ITT: Anarchism without adjectives

ITT: Anarchism without adjectives

let us focus on our common goals rather than our differences:

>Voltarine sought conciliation between the various schools, and said in her essay Anarchism, "There is nothing un-Anarchistic about any of [these systems] until the element of compulsion enters and obliges unwilling persons to remain in a community whose economic arrangements they do not agree to. (When I say 'do not agree to' I do not mean that they have a mere distaste for...I mean serious differences which in their opinion threaten their essential liberties...)...Therefore I say that each group of persons acting socially in freedom may choose any of the proposed systems, and be just as thorough-going Anarchists as those who select another."[8]

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarchism_without_adjectives

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=JDrz2LGMVwA
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

Epic.

Ancaps have nothing in common with other anarchists.

2nded. All they want is to replace the mechanisms of the state with private corps. that accomplish the same unethical actions.
>inb4 voluntaryists get butthurt

I'm all for intersectionality, but you can't just lump all forms of anarchism together. Primitivists share little common ground with, say, ancoms. And egoist anarchists might argue against some systems of anarchism. Plus, any form of capitalism, no matter how "voluntary," is shit. Literally all anarchists are anti-capitalist.

This.

Also this.

Are we talking actual anarchism, or are we pretending to be anarchists when we're actually just leftists in love with the government?

Also, if we look at the one major attempt to implement it in semi-recent history (Revolutionary Catalonia), it seems to me that anarchism just isn't viable; human nature always wins out. Of course, I could be completely wrong.

guess not everyone on Veeky Forums is actually retarded

>human nature

>human nature always wins out
KEK

Ah, looks like someone just discovered Foucault. Fair enough, I'm willing to reject the label of "human nature." I used it because it was quicker than saying Revolutionary Catalonia crumbled due to common practices seen throughout human history such as greed, murder, and a strong man willing to impose what he deemed order on the populace.

>Actually believing that humans are special-snowflake logic + ideology machines.

Kek, enjoy fantasy land

>Implying you know anything about human nature

>The subject is unconsciously biased towards itself. We easily forgive ourselves for actions we would condemn others for
>Morality is purchased with safety; when safety goes, so too does morality.
>We cannot know other's minds, so we distrust those who act, believe, look, or speak differently.
>Man loves other things in proportion to their similarity to or use for him.

Mankind needs law and homogeneity to get along. Have fun LARPing as perfect logic machines

Socialism in any form is statist. First, lets define the state. A common definition "the structure that upholds private property" is generally lacking, due to the nature of taxation making all private property really public property. An individual does not own something when they have to pay tribute on it. Better is one invoking the social contract, in that the conditions in order for us to survive are created by the common populous, so we are all duty bound to serve this commonality. So the state in this context is whatever has the legal monopoly over the use of force, in order to enforce the social contract. IE taxation, regulation, the law, etc. Socialism in every form is based around this social contract, that capital property is held in common and everyone gets one vote in order to express their control of some economic factor. This so obviously statist, the leftist delusion that their ideas are anarchist, confounds me deeply. Individuals relations and agreements are not possible in any socialist system, because the overpowering force the central communal organization has a say in all transactions. Socialism replaces the state with an entity that demands participation by everyone, in order for them to have access to the means of survival, and alienates and dispossesses anyone that don't not conform to the groups political control of the individual.

Leftists critiques of capitalism are very hit or miss, tending more towards miss, but being correct about a failing of capitalism isn't an automatic endorsement of socialism. For no reason other than so far their has been no real argument against private property, because what they call capitalism is really socialism (public property). A system of private property and more importantly private credit is possible without a class of controllers, though speculation and the reward for property investment is vital for a robust economy. Basically, if computers controls the banks and how credit is issued, all the flaws of capitalism would melt away, and a stateless society could exist.

Holy shit you know nothing about socialism.

Your "MUH HUMAN NATUUUUUURE" argument is shit but anarchism is unlikely because the state mechanism is convenient and communes and direct democracy suck. I am a non Marxist-Leninist state socialist.

I was thinking of arguing but the examples I can think of are like third way anarchists that obv also happen to use some similar arguments to ancaps.

I have no particular issue with some mechanisms used within capitalism being used to a good end within an anarchist collective but yeah ancaps are like retards that want a veneer of rebelliousness. Like the current UK tory party and their obsession with having pics of revolutionary communists in their offices.

>due to the nature of taxation making all private property really public property
I'm not reading past here because there are just so many issues
1. There are examples like Pitt the Younger admitting taxation is theft (he actually introduced income and inheritance tax to Britain to fund the war). So even in capitalist systems yes there are strong arguments against tax.
2. Property is very very rarely taxed in any meaningful way. Pls gib examples of Georgist taxation in capitalist countries. It certainly gets argued for but isn't put into practice.

I think Taiwan has some minor Georgist taxes because Sun Yat Sen was big into it.

I'll look that up bro.

I was confused when Voltaire became a 'her.'

How many (You)s to one Internet?

Great reply.

I don't quite get your point. What does "meaningful" mean?

>UK tory party and their obsession with having pics of revolutionary communists in their offices
Do they actually? I'm English and I've never heard of this, it sounds fucking hilarious
Also, yeah, Ancraps aren't Anarchists. Anarchists are comrades like Rocker, Reclus, Goldman, Kropotkin, you know.

Aye, I agree, but what's even more worrying is if we leave we might end up with Boris fucking Johnson as PM. And I thought the left of the Tory party were shite, but Boris openly said he'd privatise the NHS.

Pickles has a pic of Ché and Gove has a pic of Lenin. I heard back when the coalition got in that Cameron had based his rhetoric for the big society on Cuban politics.

Got to be honest, the whole Gove loving Lenin + loving super austerity + wanting to leave the EU is a little worrying, especially now it's clear he has Naziism on his mind.

Why is British politics so fucked up, almost none of these things have anything to do with one another. I'm left wondering if your politicians are that stupid or the Brits themselves are.

Our politicians have a habit of appearing stupid, but being quite smart. Also, yeah, our population is in the hands of Rupert Murdoch and his mates, so we're pretty fucked considering he uses his media empire to spread his bullshit agenda.

That post when I read it seemed garbled, so I tried again.

I feel really weird now how America might have a socialist health care system and we might end up with their shitty old system. The very negligible benefit the US has is competition has led to like superstar highly specialised surgeons and shit: guys who are known to be good at very rare/niche operations and so get lots of practice by getting nearly every rare/niche patient in the country. So while most surgeons maybe get such and such difficult case once or twice in a career, a few will do hundreds or thousands of these difficult operations. Britain isn't that big tho. And it'll kill A&E.

And on Boris, I was talking to someone about what he'd done in London as mayor and having to explain Boris bikes and Cross rail were Comrade Ken.

Gove just wants to look "radical" and "dangerous". And to do that he's looking at people that attempted to enact social change by mass killing, often through ghettoisation and starvation and so on. P much he's mixing up being radical and being edgy. I doubt very much he's looking seriously at Lenin's thought beyond that, having known more than my fair share of Tory supporters.

I would guess Pickles and Cameron are trying to portray themselves as a new version of "One Nation Tories". Gove is super bezzie mates with Cameron tho so maybe he's trying to do the same, but again with edge.

I'll add as well that we have a very very strong political class. They don't know how to talk to people anymore for the most part and act incredibly weird, most of the time they never see anyone else but other politicos.

>Our politicians have a habit of appearing stupid, but being quite smart.
I find it hard to believe when it comes to some.

>I find it hard to believe when it comes to some.
Smart may be an overestimate for some, but they're still more intelligent than they make out to be. I mean, Boris acts like a fool but he knows how to play politics - same with Cameron.

Don't worry senpai, I'm sure only most of our NHS will be defunded then privatised, but hopefully less than half so we can still use the shitty defunded -but free- healthcare.

>Don't worry senpai, I'm sure only most of our NHS will be defunded then privatised, but hopefully less than half so we can still use the shitty defunded -but free- healthcare.
The Welsh and Scottish systems are already quite different thanks to devo. Maybe it's time to move there?

I notice that those privatised GP ads and health care have calmed down a bit in the lead up to the EU referendum. I'd guess a few companies feel either leave or remain is not in their best interest.

I agree with de Cleyre, but the only system [on a global scale] that provies ground for that is private property anarchy.

Your non Marxist-Leninist state socialist outlook is shit.

youtube.com/watch?v=JDrz2LGMVwA

why

you got memed

The only options are scientism and "special snowflakes"

You almost succeeded in describing the compete antithesis of socialism.

Ancaps are not anarchists.

At that point the only goal is
>No state, still capitalism and the bourgeoisie.
Which is not "anarchism without adjectives", it's a recruiting drive for ancaps under the guise of unity.

Does nobody in this thread know what a union of egoists is?
>Morality
Holy shit, have actually read any anarchist works?

r i p books...;_;