Is it just me, or does there appear to be growing infestation of Ancaps? Maybe Im liking the wrong Facebook pages but I am seeing way more than I used to see. This needs to be combated at the least.
Perhaps we should start making attempts to organize and at least present an opposing viewpoint on popular sites (such as facebook).
It's an internet philosophy, the refuge of middle-class white nerds who got hard into right-wing extremism. That's it. We will never meet one outside the comments section of a youtube video. My suggestion is to not argue with them, don't go on their websites, pretend they don't even fucking exist. We anarchists need to pay attention to the people, and realize the existence of "anarcho-capitalism" is a profound, morally reprehensible aberration that is OUR FAULT because we have fallen so out of touch with the working class. So many people want to take up a name as cool as "anarchist" yet so few give a damn about what it means!
If I ever see a "black and yellow" flag outside a jpeg, I'm punching the fucker holding it! The fact that these fascist vermin are taking an idea that people fought and died for sickens me to my core. There isn't a single fucking "anarcho-capitalist" as hard, as passionate, or as spirited as Durruti, Makhno, Malatesta or Magón - and there never goddam will be. I despise them as much as I despise any reactionary. The forces of decadent, middle-class liberalism will never take anarchism and turn into the ideology of idiots and morons!
Anyone who wants to see the true face of these scum needs to read their book Democracy: The God That Failed. They despise the weak. If we anarchists ever become popular, we must rid that goddam idea from the face of the earth.
To Conatz and anyone who's ever met these reactionaries outside the internet - are they all a bunch of terrible human beings or what?
I haven't met one Anarchist in person, so lack proper perspective on strength of Anarchy as a whole.
I am in agreement however in that they are as bad as fascists. They appear as ideological enemy, a contradiction at its core that many in the West unfortunately find appealing- or at least online.
The only reason I did post this is the sight of specter of something that could become popular looming in the distance, if given chance. And dismay at the number of those who talk of the gold and black flag.
I'm actually THE quintessential anarchist, I have the scars to prove it, but I digress, yes, they are as bad as fascists, I regard them as bank credit-riding yuppies, as cold and unfeeling, as self-absorbed and greedy, I also loath their ignorance!
I am also not too eager to spend my time fighting these virtual nerds, but from the local point of view, they are not too harmless. This ideology was the main one in this country until a few years ago and those people are always looking for some ways to come back. And disguising anarcho-capitalism as some form of "mutualism" which opposes large-scale capitalism (while actually not being anti-capitalist at all), they are able to smuggle their ideas across to people. For example here, and keep in mind the FB generation of activists have no idea about what is real and what is virtual.
Mutualism = small-scale self-managed capitalism
Market socialism = large-scale self-managed capitalism
An-capitalism = large-scale 'traditional' capitalism with privatized states
Nannernanner - best post yet! 
I don't think you have to be a bad person to hold bad ideas. If someone was an ancap IRL I wouldn't hit them or any other reactionary because then I'd have to punch my dad and uncle.
some people who write for the German journal eigentümlich frei (10x a year, ~ 5000 copies) perceive themselves as "Anarcho-Capitalistic" ... the journal prides itself as a "market place for liberalism, capitalism and anarchism", in my opinion, most of the authors are either bourgeois libertarians, classical liberals or people belonging to the New Right, plus some weirdos from the Men's rights movement, the notorious national anarchist Peter Toepfer and the individualist anarchist (Stirner & Mackay fan) Uwe Timm
Look not to defend these kinds of people but equating them to fascists is a wee bit over the top in my experience.
At least from my encounters with them they are mostly just small business fetishists who dream of some pure and perfect state of capitalism in which a range of small to medium sized businesses compete on some perfect unstained market and in which every person is viewed as some self-reliant enlightened individualist entrepeneur. And besides that they have a massive fetish for anything that is supposed to be voluntary (basically the traditional view of the market as a voluntary and self organised interaction of equals). And then well alot of them are also the kind that constantly whine about how capitalism isn't pure at the moment and how corporations and governements have corrupted it. So basically they are a group of liberals who want to privatise the state and hold the age old small business fetish you see in alot of liberalistic currents throughout history. Which I think is still quite something else from fascism, as they are basically just a bunch of extreme liberals, extreme liberals who are deluded and piss off a lot of people by appropriating the name of a totally opposite movement, but still just a bunch of extreme liberals.
Although there is something to say about fascistic tendencies within the theoreticians and figureheads of this "tendency" (see for example the sympathies of the mises institute with Pinochet). But as far as I have encountered this doesn't seem much of a concern for most of the internet activists.
I've been called one(I'm not) but I've never met one. I don't get the tendency of some people to get their knickers in a twist about them to such a degree though. It seems to me that through sheer weight of numbers in agreement and the direct effect they have in our lives the real 'enemy' are those that believe in western democracy. If we're going to hate anyone(I don't, it serves no purpose), then surely these fuckers should be the ones. Their 'philosophy' is in our faces all day, every fucking day. It's a philosophy of blame, irresponsibilty, mediocrity and shallowness. That's the one that angers me the most and it's the one that most of the ruling, middle and working classes subscribe to. Fucking shameful.
Hu, I was under the impression that they were dieing and the internet biased right wing “libertarian” trend was reaching it's expiration date.
to be fair I have stop paying attention to the youtube political community a long time ago, so I'm not in a position to know. But I'm sure that that shit be dieing ever since youtube made it harder to find out about new channels. Even my right wing friend that has his own channel in youtube has stopped caring about reading economic and political books (he dose not know that I know he has the channel, funny story).
Anyway a bunch of misanthropic upper-middle class kids ranting on the internet with no potential for real action is not gana mean anything. Last year in my local anarchist book fair one of those Caronian-muralist /anarcho-cap types running a stand ( he was from the “Left Libertarian alliance”)got threatened to get punched in the face while I was having a talk with him. Basicly shows how well established they are in the actual anarchist movement. Anyway he quickly gave his threaten-er a free pamphlet claiming that it would legitimize his position in relation to the wider anarchist movement(i was personally a bit pissed myself since he charged me for the same pamphlets the year before).
Yeah, maybe I hang around in the wrong circles, but I have never met one IRL....
for the pure article, see this site:
www . lewrockwell . com
i knew two libertarian party types when i was a u-grad, irresponsible narcissists the both of them.
I don't think you have to be a bad person to hold bad ideas. If someone was an ancap IRL I wouldn't hit them or any other reactionary because then I'd have to punch my dad and uncle.
I think the confusion here arises because most people do not understand the tactical use of violence by anti-fascists. Most people wrongly assume that anti-fascist violence is motivated by moral repugnance at fascists, ergo if you can ascribe a moral equivalence to fascism on the part of any other party, then the use of violence against them is justified by reference to antifascism, ipso facto. This is entirely incorrect.
Despite the messages of many "cultural antifascist" music bands, art groups etc, antifascist violence, at least in the eyes of its actual practicioners, is a pragmatic response, rather than a moral or emotional one. It is a response to the use of violence by fascists to silence, terrorise and organisationally liquidate any left or target-ethnicity resistance to fascist violence. There may be many ways that certain Tories or corporate predators may have even more offensive views or be destroying more lives than current fascist groups, but because they are using the apparatuses of the state or market to do so, then using the same kind of tactics against them as the EDL or whathaveyou, would be an inappropriate extension of antifascist rationale. Contrary to the propaganda of the dominant ideology, antifascist violence is not an attack on freedom of speech, but a defence of it - on the part of those whom fascists aim to silence through their violence. Or, as we used to say, all militant antifascism is just self-defence. And certainly never an excuse to use violence against people whose political views piss you off, just because you find them offensive.
I think I have told this story before, but there was an American right-wing libertarian working at Freedom bookshop once. She was nice, but her politics were awful. She would always critique various things we spoke about, and I asked her one time what the "anarchist movements" prioritises should be, and she told me 'the abolition of the NHS'
It's an internet philosophy, the refuge of middle-class white nerds who got hard into right-wing extremism. That's it. We will never meet one outside the comments section of a youtube video. My suggestion is to not argue with them, don't go on their websites, pretend they don't even fucking exist. We anarchists need to pay attention to the people, and realize the existence of "anarcho-capitalism" is a profound, morally reprehensible aberration that is OUR FAULT because we have fallen so out of touch with the working class. So many people want to take up a name as cool as "anarchist" yet so few give a damn about what it means!If I ever see a "black and yellow" flag outside a jpeg, I'm punching the fucker holding it! The fact that these fascist vermin are taking an idea that people fought and died for sickens me to my core. There isn't a single fucking "anarcho-capitalist" as hard, as passionate, or as spirited as Durruti, Makhno, Malatesta or Magón - and there never goddam will be. I despise them as much as I despise any reactionary. The forces of decadent, middle-class liberalism will never take anarchism and turn into the ideology of idiots and morons!
Anyone who wants to see the true face of these scum needs to read their book Democracy: The God That Failed. They despise the weak. If we anarchists ever become popular, we must rid that goddam idea from the face of the earth.
To Conatz and anyone who's ever met these reactionaries outside the internet - are they all a bunch of terrible human beings or what?
I was responding to this
Mutualism = small-scale self-managed capitalism
Completely false - mutualism is anti-capitalist to its core.
Just because something isn't communist it doesn't mean its capitalist.
Mutualism is one of the trends of anarchism, probably the oldest of the modern anarchist movement.
Anarchism does not have to be communist (although it absolutely cannot be capitalist to get us back on track).
The Alliance of the Libertarian Left is a broad group. It is however increasingly anarchistic and anti-capitalist (just not communist).
There are several well respected anarchists who have been or are associated with them. The ones I've come across are often Wobblies, or associated with anarchist groups and actions (often being more concerned with supporting anarchism as a whole than trying to foist their views on others).
I know I won't get any support here, as anything non-communist is usually shut down, but left libertarians aren't typically 'anarcho'-capitalist, and are generally anti-capitalist.
The biggest issue is that a lot come from the more mainstream US Libertarian climate, but came to realise that so much of that movement is not concerned with any freedom, except that for the rich to exploit the poor. This means their language often differs from mainstream anarchists, even if they reject capitalism and authority and the political process.
That comes from a lack of broad knowlege of anarchism - and that is our failing. People know of libertarianism more than anarchism, and look to its rhetoric of freedom, even if it is false.
There are of course many 'anarcho'-capitalists who are quite vile who do seem to be petulant teenagers. I've given up paying any attention to them, I suggest everyone else does likewise, unless they come asking quesdtions in a reasonable manner - they may not be a lost cause if they're willing to engage constructively.
There are of course many 'anarcho'-capitalists who are quite vile who do seem to be petulant teenagers.
Wow that was me three years ago. Only I was more crimethinky than ancappy though I had a little of that.
The Alliance of the Libertarian Left is a broad group. It is however increasingly anarchistic and anti-capitalist (just not communist).
There are several well respected anarchists who have been or are associated with them. The ones I've come across are often Wobblies, or associated with anarchist groups and actions (often being more concerned with supporting anarchism as a whole than trying to foist their views on others).I know I won't get any support here, as anything non-communist is usually shut down, but left libertarians aren't typically 'anarcho'-capitalist, and are generally anti-capitalist.
The biggest issue is that a lot come from the more mainstream US Libertarian climate, but came to realise that so much of that movement is not concerned with any freedom, except that for the rich to exploit the poor. This means their language often differs from mainstream anarchists, even if they reject capitalism and authority and the political process.
That comes from a lack of broad knowlege of anarchism - and that is our failing. People know of libertarianism more than anarchism, and look to its rhetoric of freedom, even if it is false.There are of course many 'anarcho'-capitalists who are quite vile who do seem to be petulant teenagers. I've given up paying any attention to them, I suggest everyone else does likewise, unless they come asking quesdtions in a reasonable manner - they may not be a lost cause if they're willing to engage constructively.
I think this is misrepresenting the “Alliance of left libertarian a”(ALL, for short)
their pamphlets use 'anarcho'-capitalist text
and the 'Mutualist' there follow Kevin Carson. Who views an-caps as a legit form of anachism, his notion is 'libertarianism' is not to far off from what mainstream American politics and an-caps calls 'libertarianism'. There are also 'argoists' and other non-state market people in the ALL.
Kevin Carson's mutualism is not too far off from an-cap's. I might add that even Carson's folowers state that Carson's mutualism has little if anything to do with Proudhon. I have trouble thinking of Carson's mutualism as a legit form of anarchism.
Kevin Carson has some writing on organizations, iv thought about digging in to that...dose anyone know if it is any good?
He's moved to the left over the years
"Non state market" is an oxymoron.
Carson hangs out with "an"caps, "national-anarchists", reactionaries, right-wing extremists, new right perverts, fucking degenerates, reactionaries, racists and scum; he's "moved to the left" the same way Goebbels "moved to the right".
He deserves to have his hands broken for his shtick. Idiot.
Kevin Carson has been a bad influence on a lot of things... including The Anarchist FAQ.
Imagine how better it could have been without such douche-bags like Kevin Carson, Pierre-Joseph Proudhon, Benjamin Tucker, Max Stirner, Emile Armand, and Henry Appleton (who was born again on the Libcom forum as ComradeAppleton).
Greetings and Salutations!
I am an anarcho-capitalist myself. Pleased to meet you. I decided to come here because I desire to foster understanding between the left and right sects of the anarchist movement.
Let me define anarchy as I see it. Anarchy is the ultimate result of the NAP the desire to remove coercion from our lives. Anarchy is not an economic system. The result of anarchy is the free market. This does not mean a capitalist market, it means simply the market, which can have either socialism or capitalism or both. There is no need for socialists to fight capitalists, the enemy is the State, not an economic system.
By acknowledging that value is subjective, that we may not have all the same goals, and that we do not have to agree on everything. We can move forward with dismantling the State.
I'm here because I want to learn about left anarchy. I am particularly interested in Proudhon, Long, and Tucker. I haven't read their stuff yet, but I will.
Please do not respond to me with vitriol. I come in peace! 
I do not desire a flame war! I desire intelligent discourse, a sharing of ideas. The pursuit of knowledge is sacred, the disemination of knowledge is sacred! Let us not quible like children, let us share ideas. Maybe progress can be made towards realizing anarchy in our life time!
Imagine how better it could have been without such douche-bags like Kevin Carson, Pierre-Joseph Proudhon, Benjamin Tucker, Max Stirner, Emile Armand, and Henry Appleton (who was born again on the Libcom forum as ComradeAppleton).
Yes. That is all I've got to fuckin' say. This is an excellent post, and I wish I could write more about it. And for an answer, things would be soooo much better. Have you read Black Flame?
however, I think it might just be what inevitably happens when you get a bunch of middle-class types in any left-wing, working class movement. If Stirner, Tucker, Proudhon, Armand, and every single one of those goddam morons all had a heart attack before they could spew their garbage from their pens, there would have been just another middle-class antisocial moron replacing them by writing something even worse!
edit:
seriously, again, excellent post. I just started reading the zinelibrary.in archives because I got a lot of pdf links with their name in the urls and... fuck. Just fuck, man. Remember to Fight Speciesism! y'all
edit:
Wanna organize without all those dirty, nasty mundanes getting in the way? Your friendly neighbourhood left subcult knows how! P.S, filed under 'Organizing Manuals' so this is some serious muthafuckin' shit yo
This was filed under "class struggle' so I presume this means screaming the whole book from its very first page at the least middle class looking person at your Infoshop.
And, if you need to kick back after a long day of protesting at the entire nation of Israel through interpretive dance, sit back in what used to be your toilet seat, put your feet up on your ikea coffee table you stole from some dude's house, and read The Collected Writings Of The Unabomber. Or if you're feeling particularly intellectual you can learn about the complex theoretical contours and societal implications of Gender Anarky.
My god it's depressing and hilarious all at the same fucking time. Libcom is a beacon of light in a sea of shit.
notrueliberal, first please stay on one thread. Don't derail every thread. Two, anarcho-capitalism is a contradiction in terms historically, logically, economically, and politically. Please stop using it.
Anarchism specifically came out of the workers movement as the anti-state wing of socialism and came to encompass a rejection of all forms hierarchy and coercion. Capitalism is inherently hierarchical and the market is inherently coercive (not to mention needing state functions to be propped up). Ergo, anarcho-capitalism is oxymoron. Please don't use the term
If you want to know more about anarchism (which is not 'left anarchy') start here:
http://libcom.org/library/libcom-introductory-guide
And since the anarchist FAQ has been mentioned on this thread, you should read that too, starting here:
http://anarchism.pageabode.com/afaq/secFcon.html
And since I know you're going to go on about co-ops/'horizontal' businesses, start here:
http://libcom.org/library/co-ops-or-conflicts
http://libcom.org/library/co-operatives-all-together
http://libcom.org/library/participatory-society-or-libertarian-communism
Now please stop calling yourself an anarchist.
Nanner please define middle class
"Let me define anarchy as I see it. Anarchy is the ultimate result of the NAP the desire to remove coercion from our lives. Anarchy is not an economic system. The result of anarchy is the free market. "
If you think a market isn't coercive then explain baliffs, and while your at it explain how "Pay my price for water and electricity or I'll shut you off" isn't coercive. And how exactly would you plan to deal with Private prisons, private police, private military, etc if you abolish the state but not the market.
"Please do not respond to me with vitriol. I come in peace! tongue I do not desire a flame war! I desire intelligent discourse, a sharing of ideas."
If that really is the case then I strongly suggest you stop talking like your from a Mediaeval fair addressing the court, and stop pre-emptively assuming what our responses are going to be. Oh and maybe start your own threads if your not really interesting in the threads conversation.
Now to get back on track I really don't believe Ancaps are really on the rise, they may be "big" on the internet but the internet is one big echo chamber that allows small groups spread thinly to make contact with each other. (Libcom itself is an example really) Tell me do they have any actual physical presence anywhere?
And as for presenting an opposing view, whats wrong with pointing out how private forces can be just as oppressive as state agencies whenever they try to peddle their "Privatise everything" line?
I personally have never heard a convincing rebuttal to that. At most I've received some comment about how all those nasty private armies work for governments which isn't true and easy to prove.
In less than two weeks time hundreds of neo-Nazis and racists will descend on the coastal town of Dover calling for Britain to “close the border”. It is vital that anti-fascists and anti-racists...
A short biography of Séraphine Pajaud, French anarchist and champion of atheism, anti-militarism and women's liberation
An article by Staughton Lynd reinterprets the concept of union democracy to include workers of all kinds (unionized workers, nonunion workers, and farmers); protection of the rights to strike,...
Please read the posting guidelines before posting. If you see anything which falls outside them please use the down' button on the offending post to flag it for the moderators' attention, or in the case of spam, click the 'spam' button. Site admins are listed here, and feedback can be posted in the feedback forum.
Click here to register now. Logged in users:
Can comment on articles and discussions
Get 'recent posts' refreshed more regularly
Bookmark articles to your own reading list
Use the site private messaging system
Start forum discussions, submit articles, and more...
An internet phenomenon not worth spending time on. I mean, some have literally spent thousands of hours in internet wars with these people. I have met 2 self-identified anarcho-capitalists in my 5 years of radical left involvement...