Anarchism vs."anarcho"-statism & "anarcho"-capitalism
Top Comments
All Comments (151)
-
Any point you could have made regarding the argument for or against having a providential polity and social framework in a stateless society were instantly scuppered by your choice to use the ignorant homophobic language of barbarians.
-
You don't need a state to have property rights, in fact, the state is anti private property. They will give public property the image of private property at times to give a false image that they care about property, but the very fact that government is not possible without taxation aggressive violence proves that private property is always at threat. Without the state, spontaneous order would create an environment of individual property rights. Non-state private property ends collective slavery
-
Anyone that violates the Non-Coercion Principle should be charged as such.
-
mr1001nights: You assume too much when you say, "At the core of the anti-hierarchical nature of an anarchist economic system...". Anarchy means "no ruler", not "no hierarchy". It's foolish to think people won't naturally form hierarchies when left free from rulers. Hierarchies are a natural part of life. That being said, you don't have to join any hierarchy in a world without rulers. You may starve to death but that's your problem. Some of us actually like to trade our skills for cash. Weird.
-
what exactly does non-exploitative property entail? is it simply basic commodities such as my home and my tooth brush, or does it include things used only for the personal pleasure derived from them, such as my television or computer? for instance, one of my hobbies is collecting military surplus items. i have no real need to have these items, but i enjoy them just to have them. would things like this fall under non-exploitative property?
-
what exactly does non-exploitative property entail? is it simply basic commodities such as my home and my tooth brush, or does it include things used only for the personal pleasure derived from them, such as my television or computer? for instance, one of my hobbies is collecting military surplus items. i have no real need to have these items, but i enjoy them just to have them. would things like this fall under non-exploitative property?
-
The guy in this video is alarmingly foolish. He understands nothing about economics, contracts or private property. He talks and talks and all that comes out is confusion. He quotes Rothbard but has no idea what Rothbard is saying. I'm ashamed to be human.
-
Who decides what those limits are, and who enforces them? Clearly everyone cannot do it, because not everyone agrees. So here you would have a hierarchical situation in which only some people have the right to define and enforce property rights. How do you resolve this contradiction?
-
If there is no ownership, then there is no theft. Also no such thing as vandalism or trespassing.
You don't own the house you are living in. So if I got the urge to burn it dow, I would be doing no wrong since the house belonged to NO ONE in the first place. I could also kick down the door and move in.
There is no tender around for me to start my BBQ fire, so it is okay for me to walk up to you and strip the shirt off of you back.
No one owns anything.
In the end, all "property" is a rights claim the community can reject. But if they do voluntarily allow fascism, anarchism won't last long.
TheAntiAuthoritarian 2 years ago 4
But you said you have a choice to whether or not you want control over yourself. You don't have a choice.
Land and houses are two different things. This should be obvious. Where the are you going to build the house? This is another situation where humans don't really have a choice.
Farms and the means of production are needed for a community to survive, so a snobby unethical capitalist cannot claim a dictatorship over something needed for our existence.
TheAntiAuthoritarian 2 years ago 2