My doubts about anarchy - page 7. | Bitcointalksearch.org

The Script

sr. member

Activity: 336

Merit: 250

Quote from: em3rgentOrdr on March 30, 2011, 04:14:41 AM

Quote from: grondilu on March 28, 2011, 12:25:21 AM

I seriously begin to doubt the concept of anarchy means anything anyway. To me, anarchy is to politics what nihilism is to philosophy. It's a paradoxical, contradictory concept.

I've reached the point where I try to reject political concepts. All I can do as a human is to act. Therefore, acting is what is important. And how do I act? By promoting bitcoin, when possible... Does this make me an "anarchist". I guess so...

Ah, Human Action. That self-evident axiom upon which a whole theory of economic thought is based.

But I agree with you that rejecting politics is about the only option at this point. Reminds me of an article I read by Frank Chodorov:

http://mises.org/daily/5027/On-Doing-Something-About-It

eMansipater

sr. member

Activity: 294

Merit: 273

Quote from: em3rgentOrdr on March 30, 2011, 04:14:41 AM

...And how do I act? By promoting bitcoin, when possible... Does this make me an "anarchist". I guess so...

lol, hardly.

em3rgentOrdr

sr. member

Activity: 434

Merit: 251

youtube.com/ericfontainejazz now accepts bitcoin

Quote from: grondilu on March 28, 2011, 12:25:21 AM

I seriously begin to doubt the concept of anarchy means anything anyway. To me, anarchy is to politics what nihilism is to philosophy. It's a paradoxical, contradictory concept.

I've reached the point where I try to reject political concepts. All I can do as a human is to act. Therefore, acting is what is important. And how do I act? By promoting bitcoin, when possible... Does this make me an "anarchist". I guess so...

Garrett Burgwardt

sr. member

Activity: 406

Merit: 256

Quote from: rebuilder on March 29, 2011, 04:23:16 PM

Has there ever been an anarcho-capitalist society? What happened to it?

Medieval Iceland was a good functioning example.

The American Old West was another good example, due to how far removed from the central government they were.

And Somalia is currently effectively an anarcho-capitalist society.

I'm writing a big paper on this, so stay tuned, I'll be posting it here soon.

rebuilder

legendary

Activity: 1615

Merit: 1000

Has there ever been an anarcho-capitalist society? What happened to it?

FatherMcGruder

sr. member

Activity: 322

Merit: 250

Quote from: theymos on March 28, 2011, 12:45:45 AM

In anarcho-capitalism, the moderates don't have to give up anything; they voluntarily hire a protection agency.

Protection? Voluntary? Something about an offer...

Quote from: The Script on March 28, 2011, 05:33:57 PM

It is interesting to note that in an anarcho-capitalist society you could construct an anarcho-socialist community, but not the other way around.

This is absolutely untrue. Capitalists do not respect one's right to own the product of his labor and they believe that they can own land. They will destroy the anarchists to protect their profits. This protocol has precedent before and during the Spanish Civil War.

rebuilder

legendary

Activity: 1615

Merit: 1000

Freedom defined is freedom denied.

deadlizard

member

Activity: 112

Merit: 11

Quote from: MoonShadow on March 28, 2011, 08:11:38 PM

Quote from: sortedmush on March 28, 2011, 04:05:03 AM

I'd like to point out that there is a huge difference between Anarcho Capitalism and Anarcho-Communism/Socialism.

You mean besides the fact that Anarcho-Socialism is a contradiction in terms?

I'll say it again - "Capitalism and Socialism are Statist paradigms"
Anarchy is simply Voluntary interaction.

Anarcho-Socialism is double-think ... creighto snuck up while I was posting and gave a better explanation

MoonShadow

legendary

Activity: 1708

Merit: 1007

Quote from: 左 on March 29, 2011, 02:37:48 AM

Quote from: MoonShadow on March 28, 2011, 08:11:38 PM

Quote from: sortedmush on March 28, 2011, 04:05:03 AM

I'd like to point out that there is a huge difference between Anarcho Capitalism and Anarcho-Communism/Socialism.

You mean besides the fact that "Anarcho"-capitalism is a contradiction in terms?

FTFY.

Anarcho-capitalism isn't a contradiction in terms, because capitalism isn't (in it's original meaning) a political ideology. What most people think of as capitalism in our modern age is actually corporatism/merchantilism in new clothes. It's not new either. I said that anarcho-socialism was a contradiction in terms, not because I consider any variation of anarchism viable, but because anarchism and socialism are two political ideologies that are diametricly opposed to one another. Anarchism is the absence of government external to the individual, while socialism is a social & political structure explicitly designed to impose a form (i.e. governance) upon society at large. No matter how one feels about either ideology, no rational person can consider the fundamentals of the both of them, and conclude that they can coexist.

左

sr. member

Activity: 476

Merit: 250

Quote from: MoonShadow on March 28, 2011, 08:11:38 PM

Quote from: sortedmush on March 28, 2011, 04:05:03 AM

I'd like to point out that there is a huge difference between Anarcho Capitalism and Anarcho-Communism/Socialism.

You mean besides the fact that "Anarcho"-capitalism is a contradiction in terms?

FTFY.

MoonShadow

legendary

Activity: 1708

Merit: 1007

Quote from: sortedmush on March 28, 2011, 04:05:03 AM

I'd like to point out that there is a huge difference between Anarcho Capitalism and Anarcho-Communism/Socialism.

You mean besides the fact that Anarcho-Socialism is a contradiction in terms?

LMGTFY

hero member

Activity: 644

Merit: 502

Quote from: The Script on March 28, 2011, 05:33:57 PM

It is interesting to note that in an anarcho-capitalist society you could construct an anarcho-socialist community, but not the other way around.

I keep reading that here, but without any explanation why it's the case.

During the Social Revolution in Spain (an Anarcho-Syndicalist revolution that was ultimately crushed by the Spanish Communist Party and the Soviet Union) small-scale capitalism existed. Small farms weren't collectivized, and although the larger land-owners had their lands seized it was by state dictat (the Spanish state being largely non-anarchist, as most anarchists refused to join the government). Even amongst the anarcho-syndicalist collectives there was an element of capitalism, with trade between collectives occurring.

I can't see anything inherent in the rejection of rulers that would lead to capitalism becoming "forbidden". It may become increasingly difficult for capitalists to compete with collectives, but construction of a capitalist society within a wider anarchist society shouldn't be impossible.

The Script

sr. member

Activity: 336

Merit: 250

Quote from: da2ce7 on March 28, 2011, 04:15:41 AM

Quote from: grondilu on March 28, 2011, 03:42:56 AM

Might be a big cliché, but I think they want everyone to live in harmony and non-violence. Meaning that nobody possesses anything, everybody works for everyone and you have to share whatever you produce.

But there are limited resources, people like cars, computers, hookers. If you have to share everything what dose one have? Nothing?
If you are the only one with water, do you have to share it with everyone so everyone dehydrates?

In a 'nobody owning anything' society, there is no impulse for anyone to save up for the bad times. As everyone else will attack you for 'hoarding.'

To me any non-capitalistic society will be short-lived. Particularly one that runs on anarchy.

Economically it is unsustainable, morally it is evil.

+1

It is interesting to note that in an anarcho-capitalist society you could construct an anarcho-socialist community, but not the other way around.

da2ce7

legendary

Activity: 1222

Merit: 1016

Live and Let Live

Quote from: grondilu on March 28, 2011, 03:42:56 AM

Might be a big cliché, but I think they want everyone to live in harmony and non-violence. Meaning that nobody possesses anything, everybody works for everyone and you have to share whatever you produce.

But there are limited resources, people like cars, computers, hookers. If you have to share everything what dose one have? Nothing?
If you are the only one with water, do you have to share it with everyone so everyone dehydrates?

In a 'nobody owning anything' society, there is no impulse for anyone to save up for the bad times. As everyone else will attack you for 'hoarding.'

To me any non-capitalistic society will be short-lived. Particularly one that runs on anarchy.

Economically it is unsustainable, morally it is evil.

sortedmush

full member

Activity: 140

Merit: 100

I'd like to point out that there is a huge difference between Anarcho Capitalism and Anarcho-Communism/Socialism.

Each have a very different idea of what the state is and what property is.

All of the questions and doubts raised on this forum are very basic. There's plenty of ideas out there.

If you want an idea of what Anarcho Capitalists are talking about. I suggest having a look at freedomainradio.com (there'll be a podcast talking about your doubt there for sure)

If you're interested in finding out about Anarcho-Communism/Socialism, look at anarchistfaq.org

I'd suggest having a look at both to see how different they are.

kiba

legendary

Activity: 980

Merit: 1014

Quote from: da2ce7 on March 28, 2011, 03:40:13 AM

Quote from: grondilu on March 28, 2011, 02:43:29 AM

Very true. But I suspect most anarchists (well at least the left-anarchists) don't like this idea, neither do they like cryptography or money in general.

So what do they like?

Remember, these anarchists are the kind of people who dislike the idea of division of labor, of profit, and other concepts.

grondilu

legendary

Activity: 1288

Merit: 1076

Quote from: da2ce7 on March 28, 2011, 03:40:13 AM

So what do they like?

Might be a big cliché, but I think they want everyone to live in harmony and non-violence. Meaning that nobody possesses anything, everybody works for everyone and you have to share whatever you produce.

da2ce7

legendary

Activity: 1222

Merit: 1016

Live and Let Live

Quote from: grondilu on March 28, 2011, 02:43:29 AM

Very true. But I suspect most anarchists (well at least the left-anarchists) don't like this idea, neither do they like cryptography or money in general.

So what do they like?

grondilu

legendary

Activity: 1288

Merit: 1076

Quote from: Alex Beckenham on March 28, 2011, 02:17:20 AM

I prefer to think of it as everyone having power, and personal cryptography is just one tool that helps in that area.

Very true. But I suspect most anarchists (well at least the left-anarchists) don't like this idea, neither do they like cryptography or money in general.

Alex Beckenham

full member

Activity: 154

Merit: 100

Quote from: grondilu on March 28, 2011, 12:45:29 AM

Power does exist and therefore I have difficulty to imagine a society without it.
Truly, in the world there will always be at least one person who will be willing to take the power. If nobody does, I will.

I prefer to think of it as everyone having power, and personal cryptography is just one tool that helps in that area.

Topic: My doubts about anarchy - page 7. (Read 18182 times)