Daily Anarchist Forum
September 23, 2021, 12:47:31 AM *
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 3
  Print  
Author Topic: The difference between agorism and anarchism  (Read 20166 times)
Seth King
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
*****
Posts: 3211



View Profile WWW
« on: June 09, 2010, 03:11:07 PM »

Can somebody tell me the difference between the two? If someone who considers themselves an agorist got labeled an anarchist by someone else, would they correct them on it and explain the difference?
Logged

When are you moving to New Hampshire?
FormerlyBrainwashed
Jr. Member
**
Posts: 68


View Profile
« Reply #1 on: June 09, 2010, 09:13:15 PM »


According to Konkin:

"Agorism is a way of thinking about the world around you, a method of understanding why things work the way they do, how they do, and how they can be dealt with how you can deal with them."

A good start would be to read "An Agorist Primer." http://www.kopubco.com/pdf/An_Agorist_Primer_by_SEK3.pdf

I have to admit... I have only been reading about agorism for a few months. Nevertheless, unlike the more simplistic usage of terms like anarchism and anarcho-capitalism, I think agorism is unique in that while it [contains] anarchism and anarcho-capitalism as part of its make-up... It likewise expands on the solution (specific means to achieve specific ends) in more of a systematic way (e.g. expanded emphasis on counter economics, etc.).

I would characterize agorism as fully developed & fully consistent anarchism. As such - there is no conflict in calling an anarchist an agorist (or visa versa); but doing so doesn't necessarily mean that the anarchist fully understands the broader tenets of agorism that basic anarchism does not really delve into as thoroughly.

The emphasis of consistency within agorism is a key element of its ideology. This is a VERY brief answer to your question, but rather than regurgitating what others have already stated very well... that's why I posted the link to An Agorist Primer, above.

Logged
Seth King
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
*****
Posts: 3211



View Profile WWW
« Reply #2 on: June 09, 2010, 11:22:01 PM »

Wow! Thanks for posting that link. Is that the entire book? It looks like it was published in 2008. I am going to have to check out the Ludwig von Mises Institute and see if they have his book for sale. If not, I would be curious as to why.

I have a hard time reading books online. I prefer books in hand. But that was a nice link with clearly legible type and easy to navigate.

How did you first hear about Konkin and agorism? Did konkin pen the term? Were you already well steeped in free-market philosophy before reading him? Am I going to regret naming my sight the Daily Anarchist after I read it, wish instead, that I had named it The Daily Agorist? Haha.

It's definitely something I am going to have to look into as I know there are a healthy amount of compatriots who self-identify as agorist. Also, it doesn't have any negative connotations like anarchist.
Logged

When are you moving to New Hampshire?
FormerlyBrainwashed
Jr. Member
**
Posts: 68


View Profile
« Reply #3 on: June 10, 2010, 01:23:59 PM »


Yes that is the entire book but that's not saying much. It is only around 100 pages +/- and a very quick read. Each page only has about 2 or 3 paragraphs on it and it is very interesting stuff so it goes by quick. You can order the book online or, since it is relatively small, you can simply print it off. I read most of it on an iPhone without a problem at all.

It was published in 2008 although Konkin published New Libertarian Manifesto in 1983 (linked here: http://agorism.info/docs/NewLibertarianManifesto.pdf). NLM is much shorter and less detailed but also lays out the ground work for agorism.

More info on agorism (including audio readings of the NLM mentioned above) can be found at: http://agorism.info/

There are other sources as well, but that one is a good starting point that can answer many of your questions. My personal opinion is that the linked videos ( at agorism.info) are off base though, and am not sure why they are linked.

Likewise I have spoken with other "agorist's" who embrace differing ideas. Some support socialist-anarchism, some anarcho-capitalism, and other various "'ism's." When learning about agorism it is important not to confuse what it actually IS vs. what others purport it to be. Konkin does a masterful job at pointing out the necessity of consistency from start to finish. That others may or may not mis-characterize what agorism actually is should not nullify the truisms that it actually espouses. The opening of An Agorist Primer does a very good job at laying this out in clear language.

Yes - Konkin did pen the term agorism.

I came to knowledge of agorism via independent studies. I continually search for various philosophical problems (usually studying all angles of every subject I research, for, against, and in-between). I do not know what I was onto at the time but whenever I stumbled upon agorism, I wasn't really looking for it. I think it just caught my eye somewhere and so I focused on it and found that after reading what it's all about (from its source - Konkin), I couldn't find ANY area of disagreement.

Even as you suggested previously, the term "anarchism" unfortunately carries a negative connotation because the rulers of the oligarchy want it that way. So, even while agorism incorporates anarchism, since it offers more of a solution oriented, methodical and coherent approach, I do think that it is more palatable for the lay-person who is encountering these ideas for the first time. Of course none of that negates the reality that anarchism (as a standalone) is not "bad" to begin with; albeit agorism attempts to complete an otherwise open-ended philosophy (or network of presuppositions, aka world-view).

You asked if I was already well steeped in the free-market philosophy before reading Konkin.

In all honestly, no. I had a very general understanding of free-market philosophy and anarcho-capitalism; but I cannot honestly say that I really understood "market anarchism" and how essential counter-economics is to its success. Moreover, even though I had already developed, within my own mind, how important it is to fully divorce oneself from ownership of the system (as described in another thread), I didn't know how to pull it altogether in such a way as to impact MY goals immediately. Of course, it is an entirely different thing to rid oneself of all the old baggage that we accumulate over the years prior to this sort of knowledge... but it absolutely lays out [a] proper (consistent) course to take. After all, as individuals we are free to choose what pace we will set in our individual endeavors.

Counter-Economics, as described by Konkin, is the means to a desired end (that end being, life in the Agora... hence agorism/agorist, etc.).

While I continue to learn how to liberate myself I am content in knowing that I analyze every new concept (new to me) that comes my way against reality. Since Agorism is: "Thought and action consistent with freedom..." It doesn't matter if tomorrow I come to knowledge of something that is found to be true, yet contradicts previously held presuppositions. What matters is that I recognize what truth is, and adjust my world-view accordingly.

That is what I endeavor to do.







Logged
Seth King
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
*****
Posts: 3211



View Profile WWW
« Reply #4 on: June 10, 2010, 02:10:37 PM »

You mentioned socialist-anarchism as being consistent with agorism. I often try to tell people that under free-market anarchism, people can still be as socialistic as they want, and as long as they don't try to force their system on me, I have got no problems with that. Under our current paradigm of winner takes all, socialism and capitalism cannot co-exist. Would you consider yourself a socialist-anarchist, or more of a anarcho-capitalist, or is that question missing the point entirely?
Logged

When are you moving to New Hampshire?
FormerlyBrainwashed
Jr. Member
**
Posts: 68


View Profile
« Reply #5 on: June 10, 2010, 03:29:12 PM »


Quote
You mentioned socialist-anarchism as being consistent with agorism.

Actually... I didn't.

I said:

"Some support socialist-anarchism, some anarcho-capitalism, and other various "'ism's." When learning about agorism it is important not to confuse what it actually IS vs. what others purport it to be."

I do agree though with what you said. In a truly voluntary society people would be free to associate themselves with whatever system they desire. I also agree that socialism and capitalism cannot co-exist.

I find the principles of anarcho-capitalism to be consistent with liberty. I cannot say as much about socialist-anarchism. I have read a lot about why people in that camp would suggest otherwise, but ultimately they seem to want to conduct "social engineering" in order to achieve their utopian view of their socialist-anarchist society. That just doesn't settle well with me. Social engineering seems to imply merely a different flavor of brainwashing rather than teaching people to question everything and let truth (as best as they can determine what that is) be the final arbiter.

The point in my original statement that you unintentionally misunderstood was only that agorism is NOT whatever any particular philosophical camp wants to declare it to be.

Konkin's "most comfortable definition of agorism" was stated as:

"Agorism is the consistent integration of libertarian theory with counter-economic practice; an agorist is one who acts consistently for freedom and in freedom."

Again - The emphasis on consistency is paramount. As I mentioned earlier, as new idea's are discovered, they have to be weighed and measured against reality. If they pass muster, then they can be incorporated into the overall philosophy. Agorism simply says, whatever reality is, represents the Agora.

I guess the best way for me to describe what I think about socialist-anarchism is that I [fail] to see how it is morally defensible. Perhaps I just don't get it? But since I do not have the same perspective of anarcho-capitalistic principles, I can defend it (as far as I can tell), and I do find it to be consistent with all else that I accept as true. As such - I believe it works in harmony towards the goals of agorism.

Hope that helps....?

BTW - For whatever it's worth... I am not all about quoting whatever Konkin happened to say every time I comment. I am using the "Konkin" quotes because I think it most accurately represents what agorism actually is.

Afterall, he was the founding source of it. ;-)

Others can surely develop his ideas even further (if they/we are able), which obviously ought to be pursued.

Logged
Seth King
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
*****
Posts: 3211



View Profile WWW
« Reply #6 on: June 10, 2010, 03:37:53 PM »

I fully intend to read the New Libertarian Manifesto some day. Have you read Murray Rothbard's Libertarian Manifesto AKA For A New Liberty?

Also, you've mentioned several times "counter-economics." What does that mean? Also, Konkin doesn't seem to be mentioned, or any of his books sold by the Ludwig von Mises Institute. Can you explain that? How do you feel about LvMI?
Logged

When are you moving to New Hampshire?
FormerlyBrainwashed
Jr. Member
**
Posts: 68


View Profile
« Reply #7 on: June 14, 2010, 01:59:11 PM »


No, haven't read Rothbard's Libertarian Manifesto. I did download it though based on your comment. That being said, I have read von Mises' Human Action. Not sure how much they differ but I do take exception to LvM's apparent subjectivist leanings in terms of how people ought to act. That is a loaded statement, I know.

Since I was travelling the last few days I am not sure if you read An Agorist Primer or New Libertarian Manifesto, so perhaps you already got the answer to the question about counter economics?

Why doesn't LvMI mention Konkin? I dunno? Maybe they think Rothbard's and Mises' philosophies were complete as they were?

In New Libertarian Manifesto, Konkin says:

Acknowledgments above all to
Ludwig Von Mises,
Murray N. Rothbard,
Robert LeFevre,
and their sources.

Also, of that work Rothbard said:

"Konkin's writings are to be welcomed. Because we need a lot more
polycentrism in the movement. Because he shakes up Partyarchs who tend
to fall into unthinking complacency. And especially because he cares deeply
about liberty and can read-and-write, qualities which seem to be going out
of style in the libertarian movement."

Nevertheless, as you read Konkin you will see (objectively) where he indeed does advance what LvM and Rothbard left us. I think he also does a scholarly job of respectfully pointing out flaws wherein they may be evident, as well.

As short as those 2 booklets are, they are very easy for folks like us (who have publicly stated an interest in studying these things) to go through them quickly as they are very interesting and hard to put down.

You asked what I think about LvMI. - I think it is an amazing resource. There is so much information there that a serious student could find joy in independent study any time they want to. Makes me think back to pre-Internet days and how inaccessible things were. Amazing now that when we are considered to be in the "age of information" (due to ease of accessibility) we are NOT in any sort of "age of knowledge." That's too bad... So much info available and most couldn't care less.

One thing worth pointing out... I don't care much for labels. Labels invoke all sorts of meanings, some true, some not true. While I agree with various view points in different areas of consideration, I make it a point to identify myself with me. I might very well promote certain schools of thought, and I don't condemn anyone for associating themselves with whatever they choose; but I myself claim the "title" of "individual" as my chief allegiance. When reality is the ultimate judge, and knowledge is incremental... our views are bound to change. Consistent appeal to the truth is the most rational approach we could endeavor to pursue (all labels aside).



« Last Edit: June 14, 2010, 03:04:56 PM by FormerlyBrainwashed » Logged
Seth King
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
*****
Posts: 3211



View Profile WWW
« Reply #8 on: June 14, 2010, 02:49:17 PM »

Well said. I haven't read those books yet, but I did do some wikipedia research on agorism and konkin over the weekend. I now know what counter-economics is. For an anarchist who finds no panacea in voting, the black market, the free-market, the disobedient individual who practices counter-economics is the only way to go. It is self-evident.

I'm probably not going to read those books until I get a copy in my hands. I don't like reading books on the internet and I don't care to print them out either. There is only one material good that I really collect, and that is books. I like to have a published copy of all of the books I read. So, I will buy those books and have them shipped to me. Then they will be read.
Logged

When are you moving to New Hampshire?
FormerlyBrainwashed
Jr. Member
**
Posts: 68


View Profile
« Reply #9 on: June 14, 2010, 03:01:47 PM »


I understand. I like having a copy in my hands too... but I am too impatient to wait, and too broke to buy everything I'd want to read. The other thing I like about online reading is that if I get a few chapters into it and it is not rubbing me the right way, I've only spent my time up to that point.

Looking forward to your input after reading them though.

Both can be purchased here: http://www.kopubco.com/

Also - Here is a link to a 2 page pamphlet to wet your appetite. - http://agorism.info/docs/Counter-Economics.pdf


Logged
Seth King
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
*****
Posts: 3211



View Profile WWW
« Reply #10 on: July 23, 2010, 12:04:17 AM »

I just finished reading both the New Libertarian Manifesto as well as An Agorist Primer. They were both excellent books. They definitely rang much more true to me than the whole "get out the vote" garbage. Konkin was definitely ahead of his time. And it is amazing to read about how the agorist society gets created through different phases and tactics. It seems to me to be happening, most notably, in New Hampshire. Fascinating reads, and inspiring. Thank you for the recommendations! Any other books I should check out?
Logged

When are you moving to New Hampshire?
FormerlyBrainwashed
Jr. Member
**
Posts: 68


View Profile
« Reply #11 on: July 23, 2010, 12:12:23 PM »



I fully intend to read the New Libertarian Manifesto some day. Have you read Murray Rothbard's Libertarian Manifesto AKA For A New Liberty?

Also, you've mentioned several times "counter-economics." What does that mean? Also, Konkin doesn't seem to be mentioned, or any of his books sold by the Ludwig von Mises Institute. Can you explain that? How do you feel about LvMI?


I am half way through reading For A New Liberty - Very good read so far and I'd certainly encourage people to read it along with the others works listed on this thread as they certainly work in harmony with eachother.

A quote worth pointing out from An Agorist Primer (page 70):

Quote
Murray Rothbard, following Ludwig Von Mises's Human Action with his own economic treatise Man, Economy and State, added that insight onto Austrian economics in the final chapters. The demand for elucidation was so great that he wrote, in detail, an entire book on the subject: Power and Market.

It is amazing that, for a time, even Dr. Rothbard forgot his own lesson. The choice was power/politics vs. market/economics. Using political means to achieve free-market ends is self-destructive and self-defeating.

The recognition of the Libertarian incompatibility of statist means to anti-statist ends was the first agorist insight. Following that, the new agorists looked for the proper means to achieve a free society or at least a fully libertarian society. They sought market means only.

The author of this book and his companions found the Counter-Economy "staring them in the face" as soon as they thought of looking.

This simple quote is of vital importance (IMHO). Konkin is not here dogging-out Rothbard nor his very significant contribution to Libertarian thought. What he is pointing out though is the importance of moving ever closer towards the consistent application of means that are not contradictory, or, do not sanction compromise in order to achieve the desired end.

I have recently noticed an increase in the usage of a particular line of reasoning that I find to be a gross misrepresentation of true agorist theory, and quite frankly, a cop-out on the part of those who use it. That is, "don't let the good be the enemy of perfection."

All the min-archist half-hearted statist's out there that want to use that line of reasoning are certainly free to do so. The problem is, they are missing the point. Again, as quoted from Konkin above, "Using political means to achieve free-market ends is self-destructive and self-defeating."

He continues on the next page (page 71) with:

Quote
To understand agorism fully and to compare to competing ways of thinking, one needs know two things about it: its goal and its path to that goal. This knowledge is critical to evaluating all ideologies. The goal is living in the agora and the path is expanding Counter-Economics. Remember our constant, if not nagging, emphasis on consistency, both internally and with reality. Agorism must have a path consistent with its goal and a goal consistent with its path.

I would submit that the concept of pursuing continuity between paths and goals is not at all unique to agorism. Such a concept smacks of common sense... Nevertheless, too many "liberty activists" are content with trading in their neighbors' will (via the ballot box), a will they have no rightful claim over, for incrementalism even though such incrementalism is ultimately antithetical to their stated worldview (which is obviously quite confused).

« Last Edit: July 23, 2010, 02:03:54 PM by FormerlyBrainwashed » Logged
Seth King
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
*****
Posts: 3211



View Profile WWW
« Reply #12 on: July 23, 2010, 01:26:36 PM »

I don't think Konkin is the right person to read if you are still a libertarian minarchist. Konkin even says in the preface to NLM that he recommends one read For A New Liberty before any of his own stuff. For A New Liberty was the case against statism. Konkin made the case for practicing the agora to achieve that end, which is where Rothbard slipped up.
Logged

When are you moving to New Hampshire?
NickyTheHeel
Newbie
*
Posts: 11


View Profile
« Reply #13 on: July 29, 2010, 04:06:38 AM »

I have recently noticed an increase in the usage of a particular line of reasoning that I find to be a gross misrepresentation of true agorist theory, and quite frankly, a cop-out on the part of those who use it. That is, "don't let the good be the enemy of perfection."

Yeah, what's the deal with that?  I've seen and heard that line more in the last three months than I had in the other 38.5 years of my life.  By a factor of mucho.
Logged
Intuition
Newbie
*
Posts: 35


View Profile
« Reply #14 on: August 04, 2010, 02:55:41 AM »

I have recently noticed an increase in the usage of a particular line of reasoning that I find to be a gross misrepresentation of true agorist theory, and quite frankly, a cop-out on the part of those who use it. That is, "don't let the good be the enemy of perfection."

Not only that, but those who use the quote in that context are also bastardizing and misapplying a solid quote. Nothing about their plan is good.

Quote
All the min-archist half-hearted statist's out there that want to use that line of reasoning are certainly free to do so. The problem is, they are missing the point. Again, as quoted from Konkin above, "Using political means to achieve free-market ends is self-destructive and self-defeating."

Exactly. It'd be like if I wanted to extinguish the mafia and decided the way to accomplish that was to join the mafia and then somehow convince them that their crimes are illegitimate and immoral. There is simply no logic in it.
Logged
Pages: [1] 2 3
  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!