DOCSLIB.ORG

An Anarchist FAQ — Section F

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
An Anarchist FAQ — Section F proportion to their power or wealth: a question fit perhaps to be discussed by slaves in the hearing of their masters, but highly un- becoming to reasonable and free men in search of the truth." [The Social Contract and Discourses, p. 49] This seems applicable when you see Rothbard proclaim that inequality of individuals An Anarchist FAQ — Section will lead to inequalities of income as "each man will tend to earn F an income equal to his 'marginal productivity.'" This is because "some men" (and it is always men!) are "more intelligent, others more alert and farsighted, than the remainder of the population" and capitalism will "allow the rise of these natural aristocracies." In fact, for Rothbard, all government, in its essence, is a con- spiracy against the superior man. [The Logic of Action II, p. 29 and p. 34] But a few more points should be raised. The uniqueness of individuals has always existed but forthe vast majority of human history we have lived in very egalitar- ian societies. If social inequality did, indeed, flow from natural inequalities then all societies would be marked by it. This is not the case. Indeed, taking a relatively recent example, many visitors to the early United States noted its egalitarian nature, something that soon changed with the rise of capitalism (a rise dependent upon state action, we must add). This implies that the society we live in (its rights framework, the social re- lationships it generates and so forth) has far more of a deci- sive impact on inequality than individual differences. Thus cer- tain rights frameworks will tend to magnify "natural" inequali- ties (assuming that is the source of the initial inequality, rather than, say, violence and force). As Noam Chomsky argues: "Presumably it is the case that in our 'real world' some combination of attributes is conducive to suc- cess in responding to 'the demands of the economic system.' Let us agree, for the sake of discussion, that this combination of attributes is in part a matter of native endowment. Why does this (alleged) fact pose an 'intellectual dilemma' to egalitarians? Note that 64 the convict camp. True anarchist equality implies freedom, not quantity. It does not mean that every one must eat, drink, or wear the same things, do the same work, or live in the same manner. Far from it: the very reverse, in fact. Individual needs and tastes differ, as appetites differ. Itis equal opportunity to satisfy them that constitutes true equality. Far from levelling, such equality opens the door for the greatest possible variety of activity and development. For human character is diverse, and only the repression of this free diversity results in levelling, in uniformity and sameness. Free opportunity and acting out your individuality means development of natural dissimilarities and variations. Life in freedom, in anarchy will do more than liberate man merely from his present political and economic bondage. That will be only the first step, the preliminary to a truly human existence." [What is Anarchism?, pp. 164-5] So it is precisely the diversity of individuals (their unique- ness) which drives the anarchist support for equality, not its denial. Thus anarchists reject the Rothbardian-Newspeak def- inition of equality as meaningless. No two people are identi- cal and so imposing "identical" equality between them would mean treating them as unequals, i.e. not having equal worth or giving them equal respect as befits them as human beings and fellow unique individuals. So what should we make of Rothbard's claim? It is tempt- ing just to quote Rousseau when he argued "it is . useless to inquire whether there is any essential connection between the two inequalities [social and natural]; for this would be only ask- ing, in other words, whether those who command are necessarily better than those who obey, and if strength of body or ofmind, wisdom, or virtue are always found in particular individuals, in 63 system we live under. Inequality of endowment, in this per- spective, implies inequality of outcome and so social inequality. As individual differences are a fact of nature, attempts to create a society based on "equality" (i.e. making everyone identical in terms of possessions and so forth) is impossible and "unnatu- Contents ral." That this would be music to the ears of the wealthy should go without saying. Before continuing, we must note that Rothbard is destroying Section F: Is ”anarcho”-capitalism a type of an- language to make his point and that he is not the first to abuse archism? 5 language in this particular way. In George Orwell's 1984, the expression "all men are created equal" could be translated into F.1 Are ”anarcho”-capitalists really anarchists? 17 Newspeak "but only in the same sense in which All men are redhaired is a possible Oldspeak sentence. It did not contain a F.2 What do ”anarcho”-capitalists mean by freedom? 35 grammatical error, but it expressed a palpable untruth – i.e. that F.2.1 How does private property affect freedom? . 44 all men are of equal size, weight, or strength." ["Appendix: The F.2.2 Do "libertarian"-capitalists support slavery? . 49 Principles of Newspeak", 1984, p. 246] It is nice to know that F.3 Why do ”anarcho”-capitalists place little or no "Mr. Libertarian" is stealing ideas from Big Brother, and for the value on equality? 61 same reason: to make critical thought impossible by restricting F.3.1 Why is this disregard for equality important? . 73 the meaning of words. F.3.2 Can there be harmony of interests in an unequal "Equality," in the context of political discussion, does not society? ...................... 81 mean "identical," it means equality of rights, respect, worth, power and so forth. It does not imply treating everyone identi- F.4 What is the right-”libertarian” position on pri- cally (for example, expecting an eighty year old man to do iden- vate property? 95 tical work as an eighteen violates treating both equally with re- F.4.1 What is wrong with a "homesteading" theory of spect as unique individuals). Needless to say, no anarchist has property? . 105 ever advocated such a notion of equality as being identical. As discussed in section A.2.5, anarchists have always based our ar- F.5 Will privatising ”the commons” increase liberty?112 guments on the need for social equality on the fact that, while people are different, we all have the same right to be free and F.6 Is ”anarcho”-capitalism against the state? 120 that inequality in wealth produces inequalities of liberty. For F.6.1 What's wrong with this "free market" justice? . 122 anarchists: F.6.2 What are the social consequences of such a sys- tem? . 132 "equality does not mean an equal amount but equal F.6.3 But surely market forces will stop abuses by the opportunity . Do not make the mistake of identi- rich? . 135 fying equality in liberty with the forced equality of F.6.4 Why are these "defence associations" states? . 146 62 3 F.7 How does the history of ”anarcho”-capitalism show that it is not anarchist? 152 F.7.1 Are competing governments anarchism? . 156 F.7.2 Is government compatible with anarchism? . 164 F.7.3 Can there be a "right-wing" anarchism? . 175 F.3 Why do F.8 What role did the state take in the creation of ”anarcho”-capitalists place capitalism? 182 F.8.1 What social forces lay behind the rise of capi- little or no value on equality? talism? . 197 F.8.2 What was the social context of the statement "laissez-faire?" . 202 Murray Rothbard argued that "the 'rightist' libertarian is not F.8.3 What other forms did state intervention in cre- opposed to inequality." [For a New Liberty, p. 47] In contrast, ating capitalism take? . 209 genuine libertarians oppose inequality because it has harm- F.8.4 Aren't the enclosures a socialist myth? . 219 ful effects on individual liberty. Part of the reason "anarcho"- F.8.5 What about the lack of enclosures in the Amer- capitalism places little or no value on "equality" derives from icas? . 225 their definition of that term. "A and B are 'equal,'" Rothbard ar- F.8.6 How did working people view the rise of capi- gued, "if they are identical to each other with respect to a given talism? . 238 attribute . There is one and only one way, then, in whichany two people can really be 'equal' in the fullest sense: they must be identical in all their attributes." He then pointed out the obvi- ous fact that "men are not uniform . the species, mankind, is uniquely characterised by a high degree of variety, diversity, dif- ferentiation: in short, inequality." [Egalitarianism as a Revolt against Nature and Other Essays, p. 4 and p.5] In others words, every individual is unique – something no egalitarian has ever denied. On the basis of this amazing in- sight, he concludes that equality is impossible (except "equal- ity of rights") and that the attempt to achieve "equality" isa "revolt against nature." The utility of Rothbard's sophistry to the rich and powerful should be obvious as it moves analysis away from the social system we live in and onto biological dif- ferences. This means that because we are all unique, the out- come of our actions will not be identical and so social inequal- ity flows from natural differences and not due to the economic 4 61 a consequence of the fact that the sale of labour power entails the worker's subordination." [Carole Pateman, Op.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Anarchist FAQ (17/17)
    An Anarchist FAQ (17/17) The Anarchist FAQ Editorial Collective June 18, 2009. Version 13.1 Contents An Anarchist FAQ after ten years 3 2 An Anarchist FAQ after ten years 3 It is now ten years since “An Anarchist FAQ” (AFAQ) was officially released. A lot has happened over that time, unfortunately finishing it has not been one of them! Over that decade, AFAQ has changed considerably. It was initially conceived as a energy-saving device to stop anarchists having to continually make the same points against claims that “anarcho”-capitalism was a form of anarchism. As would be expected, the quality of the initial versions and sections were pretty mixed. Most of it was extremely good (even if we do say so ourselves!) and has required little change over the decade (mostly we have built upon and expanded the original material). A few bits were less good and have been researched more and rewritten. We have also, of course, made mistakes and corrected them when we have been informed about them or have discovered them ourselves. In general, though, our initial work has stood up well and while we were occasionally wrong on a few details, the general thrust of even these areas has been proven correct. Overall, our aim to produce an FAQ which reflected the majority of anarchist thought, both currently and historically from an international perspective, has been a success as shown by the number of mirrors, links and translations AFAQ has seen (being published by AK Press confirms this). Since the official release, AFAQ has changed.
    [Show full text]
  • Markets Not Capitalism Explores the Gap Between Radically Freed Markets and the Capitalist-Controlled Markets That Prevail Today
    individualist anarchism against bosses, inequality, corporate power, and structural poverty Edited by Gary Chartier & Charles W. Johnson Individualist anarchists believe in mutual exchange, not economic privilege. They believe in freed markets, not capitalism. They defend a distinctive response to the challenges of ending global capitalism and achieving social justice: eliminate the political privileges that prop up capitalists. Massive concentrations of wealth, rigid economic hierarchies, and unsustainable modes of production are not the results of the market form, but of markets deformed and rigged by a network of state-secured controls and privileges to the business class. Markets Not Capitalism explores the gap between radically freed markets and the capitalist-controlled markets that prevail today. It explains how liberating market exchange from state capitalist privilege can abolish structural poverty, help working people take control over the conditions of their labor, and redistribute wealth and social power. Featuring discussions of socialism, capitalism, markets, ownership, labor struggle, grassroots privatization, intellectual property, health care, racism, sexism, and environmental issues, this unique collection brings together classic essays by Cleyre, and such contemporary innovators as Kevin Carson and Roderick Long. It introduces an eye-opening approach to radical social thought, rooted equally in libertarian socialism and market anarchism. “We on the left need a good shake to get us thinking, and these arguments for market anarchism do the job in lively and thoughtful fashion.” – Alexander Cockburn, editor and publisher, Counterpunch “Anarchy is not chaos; nor is it violence. This rich and provocative gathering of essays by anarchists past and present imagines society unburdened by state, markets un-warped by capitalism.
    [Show full text]
  • Socialism and the Blockchain
    future internet Article Socialism and the Blockchain Steve Huckle * and Martin White Creative Technology Group, Department of Informatics, University of Sussex, Chichester 1, 128, Falmer, Brighton BN1 9QT, UK; [email protected] * Correspondence: [email protected]; Tel.: +44-0-1273-606755 Academic Editor: Carmen de Pablos Heredero Received: 5 August 2016; Accepted: 10 October 2016; Published: 18 October 2016 Abstract: Bitcoin (BTC) is often cited as Libertarian. However, the technology underpinning Bitcoin, blockchain, has properties that make it ideally suited to Socialist paradigms. Current literature supports the Libertarian viewpoint by focusing on the ability of Bitcoin to bypass central authority and provide anonymity; rarely is there an examination of blockchain technology’s capacity for decentralised transparency and auditability in support of a Socialist model. This paper conducts a review of the blockchain, Libertarianism, and Socialist philosophies. It then explores Socialist models of public ownership and looks at the unique cooperative properties of blockchain that make the technology ideal for supporting Socialist societies. In summary, this paper argues that blockchain technologies are not just a Libertarian tool, they also enhance Socialist forms of governance. Keywords: Bitcoin; blockchain; cryptocurrency; fiat money; libertarianism; socialism; Marxism; anarchism 1. Introduction Bitcoin (BTC) is referred to as cryptocurrency because it is a form of electronic cash that relies on cryptography. Since its inception in early 2009 [1], it has achieved a degree of prominence, not least in terms of market value; at the time of writing, its total market capitalisation was over US $6 billion [2]. Furthermore, governmental institutions are beginning to examine the blockchain technology underpinning BTC [3] because some of its properties, which we discuss below, may have implications that extend beyond economics and into social, political and humanitarian domains [4].
    [Show full text]
  • Anarchism and Libertarianism
    CHAPTER 10 Anarchism and Libertarianism Roderick T. Long Introduction “Libertarianism,” understood as a term for a specific political ideology, origi- nated as a synonym for anarchism, and more precisely the communist anar- chism of Joseph Déjacque (1821–1864), whose use of “libertaire” in this sense dates to 18571—though individualist anarchists soon picked up the term as well.2 Nowadays, however, the term “libertarianism” is frequently associated, particularly in English-speaking countries, with a movement favoring free mar- kets, private property, and economic laissez-faire, generally resting either on the efficiency of the price system in coordinating individuals’ plans,3 or else on an ethical principle of self-ownership or non-aggression4 which is taken to define individuals’ rights against forcible interference with their persons and (justly acquired) property. This is the sense in which the term “libertarian” will be employed here. (Today French actually has two words corresponding to the English libertarian: “libertaire,” meaning an anarchist, particularly a left-wing anarchist, and “libertarien,” for the free-market advocate.) It is with the relation of libertarianism (in the free-market sense) to anarchism that this chapter is concerned. While sometimes considered a form of conservatism, libertarianism dif- fers from typical versions of conservatism in endorsing a broad range of social liberties, and thus opposing, e.g., drug laws, censorship laws, laws restricting consensual sexual activity, and the like. (Libertarians usually, though not al- ways, differ from typical conservatives in opposing military interventionism 1 Joseph Déjacque, De l’être-humain mâle et femelle: Lettre à P.J. Proudhon (New Orleans: Lamarre, 1857).
    [Show full text]
  • The Meaning of Anarchism Via Twelve Libertarians
    The Meaning of Anarchism via twelve libertarians Part 1: The Founding Fathers Iain McKay www.anarchistfaq.org Overview Anarchism is a much misunderstood and much misrepresented theory. Rejecting the chaos of capitalism and statism, it seeks to create the order of libertarian socialism, a free society of free associates. To discover more, please join Iain McKay (author of An Anarchist FAQ) for an exploration of libertarian ideas by means of six male and six female anarchist thinkers and activists. Over two nights, the lives and ideas of the founding fathers and mothers of anarchism – including Michael Bakunin, Peter Kropotkin, Louise Michel and Emma Goldman – will be discussed and their continuing relevance highlighted. Founding Fathers, 1840 to 1940 •Pierre-Joseph Proudhon •Joseph Déjacque •Michael Bakunin •Peter Kropotkin •Errico Malatesta •Rudolf Rocker Sages and Movements • Some trace Anarchism back to the dawn of civilisation • Yes, those subject to hierarchies would conclude need to end them • Anarchism as a named socio-economic theory and movement: • Dates from 1840, with Proudhon’s What is Property? • Product of rise of capitalism, failure of the French Revolution, labour protest growth • Did not appear fully formed but rather developed over time • Part of the wider labour and socialist movements • Mutual influence and interaction • Different schools of thought, but substantial amount in common • Thinkers became influential because they championed – and developed – ideas already raised in the wider movement • “Sages” not always
    [Show full text]
  • Anarchist Economics
    Anarchist Economics The Economics of the Spanish Libertarian Collectives 1936-39 Anarchist Spain has a particular historic significance for the world anarchist movement. The extent and breadth of publications on the Spanish Economics Civil War and the Revolution of 1936-9 is ever expanding. Nevertheless, little has been written on the economics of that rev- olution, in which hundreds of collectives were established by the revolutionary working class in city and country, acting on inspira- An Alternative for tion from the National Confederation of Labour (CNT), the anarcho- syndicalist union. a World in Crisis In this pamphlet the author examines the adoption of the ideas of the C.N.T. and looks at some of the anarchist collectives created in 1936. He assesses the success of these experiments which con- stituted a way of life for thousands of people for up to three years, and draws conclusions on the day to day improvements that were produced. The collectives, as well as being a tribute to the tenacity and clar- ity of the ideas of the anarchist movement, can also be taken as another confirmation that anarchist ideas are often taken up by non-revolutionary workers in times of upheaval and with the prospect of a more egalitarian society. Now, just as in 1936, these ideas are essential if we are to rid ourselves of capitalism and cre- ate a truly free society. za la B a o b o k a s Z “ K “ n ! o e w e l r ed F ge be is the Key to Post: Postnet Suite 47, Private Bag X1, Fordsburg, South Africa, 2033 E-Mail: [email protected] Abraham Guillen Website: www.zabalaza.net Anarchist Economics M Page 20 M Appendix 2: Ten Points of Self-Management 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Mutualism As Market Practice: an Examination of Market Performativity in the Context of Anarchism and Its Implications for Post-Capitalist Politics
    Mutualism as market practice: An examination of market performativity in the context of anarchism and its implications for post-capitalist politics Lloveras, J., Warnaby, G. & Quinn, L. Author post-print (accepted) deposited by Coventry University’s Repository Original citation & hyperlink: Lloveras, J, Warnaby, G & Quinn, L 2019, 'Mutualism as market practice: An examination of market performativity in the context of anarchism and its implications for post-capitalist politics' Marketing Theory, vol. (In-Press), pp. (In-Press). https://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1470593119885172 DOI 10.1177/1470593119885172 ISSN 1470-5931 ESSN 1741-301X Publisher: SAGE Publications Copyright © and Moral Rights are retained by the author(s) and/ or other copyright owners. A copy can be downloaded for personal non-commercial research or study, without prior permission or charge. This item cannot be reproduced or quoted extensively from without first obtaining permission in writing from the copyright holder(s). The content must not be changed in any way or sold commercially in any format or medium without the formal permission of the copyright holders. This document is the author’s post-print version, incorporating any revisions agreed during the peer-review process. Some differences between the published version and this version may remain and you are advised to consult the published version if you wish to cite from it. Mutualism as market practice: An examination of market performativity in the context of anarchism and its implications for post-capitalist politics Javier Lloveras (Faculty of Business and Law, Manchester Metropolitan University, UK) Gary Warnaby (Faculty of Business and Law, Manchester Metropolitan University, UK) Lee Quinn (Faculty Research Centre for Business in Society, Coventry University, UK) Javier Lloveras is a Senior Lecturer in Marketing and Consumer Behaviour based at the Manchester Metropolitan University Business School, where he is affiliated to the Business Transformations Research Center and the Institute of Place Management.
    [Show full text]
  • An Anarchist FAQ — Section I Contents
    An Anarchist FAQ — Section I Contents Section I: What would an anarchist society look like? 4 I.1 Isn’t libertarian socialism an oxymoron? 12 I.1.1 Is socialism impossible? ................................ 17 I.1.2 Is libertarian communism impossible? ........................ 27 I.1.3 What is wrong with markets anyway? ........................ 39 I.1.4 If capitalism is exploitative, then isn't socialism as well? . 45 I.1.5 Does capitalism efficiently allocate resources? .................... 48 I.2 Is this a blueprint for an anarchist society? 62 I.2.1 Why discuss what an anarchist society would be like at all? . 66 I.2.2 Will it be possible to go straight to an anarchist society from capitalism? . 68 I.2.3 How is the framework of an anarchist society created? . 72 I.3 What could the economic structure of anarchy look like? 79 I.3.1 What is a "syndicate"? ................................. 83 I.3.2 What is workers' self-management? ......................... 90 I.3.3 What does socialisation mean? ............................ 96 I.3.4 What relations would exist between individual syndicates? . 102 I.3.5 What would confederations of syndicates do? . 106 I.3.6 What about competition between syndicates? . 113 I.3.7 What about people who do not want to join a syndicate? . 118 I.3.8 Do anarchists seek "small autonomous communities, devoted to small scale produc- tion"? .......................................... 119 I.4 How would an anarchist economy function? 123 I.4.1 What is the point of economic activity in anarchy? . 127 I.4.2 Why do anarchists desire to abolish work? . 129 I.4.3 How do anarchists intend to abolish work? .
    [Show full text]
  • Prefiguring Alternative Economic Realities
    the author(s) 2014 ISSN 1473-2866 (Online) ISSN 2052-1499 (Print) www.ephemerajournal.org volume 14(4): 781-809 The stream of self-determination and autogestión: Prefiguring alternative economic realities Marcelo Vieta abstract This article maps out a possible genealogy of autogestión – workers’ self-management – through ‘the stream of self-determination’ that historically grounds and flows through it. While its practices among working people long predate the modern capitalist era, theoretical and political considerations of autogestión as the cornerstone of an alternative society began to be mapped out most fully with 19th-century classical social anarchists. For them, the practices of self-managed workers’ organizations and cooperatives stimulated ideas about the other society free from capitalist and state exploitation. Influencing 20th- and 21st-century theories and practices of alternative economic arrangements, notions of autogestión have continued to prefigure and advance, implicitly and explicitly, the self-determination of people’s own productive lives. The first section of the article posits that freedom for self-determination via autogestión finds its wellspring in classical social anarchist economics. Subsequent sections of the article address the continued relevance of the stream of self-determination for 20th-century theories and practices of autogestión, ultimately leading to a theory of a ‘new cooperativism’ for the 21st century. The stream of self-determination coursing through autogestión – first articulated by classical social anarchists – continues to prefigure a different socio-economic reality for the future in the present. Introduction There is a stream of radical economic thought that courses through theories and practices of autogestión, or workers’ self-management: Working people must free themselves from the oppressions inherent to hierarchical forms of power that, in capitalism, is embodied to a great extent in wage slavery and its exploitative mode of production.
    [Show full text]
  • An Anarchist FAQ — Section G Contents
    An Anarchist FAQ — Section G Contents Section G: Is individualist anarchism capitalistic? 3 G.1 Are individualist anarchists anti-capitalist? 10 G.1.1 What about their support of the free market? .................... 18 G.1.2 What about their support of "private property"? . 25 G.1.3 What about their support for wage labour? ..................... 30 G.1.4 Why is the social context important in evaluating individualist anarchism? . 39 G.2 Why do individualist anarchists reject social anarchism? 45 G.2.1 Is communist-anarchism compulsory? ........................ 46 G.2.2 Is communist-anarchism violent? .......................... 51 G.2.3 Does communist-anarchism aim to destroy individuality? . 55 G.2.4 What other reasons do individualists give for rejecting communist-anarchism? . 58 G.2.5 Do most anarchists agree with the individualists on communist-anarchism? . 62 G.3 Is ”anarcho”-capitalism a new form of individualist anarchism? 64 G.3.1 Is "anarcho"-capitalism American anarchism? ................... 69 G.3.2 What are the differences between "anarcho"-capitalism and individualist anar- chism? ......................................... 74 G.3.3 What about "anarcho"-capitalists' support of "defence associations"? . 81 G.3.4 Why is individualist anarchist support for equality important? . 86 G.3.5 Would individualist anarchists have accepted "Austrian" economics? . 88 G.3.6 Would mutual banking simply cause inflation? ................... 91 G.4 Why do social anarchists reject individualist anarchism? 99 G.4.1 Is wage labour consistent with anarchist principles? . 114 G.4.2 Why do social anarchists think individualism is inconsistent anarchism? . 122 G.5 Benjamin Tucker: capitalist or anarchist? 129 G.6 What are the ideas of Max Stirner? 137 G.7 Lysander Spooner: right-”libertarian” or libertarian socialist? 146 2 Section G: Is individualist anarchism capitalistic? The short answer is, no, it is not.
    [Show full text]
  • International Medical Corps Afghanistan
    Heading Folder Afghanistan Afghanistan - Afghan Information Centre Afghanistan - International Medical Corps Afghanistan - Revolutionary Association of the Women of Afghanistan (RAWA) Agorist Institute Albee, Edward Alianza Federal de Pueblos Libres American Economic Association American Economic Society American Fund for Public Service, Inc. American Independent Party American Party (1897) American Political Science Association (APSA) American Social History Project American Spectator American Writer's Congress, New York City, October 9-12, 1981 Americans for Democratic Action Americans for Democratic Action - Students for Democractic Action Anarchism Anarchism - A Distribution Anarchism - Abad De Santillan, Diego Anarchism - Abbey, Edward Anarchism - Abolafia, Louis Anarchism - ABRUPT Anarchism - Acharya, M. P. T. Anarchism - ACRATA Anarchism - Action Resource Guide (ARG) Anarchism - Addresses Anarchism - Affinity Group of Evolutionary Anarchists Anarchism - Africa Anarchism - Aftershock Alliance Anarchism - Against Sleep and Nightmare Anarchism - Agitazione, Ancona, Italy Anarchism - AK Press Anarchism - Albertini, Henry (Enrico) Anarchism - Aldred, Guy Anarchism - Alliance for Anarchist Determination, The (TAFAD) Anarchism - Alliance Ouvriere Anarchiste Anarchism - Altgeld Centenary Committee of Illinois Anarchism - Altgeld, John P. Anarchism - Amateur Press Association Anarchism - American Anarchist Federated Commune Soviets Anarchism - American Federation of Anarchists Anarchism - American Freethought Tract Society Anarchism - Anarchist
    [Show full text]
  • Anarchist FAQ
    An Anarchist FAQ The Anarchist FAQ Editorial Collective June 18, 2009. Version 13.1 Contents Introduction ......................................... 3 Section A: What is Anarchism? ............................... 3 Section B: Why do anarchists oppose the current system? ................ 3 Section C: What are the myths of capitalist economics? ................. 3 Section D: How do statism and capitalism affect society? ................ 3 Section E: What do anarchists think causes ecological problems? ............ 3 Section F: Is “anarcho”-capitalism a type of anarchism? ................. 3 Section G: Is individualist anarchism capitalistic? ..................... 3 Section H: Why do anarchists oppose state socialism? .................. 3 Section I: What would an anarchist society look like? .................. 3 Section J: What do anarchists do? ............................. 4 Appendix: Anarchism and “anarcho”-capitalism ..................... 4 Appendix: The Symbols of Anarchy ............................ 4 Appendix: Anarchism and Marxism ............................ 4 Appendix: The Russian Revolution ............................. 4 Bibliography for FAQ ..................................... 4 An Anarchist FAQ after ten years ............................. 4 2 Introduction Introduction Section A: What is Anarchism? What is Anarchism? Section B: Why do anarchists oppose the current system? Why do anarchists oppose the current system? Section C: What are the myths of capitalist economics? What are the myths of capitalist economics? Section D:
    [Show full text]