What are the best books on anarchism that you've read, Veeky Forums?

What are the best books on anarchism that you've read, Veeky Forums?

Other urls found in this thread:

marxists.org/reference/archive/perlman-fredy/1984/nationalism.htm
intcssc.files.wordpress.com/2014/06/the-critique-of-science-historical-materialist-and-dialectical-studies-on-the-relation-of-the-modern-science-of-nature-to-the-bourgeoisie-and-capital31.pdf
intcssc.files.wordpress.com/2014/06/the-critique-of-science-historical-materialist-and-dialectical-studies-on-the-relation-of-the-modern-science-of-nature-to-the-bourgeoisie-and-capital33.pdf
tandfonline.com/loi/mpke20
c4ss.org/
anarchistsocialdemocracy.com/pdf Documents/Anarchist Social Democracy, Structure & Theory (Zine Format).pdf
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

The Ego and Its Own

I don't understand how people can believe such specific meme ideologies (left-rothbardianism, post-keynesianism, deleonism). Pic related is the best classical anarchist.

Fredy Perlman's work is good, "The Continuing Appeal of Nationalism" is a good essay to start with
marxists.org/reference/archive/perlman-fredy/1984/nationalism.htm

Also Kevin Carson is really just a crypto-Ricardian Socialist

Mutualism and market socialism in general is horseshit. It's based on the same utopian idea that fuels social democracy: the possibility of "fixing" the inherent problems of market economies in general and capitalism specifically.

Also what this guy said

Is far left just french dudes making theories that are not applicable in real circumstances?

There's a bunch of Russians too

Post-keynesianism is a scientific research paradigm, not an ideology.

It's only anarkiddies.

Most ideologies say that about themselves.

No they don't and it's irrelevant if they do.

>science
>paradigm
>not an ideology

intcssc.files.wordpress.com/2014/06/the-critique-of-science-historical-materialist-and-dialectical-studies-on-the-relation-of-the-modern-science-of-nature-to-the-bourgeoisie-and-capital31.pdf

Really makes you think.

wrong link
intcssc.files.wordpress.com/2014/06/the-critique-of-science-historical-materialist-and-dialectical-studies-on-the-relation-of-the-modern-science-of-nature-to-the-bourgeoisie-and-capital33.pdf

The Politics of Social Ecology by Janet Biehl and the Murray Bookchin's work is really good imo

Provide literally one journal dedicated to left-rothbardianism or deleonism.

tandfonline.com/loi/mpke20

wew he's still going

I'll change my position, if you want to say everything is an ideology or what have you that's fine. The difference between PK and those others is that it's not a meme or a sideline topic.

>can't refute anything
>lets say wew

I'm always making gish gallops and changing my position when it hasn't been refuted, especially in arguments about whether something is or isn't a meme.

It's meaningless to say something is an ideology if everything is an ideology so I give that simply because that's a misinterpretation of what I meant.

It's not ideological in the sense that it's not idealistic. It's an analysis of the world as is, instead of a theory of how the world should be.

I think C4SS is mostly left-rothbardians.
c4ss.org/

Just admit that you don't actually know anything about post-Keynesian economics and you shat yourself trying to look knowledgeable.

>think tank and media center

dude what
I didn't say anything about it other than the true fact that it is a meme
>journal

Yeah you have no replies and you're finished.

Your meme has a website, actual science has 4 dedicated Journals:
Review of Keynesian Economics, Journal of Post Keynesian Economics, Cambridge Journal of Economics and Review of Political Economy

you literally shared an online magazine

user calm down alright they have a lot of magazines aka journals I know. Don't worry it's a serious meme science.

Do they even have peer review?

You know how many think tanks are actually CIA fronts lmao?

I understand user. That's why I said left-rothbardianism is a meme.

>left
>rothbardian
>this is real

I hope syphilis fucking kills me

also read Bookchin hevalno

>Left-Rothbardians
Like Murray wouldn't have had them physically removed

none because anarchism is a joke.

unironically this

Not only is it possible, it would be preferable.

Not to say it's likely, but we could see any number of things out of the looming societal scramble to come. I'm prepared to shoot some fascists to preserve my planet.
Read up lads.

Tucker's Instead of a Book, the poetry of Renzo Novatore, I've only read God & the State by Bakunin but that I enjoyed it. I haven't read Kropotkin but he's on my list, also I recommend Gustave de Molinari's the Production of Security. I haven't read man, economy, and state entirely but I was disappointed to read Rothbard's stance on IP and his shilling as if it's totally free market and enforcing IP anarchistic, For a New Liberty was donated to me and has an introduction by Rockwell, I don't know who he is but the introduction was written in 2006 and he is really sucking Rothbard dry, praising him as the source of Libertarian thought t which I think marks my beginning disappointments with Rothbardianism

>closely affiliated with the Molinari Institute
I don't understand how left-wing market anarchism actually works tbqfh. Is it just some kind of neoliberalism for leftist?

As far as I understand it it's a complete contradiction.

Markets function by the principle that multiple firms search for profit and this causes competition, clearance and equilibrium. (except in the real world of course)

Under socialism there is no profit motive.

Since this is a pure contradiction market socialism must be a misnomer. What I think they mean is some sort of system where all firms are co-ops and supposedly the same shit that happens in regular capitalist markets happens here. Sounds like a fairy tale for more than one reason. What happens when one firm gets whipped out due to competition? A whole bunch of people are now proletarian and not owners of a useful means of production, welp then they can start working for a wage OR be distributed into other firms which would require some sort of central planning. If these other firms have no need for the labour then welp, people stay proletarian I guess.... and wage labour comes back. So where's the socialism here? Sounds like fantasies about an ideal capitalism.

Pretty much spot on. People like Rosa Luxemburg have been calling this shit out since the beginnings of the workers' movement. These ideas only see a revival because people subscribe to the "planned economy doesn't work" meme.

I'm just going to drop a essay thatI think you'll find quite interesting anarchistsocialdemocracy.com/pdf Documents/Anarchist Social Democracy, Structure & Theory (Zine Format).pdf

Wow, this is even memeier than post-keynesianism. Did you literally find this on deviantart?

>Mutualism and market socialism in general is horseshit.

Why?

> the possibility of "fixing" the inherent problems of market economies in general and capitalism specifically.

By making sure the means of production are held in common, like every other leftist philosophy. I see no point in forcing everyone to just eliminate all tokens of exchange.

literally kill yourself ignoramus

hey now, don't say that!

Don't kill yourself ignoramus, he hasn't done anything to you. Kill yourself a stag or something, you'll at least end up with some good meat.

that violates the NAP familia

anarcho-capitalism is the ultimate Jewish ploy to ruin your life for a few shekels without fear of retaliation. "Good Goy" the ideology.

anarcho-communism is just communism

Eumeswil by Ernst Jünger.

Did you mean to link or something?

Yeah, ancaps are knuckleheads. I imagine the whole range of ideologies happening in various places for while, IF they ever happen at all, but ancap enclaves would eventually dissolve

>Jewish ploy
This is a ridiculous slur, since there's a huge amount of Jewish anarchists and socialists out there. The ploy is a capitalists ploy. Gold fetishists come in all races and religions.

>He wrotes an eassay against intellectual property
>Copyrighted Material
What did he mean by this?

Studies in Mutualist Political Economy was published before that essay.

bump