What are?

[MAM]

So I'm new, and I've been reading the forums recently, it turns out that there are many shades of ancap, so I was wondering what are these shades? I.E What's an Agorist, what's a Mutualist, I'm sure there are others.

Any way thanks for your assistance!

[braindead0]

I'm gonna need popcorn for this one....

Hopefully someone will take a shot.  From what I've been able to fathom, there's a lot of shades of grey and many opinions..

[Distruzio]

So I'm new, and I've been reading the forums recently, it turns out that there are many shades of ancap, so I was wondering what are these shades? I.E What's an Agorist, what's a Mutualist, I'm sure there are others.

Any way thanks for your assistance!

Each are separate approaches to market anarchy, of which anarcho-capitalism is a synonym sometimes preferred due to the hostility received from other anarchists. Agorism is a term used to identify the counter-market approach to market anarchy - an emphasis on black market transactions, non-currency based trade, and the like.

Mutualists are market anarchists who, in short, apply a practical approach to anarchist transitions that the AnCap (anarcho-capitalist) is wise to concede within reason. They believe that homesteading establishes ownership, even where property was already previously thought secured. Although left-libertarians and, therefore, deserving of a strong paddle as though they were a child, the mutualist yet maintains the BEST tactic of redressing public to private property transition. Assuming a State suddenly abolish its public education, mutualists would see the school teachers assume ownership of the buildings and property they work on through a quasi-homesteading approach - this would create voluntary education business firms subject to private market rather than being exempt via public property status.

Follow?

[dpalme]

So I'm new, and I've been reading the forums recently, it turns out that there are many shades of ancap, so I was wondering what are these shades? I.E What's an Agorist, what's a Mutualist, I'm sure there are others.

Any way thanks for your assistance!

Each are separate approaches to market anarchy, of which anarcho-capitalism is a synonym sometimes preferred due to the hostility received from other anarchists. Agorism is a term used to identify the counter-market approach to market anarchy - an emphasis on black market transactions, non-currency based trade, and the like.

Mutualists are market anarchists who, in short, apply a practical approach to anarchist transitions that the AnCap (anarcho-capitalist) is wise to concede within reason. They believe that homesteading establishes ownership, even where property was already previously thought secured. Although left-libertarians and, therefore, deserving of a strong paddle as though they were a child, the mutualist yet maintains the BEST tactic of redressing public to private property transition. Assuming a State suddenly abolish its public education, mutualists would see the school teachers assume ownership of the buildings and property they work on through a quasi-homesteading approach - this would create voluntary education business firms subject to private market rather than being exempt via public property status.

Follow?

Damn, you're a one man ancap encyclopedia aren't you? Good to have someone so knowledgeable here.

[LegesNullae]

Although left-libertarians and, therefore, deserving of a strong paddle as though they were a child

Would you mind explaining this line? I'm not sure I follow.

[JustSayNoToStatism]

Distruzio's post is really good.

My own take, quite similar to the above, is as follows:

As far as I know, the term agorism comes from Sam Ed Konkin III. If you place strong emphasis on counter economics, and black and gray markets, "starving the beast" if you will, then you might call yourself an agorist.

I have not read much on mutualism, so here are my uneducated thoughts. I see it as a branch of market anarchism that has roots with both Proudhon and Tuckeran socialism. Here's a quote from Tucker, where he criticizes State socialism:

"The claim of the State Socialists, however, that this right would not be exercised in matters pertaining to the individual in the more intimate and private relations of his life is not borne out by the history of governments. It has ever been the tendency of power to add to itself, to enlarge its sphere, to encroach beyond the limits set for it; and where the habit of resisting such encroachment is not fostered, and the individual is not taught to be jealous of his rights, individuality gradually disappears and the government or State becomes the all-in-all."

Some mutualists fall for the labor theory of value. Also, their is a tendency to have negative feelings towards the idea of rent and interest, although they usually don't believe they should use force to prevent it. They also favor voluntary collective ownership of the means of production. So these things aren't too big of a deal. If you dislike what I'm doing, but will leave me alone, that's fully consistent with all the rest of market anarchism. If you want to start a cooperative that will peacefully trade handmade goods for fresh fruits and vegetables instead of buying at a grocery store, there's nothing involuntary about it. It's just a personal preference, like choosing one brand of a product over another.

Also, as you may have noticed, I prefer market anarchism over the term anarcho-capitalism. Rothbard coined the term that we now abbreviate "ancap." In the same way that socialism is automatically associated with state socialism, the same goes for capitalism.

I think of market anarchism as an umbrella term for all market oriented schools of anarchist thought, including people who call themselves agorists, ancaps, and mutualists. Voluntaryism is pretty much synonymous with ancap and market anarchism, although some people on here might correct me on that.

Edit: Here's another quote from Tucker:
"The Anarchists are simply unterrified Jeffersonian Democrats. They believe that "the best government is that which governs least," and that that which governs least is no government at all. Even the simple police function of protecting person and property they deny to governments supported by compulsory taxation. Protection they look upon as a thing to be secured, as long as it is necessary, by voluntary association and cooperation for self-defence, or as a commodity to be purchased, like any other commodity..."
Found here
^That site is about panarchism, which straddles the line between extreme anti-federalism and market anarchism, and very likely what a real market anarchist society would look like, in my estimation.

[MAM]

So I'm new, and I've been reading the forums recently, it turns out that there are many shades of ancap, so I was wondering what are these shades? I.E What's an Agorist, what's a Mutualist, I'm sure there are others.

Any way thanks for your assistance!

Each are separate approaches to market anarchy, of which anarcho-capitalism is a synonym sometimes preferred due to the hostility received from other anarchists. Agorism is a term used to identify the counter-market approach to market anarchy - an emphasis on black market transactions, non-currency based trade, and the like.

Mutualists are market anarchists who, in short, apply a practical approach to anarchist transitions that the AnCap (anarcho-capitalist) is wise to concede within reason. They believe that homesteading establishes ownership, even where property was already previously thought secured. Although left-libertarians and, therefore, deserving of a strong paddle as though they were a child, the mutualist yet maintains the BEST tactic of redressing public to private property transition. Assuming a State suddenly abolish its public education, mutualists would see the school teachers assume ownership of the buildings and property they work on through a quasi-homesteading approach - this would create voluntary education business firms subject to private market rather than being exempt via public property status.

Follow?

I think so thanks!

[Will]

Although left-libertarians and, therefore, deserving of a strong paddle as though they were a child

Would you mind explaining this line? I'm not sure I follow.

I second this. I fail to see how physically or metaphorically spanking children or leftists is beneficial to anyone involved...

[Distruzio]

Although left-libertarians and, therefore, deserving of a strong paddle as though they were a child

Would you mind explaining this line? I'm not sure I follow.

u

I second this. I fail to see how physically or metaphorically spanking children or leftists is beneficial to anyone involved...

I meant that the left libertarian/left anarchist is little more than a child throwing a tantrum b/c the world isn't fair. In that sense, they deserve a good paddling. Its a metaphor about the maturity of their approach to socil disruptions.

[LegesNullae]

I meant that the left libertarian/left anarchist is little more than a child throwing a tantrum b/c the world isn't fair. In that sense, they deserve a good paddling. Its a metaphor about the maturity of their approach to socil disruptions.

This seems like an ad hominem. Left-libertarians (many of whom are market anarchists) simply prefer social relations that are more egalitarian than hierarchical, hence their support for workers' cooperatives and general anti-sexism, anti-racism, etc. I fail to see how having a preference is a "temper tantrum." There might be left-libertarians/left anarchists who sometimes act this way, but it's unfair to judge an entire group in such a manner.

And I know that you were probably kidding, but advocating paddling over intellectual disagreements isn't exactly classy.

[kunkmiester]

There are a number of theories about how the world should ideally work, and anarcho-capitalism/insert-your-ism-here is only one of them.  It's quite clear to us that most anarchist approaches would, when properly established in societies educated in their responsibilities and with the "legal frameworks" set up for them, be better than a statist society.

The problem we find here is that we are in a statist society, and very few people have the education to work with anarchism, and the legal framework is very hostile to anything that would disrupt the state.  It gets pretty clear that a revolution of some sort is needed to transition society from statism to anarchism.  We've all made individual revolutions(or are in the midst of them) and have been educating ourselves to how to work in an anarchist society--this is the point of the blog and forum after all.  The problem is that not everyone is going to want to make the transition.

A number of "flavors" of anarchism, such as agorism, aren't so much different creeds as different ways to move to an anarchist system.  Agorism favors a non-violent "opting out" of the current system, and moving economic activity underground and beyond the reach of the state.  The idea here is that anarchists will form their own society, which will expand as more and more people opt out, until it's big enough that it can defeat the state and establish an open anarchist society--see the novel written for it, "Alongside Night."

[Distruzio]

I meant that the left libertarian/left anarchist is little more than a child throwing a tantrum b/c the world isn't fair. In that sense, they deserve a good paddling. Its a metaphor about the maturity of their approach to socil disruptions.

This seems like an ad hominem. Left-libertarians (many of whom are market anarchists) simply prefer social relations that are more egalitarian than hierarchical, hence their support for workers' cooperatives and general anti-sexism, anti-racism, etc. I fail to see how having a preference is a "temper tantrum." There might be left-libertarians/left anarchists who sometimes act this way, but it's unfair to judge an entire group in such a manner.

And I know that you were probably kidding, but advocating paddling over intellectual disagreements isn't exactly classy.

Well, I premise my entire ethical worldview on property rights and their axiomatic status. Egalitarianism is hostile by its very nature to the existence of property. Therefore, the libertarian who emphasizes equality over liberty, as the left libs do, sound remarkably like a child complaining that my sucker is more orange than his. Their entire approach to libertarianism is personally revolting to me. Individuals do, and have, warranted reconsideration, but I make no excuses for my discriminatory perspectives. I am NOT an egalitarian in the slightest.

[JustSayNoToStatism]

Please elaborate on the axioms.

[Distruzio]

Please elaborate on the axioms.

Done.