Of those not already mentioned, I am particularly fond of William Godwin, considered the first modern anarchist, especially his text An Enquiry Concerning Political Justice and its Influence on Morals and Happiness. A brief excerpt:
A second source of those destructive passions by which the peace of society is interrupted is to be found in the luxury, the pageantry and magnificence with which enormous wealth is usually accompanied. Human beings are capable of encountering with cheerfulness considerable hardships when those hardships are impartially shared with the rest of the society, and they are not insulted with the spectacle of indolence and ease in others, no way deserving of greater advantages than themselves. But it is a bitter aggravation of their own calamity, to have the privileges of others forced on their observation, and, while they are perpetually and vainly endeavouring to secure for themselves and their families the poorest conveniences, to find others revelling in the fruits of their labours. This aggravation is assiduously administered to them under most of the political establishments at present in existence. There is a numerous class of individuals who, though rich, have neither brilliant talents nor sublime virtues; and, however highly they may prize their education, their affability, their superior polish and the elegance of their manners, have a secret consciousness that they possess nothing by which they can so securely assert their pre-eminence and keep their inferiors at a distance as the splendour of their equipage, the magnificence of their retinue and the sumptuousness of their entertainments. The poor man is struck with this exhibition; he feels his own miseries; he knows how unwearied are his efforts to obtain a slender pittance of this prodigal waste; and he mistakes opulence for felicity. He cannot persuade himself that an embroidered garment may frequently cover an aching heart.
Start with ABCs of Anarchism by Berkman - this gives you a ground level, practical, made to be distributed pamphlet from the most thoughtful active(ie not sitting in their bedrooms) group of anarchists in the 20th century.
Next read Mattew Arnold's Culture and Anarchy to get a more philosophical view.
After that read Proudhon, Bakunin, Mutual Aid, Pessoa, etc. but the two I mentioned are probably the best places to start. I teach a class on the topic at a university level.
Absolutely start with Berkman, then move past to go on to Proudhon and Bakunin. Then read Homage to Catalonia and have your soul crushed at how what would otherwise be a brilliant system of living is absolutely BTFO by the bourgeoisie, more totalitarian factions , and the relative disinterest by the masses.
You should start with What is Property?, by Proudhon (1840). Then, try to read Statism and Anarchy, which is a collection of texts from Bakunin (Cambridge University Press). Mutual Aid from Kropotkin is also a good read.
>>7583395 inequality is first and foremost a genetic phenomenon actual anarchism is radical traditionalism, a return to the natural order "anarchism" is commies unironically believing in the tabula rasa and completely failing to see that equality is a state lie/meme
>>7585671 and here it is. as opposite to muh feels leftists use to justify their mooching and thievery, anarcho-capitalism can actually be defended through logic. https://mises.org/library/argumentation-ethics-and-liberty-concise-guide
>>7585730 >proudhon >the guy who said 'property is theft' even a child could tell that is self-refuting. Property is justified by the self-ownership and nonagression principles. Whoever thought that up obviously has the mentality of a vindictive child and deserves to be ignored by all reasonable individuals.
>>7585773 left-anarchism is inherently authoritarian because the redistribution of wealth would require force and coercion. It doesn't recognize the right to self-ownership, and that's just one step away from totalitarianism
>>7585805 Left anarchism does not require the redistribution of wealth, you turd.
>>7585805 >It doesn't recognize the right to self-ownership Au contraire, Leftist anarchism, the only true form of anarchism, recognizes the individual as being subject to the will of others through the centralization of capital. You aren't an anarchist. You're a lolbertarian with a fancy name. You support that can only lead to tyranny and the subjection of the masses.
>>7585830 Isn't the point of anarchism to be against THE STATE, not voluntary indivduals doing business? In AnCap it'd be prohibited to initiate force, as I hope it would be in Leftist anarchism otherwise it wouldn't be anarchism, so if someone wanted to voluntarily make their own commune or whatever we wouldn't care, the enemy should be the State not businesses who make things and employ people idiot >inb4 capitalism is a branch of the State
>>7585848 >Isn't the point of anarchism to be against THE STATE, not voluntary indivduals doing business? Define voluntary. >In AnCap.... >but muh NAP Literally another tool be used by a bourgeois class that is in all functionality the state. Instead of opression by the state it will be Coca-ColaTM. Congrats. >if I say inb4 it invalidates his arguement
Don't read any of the classical anarchists because they are stupid and boring as fuck OP and you're just going to waste your time. Just remember to bee yourself and create a new non-epistemic ontology via your daily practical-critical activity.
>>7585765 "property is theft" is actually nonsensical because property and theft are both bourgeois legal concepts which make no sense outside the realm of positive law which proudhon never fully rejected
>>7585805 "rights" are a purely metaphysical concept. You're right to "self-ownership" violates my rights to own you if my metaphysics deem it my right to do so. Rights discourse is inherently totalitarian because it totalizes your rights onto everyone else.
>>7585863 Read some Nozick, srsly. You won't get any better account of this private justice system anywhere (also, the agencies will become a "state-like" entity itself, so your anarchocapitalism is self-defeating at the end).
>>7585830 >Left anarchism does not require the redistribution of wealth, you turd. How? abolishing property and capitalism would require expropriation and most likely violence. To preserve socialism you need to forbid people from trading or having control of land or resources.
>>7585996 The abolition of private property is not akin to redistribution. Redistribution implies that it is changing ownership from one hand to the other. It is not moving between individuals. >to preserve socialism.... Not forbid people from trading or having control of land or resources aka capital, just the private ownership.
>>7585996 Property has to be upheld, simply not recognizing it takes no work what so ever. To preserve capitalism you need to forbid people from trading or controlling land and resources which you claim they do not own.
>>7586141 Not really. At *least* in this type of a system you'd have a choice.
And capitalism =! for-profit; their could be employee-owned, sole-proprietorship's, partnerships, customer-owned, non-profits, mutual-aid-societies, voluntary communes, anarchosyndicalist collectives, etc., type of business relationships.
Now now, we all know that's not the case. Even so-called non-profits and collectives/cooperatives are incentivized to increase market share at every turn as well as delivering returns to participants. How is that not a profit motivator?
I believe I need some kind of basic understanding of a system that differ from the materialistic bullshit we have. If I understand , you suggest to not read anything ? If I am not correct , what should I read ?
>>7586807 ...because their profit margin (i.e. money left over after expenses and materials) can *still* be zero. They could simply want to expand their userbase, or they may grow because customers seek *them* out. There are lots of organizations that cap membership; for example co-housing will often cap the number of members they have. There, not more profit motivator.
>>7586824 "Expenses" is a highly flexible term. Modern American universities and HMOs being a good example of non-profit entities competing like for-profits to deliver value to employees, if not to stakeholders.
In a competitive capitalist system, the organizations that deliver the best value to the stakeholder/member succeed. Little communes and mutual-aid societies won't resist the onslaught of larger entities, seeing as how economic warfare is the natural result of the whole NAP being applied to large entities.
>>7586824 How the hell would you reinvest in expansion or even maintain subsistence if you eliminate profit? Reinvestment isn't optional if you plan on surviving. If you're not beating your sectoral rate of profit you're doomed.
Any form of monetary economy requires responding to actions outside of your control. The revolutionary ability of capitalism to rapidly devalue value means you have to react fast and plan extensively.
>>7586855 >In a competitive capitalist system, the organizations that deliver the best value to the stakeholder/member succeed. Little communes and mutual-aid societies won't resist the onslaught of larger entities, seeing as how economic warfare is the natural result of the whole NAP being applied to large entities.
What kind of "economic onslaught" are you talking about? You do know that some people *like* small cafes, local businesses, etc. According to your "theory," a place like this should've went bankrupt long ago: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Park_Slope_Food_Coop
>>7586895 >You do know that people can own guns and hire security, right? Yes, which will ultimately result with the most powerful group of armed people having the upper hand over others and being able to tell them what to do and get away with it. Which is a de facto state.
>>7586864 >You do know that some people *like* small cafes, local businesses, etc
It doesn't matter what people like in a monetary economy, it only matters if you can operate at a profit rate which allows you to survive. Under a true liberal economic arrangement could small cafes and local businesses operate profitably and sustainably if the value of their capital is being constantly devalued at a more rapid pace?
>>7586910 That's not how armed conflict works. People don't just sign up for jobs knowing they'll be killed. You have a very warped view of humanity if you think we need a violent government to keep everyone "in order."
>>7586915 >Under a true liberal economic arrangement could small cafes and local businesses operate profitably and sustainably if the value of their capital is being constantly devalued at a more rapid pace?
Yes. We see it all the time. Even used book stores are making a comeback.
>>7586944 Because books are worth a lot less then they once were because of capitalism driving down their value. The success of capitalism is the devaluation of value. The end result of competition is always monopoly but monopoly eventually will give way to competition. All those book stores will eventually become unprofitable again at some point and go out of business. The closer to liberalism in its pure form you get the smaller and violent these cycles will get, ruining lives in the process.
Liberalism is naïvely positive and socialism is violently negative.
>>7586945 It's easy to opt out. Live on a hippy commune, live in a condo building with security, or just buy your own: http://www.smith-wesson.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/Product4_750001_750051_765698_-1_757911_757798_757797_ProductDisplayErrorView_Y
Sorry, government doesn't protect people from violence anyways. Have you been to poor neighborhoods?
>>7587004 >large state-like actor that levies fees from all the inhabitants in a given geographical area for basic services like protection >"just opt out of it man, live in a condo with security or buy a pea shooter"
>>7591049 The really great thing about that website is that it is regularly updated and expanded. It is actually a project began by a university professor who teaches the subject and part of his students' grades each semester is their contribution to that Archive. I guarantee nearly everything recommended in every anarchist thread we've ever had on /lit/ can be found in that one location.
>>7586995 >The end result of competition is always monopoly This makes a sweeping statement of every single industry ever known to man, from street food stands to banks. It doesn't work this way a priori, variables such as product differentiation, barriers to entry and amount of players in the market. You can read more here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Industrial_organization
How would the economic regime turn out in a stirnerian anarchism? (individual-an, I suppose?)
>>7588875 >>7591418 > Ex-Proletariats who now have the power to control a whole nation's resources will give up their power to peasants for free. > mfw
>>7592742 These lads called themselves communists because they strove for communism, not because they had already realised it. Communism was their ideological allegiance. They called the actual systems they put in place socialism.
>>7592829 > My system is so perfect that it should be violently mandatory for every nation, regardless of culture, geopolitical situation or economics > also people will work for the greater good for the nation in an uncoerced fashion > this period of unprecedented opression and genocide will take to anarchism and non-opression > mfw
End systematic worldwide opression! Sent from my Samsung Galaxy S6
>>7592859 >My system is so perfect that it should be violently mandatory for every nation, regardless of culture, geopolitical situation or economics Not regardless of, in replacement of.
>also people will work for the greater good for the nation in an uncoerced fashion They just need a few generations of tough love education.
>this period of unprecedented opression and genocide will take to anarchism and non-opression If there's any way to lead to a non-oppresive anarchism it would be through tremendous force against reactionary elements first. There's nothing contradictive about that. The only way to peace is through war.
>>7585882 Except Coca Cola doesn't have a monopoly on the legal use of the initiation of force and can't at all work in the same way a state does, the State uses violence to smash competition and forces it's 'customers' to pay for goods and services through taxation and if the 'customers' decline then they're kidnapped or killed by some guys in uniforms, and I define voluntary as an individual doing as he wants, in this case with another individual, to satisfy both their needs >I want this burger >I want to sell this burger >we can both come to a deal and both end up happier after it, getting what we both wanted
>>7592946 there's always going to be a power structure of some sort. That's my main problem with ancap thinking, they naively assign metaphysical/moral value to ideological constructs of our current system (like contracts, property, 'freedom') while ignoring they are a product of the state system and could not exist without it. Without a state monopoly on force a contracts and titles of property are no more than gentleman's agreements, currency scraps of paper and 'natural rights' just quasi-religious metaphysics. the use of violence always tends towards being a monopoly, at best an ancap system would result in a pseudo-feudal structure based around security forces, 'capitalism' as we know it being relegated to a secondary role.
Anarchy just means 'without rulers'. It doesn't mean no government exists.
I'm not even an Anarchist (I like me a strong hierarchy) but people who think Anarchy = People running around setting things aflame because 'der aint no rules' are up with people who pronounce the Pacific Ocean as the Specific Ocean. Total retards.
Anarchism is a bunch of systems i think are nice on paper but flawed in practice, but serious anarchists will accept that some sort of government/law is necessary, but want one that is extremely decentralized/minimal in scope. A couple might want to remove it entirely, but even those will want to replace it with something else that serves broadly the same purpose.
For example, a direct and total democracy (one in which everyone gets to vote, all votes are equal and all issues are voted on) would be - ironically - an anarchy. At least for as long as it took for some power blocs to form and start making laws on things that start to make it not an anarchy anymore (again, im not actually an anarchist, shit like this is why).
Hell, Libertarianism follows into anarchy if you go far enough (thing Rapture from Bioshock if you want the themepark version).
>>7592877 > We will replace your culture > we rly know best guise
> tough love education. Hundreds of millions dead were not enough?
> only way to peace is through war. Define War. Are you thinking about pax romana? Could I counterpoint with Switzerland, which hasn't been in an armed conflict since ever or is this one of your sly fox's definitions where you use ad hoc reasoning to make any debate moot?
>>7593715 >hundreds of millions Not sure commies executed so many, bruv. Or are you one of those people who put every heart attack under Mao on his kill list?
>Could I counterpoint with Switzerland, which hasn't been in an armed conflict since ever or is this one of your sly fox's definitions where you use ad hoc reasoning to make any debate moot? That's because they're sitting on everyone's gold. They're like the monopoly bank. Switzerland thrives of wars, whether they be world wars or drug wars or tax wars. Before that they were the most notorious mercenaries in Europe though.
>>7586829 I'm not one the people you replied you, but i hope you read this. This is one of the most reasonable and well written post i ever saw on 4chan. For that i thank you. I'm sorry if my writing offended anyone, English is not my first language.
>>7588709 There are now and will continue to be, in an anarchist future we all hope fore, many subtle hues and variants. The left-right dichotomy would/will continue. Some radical individualists that shun communities, collectives and their own families. These "rightwing" anarchists will mostly grow out of it though. :3
>>7594465 My own, or "second wave", socialist variety I suppose. Never had anything more than everyday common sense variety handed to me growing up, and hadn't given it much thought till after I got away from family. The "feminine" is now more associated with the gender hallmarks that I only employ half of. So the whole movement is misnamed now. Though feminism is far from irrelevant, class difference is still the most nettlesome problem in society. Capitalism the worst of all religions.
>>7594641 Try to imagine how anarchism could develop. As it would is we could bring ourselves to drop capitalism and money of any kind altogether. Slowly we would decentralize governments till we were left with the authority of the townsfolk and the family unit. I was only poking fun at the wild eyed teenagers who would run away from home only to return later in life seeking the comfort of old loved ones.
>>7591418 THE END/STATED GOAL AND WHAT ACTUALLY HAPPENS ARE TWO DIFFERENT THINGS IT IS LAUGHABLE THAT ANARCHISTS LIKE TO SAY THAT ANARCHOCAPITALISM ISN'T TRUE ANARCHISM (NOT THAT THIS IS NECESSARILY WRONG) BUT ANARCHOCOMMUNISM IS SOMEHOW TRUE ANARCHISM EQUALITY DOES NOT EXIST, EVER, IN ANY FORM, IT IS ONLY THE STATE THAT CAN MAINTAIN THE FACADE OF EQUALITY REMINDER THAT THE TWO """""ANARCHISTS""""" IN THIS THREAD ARE A WOMAN AND SOMEONE PRETENDING TO BE A WOMAN, THEY CAN ONLY THINK DEONTOLOGICALLY
>>7594922 ALSO THE ONE THAT PRETENDS TO BE A GIRL EDITS A MANGA IN A CLEAR ATTEMPT TO PRETEND HE'S THE 15 YEAR OLD GIRL IN THE COMIC THIS IS THE SORT OF PERSON THAT THINKS THEY CAN THRIVE WITHOUT A STATE (WHO'S GOING TO PAY FOR YOUR RESPEC POTIONS???)
>>7586018 > Not recognizing property takes no work at all
If ownership is something that is argued (whether you have arbitrary distinctions between personal/private or think that "use" defines valid ownership), ignoring property claims will simply cause conflict over the use/control over the claimed property in question.....
Thread replies: 163 Thread images: 24
Thread DB ID: 432247
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.
This is a 4chan archive - all of the shown content originated from that site. This means that 4Archive shows their content, archived. If you need information for a Poster - contact them.
If a post contains personal/copyrighted/illegal content, then use the post's [Report] link! If a post is not removed within 24h contact me at [email protected] with the post's information.