capitalism and the state

an answer to yeahwhateverman's comments to my last video.

Category:

News & Politics

Tags:

• capitalism
• the
• state
• anarchism

[Primeprophet]

Yuk! anarchism...? I'd rather be arrested and beaten up by a state than by anarchists- the latter are more likely to use brutal torture without restraint whereas the former observe strict protocol shaped by centuries of moral evolution.

[norulers85]

a) who said anything about beating anyone up?

b) Who says the state wouldn't use torture? (guantanamo bay anyone?)

c)why would anarchists beat you up?

d)the state is not moral.

you really know nothing about anarchism.

go read a book

[yeahwotevaman]

LOL. You have got an off-topic, ill-informed, strawman argument already. Welcome to YouTube!

[norulers85]

lol. yeah, wondered when one might appear

[norulers85]

anti-statism is valid and true. it is perfectly possible to remove it. The state is the monopoly of force owned by a government. volentary social and economic relationships do not generate the state. The Government does. governments must be got rid of and can be. They ARE a cancer.

[yeahwotevaman]

The shallowness of anti-statism is that it just sees the state like a cancer that can be cut out of society, rather than an organisational form that emerges from the social and economic relationships that make a state necessary in the first place.

[norulers85]

Anarchism in its various forms have always opposed private property in the current capitalist sense and capitalism in general.

[norulers85]

anarcho capitalists certainly would fall under the label of bousgoise liberal "radicals" as you say. anarchists who support a market economy (like myself) support a market but not nessesarily a capitalist one. If a ideology has to twist and subvert definitions in order to fit together, it can't be much good. the whole thing doesn't hold up to analysis and is not a form of anarchism. Just shallow libertarianism.

[yeahwotevaman]

However, most Rothbardians, or those than cite him as a major influence do not support capitalism as you or I understand the term.

[yeahwotevaman]

I think that anarchism stands on it's own. It doesn't logically exclude individuals or collectives from private property ownership per se, and it doesn't exclude a market economy. To some people this means capitalism, but that is a bastardisation of the term 'capitalism' more than anything else. Some self-described 'anarchists' you might find here are little more than bourgiose 'radicals' who's anarchism is little more than a shallow anti-statism.