individual Anarchism and Anarcho-communism.

Question

Could individual Anarchism and Anarcho-communism co-exist in the same geographical region, could they tolerate each other? and perhaps could they interact or trade?

Comments

It depends on what you're defining as "individual anarchism" (and even then it's debatable).

---

say more, RB. i'm not sure why there would be a problem? but maybe i'm being slow...

---

I suppose its whether you would define individual Anarchism, as "Anarcho-Capitalism" as some Anarcho-Capitalists do. I did not so much mean that, I meant how would individualism, fair in an Anarcho-communist society. Would the individual be able to retain those things needed to maintain their own individual needs?

---

I am not as such asking whether "@ Capitalists" would be able to interact with Anarcho-communist's, though the question still remains would an Anarcho-communist's society tolerate @ Capitalism in the same geographic region? I suppose that would depend on the Anarcho-communist society. However, how would an individual, who wished to retain those things necessary to their own well being; food, water, some form of security and perhaps whatever possessions they personally chose to keep, would an Anarcho-communist society allow this individual, to retain these things and to maintain their own individualism and independence?

---

i doubt RB applied @-capitalist to your question, since @-caps are not anarchist.
but i didn't realize you mean a lone individualist in a group of "other", whether the other is @-communist or not.

---

Concepts like co-existence, tolerance, and trade are so loaded down with bourgeois baggage that different definitions need to be offered for a specifically anarchic understanding of them. Or they just need to be ditched.

---

Could an individual anarchist, who wished to live alone and have the things needed for any person to live; food, water, shelter, etc be left alone and be allowed to keep these things if in the same region as an Anarcho-communist commune? and could they exchange the things they had perhaps grown or owned/found/made such as; food, craft items or tools or even skills, for other food and needed objects with the commune?

---

Yes, that is more or less the scenario I imagine, whether an individual who did not wish to be directly associated with a group of "others" would be allowed and able to live independently of the group of "others". The reason I mentioned @-capitalism, is that it is often claimed,by A-Capitalist's that their's is the only true individual Anarchism. A sentiment I do not agree with.

Answer 1

ignoring the @-cap interpretation of "individual"...

as an anarchist with strong individualist tendencies, i would say i might be able to co-exist with such a society, in likely similar ways to how i co-exist with a democrapitalist society, but i surely would not be a willing "member" of that - or any - society.  my coexistence is possible because i have found a way to live *largely* outside it, limiting my interactions with it mostly to those of my own choosing (though largely driven by necessity, i merely choose the time and place).

as to whether/how that society would tolerate me... probably not all that unlike the way the current society "tolerates" non-conformists with radical(ly different) ideas and behaviors. that is - barely, at best. just enough to satisfy societal believers, keeping them convinced that "freedom" is still part of the equation.

maybe not a great answer, change this to a comment if more appropriate.

Answer 2

I think they would definately coexist. Anarcho-communism is based on VOLUNTARY contribution. I one does wish to be on their  own there is no good reason to stop him from doing so. In doing so, wouldn't that make the group preventing him into an oligarchy versus anarchy?