Hi. Welcome to the site. Please check out the About Us, and if you have a question about crime and/or punishment, perhaps look at some previous questions along those lines first.
Welcome to Anarchy101 Q&A, where you can ask questions and receive answers about anarchism, from anarchists.


–4 votes
If anarchism is incompatible with private property and markets, then what term should people who favor a stateless society that includes markets use?

The desire is to identify as an individual that favors a stateless society; which most people would call "anarchism". Since "co-opting" this term is offensive to some of you, I would like to have another word to use when talking to Anarcho-Syndicalists and other stripes of Anti-Market-Anarchists.

I have not emotional attachment to a word. I would gladly "give it back" and "stop co-opting" terms.

See quote as proof that AnCaps were recognized as a 'stripe' of Anarchists even in 1959:

From: Carl Landauer's European Socialism: A History of Ideas and Movements - 1959

"To be sure, there is a difference between individualistic anarchism and collectivistic or communistic anarchism; Bakunin called himself a communist anarchist. But the communist anarchists also do not acknowledge any right of society to force the individual. They differ from the anarchistic individualists in their belief that men, if freed from coercion, will enter into voluntary associations of a communistic type, while the other wing believes that the free person will prefer a high degree of isolation. The communist anarchists repudiate the right of private property which is maintained through the power of the state. The individualist anarchists are inclined to maintain private property as a necessary condition of individual independence, without fully answering the question of how property could be maintained without courts and police."

Actually, Tucker and Spooner both wrote about the free market's ability to provide legal and protection services, so Landauer's remark was not accurate even in 1959
by (380 points)

i believe you might enjoy shawn wilbur, an awesome translator and thoughtful person all around, one who is much more interested in questions of markets, etc, than anyone here probably is.
thanks dot. I will check him out. By the way, you have been a very fair admin. I realize that my arguments are not favorable to many here. But, for the most part, your members have also been kind in their responses. If you want me to stop posting, I will. Just say the word and I'm gone.
thanks. what i would appreciate is if you don't vote up or down comments, and don't answer questions.
commenting and asking questions is quite fine.
that's my preference.
and perhaps shawn will clarify some things that we won't. :)

by the way, i'm downvoting this question because a) to call this process "barring" you is not accurate. people saying that what you are is not an anarchist is not "barring you" from anything.  
b) the question is too specific to you (your definition of "libertarian anarchist," for example.
what about "market anarchist"?

personally i think you are a bit too concerned about "offending" folks with a label, but maybe that is just my own reaction to the widespread effects of identity politicians (aka the language police). ;-)  but i definitely appreciate your desire to engage in a meaningful way.

"They differ from the anarchistic individualists in their belief that men, if freed from coercion, will enter into voluntary associations of a communistic type, while the other wing believes that the free person will prefer a high degree of isolation."

any one-size-fits-all perspective like those is highly suspect, imo.

individualist anarchists that i know do not in any way support "private property", but rather think in terms of "personal property", which has to do with usage and possession rather than ownership. obviously, no state is required for folks to have and use resources, those folks just need to be ready and willing to deal with interactions with other folks that may involve those resources. for sure, sometimes shit will happen that ain't too cool with me. but i'd be quite happy to take my chances in that stateless world, building meaningful personal relationships to better deal with such unwanted scenarios, without the coercion of institutions.

1 Answer

+2 votes
The historical tradition of anarchism as a more or less coherent philosophy and set of practices has (despite Proudhon) always been anti-capitalist and mostly anti-market. When the French state outlawed anarchism in the 1890s, French and other interested people began using the term "libertarian" more often in its place; but the term had already been claimed by the non-Marxist sections of the First International, where another synonym, "anti-authoritarian," was used. The complete terminology was "libertarian communist" or "anti-authoritarian communist" to distinguish the anarchists from the Marxists, who all wanted some form of state. The Anglophone usage of Libertarian to mean a philosophy of a free-market with little or no government regulation is more recent, and it is contradictory to the general usage among conscious anarchists.

And, to confound all of us, Tucker consistently referred to himself as a socialist.
by (570 points)