- Capitalism and Alternatives -

Would you like me to assemble a list of the works I've read?

Posted by: Loudon Head on February 01, 19100 at 10:42:27:

In Reply to: So what determines who has a greater right to these resources? posted by Lark on January 31, 19100 at 18:16:44:

: No it means without ruler or leader, which means without IMPOSED and THEREFORE ILLEGITIMATE authority, get your facts staright instead of adopting a trendy ideology that apologises for the rich while they laugh at your shooting yourself in the foot antics.

See my reply to McSpotlight in this thread. My point still stands.

: : Anarchists on the left like to think that "rule" means all hierarchy, which apparently includes rules of property ownership.

: Er, political prejudice anyone, have you ever read anarchists of the left ot know what they think?

Oh yes. Would you like me to assemble a list of the works I've read? In addition, I read this board quite often (though I only post occasionally), and I frequently read and reread the Anarchist FAQ (that one with the black and red flag.)

> I also thought anarchism was about freedom and therefore did not respect the conventional political left-right spectrum?

I don't respect it. But, anarchists of today seem to me to fall into two (very general) categories which are frequently referred to as left and right. I was merely trying to distinguish the kind of anarchist I am with the kind of anarchist I disagree with.

: :Unfortunately, property is one of those things which is genuinely impossible to do away with.

: I think you may be refering to possession.

I think I know to what I am referring. If you wish to argue the point, then argue it.

: This is a bit silly really. I suppose in the court of the king or the war lord who is insisting that the world and everyone in it is his property to dispose of as he wills or sees fit you'd say sure enough you are correct the very idea of property or ownership is inviolable and absolute without exception.

Well hello, non-sequiter. Is this supposed to convey a point?

: : "Property" is merely a way of saying "allocation of scarce resources." Since all the resources on earth are scarce, they must be allocated. We will never be free from this fact of life.

: So what determines who has a greater right to these resources? If you are going to challenge the rule and monopoly of the state are you now going to pretend a similar rule and monopoly of the market place does not exist, a nice thought, a nice utopian thought. The invisible leviathan exists alongside the visible (state) one whether you like it or not both are equally illegitimate and exploitative.

The market place is just a convenient way of referring to people making free and voluntary transactions. Does such a free market place currently exist anywhere on earth? No. There isn't a country on earth without a government which interferes with the market. Get rid of the market, and you get rid of freedom.

: The choices you put before us are private or publiclly owned monopoly/command economies, equally terrible, equally unfree.

I'm curious. In your conception of a free market, who exactly owns this "monopoly" and what exactly do they have a monopoly in? You don't seem to have much understanding of the free market. You accuse me of not having read the left anarchists that I critique, but I can't see any evidence that you've read the anarcho-capitalists.

: : : "Anarchy" in the best sense of the word (freedom from coercion and other definitions along those lines)

: : Your definition of coercion is meaningless. Neither you nor I will ever be free from the "coercion" of property, hunger, or the weather.

: Why's that? Hold on is that the way we couldnt fly or swim or grow crops or build shelters?

Well, we can't fly (though we can build machines which can.) Who EVER said we couldn't swim??? And what about my critique bears any relation to whether we can grow crops or build shelters?

I didn't say we couldn't take actions which assist us and help assuage the effects of hunger and natural disaster. We just can't do away with hunger or natural disaster. They exist apart from our wills.

: : --
: : McSpotlight: To be precise on this, 'anarchism' is derived from 'an-arkos' (Anc. Gr.) - meaning 'no leader'; it means the absence of any imposed power heirarchy.

: Oh, shit, really repeating everything you said there McSpotlight, sorry about that, should read the posts before replying.

Hmm. Yes. Yes, you should.

Follow Ups:

The Debating Room Post a Followup