarchy, which will include capitalism. To that degree, do any of us want to associate Ancap with with the general conceptions of political anarchism?

Should we just switch to "Anti-Statist?"

  • | Post Points: 50
Top 100 Contributor
Male
Posts 917
Points 17,505

BUT CAPITALISM IS STATISM.

There is no winning with these people. I know what I mean by capitalism, market anarchism, etc. These word games are just pointless.

I will break in the doors of hell and smash the bolts; there will be confusion of people, those above with those from the lower depths. I shall bring up the dead to eat food like the living; and the hosts of dead will outnumber the living.
  • | Post Points: 5
Top 500 Contributor
Male
Posts 286
Points 4,665
skylien replied on Sun, Feb 27 2011 3:24 PM

It's boring semantics stuff.

Somehow I have the feeling this thread is not intended for an honest discussion, but merely for advertisement of their ideology.

"Quis custodiet ipsos custodes, qui custodes custodient? Was that right for 'Who watches the watcher who watches the watchmen?' ? Probably not. Still...your move, my lord." Mr Vimes in THUD!
  • | Post Points: 20
Top 500 Contributor
Male
Posts 268
Points 5,220

Gee you figure that out all by yourself?  

OBJECTION!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

If you preface everything you say with the phrase 'studies have shown...' people will believe anything you say no matter how ridiculous. Studies have shown this works 87.64% of the time.
  • | Post Points: 20
Top 500 Contributor
Male
Posts 286
Points 4,665
skylien replied on Sun, Feb 27 2011 3:39 PM

Yeah, guess I have my smarty pants on. Hopefully he doesn’t make a thread for every headline of the anarchist FAQ.

"Quis custodiet ipsos custodes, qui custodes custodient? Was that right for 'Who watches the watcher who watches the watchmen?' ? Probably not. Still...your move, my lord." Mr Vimes in THUD!
  • | Post Points: 20
Top 100 Contributor
Male
Posts 917
Points 17,505

This is what happens when lefto's finally crack and lose it. You should see Francois Tremblay.

I will break in the doors of hell and smash the bolts; there will be confusion of people, those above with those from the lower depths. I shall bring up the dead to eat food like the living; and the hosts of dead will outnumber the living.
  • | Post Points: 20
Top 75 Contributor
Posts 1,189
Points 22,990

All central planning leads to statism.
 

Freedom has always been the only route to progress.

Post Neo-Left Libertarian Manifesto (PNL lib)
  • | Post Points: 5
Top 75 Contributor
Male
Posts 1,129
Points 16,635
Giant_Joe replied on Sun, Feb 27 2011 5:50 PM

He says that Anarchism as an ideology which both rejects the state and all forms of hierarchy, which will include capitalism.

How do they raise children?

  • | Post Points: 35
Top 500 Contributor
Male
Posts 244
Points 5,455
Felipe replied on Sun, Feb 27 2011 6:05 PM

How do they raise children?

Marx raises their children

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 75 Contributor
Male
Posts 1,289
Points 18,820
MaikU replied on Sun, Feb 27 2011 6:21 PM

Giant_Joe:

He says that Anarchism as an ideology which both rejects the state and all forms of hierarchy, which will include capitalism.

How do they raise children?

 

 

now that's a good point, never thought about it this way. Maybe they would reply that children would be "owned" or raised collectively? Hm..

"Dude... Roderick Long is the most anarchisty anarchist that has ever anarchisted!" - Evilsceptic

(english is not my native language, sorry for grammar.)

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 75 Contributor
Male
Posts 1,129
Points 16,635
Giant_Joe replied on Mon, Feb 28 2011 9:36 AM

now that's a good point, never thought about it this way. Maybe they would reply that children would be "owned" or raised collectively? Hm..

But raising, in and of itself, requires a "non-flat" relation. One is the authority on some subject matter, and the other is learning. Hierarchy is an essential property of the universe.

They don't have an answer for this. There will be more arguing about the definition of words, or they will make a reservation or exception "just this time" (tm) to make it work. Progressivism runs on "we will make an exception, just this time" until you get the mess we got today.

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 500 Contributor
Posts 312
Points 4,310
Chyd3nius replied on Mon, Feb 28 2011 9:46 AM

If leftist would have let us to have the word "liberal" not of this bulls*** would ever have to be argued off. I personally see anarcho-capitalism as a combination of anarchism and capitalism, not just a pure anarchism.

-- --- English I not so well sorry I will. I'm not native speaker.
  • | Post Points: 20
Top 100 Contributor
Male
Posts 917
Points 17,505

Liberalism is leftist, including classical liberalism. All the same egalitarian, revolutionary, populist, rightsist, Enlightenment nonsense. Anyways, libertarianism is not liberalism; classical or otherwise. It is something new and different.

I will break in the doors of hell and smash the bolts; there will be confusion of people, those above with those from the lower depths. I shall bring up the dead to eat food like the living; and the hosts of dead will outnumber the living.
  • | Post Points: 20
Top 500 Contributor
Posts 312
Points 4,310
Chyd3nius replied on Mon, Feb 28 2011 10:24 AM

Well, I don't know who free market-advocate used the word "libertarianism" firstly in modern sense, but originaly it was a synonym to left wing-anarchism. So my message to the leftist complaining about the use of words: You started it, so bear the consequenses.

-- --- English I not so well sorry I will. I'm not native speaker.
  • | Post Points: 20
Top 100 Contributor
Male
Posts 917
Points 17,505

Really, libertarianism starts as a left-wing religious movement and then moves into politics; but market-libertarianism is almost as old; and actually in terms of theory (not semantics) market anarchism predates the American Revolution or left-anarchism with Burke's A Vindication of Natural Society.

I will break in the doors of hell and smash the bolts; there will be confusion of people, those above with those from the lower depths. I shall bring up the dead to eat food like the living; and the hosts of dead will outnumber the living.
  • | Post Points: 5
Previous | Next
Page 1 of 1 (29 items) | RSS