The Ancap-Ancom Divide.

[Nuwe Suid Afrika]

Capitalism favors a free economy. Communism favors a planned economy.

False Dichotomy.

Capitalism favors a market economy based on authoritarian workplaces and private ownership of the means of production. Communism favors direct democratic management over the means of production and goods being distributed according to need.

You've just explained "Free Economy" and "Planned Economy".

[Conglomerate of Iron]

ALERT TO THREAD DERAILERS WHO ARE COMPLETELY IGNORANT ABOUT ANARCHISM

IF YOU DO NOT CEASE AND DESIST WITH THE THREAD DEAILMENT I WILL CONTACT AN ADMIN.

Your ignorance of anarchism does not precipitate your threadjacking. Start your own thread asking aanarchists what anarchism is about.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR COOPERATION.

[Kainesia]

Capitalism favors a free economy. Communism favors a planned economy.

goods being distributed according to need.

Which is why communism sucks. Communism provides essentials through a monopoly supplier, and no luxury goods. Anyone tries to fill that gap in the market they get struck down for private ownership. It's a stupid system IMHO.

[Liberty and Linguistics]

ALERT TO THREAD DERAILERS WHO ARE COMPLETELY IGNORANT ABOUT ANARCHISM

IF YOU DO NOT CEASE AND DESIST WITH THE THREAD DEAILMENT I WILL CONTACT AN ADMIN.

Your ignorance of anarchism does not precipitate your threadjacking. Start your own thread asking aanarchists what anarchism is about.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR COOPERATION.

Frankly, nobody is derailing the thread. This thread is about how anarchists of all stripes could work together. What I'm asking is, where do the statists like me fit in?

[The New Sea Territory]

I don't mean to stick up for the guy that just came in here and left with a "/thread", but although Anarchy can look good on paper, Communism does too, and it's never worked.

Stating something hasn't historically existed or workers does not make it less valid. People said in the 1800s that the Roman Republic failed, thus, all republics will fail. We now only have to look around the world to see that such arguments based on "it hasn't worked" are bullshit. Nothing more than a masked and inverted appeals to tradition.

[Conglomerate of Iron]

ALERT TO THREAD DERAILERS WHO ARE COMPLETELY IGNORANT ABOUT ANARCHISM

IF YOU DO NOT CEASE AND DESIST WITH THE THREAD DEAILMENT I WILL CONTACT AN ADMIN.

Your ignorance of anarchism does not precipitate your threadjacking. Start your own thread asking aanarchists what anarchism is about.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR COOPERATION.

Frankly, nobody is derailing the thread. This thread is about how anarchists of all stripes could work together. What I'm asking is, where do the statists like me fit in?

You stay the hell out of anarchistan.

[Kainesia]

Why not move to Somalia then? I heard it turned out rather well there. Or the Aussie outback?

Rather, they lack a functioning government because of war.

That cuts both ways, if anarchism is implemented we would end up with war because of a lack of a functioning government, as new states try and take its place.

[The New Sea Territory]

Which is why communism sucks. Communism provides essentials through a monopoly supplier, and no luxury goods. Anyone tries to fill that gap in the market they get struck down for private ownership. It's a stupid system IMHO.

[Citation Needed]

[Liberty and Linguistics]

Frankly, nobody is derailing the thread. This thread is about how anarchists of all stripes could work together. What I'm asking is, where do the statists like me fit in?

You stay the hell out of anarchistan.

Great. I'll stay in the States, where I'll peacefully advocate lower taxes and fairer laws.

[The New Sea Territory]

Rather, they lack a functioning government because of war.

That cuts both ways, if anarchism is implemented we would end up with war because of a lack of a functioning government, as new states try and take its place.

This thread is not about whether or not anarchism could work, but the divide between anarcho-communists and anarcho-capitalists. Please, get back on topic

[Liberty and Linguistics]

Rather, they lack a functioning government because of war.

That cuts both ways, if anarchism is implemented we would end up with war because of a lack of a functioning government, as new states try and take its place.

Well, technically Somalia has some sort of state. It just can't do jack-shit. People are trying to implement various states, yes. But, that can happen in even the most statist of societies. It happened in Syria. It happened in Somalia.

[The New Sea Territory]

False Dichotomy.

Capitalism favors a market economy based on authoritarian workplaces and private ownership of the means of production. Communism favors direct democratic management over the means of production and goods being distributed according to need.

You've just explained "Free Economy" and "Planned Economy".

No, a "free economy" is no more free than any other economic system enforced violently. Stating "free" and "planned" are labels made to make capitalism look free and libertarian, despite being an hierarchical system almost always enforced through threats of violence.

[The Greater Fascist Federation]

How would AnCom work???
Communism = State owned economy
Anarchism = No State...

[Liberty and Linguistics]

Since I'm a kind statist[tm], I'll try to steer this thread back on topic. In a hypothetical "anarchist world" would anarcho communist and anarcho capitalist societies remain separate but friendly? Or, would it be desirable for a big anarchist society without any labels, one where markets and co-operatives both exist?

[Liberty and Linguistics]

How would AnCom work???
Communism = State owned economy
Anarchism = No State...

<state owned economy
<communism

Pick one.

[Kainesia]

Which is why communism sucks. Communism provides essentials through a monopoly supplier, and no luxury goods. Anyone tries to fill that gap in the market they get struck down for private ownership. It's a stupid system IMHO.

[Citation Needed]

You said it yourself, the state provides goods according to need. you don't need a granite kitchen, so the state isn't gonna provide it.

In a capitalist economy, you can pay a privately owned supplier to provide it, and you will be paying for the raw materials, but also the wages of the people working at granitetopsrus co. Thus, you get a nice kitchen, and create demand in an economy.

Also, if the state is providing goods, and private ownership is forbidden, it sure as hell will be a monopoly.

[The New Sea Territory]

Since I'm a kind statist[tm], I'll try to steer this thread back on topic. In a hypothetical "anarchist world" would anarcho communist and anarcho capitalist societies remain separate but friendly? Or, would it be desirable for a big anarchist society without any labels, one where markets and co-operatives both exist?

Coexistence between markets and cooperatives would be it's own economic system: mutualism or left-wing market anarchism, which is what I advocate. (See the flag)

An Anarchist without adjectives world would allow people to voluntarily practice whatever system they want so long as it is not coerced onto others. I also advocate this, but I add in primitivists, ancaps and a few other people who are usually not included in AWA.

[The New Sea Territory]

[Citation Needed]

You said it yourself, the state provides goods according to need. you don't need a granite kitchen, so the state isn't gonna provide it.

Communism has no state.....you simply don't know what you are talking about if you think it does.

[Farnhamia]

That cuts both ways, if anarchism is implemented we would end up with war because of a lack of a functioning government, as new states try and take its place.

This thread is not about whether or not anarchism could work, but the divide between anarcho-communists and anarcho-capitalists. Please, get back on topic

An excellent idea.

Topic, people, get back to it: the divide between anarcho-communists and anarcho-capitalists, not whether anarchism in and of itself is good or workable or anything like that.

[Liberty and Linguistics]

Since I'm a kind statist[tm], I'll try to steer this thread back on topic. In a hypothetical "anarchist world" would anarcho communist and anarcho capitalist societies remain separate but friendly? Or, would it be desirable for a big anarchist society without any labels, one where markets and co-operatives both exist?

Coexistence between markets and cooperatives would be it's own economic system: mutualism or left-wing market anarchism, which is what I advocate. (See the flag)

An Anarchist without adjectives world would allow people to voluntarily practice whatever system they want so long as it is not coerced onto others. I also advocate this, but I add in primitivists, ancaps and a few other people who are usually not included in AWA.

Then, what's to be said about the anarchists who think that all in an anarchist society should be coerced to not be involved in markets? Are they anarchists?

[The New Sea Territory]

Coexistence between markets and cooperatives would be it's own economic system: mutualism or left-wing market anarchism, which is what I advocate. (See the flag)

An Anarchist without adjectives world would allow people to voluntarily practice whatever system they want so long as it is not coerced onto others. I also advocate this, but I add in primitivists, ancaps and a few other people who are usually not included in AWA.

Then, what's to be said about the anarchists who think that all in an anarchist society should be coerced to not be involved in markets? Are they anarchists?

They are, just not AWA/voluntaryists.

[Kainesia]

Since I'm a kind statist[tm], I'll try to steer this thread back on topic. In a hypothetical "anarchist world" would anarcho communist and anarcho capitalist societies remain separate but friendly? Or, would it be desirable for a big anarchist society without any labels, one where markets and co-operatives both exist?

In an anarchist world the group of people with the most guns or resources or both will just take over and become a new state, all the anarchists will do is destroy democracy and ruin the economy.

[Liberty and Linguistics]

Then, what's to be said about the anarchists who think that all in an anarchist society should be coerced to not be involved in markets? Are they anarchists?

They are, just not AWA/voluntaryists.

But, doesn't anarchism call for an end of coercion, whether it be done by private organizations or states? Or, am I entirely wrong?

[Ashmoria]

Frankly, nobody is derailing the thread. This thread is about how anarchists of all stripes could work together. What I'm asking is, where do the statists like me fit in?

You stay the hell out of anarchistan.

you probably need to take this to an anarchism forum. as long as we are talking about anarchism it isn't derailing by the standards of this forum.

[Nuwe Suid Afrika]

Stating something hasn't historically existed or workers does not make it less valid.

Of course, I understand that- I was just making a comparison. Although I understand that anarchism has never been used in the real world, it is easy to compare to communism to anarchism and see how good they both look on paper, and see how horribly communism works when played out.

Nothing more than a masked and inverted appeals to tradition.

We have been doing X for generations.

Therefore, we should keep doing X.

Our ancestors thought X was right.

Therefore, X is right.

I'm not appealing to tradition. There's many more... logical political ideologies that haven't been tried, or set into motion.