Political philosopher here. Re: questions on anarchism: there are two main branches--individualist and collectivist. Individualist anarchism wants freedom (usually) due to individual rights, while collectivist anarchists have a fundamental concern for equality in terms of wealth and domination. Anarcho-capitalists, and OP, are individualist anarchists. They share the common anti-state, pro-voluntary agreement foundation for human interaction. But collectivist anarchists focus on the domination inherent in social structures within capitalism--along the lines of Marxist exploitation and restrictions in freedom that result from being in wage-labor--while individualist anarchists only care about the state (the collectivists care about both). Libertarianism, as understood today, is rooted in individualist anarchism, while Occupy Wall Street and other on-the-ground progressive movements are more rooted in collectivist anarchist principles (especially with the combination of belief in change from below and equality) in practice.
Gun control is obviously opposed by individualist anarchists but interestingly, there's some tension in collectivist anarchist thought. In principle, they oppose all forms of coercion and see that via voluntary agreement people will come to more egalitarian and "fair" social arrangements, but given that we live within a coercive state, many collectivist anarchists endorse gun control in the name of promoting human well-being and protecting people; they think gun control would be taken up voluntarily in a collectivist anarchist society, but since we don't live in one, they seem to compromise and say we should have gun control that everyone doesn't agree to. The same is the case with social welfare. This issue of applying collectivist anarchist principles to American politics is definitely a source of tension for American collectivist anarchists.
If interested in individualist anarchism: check out Nozick, Rothbard, Hayek, and Stirner, among others I'm not that famliar with. If interested in collectivist: check out Kropotkin, Proudhon, Bookchin, or Colin Ward, among others. It's a really rich tradition that's relatively unknown, even in academia.
mxjohnxm49 karma
Political philosopher here. Re: questions on anarchism: there are two main branches--individualist and collectivist. Individualist anarchism wants freedom (usually) due to individual rights, while collectivist anarchists have a fundamental concern for equality in terms of wealth and domination. Anarcho-capitalists, and OP, are individualist anarchists. They share the common anti-state, pro-voluntary agreement foundation for human interaction. But collectivist anarchists focus on the domination inherent in social structures within capitalism--along the lines of Marxist exploitation and restrictions in freedom that result from being in wage-labor--while individualist anarchists only care about the state (the collectivists care about both). Libertarianism, as understood today, is rooted in individualist anarchism, while Occupy Wall Street and other on-the-ground progressive movements are more rooted in collectivist anarchist principles (especially with the combination of belief in change from below and equality) in practice.
Gun control is obviously opposed by individualist anarchists but interestingly, there's some tension in collectivist anarchist thought. In principle, they oppose all forms of coercion and see that via voluntary agreement people will come to more egalitarian and "fair" social arrangements, but given that we live within a coercive state, many collectivist anarchists endorse gun control in the name of promoting human well-being and protecting people; they think gun control would be taken up voluntarily in a collectivist anarchist society, but since we don't live in one, they seem to compromise and say we should have gun control that everyone doesn't agree to. The same is the case with social welfare. This issue of applying collectivist anarchist principles to American politics is definitely a source of tension for American collectivist anarchists.
If interested in individualist anarchism: check out Nozick, Rothbard, Hayek, and Stirner, among others I'm not that famliar with. If interested in collectivist: check out Kropotkin, Proudhon, Bookchin, or Colin Ward, among others. It's a really rich tradition that's relatively unknown, even in academia.
View HistoryShare Link