Anarchist: Help a brother out

[Britanania]

I'm a philosophical anarchist. The state has no inherent legitimacy or right to command, so there is no obligation or duty to obey it.

I don't know of any anarchist literature to recommend as I have arrived at my position independently, not because I was convinced by reading any such literature. I could recommend marxists.org and theanarchistlibrary.org if you're interested in reading a wide variety far-left works with having to buy it. Despite the name, the library at marxists.org doesn't just feature Marxist or even just communist literature. It has Adam Smith's "The Wealth Of Nations" on it, for example.

I sort of am of the same vein, but I accept a form of governance (which is separate from government) for practical purposes, although it is purely voluntary.

I use the analogy of the Church. I go to Church because I like to, not because I am coerced. I give money every week because I think it's good for me to do so, not because I have to, and I follow the rules not because they are enforced but because I feel that I need to for my own well being.

[PaNTuXIa]

I'm a philosophical anarchist. The state has no inherent legitimacy or right to command, so there is no obligation or duty to obey it.

I don't know of any anarchist literature to recommend as I have arrived at my position independently, not because I was convinced by reading any such literature. I could recommend marxists.org and theanarchistlibrary.org if you're interested in reading a wide variety far-left works with having to buy it. Despite the name, the library at marxists.org doesn't just feature Marxist or even just communist literature. It has Adam Smith's "The Wealth Of Nations" on it, for example.

In terms of politics, you're a Trotskyist, right? I looked at your test results.

Also, what's the difference between anarcho-socialism and anarcho-communism?

[Rio Cana]

Its your lucky day, someone uploaded this relatively short video two months ago on Anarchism in Spain 80 years ago. Really informative - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g2V6A6WEHNE

If you have the time watch this four year old documentary which was uploaded on youtube on Anarchism in Spain - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qH43YHaUGyQ

[The New Sea Territory]

I'm a philosophical anarchist. The state has no inherent legitimacy or right to command, so there is no obligation or duty to obey it.

I don't know of any anarchist literature to recommend as I have arrived at my position independently, not because I was convinced by reading any such literature. I could recommend marxists.org and theanarchistlibrary.org if you're interested in reading a wide variety far-left works with having to buy it. Despite the name, the library at marxists.org doesn't just feature Marxist or even just communist literature. It has Adam Smith's "The Wealth Of Nations" on it, for example.

I sort of am of the same vein, but I accept a form of governance (which is separate from government) for practical purposes, although it is purely voluntary.

I use the analogy of the Church. I go to Church because I like to, not because I am coerced. I give money every week because I think it's good for me to do so, not because I have to, and I follow the rules not because they are enforced but because I feel that I need to for my own well being.

I think this purely an ideological distinction though, when applying it to states. States are not purely voluntary entities.

[The New Sea Territory]

Also, what's the difference between anarcho-socialism and anarcho-communism?

Non-communist anarchism and communist anarchism.

Mutualism and collectivism exist, though much smaller than ancoms.

[Britanania]

I sort of am of the same vein, but I accept a form of governance (which is separate from government) for practical purposes, although it is purely voluntary.

I use the analogy of the Church. I go to Church because I like to, not because I am coerced. I give money every week because I think it's good for me to do so, not because I have to, and I follow the rules not because they are enforced but because I feel that I need to for my own well being.

I think this purely an ideological distinction though, when applying it to states. States are not purely voluntary entities.

Hence the abolition of states, if you're into that sort of thing

[The New Sea Territory]

I think this purely an ideological distinction though, when applying it to states. States are not purely voluntary entities.

Hence the abolition of states, if you're into that sort of thing

Oh, ok. I was confused what you were saying.

[Britanania]

Hence the abolition of states, if you're into that sort of thing

Oh, ok. I was confused what you were saying.

Sorry I didn't make that clear, I thought it was implied. I'm not one for a violent and sudden revolution, though. More gradual, getting people used to State<Church governance (again, if you're into that sort of thing)

[Conscentia]

In terms of politics, you're a Trotskyist, right? I looked at your test results.

That is what one test I did says. Both the notes I wrote at the top of my "Miscellaneous Online Test Results" apply to those results though. I did that test a long while ago - my answer may have changed. Also, that test in particular has apparently since been updated.

I wouldn't refer to myself as a Trotskyist. I am not affiliated with any Trotskyist organisations, and I haven't directly read much Trotsky. I do happen to agree with the Trotskyist interpretation of bureaucratic command economies as state capitalist, and do find some Trotskyist ideas and terminology useful - for example: The terms "deformed worker's state" and "degenerated worker's state", the idea of "political revolution" in contrast to "social revolution", and the idea of a "transitional demand" and "transitional programme" as opposed to "minimum programme".

Also, what's the difference between anarcho-socialism and anarcho-communism?

It is difference between socialism and communism. While communism necessitates socialism, socialism does not necessitate every aspect of communism. For example, while "anarcho-communists" want to abolish wage labour "anarcho-socialists" might not.

[Gages Icelandic Army]

Ancaps and Anarcho Primitivism has got no votes. Any explanation why?

I think it's because the economic hierarchy is just as capable of coercive measures as your everyday government.

And I think primitive is just ignorant.

[Conscentia]

Ancaps and Anarcho Primitivism has got no votes. Any explanation why?
I think it's because the economic hierarchy is just as capable of coercive measures as your everyday government.
And I think primitive is just ignorant.

There are ancaps and anarcho-primitivists on NS, so either they haven't seen your thread or have chosen to ignore it.

IIRC, ideas like minarchism and anarcho-capitalism used to have more of a presence on NSG around 2011/2012. It has since apparently declined, and as far as I've seen it's become a prevalent view on NSG that ancaps cannot accurately be described as anarchists.

[Ganonsyoni]

I'm an individualist green queer anarchist.

[The Forsworn Knights]

Might I ask what in the hell Anarcho-Socialism is? That is contradictory as all hell.

[Gages Icelandic Army]

I'm an individualist green queer anarchist.

So if an individual wanted to not hire gays and dump toxic gunk, what would happen? Would you side with individual, or the environment and homosexuals?

If you side with the individual, then it's hard to prioritize the environment and homosexual community since you allow individuals to do what individuals want to do, which may involve selfishness and discrimination.

If you side with the environment and homosexual, then it's hard to prioritize the individual, since you're prioritizing a special interest group and ecology over an individuals beliefs.

[Conscentia]

Might I ask what in the hell Anarcho-Socialism is? That is contradictory as all hell.

Anarchist socialism is the oldest and most prevalent form of anarchism. (See: Mikhail Bakunin, and Pierre-Joseph Proudhon.) It's not contradictory at all, though it may seem that way if you think socialism means state ownership of all business - which it does not, btw. Anarchism advocates for self-governed societies based on voluntary institutions. Socialism is a mode of production in which the means of production and controlled by the workers that operate them, with socially operated means of production being operated democratically. There is no contradiction between them.

[The Forsworn Knights]

Might I ask what in the hell Anarcho-Socialism is? That is contradictory as all hell.

Anarchist socialism is the oldest and most prevalent form of anarchism. It's not contradictory at all, though it may seem that way if you think socialism means state ownership of all business - which it does not, btw. Anarchism advocates for self-governed societies based on voluntary institutions. Socialism is a mode of production in which the means of production and controlled by the workers that operate them, with socially operated means of production being operated democratically. There is no contradiction between them.

Not even getting into the fact that that would not work at all, look at the word Socialism, then bear in mind that the term was coined in reference to Governance. Socialism is the belief that the Government has a Social Responsibility to its people, implying that there is some form of leadership establishing a basic social service, be it policing or road-paving.

[Gages Icelandic Army]

Might I ask what in the hell Anarcho-Socialism is? That is contradictory as all hell.

Anarchy: Control over ones destiny
Socialism: All individuals should have access to basic articles of consumption and public goods to allow for self-actualization. Large-scale industries are collective efforts and thus the returns from these industries must benefit society as a whole.

It's basically a communitarian anarchist society that makes sure everyone can survive, and everything else is split evenly.

[Conscentia]

Anarchist socialism is the oldest and most prevalent form of anarchism. It's not contradictory at all, though it may seem that way if you think socialism means state ownership of all business - which it does not, btw. Anarchism advocates for self-governed societies based on voluntary institutions. Socialism is a mode of production in which the means of production and controlled by the workers that operate them, with socially operated means of production being operated democratically. There is no contradiction between them.

Not even getting into the fact that that would not work at all, look at the word Socialism, then bear in mind that the term was coined in reference to Governance. Socialism is the belief that the Government has a Social Responsibility to its people, implying that there is some form of leadership establishing a basic social service, be it policing or road-paving.

That is all wrong. Socialism originated with, and was coined by, those now referred to as the 'utopian socialists', who advocated that businesses be operated as democratic co-operatives. (Co-operatives do work, btw. In-fact they're more stable than private businesses.) Socialism has nothing to do with the idea of government interventionism - that's a misconception, and one which seems to be especially prevalent in America.

[Britanania]

Anarchist socialism is the oldest and most prevalent form of anarchism. It's not contradictory at all, though it may seem that way if you think socialism means state ownership of all business - which it does not, btw. Anarchism advocates for self-governed societies based on voluntary institutions. Socialism is a mode of production in which the means of production and controlled by the workers that operate them, with socially operated means of production being operated democratically. There is no contradiction between them.

Not even getting into the fact that that would not work at all, look at the word Socialism, then bear in mind that the term was coined in reference to Governance. Socialism is the belief that the Government has a Social Responsibility to its people, implying that there is some form of leadership establishing a basic social service, be it policing or road-paving.

No, it isn't. You're thinking of Democratic Socialism, which is very different.

I suggest you read What Is To Be Done? Nikolai Chernyshevsky, Das Capital by Karl Marx, and the works of Bakunin

[Salus Maior]

Sometimes I associate as an anarcho-monarchist, but take that with a grain of salt.

....How the hell is that supposed to work?

[Conscentia]

I suggest you read What Is To Be Done? Nikolai Chernyshevsky, Das Capital by Karl Marx, and the works of Bakunin

Suggest that they read Capital? Ha! You can't honestly expect them to read that dull four volume tome. It wouldn't be that helpful anyway, as it's focus is an analysis of capitalism. Unless you're really into Marxism, you're much better off just reading Wikipedia pages.

[Major-Tom]

Sometimes I associate as an anarcho-monarchist, but take that with a grain of salt.

Sometimes I associate as a salt shaker, then I stop taking drugs for the night.

[Gages Icelandic Army]

Sometimes I associate as an anarcho-monarchist, but take that with a grain of salt.

Sometimes I associate as a salt shaker, then I stop taking drugs for the night.

[Ganonsyoni]

I'm an individualist green queer anarchist.

So if an individual wanted to not hire gays and dump toxic gunk, what would happen? Would you side with individual, or the environment and homosexuals?

If you side with the individual, then it's hard to prioritize the environment and homosexual community since you allow individuals to do what individuals want to do, which may involve selfishness and discrimination.

If you side with the environment and homosexual, then it's hard to prioritize the individual, since you're prioritizing a special interest group and ecology over an individuals beliefs.

Wut. Homophobia is a perpetuation of an oppressive hierarchy and no anarchist would support it. These individualists wouldn't be anarchists if they hold onto homophobic beliefs. And if there were, there would be united direct action from actual anarchists to combat the homophobia. Plus, I would hardly call homophobia individualist. It denies that homosexuals are individuals with unique experiences and instead classifies them as a great "other" with distinct group characteristics. Holding onto phobias is against individualism in its entirety. Plu,s it would be incredibly hard to maintain homophobic beliefs without a state enforcing cis-patriarchal inequality.

[Britanania]

I suggest you read What Is To Be Done? Nikolai Chernyshevsky, Das Capital by Karl Marx, and the works of Bakunin

Suggest that they read Capital? Ha! You can't honestly expect them to read that dull four volume tome. It wouldn't be that helpful anyway, as it's focus is an analysis of capitalism. Unless you're really into Marxism, you're much better off just reading Wikipedia pages.

One must understand the thesis to understand the antithesis