Daily Anarchist Forum
August 15, 2022, 07:39:45 PM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Welcome to the Daily Anarchist Forum!
 
   Home   Help Search Members Login Register  
Pages: [1] 2
  Print  
Author Topic: anarcho-capitalism and left values  (Read 9799 times)
Alricaus
Jr. Member
**
Posts: 72



View Profile
« on: May 15, 2012, 08:15:31 PM »

Hi there,

There is some things that bothering me at the moment about anarcho-capitalism. I tried to find answers elsewhere, without success, so I decided to come here.

One thing that I really like about anarcho-capitalism, is the fact that this system enable all other system within it. It’s like a meta-system that let people decide what fit the best their values. After having talk a lot with some real anarcho-capitalist and libertarian (I said real because I realized that some libertarian and anarcho-capitalist (more libertarian I would say) use the free-market rhetoric to legitimated some form of inequity that we lived, without considering the fact that … we don’t have a free-market!!) are more conservative in their «perfect world» that they would like to achieve.

Personally, since I came more from the left, I still have the «leftish» values. For example, in my perfect world, they would be more equality (in material terms), smaller business, more control by the worker over production, more green policies, emancipation of GLBTQ cheap university, and so fourth.  These are examples, but I could follow. Naturally, I don’t want to attain these elements by coercion; I would like to convince (or to boycott institution that goes against my values) people adopting way of living, or, alternatively, to build this society with people that have the same beliefs.

Furthermore, I think that I am more willing to ally with left-libertarian to achieve the end of the state comparatively to other anarcho-capitalist.  

I know that some anarcho-capitalists share these beliefs, but, maybe because a lot associated themselves with the right, it seems that we are quite outnumbered. I just want to know if (1) some anarcho-capitalist shares my views about the perfect world (or you know … that have similar view), and, if not (2) if you know some for of anarchy that hold the structure of anarcho-capitalism, but that share more a leftish view of what society should be attain.

If I can sum up, I would say that I fear that many anarcho-capitalist share with me the way that society should work, but not what outcomes should be achieve.  

I just want to tell that I used the term left in his common sense, since I do believe that, in some way, anarcho-capitalism is the leftish political philosophy that I know since it is the system that require coercion the less, and consequently, that require the state the less.

Thank
« Last Edit: May 15, 2012, 08:20:33 PM by Alricaus » Logged
LegesNullae
Jr. Member
**
Posts: 66


View Profile
« Reply #1 on: May 15, 2012, 09:04:58 PM »

I've been in your intellectual boat for a while now. I've found that the Alliance of the Libertarian Left (found at http://all-left.net/) has a lot of great articles about approaching "socialist" values (greater worker control, less income disparity) through purely market anarchist means. Kevin Carson and Gary Chartier in particular have written a lot about how many of the "natural" hierarchies in society aren't so natural, and are instead the result of centuries of state intervention.

Agorism (as a philosophy, not just a strategy) and Mutualism both have more of a leftist twinge to them. I'd advise reading into them.
Logged

"It is easy to be conspicuously 'compassionate' if others are being forced to pay the cost." -Murray N. Rothbard
Seth King
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
*****
Posts: 3211



View Profile WWW
« Reply #2 on: May 15, 2012, 09:35:00 PM »

I don't think material equality is ever going to be perfect. I think it will still be bell-shaped. But my understanding of free-market economics leads me to believe that with unlimited competition, profits tend towards zero. This is because people can always undercut you.

If this is the case than it seems to me that an entire economy could function quite well and still be more or less profitless. In this case, owners of companies may very well make as much as their janitors. People would sort of fit into their natural place based on their preferences and abilities, but not necessarily be any richer for it.

I know that sounds whackadoodle, and I'm not saying I fully believe it, but it wouldn't surprise me if that's how it ended up.
Logged

When are you moving to New Hampshire?
Anonymous Infowarrior
Full Member
***
Posts: 129


View Profile
« Reply #3 on: May 16, 2012, 03:53:43 PM »

I'm a mutualist/ancom. I don't see a problem with private property, but I think a collectivist society is the ultimate form of environmentalism and individualism.
Logged
AgoristTeen1994
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 590


View Profile
« Reply #4 on: May 16, 2012, 09:47:26 PM »

Infowarrior would you say this describes you? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarcho-collectivism


Anyway while I heavily disagree with you that a collectivist society is the "ultimate form of enviromentalism and individualism" I do vaguely understand where you're coming from. Just out of curiosity are there any books you'd suggest I'd read...I'll read them, even if only to better argue against the points made in those books. And honestly? I do agree with you in regards to violent insurrections. While I would much prefer peaceful means, and I think an anarchist society could be brought about through nonviolent means...doesn't mean I"m 100% opposed to insurrection. Personally I'd prefer a combination of the two.
Logged

Anonymous Infowarrior
Full Member
***
Posts: 129


View Profile
« Reply #5 on: May 16, 2012, 10:04:18 PM »

Infowarrior would you say this describes you? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarcho-collectivism


Anyway while I heavily disagree with you that a collectivist society is the "ultimate form of enviromentalism and individualism" I do vaguely understand where you're coming from. Just out of curiosity are there any books you'd suggest I'd read...I'll read them, even if only to better argue against the points made in those books. And honestly? I do agree with you in regards to violent insurrections. While I would much prefer peaceful means, and I think an anarchist society could be brought about through nonviolent means...doesn't mean I"m 100% opposed to insurrection. Personally I'd prefer a combination of the two.
I think mutualism is close, but I think that the environment is really the center piece of my anarchism. Eventually, I think capitalism will crumble, and then mutualism will crumble, and finally collectivism will replace all of that, and then it will be replaced by something even better because under anarchism, systems will change.

However, unlike most collectivists, I see no problem with private property so long as it is voluntarily provided, and is used sustainably for the good of the community.

As for books, I recommend anything that Murray Bookchin wrote (he is my personal favorite anarchist).
Logged
Disengage
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 331


View Profile WWW
« Reply #6 on: May 16, 2012, 10:31:13 PM »

Quote
However, unlike most collectivists, I see no problem with private property so long as it is voluntarily provided, and is used sustainably for the good of the community.

I'm not sure what "voluntarily provided" means in there, but what if I DON'T use my property sustainably for the good of the community?   What if I'm BBQing endangered species in a giant coal-fired pit, but I'm careful that the smoke doesn't blow your way.    Would you take my land from me?   Am I suddenly not entitled to my property if I don't use it the way you want me to?   

Please 'splain.
Logged



Anonymous Infowarrior
Full Member
***
Posts: 129


View Profile
« Reply #7 on: May 16, 2012, 10:33:55 PM »

Quote
However, unlike most collectivists, I see no problem with private property so long as it is voluntarily provided, and is used sustainably for the good of the community.

I'm not sure what "voluntarily provided" means in there, but what if I DON'T use my property sustainably for the good of the community?   What if I'm BBQing endangered species in a giant coal-fired pit, but I'm careful that the smoke doesn't blow your way.    Would you take my land from me?   Am I suddenly not entitled to my property if I don't use it the way you want me to?   

Please 'splain.
Well, the community that you voluntarily live in would be in charge of that. If you don't like the way your community handles that, you can leave.
You see, it's the community that's in charge. Not the state.
Logged
Disengage
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 331


View Profile WWW
« Reply #8 on: May 17, 2012, 05:42:36 AM »

I assume I'd be free to leave this community any time I wanted?    Without their "permission" and without an "exit tax"?     Unless these are part of some contract that I signed when I joined.    If there IS such a contract, are my children automatically made party to this contract by virtue of being born, or do they have to sign it as well?
Logged



Anonymous Infowarrior
Full Member
***
Posts: 129


View Profile
« Reply #9 on: May 17, 2012, 08:22:13 AM »

I assume I'd be free to leave this community any time I wanted?    Without their "permission" and without an "exit tax"?     Unless these are part of some contract that I signed when I joined.    If there IS such a contract, are my children automatically made party to this contract by virtue of being born, or do they have to sign it as well?
Of course. Everyone is free to live in whatever system they want, so long as it is voluntary.
If someone wants to create a capitalist community, or not contribute to collective warehouses (and be able to take from them as much as needed) they can.
Logged
Alricaus
Jr. Member
**
Posts: 72



View Profile
« Reply #10 on: May 20, 2012, 12:22:31 AM »

Quote
Kevin Carson and Gary Chartier

Ya I know them a little bit, but I thought that they were more mutualism. No ?

Quote
I don't think material equality is ever going to be perfect. I think it will still be bell-shaped. But my understanding of free-market economics leads me to believe that with unlimited competition, profits tend towards zero. This is because people can always undercut you.

If this is the case than it seems to me that an entire economy could function quite well and still be more or less profitless. In this case, owners of companies may very well make as much as their janitors. People would sort of fit into their natural place based on their preferences and abilities, but not necessarily be any richer for it.

I know that sounds whackadoodle, and I'm not saying I fully believe it, but it wouldn't surprise me if that's how it ended up.

Interesting , but, finally, I think that  my point was not only about equality. I’ll give you an example, namely, feminism.

There are a lot of school of feminism (fist waves, second waves, and so forth). One of the feminist’s schools is libertarian feminism (called Ifeminism). A lot of contemporary feminist (associated with the left), believed in social constructionism (namely, that reality is socially constructed). Therefore, they believed that gender role and sexual orientation are the product of society, and that they do not possess any fundamental nature. On the contrary, Ifeminism believed more in essentialism, i.e. that gender (male and female) and sexual orientation (homosexual, heterosexual and, sometime, bisexual) possess some fundamental characteristics. I know that some free-market anarchist associated with the left believed, somehow, in social constructionism (whether in his hard form (everything is social) or mild form (that social has a great importance, while recognized the role of genetic and biology).

Without making a debate on whether social constructivism or essentialism is true, why Ifeminsim do not believed in social constructionism? Or, conversely, why the left believed in social constructionism? Because it has the name social? My question is somehow more fundamental. Is there some anarcho-capitalism that are engaged in the same reflection (I thing the better word would be way of living) that leftish (more anarchist leftish).  It’s hard for me to ask my question clearly, but is there some anarcho-capitalist that goes beyond the reflection of economic and morality, and thinks about the problem of gender, sexual orientation (I thank a lot of these topics since I reading a lot in the subject right now, and, generally, the libertarian feminism are quite «conservative» on that topic) and so forth in a more non-traditional way.

It always shock me how, for example, free-market anarchist that associated more with the right believed in traditional way of thinking gender and sexual orientation (while they can be right, my point is that they defended this position in a quite blind manner), while those who believed in free-market anarchist but associated with the left think gender and sexual orientation in a more social constructionism point of view (while they can be right, my point is that they defended this position in a quite blind manner). Or, why does anarcho-Queer theory only associated with the left?

I don’t even know if I asking a question here. It’s just something that I find somehow strange … Personally, while I am not necessarily a social constructionism, I am open to this idea, try to understand it, and opposed quite logical arguments to it (and not political one, like it’s done by Ifemnism). By the same token, I do not necessarily believed in essentialism, but I am open to this idea, try to understand it, and opposed quite logical arguments to it (and not political one, like it’s done by gender feminism (the left one!))
« Last Edit: May 20, 2012, 01:31:20 AM by Alricaus » Logged
JustSayNoToStatism
Daily Anarchist Crew
Hero Member
****
*****
Posts: 1747


View Profile
« Reply #11 on: May 22, 2012, 12:11:04 AM »

If this is the case than it seems to me that an entire economy could function quite well and still be more or less profitless. In this case, owners of companies may very well make as much as their janitors. People would sort of fit into their natural place based on their preferences and abilities, but not necessarily be any richer for it.
Not exactly. Even in magical perfect competition land, the conclusion isn't that the business owner makes as much as the janitor. Think of it more as everyone earning the "normal" rate of return on everything. So the "human capital" of having skills or being educated will still earn people more than the unskilled, but it will be commensurate with the investment.
Logged

"I like to eat. Instead of a monarch I propose we have a Chef be final arbiter in matters. We'll call it anarcho-chefism."
-MAM
Syock
Epic
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 2427


Existing Beyond Time


View Profile WWW
« Reply #12 on: June 29, 2012, 04:32:21 PM »

@Alricaus - It seems to me that the feminism topic you are discussing is mutually exclusive from ancap.  There is of course the anarcho-feminists, but ancap as I know it doesn't go past the anarchy and capitalism bit, otherwise it would be something else by definition. 

I see no reason there wouldn't be ancaps that are all over the spectrum on a lot of topics.  It is not an all encompassing belief system.
Logged

Kinglord of Castle Manufactoria
Newbie
*
Posts: 43


View Profile
« Reply #13 on: June 29, 2012, 05:46:38 PM »

  What if I'm BBQing endangered species in a giant coal-fired pit, but I'm careful that the smoke doesn't blow your way. 

Anyone who tries to put an end to my endangered species only bbq's would receive a swift kick to the groinular region.
Logged
JustSayNoToStatism
Daily Anarchist Crew
Hero Member
****
*****
Posts: 1747


View Profile
« Reply #14 on: June 29, 2012, 08:13:15 PM »

why does anarcho-Queer theory only associated with the left?
I see anarcho-queer as a subclass of market anarchism. Sexual freedom is compatible with voluntaryism, for obvious reasons. There are lots of LGBT people in who consider themselves ancap, but I've never actually heard anyone use the term "queer-anarchism" except on Wikipedia.

@Syock: How does anarchy and capitalism not include anarcho-feminism? Women should know about their rights to leave abusive relationships. That's feminist, that's voluntaryist. Black liberation? Sick of being dominated politically? Look to voluntaryism.
Logged

"I like to eat. Instead of a monarch I propose we have a Chef be final arbiter in matters. We'll call it anarcho-chefism."
-MAM
Pages: [1] 2
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines
SMFAds for Free Forums
Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!