The Anarchist Library

>>7795506
Socialism is part of the government, so yes its a trap but in a different way than you might think. There is no ancap stuff there, so its not anarchist.

>>7795506
What is this?

File: 1456845959778.jpg (95KB, 527x622px) Image search: [Google]

95KB, 527x622px

>>7796974
>ancap
>anarchist

>>7796974
This is not my definition of anarchism.

>>7796974
You are aware that literally every form of anarchy aside from ancap has socialist/left leanings? Educate yourself. Thanks.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarchist_schools_of_thought

>>7796985
It's a site with anarchist ebooks.

>>7797047
True, the state has been dominate since the beginning of history.

>>7796989
Who is this girl?

>>7797626
her name is semena de mona

>>7795506
The US government knows that anyone who looks at that is an edgy teenager that cant even get out of his fap chair to riot.

>>7797642
o i am lafin

That would be an incredibly convoluted way of doing it. I mean, the US government already gets a ton of free information on that kind of thing from Microsoft and Google, it seems like a really stupid idea to open up a site that actually provides all this material just to use it as a honeypot. They don't have the time or resources to personally spy on everyone who uses a website like that so it seems massively counterproductive for them to put all these radical books and essays online for free.
>>7796974
Explain in 25 words or less how a person governing land is different from a person governing land in any way other than terminology, also explain in 25 words or less how you can believe that property rights come from labour and not believe in the labour theory of value and a mutualist economy.

>>7797386
M E M E O V E R L O A D

>>>>7797750
Did you mean owning rather than governing? Everything being public property (ie socialism) is the state, its the system we already have. LTV is technically incorrect, but its not really a valid argument for the socialization of property. The production of prices (capitalist's labor) is just as valid as any other form of work.Everyone should own their own property, but not everyone is capable of that. Socialism means you have just as much control of my life as I do. Self reliance being impossible is why the state (and socialism) is unjust.

File: image.jpg (25KB, 191x264px) Image search: [Google]

25KB, 191x264px

>>7795506
Don't be so paranoid Anon

>>7795506
Isn't it mostly public domain and creative commons works?

>>7796974
Ancaps are feudalists.

>>7797809
>? Everything being public property (ie socialism) is the state, its the system we already have.
what

>>7797809
Ownership means agency. If you can't choose what to do with something, you don't own it. This is why the USSR and (and any state) wasn't socialist; it was the state and not the producer who owned the means required to produce. This is also why we don't currently live in a socialist society, but a capitalist one. Microsoft for example are as uninhibited in their behaviour and business practices as any socially accepted state institution would be.

If we say that property derives from labour and is a kind of reward for it, we immediately see that capitalist private property can't be justified by labour because it employs other people to labour for it. Any ownership beyond the possession implied by usage and beyond one's own labour can only result in government and control of one person over another.

In capitalism people's lives are being controlled probably more than they were in the USSR, we just don't know it. When you have private property that affects other people, and when you have capitalist "economic freedom", you can't not affect other people. To have regular people left alone and to have truly free enterprise for the capitalist class is contradictory.

Self reliance is impossible in today's society because self reliance is impossible in any civilised society. Individualism is not something that's compatible with any economic system, you can't have individualism on any scale other than an individual scale. A capitalist is individualistic in the same way that a tsar or an egoist is individualistic. A strictly individual conception of freedom can't apply to a society because as soon as these freedoms apply to more than one person they aren't individual but collective freedoms.

>>7797853
Ancaps are fucking stupid.

If you're going to be far-right you should just be a neofascist or monarchist. At least those ideologies don't collapse on themselves after a week.

>>7797856
Too much stupid to reply to. Socialism is a lie, the establishment controls its opposition.

>>7797047
"ancap" is not associated with any way to anarchism.

>>7795506
>theanarchistlibrary
>.org
How the fuck ironic can any URL even be?

>>7798563
Sounds like you need to read that library.

>>7798031
>somebody actually wrote this

>>7798645
>somebody actually fell for that bait

>>7798654
>Jokes on you I was merely pretending!

>>7798615
Is .org not restricted to structured organizations? I would assume a Union of Egoists would not use .org. Hell, if anything, a legitimate anarchist library should be an .onion site

>>7797626
Does not appears to be a girls name.

>>7796989
>>7797028
>>7797047
>>7797750
>>7797844
god damn it newfags...

>>7797750
>it seems like a really stupid idea to open up a site that actually provides all this material just to use it as a honeypot
Not just this. I saw that at least one anarchist book was provided by Marxists! This is sabotage!

>They don't have the time or resources to personally spy on everyone who uses a website like that
They have.

>it seems massively counterproductive for them to put all these radical books and essays online for free.
Not if they are already sabotaged.

>>7797813
I need to be!

>>7797837
I don't know yet.

>>7797837
Yes

>>7798767
No, .org requires nothing anymore.

Anarchists, because you thought herding cats was fun.

>>7799943
>>>/9gag/ and studying robotics to finish a low level accountant

>>7799308
more like garden of ebin am i right