The Ancap-Ancom Divide.

[Ripoll]

Calling a well established market researcher and economics commentator an idiot is a personal attack no? I'll retract my claim if you can in fact establish that you've done more than he has and you've taken multiple courses in economics and are well established enough in the field to make a contention with any real weight behind it.

No. Unless he is personally posting here, it is not a personal attack.

My credentials are not on trial. I have already shown why he is an idiot, with the fiat currency claims.

As for the authority debate, that's really just an opinionated statement that is a question of cultural values and pragmatism. All I can say is I wholeheartedly agree with this statement


http://www.ted.com/talks/philip_howard/ ... n#t-295211 16:50 L2

Coming from someone completely disgruntled by excessive Government bureaucracy and Red Tape

There is a difference between legitimate and illegitimate authority.

That's not what you said though, you said "authority is the enemy of freedom".

[Threlizdun]

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

It does, but some anarchists call for different ways of bringing about a stateless society, such as platformists and insurrectionists. This has less to do with the actual anarchist society itself and more to do with revolutionary theory.

AWA/Voluntaryists usually advocate nonviolent revolution, cooperation between different anarchist schools, etc. Insurrectionists advocate what would essentially be considered terrorism, done by small groups to damage the state (examples include William McKinley's assassination). Platformists are almost always anarcho-communists, and they reject other forms of anarchism as legitimate.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Platformism
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Insurrectionary_anarchism

No, while platformists are almost exclusively communists and see it as the preferred anarchist model, they don't as a whole reject other versions as anarchism as legitimate.

[Conglomerate of Iron]

So if I go live in the woods and chop wood, grow food, and live off grid, I am stealing? I just want to be left alone. I make what I need and want. I dont want other peoples things, and if I do, I peacefully trade.

How am I harming anyone else?

Anarcho communists would not prevent you from doing this.

That is what I like to hear!

And if a few people settle around me and we peacefully trade, then we are a small anarchist community.

We harm none, and simply associate with each other and travelers.

[Natapoc]

A well known and widely discredited form of logic.

Appeals to authority is only a fallacy if the person is not an authority on the subject in question.
It is invalid to invoke anything the Pope may have said on the subject of space travel. He is an authority in some sense, but not where it counts.
However invoking something that Buzz Aldrin said on space travel is a valid argument.

Thats how science and research is done.

Why do you believe this? NSG needs an elementary logic lesson.

[The New Sea Territory]

Because your idea of "voluntarism"

It's voluntaryism. Voluntarism is some other, non-related ideology I'm not familiar with.

involves theft and extortion. The means of production are socially owned and democratically administrated. By trying to take them as your own and declaring that no one else may have them unless you allow them to, you are stealing from society and extorting them for what is rightfully theirs. You aren't being forced to do anything except for act peacefully and respect the property of others, which in this case is also your property, so you have mutual interest in these rules being enforced.

I agree with what you are saying, but there are two problems with this. First, it assumes that the MoP were socially owned to begin with if they are stolen. Secondly, voluntaryism is not explicitly a capitalist ideal. It's a moral philosophy, traditionally associated with anarcho-capitalism, but it isn't a synonym of ancap.

[Ripoll]

Appeals to authority is only a fallacy if the person is not an authority on the subject in question.
It is invalid to invoke anything the Pope may have said on the subject of space travel. He is an authority in some sense, but not where it counts.
However invoking something that Buzz Aldrin said on space travel is a valid argument.

Thats how science and research is done.

Why do you believe this? NSG needs an elementary logic lesson.

Can you actually back up your claims or oppositions instead of posting one liners that basically state "you're wrong and I'm not going to post why".

[The New Sea Territory]

It does, but some anarchists call for different ways of bringing about a stateless society, such as platformists and insurrectionists. This has less to do with the actual anarchist society itself and more to do with revolutionary theory.

AWA/Voluntaryists usually advocate nonviolent revolution, cooperation between different anarchist schools, etc. Insurrectionists advocate what would essentially be considered terrorism, done by small groups to damage the state (examples include William McKinley's assassination). Platformists are almost always anarcho-communists, and they reject other forms of anarchism as legitimate.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Platformism
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Insurrectionary_anarchism

No, while platformists are almost exclusively communists and see it as the preferred anarchist model, they don't as a whole reject other versions as anarchism as legitimate.

...but they are not open to collaboration with other anarchist schools of thought, correct?

[Sibirsky]

No. Unless he is personally posting here, it is not a personal attack.

My credentials are not on trial. I have already shown why he is an idiot, with the fiat currency claims.



There is a difference between legitimate and illegitimate authority.

That's not what you said though, you said "authority is the enemy of freedom".

And you do not understand context whatsoever.

[Natapoc]

Why do you believe this? NSG needs an elementary logic lesson.

Can you actually back up your claims or oppositions instead of posting one liners that basically state "you're wrong and I'm not going to post why".

Yes I can but I sustained a wrist injury that makes typing very painful so I'm afraid I won't be typing much.

[The New Sea Territory]

Can you actually back up your claims or oppositions instead of posting one liners that basically state "you're wrong and I'm not going to post why".

You live in a glass house there.

Anarchism wont work

/thread

[Ripoll]

How would anarchist communities address the state if they are no longer a part of it. Also, can't we just let people who like the state stay and those who dislike it leave as oppose to pretty much demolishing our Government?

...isn't that like a better solution?

[United Russian Soviet States]

There is too much difference between the two types of anarchists.

But a commune here, a market community there, why cannot they coexist?

Communists despise capitalism.

[Maqo]

Because your idea of "voluntarism" involves theft and extortion. The means of production are socially owned and democratically administrated. By trying to take them as your own and declaring that no one else may have them unless you allow them to, you are stealing from society and extorting them for what is rightfully theirs. You aren't being forced to do anything except for act peacefully and respect the property of others, which in this case is also your property, so you have mutual interest in these rules being enforced.

So if I go live in the woods and chop wood, grow food, and live off grid, I am stealing? I just want to be left alone. I make what I need and want. I dont want other peoples things, and if I do, I peacefully trade.

How am I harming anyone else?

If you can find some unclaimed area of woods, and settle there with your community, and don't attempt to overthrow the state or forcibly take anything from them - you're not hurting anyone other than yourself.
Good luck finding any unclaimed land though .

The problem with this idea of voluntarism is that it can't support the large societies we have today. There are simply far too many humans now for us to be able to produce the amount of food that we need to support our current numbers. While it might be 'nice' or 'ethical' according to you, it is no longer a viable solution to how we should govern ourselves.

[Ripoll]

Can you actually back up your claims or oppositions instead of posting one liners that basically state "you're wrong and I'm not going to post why".

You live in a glass house there.

Anarchism wont work

/thread

I've established and defended my position well before this thread, and I've never replied to a response in that manner.

[Conglomerate of Iron]

But a commune here, a market community there, why cannot they coexist?

Communists despise capitalism.

So you would kill me for operating a free market? When I do not interact with you at all?

[The New Sea Territory]

How would anarchist communities address the state if they are no longer a part of it. Also, can't we just let people who like the state stay and those who dislike it leave as oppose to pretty much demolishing our Government?

...isn't that like a better solution?

Why don't you stop derailing the thread?

This thread is about division in anarchist thought, specifically between Anarcho-communists and anarcho-capitalists.

[The New Sea Territory]

You live in a glass house there.

I've established and defended my position well before this thread, and I've never replied to a response in that manner.

You mean demonstrated your ability to strawman every ideology under the sun. Rationalize it as you please, you made a claim and didn't back it up, then proceeded to criticize others for doing so. Hypocrisy is illogical by definition, thus, I can safely say your arguments are illogical.

[Conglomerate of Iron]

So if I go live in the woods and chop wood, grow food, and live off grid, I am stealing? I just want to be left alone. I make what I need and want. I dont want other peoples things, and if I do, I peacefully trade.

How am I harming anyone else?

If you can find some unclaimed area of woods, and settle there with your community, and don't attempt to overthrow the state or forcibly take anything from them - you're not hurting anyone other than yourself.
Good luck finding any unclaimed land though .

The problem with this idea of voluntarism is that it can't support the large societies we have today. There are simply far too many humans now for us to be able to produce the amount of food that we need to support our current numbers. While it might be 'nice' or 'ethical' according to you, it is no longer a viable solution to how we should govern ourselves.

Lol, anarchism is the only way to make more food.

When everyone is responsible for themselves, then they will make as much food as possible to support themselves and trade for profit. Do you understand free market?

Btw: the state forcibly takes over one third of my income every paycheck. So fuck them.

[Ripoll]

That's not what you said though, you said "authority is the enemy of freedom".

And you do not understand context whatsoever.

You gave none

This is the only line that addressed my comment in regards to authority

Authority is detrimental to freedom.

[Ripoll]

I've established and defended my position well before this thread, and I've never replied to a response in that manner.

You mean demonstrated your ability to strawman every ideology under the sun. Rationalize it as you please, you made a claim and didn't back it up, then proceeded to criticize others for doing so. Hypocrisy is illogical by definition, thus, I can safely say your arguments are illogical.

There's a difference between what your philosophy tells you will happen and what probably would happen. Everyone is guilty of hypocrisy in debates so I can safely say that everyone's arguments are illogical.

[Shilya]

If you can find some unclaimed area of woods, and settle there with your community, and don't attempt to overthrow the state or forcibly take anything from them - you're not hurting anyone other than yourself.
Good luck finding any unclaimed land though .

The problem with this idea of voluntarism is that it can't support the large societies we have today. There are simply far too many humans now for us to be able to produce the amount of food that we need to support our current numbers. While it might be 'nice' or 'ethical' according to you, it is no longer a viable solution to how we should govern ourselves.

Lol, anarchism is the only way to make more food.

When everyone is responsible for themselves, then they will make as much food as possible to support themselves and trade for profit. Do you understand free market?

When everyone is making food for themselves, they're likely not making machines, or gasoline, or fertilizer. Turns out those are hard to make and require extensive cooperation and infrastructure, i.e. a large-scale society. Without them, yields decrease.

[Skeckoa]

The problem with this idea of voluntarism is that it can't support the large societies we have today. There are simply far too many humans now for us to be able to produce the amount of food that we need to support our current numbers. While it might be 'nice' or 'ethical' according to you, it is no longer a viable solution to how we should govern ourselves.

In the case of food, this is not unique to anarchism, but if food got way too expensive, human behavior would reflect that. People would eat what's cheaper, people would have less kids as having kids became more expensive, more people would farm if food got more expensive because farming gets more and more profitable.

Besides, farming is banned in many American urban areas like in Michigan. For what reason, I do not know.

[United Russian Soviet States]

Communists despise capitalism.

So you would kill me for operating a free market? When I do not interact with you at all?

A communist might. They view capitalism as oppressive.

[Ripoll]

Also how do non ancaps deal with specialization and fueling economic growth?

If everyone has to fend for themselves, how do we have time to become doctors, entrepreneurs, etc.

[Natapoc]

The problem with this idea of voluntarism is that it can't support the large societies we have today. There are simply far too many humans now for us to be able to produce the amount of food that we need to support our current numbers. While it might be 'nice' or 'ethical' according to you, it is no longer a viable solution to how we should govern ourselves.

In the case of food, this is not unique to anarchism, but if food got way too expensive, human behavior would reflect that. People would eat what's cheaper, people would have less kids as having kids became more expensive, more people would farm if food got more expensive because farming gets more and more profitable.

Besides, farming is banned in many American urban areas like in Michigan. For what reason, I do not know.

Sadly there is a lot of evidence that people have more kids when impoverished and starving. Education and high living standards are the only thing that has been effective in decreasing population growth.