Anarchast Ep. 7: "The History of Anarchism" with Lew Rockwell Part 1

In this episode we speak with Lew Rockwell of www.LewRockwell.com

Topics include:

- We are born free
- How Lew got started with anarchism
- Austrian economics was dying in the 1970s
- How Lew founded the Mises Institute
- The origins and history of anarchism
- The growth of libertarianism and anarchism
- Lew on Ron Paul and politics

LINKS & REFERENCES

The General Theory of Employment, Interest, and Money by John Maynard Keynes http://amzn.to/nQpd9l
The Critics of Keynesian Economics by Benjamin M. Anderson http://amzn.to/o8gb6x
History of economic thought by Murray N. Rothbard http://amzn.to/qpZuC0
www.LewRockwell.com
www.Mises.org

Category:

News & Politics

Tags:

• anarchast
• jeff berwick
• libertarianism
• anarchist interview
• Lew Rockwell

[MsSexySocialist]

@oldoddjobs

My point is twofold,

1. "Anarchism" both as a philosophical and a political movement has always been resolutely anti-capitalist as its very etymology means "no rule/rulers" - with capitalism (in every form) perpetuates. And yes, I acknowledge that ancap is different to state-capitalism.

2. While what we now call "capitalism has always been pegged to the state, "anarcho"-capitalism itself just decentralizes & recreates the functions of the state in private defense agencies

[RKAddict101]

Yup, young anarchocapitalist here, limited government is better than an expansionary government, but government necessarily expands; it's part of its nature. Even if we can pull government back by electing people such as Ron Paul, government will expand again in the future unless we can at some point completely rid ourselves of it.

[CloverfieldMonster95]

@MsSexySocialist You are approaching Anarchism from the Egalitarian viewpoint. We approach Anarchism from the Libertarian viewpoint. Collectivism is Statism and Leftist Anarchists are Collectivists. I think letting go of the immorality and impossibility of Socialism would be helpful for you to see why we are so confident this system can work.

[MsSexySocialist]

@magentawave

I didn't say it "could never be".

I was making the point that it wouldn't be a desirable thing to have - and that most people would fight against having it forced upon them.

It also doesn't offer "interactions ... carried out voluntarily and peacefully" as a small elite of plutocrats control everything and make sure all interactions are carried out on their terms while those without access to capital are subordinated to their whims.

[MsSexySocialist]

@magentawave

Yes, I pointed out the etymology of the term myself in the top comment box above as "no rule/rulers" (not "no state" as is commonly believed).

This is part of why "anarcho"-capitalism is not a form of anarchism.

Capitalism is "the market economy with private ownership and control of the means of production". Meaning the very tools and institutions used to produce are all in the hands of a small elite of private owners (rulers); whom the majority are subordinated to.

[magentawave]

@MsSexySocialist - Before humans flew an airplane, would you have been one of those that said: If man was meant to fly he'd have wings? There were those that believed that then just like those that still believe in the necessity of a criminal organization known as the state. Just because there has never been something as radical as real freedom where interactions are carried out voluntarily and peacefully, then why would you assume that there should never be?

[magentawave]

@MsSexySocialist - The origin of the word "anarchy" from etymonline.[com]...

anarchy

1530s, from Fr. anarchie or directly from M.L. anarchia, from Gk. anarkhia "lack of a leader, the state of people without a government" (in Athens, used of the Year of Thirty Tyrants, 404 B.C., when there was no archon), noun of state from anarkhos "rulerless," from an- "without" (see an- (1)) + arkhos "leader" (see archon).

[magentawave]

@MsSexySocialist -

The origin of the word "anarchy" from dictionary.refererence.[com]..­.

1530–40; (< Middle French anarchie or Medieval Latin anarchia ) < Greek, anarchía lawlessness, literally, lack of a leader, equivalent to ánarch ( os ) leaderless

[MsSexySocialist]

@magentawave (final)

[continued]

It gives a good and thorough Q & A style intro to libertarian socialist principles (your false description of what "socialism" is betrays a lack of basic understanding) and has a section on why anarcho-capitalism is:

1. A contradiction in terms. And

2. Would never work and could only ever be implemented through violence.

An-cap would entail the destruction of civil society which people would NEVER renounce voluntarily; hence an-cap requires force.

[MsSexySocialist]

@magentawave

[continued] . . . on a floating abstraction; the "free market" that will somehow come into place and magically solve all problems.

You don't seem to have read much actual anarchist writing. I'd recommend the Anarchist FAQ; which is available free online.

[continued]

[MsSexySocialist]

@magentawave

[continued] . . . then Marxists would qualify as anarchist as they too seek a stateless society as a long-term goal.

And again, it doesn't matter what you personally "consider" pure capitalism to be, it has never existed.

To say it somehow exists in an embryonic form in black market transactions is like saying libertarian socialism already exists in every self-managed cooperative.

No working model of such a system has ever existed and is thus based . . . [continued]