Anarchy RMB Anarchy was Liberated by Security Council Resolution # 135

WA Delegate: The Anarchist Confederation of Anarchadom (elected 138 days ago)

Founder: Illichia

BoardActivity History Admin

World Factbook Entry

Freedom For All!
"All things for all men, since all men have need of them, since all men worked to produce them in the measure of their strength, and since it is not possible to evaluate everyone's part in the production of the world's wealth... All is for all!" Kropotkin (1842 - 1921)

Information
LinkAnarchist Resources
LinkLibertarian Communism
LinkPopular Anarchist Links
LinkInfoshop News
LinkRevolution in South Asia
LinkNon-Establishment News

Activism
LinkAnarchy Linkin Linkthe LinkUK
LinkOccupied Factories of Argentina
LinkCNT Spain
LinkIWW
LinkOthers like you
LinkFood not Bombs

Anti-Consumerism
LinkAnti-Advertising
LinkGrow it yourself

Related to Nation States
LinkRegional Forum
LinkNation Tracker

Education
LinkFree schools

Embassies: Kronstadt, The Union of Metiva Lame, New World Communists States, Hippy Haven, Union of Confederate Regions, UCR, United Federation of Canada Embassy, The Church of Eris, 3753 Cruithne, belgium, Anti Authoritarian Alliance, The Cannabis Alliance, Gay, The Greenlands in Exile, The Communist Bloc, Laissez Faireholm, and 9 others.World Alliance, The International Communist Union, My Pants, The Anarchist Collective, The Waters of Lethe, Palestinian Freedom Fighters, The Exchange of Mutual Authority, Union of Socialist Soviet Republics, and Taoism.

Tags: Large, Democratic, Featured, Anti-Fascist, Founderless, Anarchist, and Liberated.

Regional Power: Very High

Anarchy contains 98 nations, the 125th most in the world.

Today's World Census Report

The Highest Drug Use in Anarchy

World Census experts sampled many cakes of dubious content to determine which nations' citizens consume the most recreational drugs.

As a region, Anarchy is ranked 1,300th in the world for Highest Drug Use.

#NationWA CategoryMotto
1.The Empire of BrodeeCivil Rights Lovefest“Get hype”
2.The Free Land of Modern LibertariaAnarchy“Do whatever the hell you want”
3.The Disputed Territories of AnomosaCorporate Bordello“Who needs laws when you've got drugs?”
4.The Protectorate of X-Corporate Police State“You cant be late until you show up.”
5.The Lawless Wastes of Paradisus FortunatusAnarchy“Eat. Sleep. Sex. Repeat.”
6.The Free Territory of Christian AnarchistsAnarchy“Our rule is the works of mercy”
7.The Creeping Celestial Vault of Sun and Moon and StarsWA MemberScandinavian Liberal Paradise“No gods; No kings”
8.The Armed Republic of MolitirLeft-Leaning College State“Nothing”
9.The Dominion of SpritzyScandinavian Liberal Paradise“Alea jacta est!”
10.The Jingoistic States of CnaxAnarchy“Silence is Golden”
Page:  «  1  2  3  4  . . . 9  10  »

Regional Happenings

More...

Anarchy Regional Message Board

The Lawless Wasteland of New Sade wrote:I like the new RIFT theme

Yes. I like it as well. And both the default and dark rifts comes with the new notices feature. A nice improvement. But in case anyone didn't know, you could still see notices in liberal and conservative themes. Now that's interesting. I wonder why they allow that for those themes as well and not for the rest of the themes. ??

The Levelled Dig-in of True Leveller wrote:The reasoning behind the name "private-state capitalism" is that in an "anarcho"-capitalist society the functions normally controlled solely by the state are"privately" owned, and therefore there isn't an abolition of the state as much as a privatization of it,


Do you plan on abolishing healthcare, defense and law? Where anarcho-capitalism would privatize it, social anarchism would merely socialize it. The functions of the state still exist in an anarchist society, they are just not perpetuated by a monopoly on the use of force (going by Weber's definition of the "state").

If you are using the Marxian definition of "state", then it still doesn't really apply, as there is no one organization in an anarcho-capitalist society that perpetuates class society (I wrote a factbook about this, saying that such a society would be perfect for a worker takeover of the economy through syndicalism).

The Levelled Dig-in of True Leveller wrote:and since control of justice is not like other "goods" in the market because it involves the risk of violence with established "defense firms", that effectively prevents the type of "open competition" that would supposedly allow everyone to "protect" themselves adequately, which means lower class people are effectively subject to the established defense firms supported by the upperclass creating a situation that is basically state-like but again the state(s) or state functions are all "privately" owned. So ultimately if "anarcho"-capitalism not only contains the privilege and authoritarianism of capitalism but also merely puts the state and its functions more in the control of the elite rather than abolishing it in favor of the freedom of communities and people to create a non-state order, than what grounds are there for considering free-market capitalism or "anarcho-capitalism" in any way compatible with anarchism?


I wrote a factbook about this. See the link below.

Basically, an anarcho-capitalist society has no regulation on the economy, so labor unions have an incredible amount of power. They could easily take over the majority of the economy, causing the elites to secede from the ancap system to create a new, extremely small community, similar to what Ayn Rand described Galt's Gulch as- the entrepreneurs on "strike".

nation=the_new_sea_territory/detail=factbook/id=366625

All this being said, I do see anarcho-capitalism as a hierarchical system, but one that needs to be dismantled in a different way than a state. While a state is a political organization that has control over an economy, anarcho-capitalism is purely an economic system. It should be destroyed by economic means, to minimize the need for violence.

Lilhavanaboys

The Anarchist Federation of Zeouria wrote:I don't believe that is an accurate name for it. Capitalism is indeed naturally hierarchial, and exacerbates both privledge and poverty; but a Capitalism that is truly free, one without a state, cannot be called state anything. I've come to believe that Anarchism and Capitalism are incompatible. Capitalism does not produce freedom, that which Anarchism's purpous is to achieve. I think we should just call it for what it is, free-market capitalism.


"Nonarchism" is a term some ancaps prefer. "Voluntaryist" as well.

Lilhavanaboys

The Post-Stoned Zone of The New Sea Territory wrote:"Nonarchism" is a term some ancaps prefer. "Voluntaryist" as well.

Nonarchism, or an-archism, are terms that the original left Anarchists used. Voluntaryist is a better term, I suppose.

Lilhavanaboys

The Post-Stoned Zone of The New Sea Territory wrote:Do you plan on abolishing healthcare, defense and law? Where anarcho-capitalism would privatize it, social anarchism would merely socialize it. The functions of the state still exist in an anarchist society, they are just not perpetuated by a monopoly on the use of force (going by Weber's definition of the "state").

If you are using the Marxian definition of "state", then it still doesn't really apply, as there is no one organization in an anarcho-capitalist society that perpetuates class society (I wrote a factbook about this, saying that such a society would be perfect for a worker takeover of the economy through syndicalism).


I was referring to the functions of that state that make the state unique such as the monopoly on force and law and its function in upholding a class system, and not simply any function that the state arrogates to itself that isn't distinctive to the state, such as healthcare etc. Also capitalists don't really have trouble with the nature of state authority, but think its authority is only illegitimate because the state doesn't "legitimately" hold its property in their system. But property owners have the same authority of monopoly on defense and rule making within their "legitimate" property and when that is combined with the use of "private defense associations" it makes for state-like authority in a privately owned decentralized way, hence "private-state capitalism", as I'll try to explain a bit more on later.
I have read your factbook and it is interesting, however while there is not technically "one" organization in an ancap society taht enforces class rule, what I was trying to explain is that the nature of defense makes it unlike any other "commodity" in market competition and anyone who wants to compete in this realm of services has to cooperate with the "defense firms" already established or risk either failure or possibly violent reults or confrontation. Of course those with more property and ownership over the means of production will have the most sway over defense firms and their rules will reflect that and therefore firms or "unions" (which are pretty much groups trying to defend workers) will essentially either fail to gain any ground as their rules are incompatible with those of the capitalist ones or will risk violent confrontation, (which is what radical unions in the past often ended up facing and still often face), meaning that were ancapism successfully established, especially considering the absolute authority property owners exercise within their propoerty, there would basically be a system of "private-statism" or sort of cartelized federated decentralized "voluntarily paid for" system of upholding private-property and class relations.
Now granted, this isn't exactly the same as statism and whether it could ever be possible to establish the predominance of "private-defense associations" and absolute private property over municipal communities, unions, communes, and other non-capitalist or other types of political or economic association is questionable at best and your scenario plays on that weakness, but it assumes the illegitimacy of capitalist property rights and authoritarianism. while you're scenario may be possible in this mega-hypothetical of an ancap world, it is also possible that those who own more property will resist or that the ability to construct

The Post-Stoned Zone of The New Sea Territory wrote:I wrote a factbook about this. See the link below.

Basically, an anarcho-capitalist society has no regulation on the economy, so labor unions have an incredible amount of power. They could easily take over the majority of the economy, causing the elites to secede from the ancap system to create a new, extremely small community, similar to what Ayn Rand described Galt's Gulch as- the entrepreneurs on "strike".

nation=the_new_sea_territory/detail=factbook/id=366625

All this being said, I do see anarcho-capitalism as a hierarchical system, but one that needs to be dismantled in a different way than a state. While a state is a political organization that has control over an economy, anarcho-capitalism is purely an economic system. It should be destroyed by economic means, to minimize the need for violence.


While you're scenario may be possible in this mega-hypothetical of an ancap world, it is also possible that those who own more property will resist, or that the ability to for labor unions and anarchistic communities to take over control of the economy and political liberty will be hindered by the absolute rights of property owners and how these will affect non-property owners or petty property owners, especially when we take into account the way use of property in order to work, rent, live in, utilize, etc can be made conditional on abiding by the owners stipulations which can include private-arbitration in the case of disputes, use of certain private defense firms or at least recognition of their authority in cases of happenings on a certain property etc. Now if you assume away the predominance of ancaps absolute property and legal forms, and assume a plurality of different property and political systems or a redistribution of property or more equal distribution of property etc, then you've basically assumed away the essential features of anarcho-capitalism that make it different from its similar philosophy of minarchism or from individualist or market anarchisms. Just to make it clear I am not opposed to market anarchism in general and especially not Mutualism, and I don't think market anarchism/mutualism is even neccessarely mutually exclusive with syndicalist, communist, municipal, and other types of anarchism, as I think they could prosperously coexist, not only in different communities but within communities where different systems are used for different pursuits or functions.
But anarcho-capitalism assumes certain forms and a certain universal system of rights and therefore it either has to fail either through chaotic collapse from internecine violence, reversion to regular statism or minarchism, or it fades away or is removed and replaced by another non-state system which is hopefully from a proliferation of anarchism. If it succeeds then we will end up with the problems already described of the class system being perpetuated and of effective "private-statism" or whatever one would rather call it.
I also disagree that "anarcho-capitalism is purely an economic system", as it assumes a certain universal system of rights and property as i mentioned before, and through this system, whether deontological or utilitarian, arrives at certain conclusions about class, property, violence etc, that are political in nature, and would affect the freedom of people living in this type of system.
"an anarcho-capitalist society has no regulation on the economy, so labor unions have an incredible amount of power." perhaps but corporations will also be free to exercise authority on their property in ways that don't exist under the state or only exist in third-world nations where the state can't exert itself or is manipulated by foreign states into accepting the free reign of foreign companies. I don't think in an "an"cap society we can assume corporations or large property owners won't try to exert power to preserve themselves, especially as I said before wheen we consider that private-defense associations are basically designed to uphold property rights the way that the state does albeit without any of the limitations the state currently forces on corporations and property owners (but in return capitalists are supported by the state in ways that would be difficult to imagine in ancapism), but the lack of regulation and support from the state only means that capitalists will create new institutions to defend their power. while I agree that violence should be minimized, and I am no advocate of insurrectionism, it is violence or force initiated by the institutions of capitalists in an ancap society that worry me. Again it is questionable whether such ancap institutions would ultimately be effective but still we can't just assume that capitalists won't use force in an ancap system and that they'd simply relinquish control over things because unions wouldn't be under the yoke of the state.
Sorry for being so lengthy, but I am not a very succinct writer, and if there ever were an ancap society I would definitely advocate a transition to real anarchism through a strategy similar to the syndicalist one you outlined while also building up communist, mutualist, and municipalist institutions to create a free society, but I don't think we can assume anarcho-capitalism is non-political, non-violent, or even really non-statist, in that ancaps are okay with territorial monopolies on violence within their scheme of property as well as the practically state-like privately owned institutions of law that, while not being true states, perhaps remove control of law even further from communities and the general population and place it in even more insulated control by the upper class. I basically totally agree with the Anarchist FAQ's critique of anarcho-capitalism so if you want to understand my stance more simply go there. You probably already agree with much of it and I probably didn't need to reexplain why ancapism is hierarchal but i thought it neccessary to reiterate in order to explain my position in regards to seeing ancapism as simply a peaceful (but hierarchal) economic system that is so different from the state that it can be dismantled simply by unionism and the capitalists will simply "wither away" into their little Galt's gulch retreats to exploit eachother.

Astrum Nigrum and Lilhavanaboys

Requesting assistance in the A3 RMB...anti-feminist nonsense.

Lilhavanaboys

The Post-Stoned Zone of The New Sea Territory wrote:Basically, an anarcho-capitalist society has no regulation on the economy, so labor unions have an incredible amount of power.


I don't buy it. What's to stop the owners from firing workers who strike, or even paying to have troublesome workers killed?

There wasn't any regulation on the economy during the late 19th century, during the era of Robber Barons and Pinkerton agents, and this is precisely what happened. How many of our comrades gave blood or even died fighting capitalists during that time?

The society proposed by anarcho-capitalists is a regression to the Gilded Age, not a progression to a society free of hierarchical systems of oppression.

In my experience, anarchocapitalists come in two flavors: the first are not really anarchists, and the second are not really capitalists. The second group is confused, and the first group is also confused, but is mostly just disingenuous about their real motives.

Astrum Nigrum, True Leveller, and Lilhavanaboys

Hey all. I'm new from Anarchist Alliance. I recently resurrected my nation after some neglect and I found the AA was pretty much gutted.

The Social Anarchist Utopia of Equilibrium131 wrote:Hey all. I'm new from Anarchist Alliance. I recently resurrected my nation after some neglect and I found the AA was pretty much gutted.

Welcome!

Forum View

by Max Barry

Latest Forum Topics