Anarcho-Capitalism

So I’m doing a research paper on anarcho-capitalism and have compiled a list of resources. I’m just looking for some feedback on the texts I have chosen. For example, am I missing any crucial literature? Have a listed any texts that wouldn’t be all that helpful or aren’t relevant (that is they don’t pertain to anarcho-capitalism)?

Here’s the list:
The Ethics of Liberty by Rothbard
For A New Liberty: The Libertarian Manifesto by Rothbard
The Machinery of Freedom by Davidson & Rees-Mogg
Anarchy, State, and Utopia by Nozick
The State by Oppenheimer
The Lysander Spooner Reader by Spooner
A Theory of Socialism and Capitalism by Hoppe
An American Experiment in Anarcho-Capitalism: The Not So Wild, Wild West by Anderson & Hill
Our Enemy The State by Nock

Any recommendations on other books or articles on anarcho-capitalism or critiques of anarcho-communism?

Take a look at this:

http://www.lewrockwell.com/hoppe/hoppe5.html

You seem to be missing “chaos theory” although I don’t know who that’s by.

I think that For a New Liberty is really the greatest single document on libertarianism in general that one could ever read.

Spooner’s a poor choice.

Robert Murphy penned CT.

I’m going to throw Freedom Under Siege by Ron Paul out there, it’s a good book.

What about Tucker? Stirner?

Even worse!

Still quite bad.

It’s simply not avoidable that market anarchism was and is socialist in nature and provides no cover for the oxymoronic ideology of “anarcho”-capitalism. Rothbard attempted to separate the “politics” of the individualist anarchists from their “economics,” but separation of the two is arbitrary and pointless, unless one is attempting to selectively appropriate convenient elements of their philosophy, as he was.

While I know all the egoist and individual anarchist were at the least not capitalists in the 1800’s, didn’t Tucker say something to the effect of (paraphrased): At least capitalism is tolerable, socialism is just unbearable?

I unfortunatly do not remember where I read that

Feel free to ignore Leviathan, he’s an anarcho-statist.

Please not this pointless semantic shit again. Really. It ain’t “oxymoronic”. Deal with it. He took what made sense from both philosophies.

I’ve not heard that. I’d imagine that it was perhaps a comment on what he deemed “state socialism.” He regarded state socialism as one form of socialism and anarchism as the other, the former authoritarian and the latter libertarian.

Shall we have assertions or shall we have argument? I’ll admit, maybe the “oxy” prefix was a bit superfluous.

If he’d done that, his collected works would have culminated in a rather thin pamphlet.

It’s superfluous when applied to your rather silly posts, yes. Linking to that is not nearly enough of course, it will not make your point for you and I am not interested to delve into the blathering of people’s whose grasp of reality is tenuous at best, k?

If you’ve nothing to add but dull sophistry, refrain from posting.

As is your repetition of that fact.

Bye bye.

I do know his friend and fellow andividual anarchist the poet, John Henry Mackay wrote a book called “The Anarchists” which showed what he thought were the flaws of anarcho-communism, and advocated individual anarchism. I would imagine Tucker had the same views. It was not capitalism that was being advocated though.

No modern libertarian would sainly use the word “socialism” to describe their philosophy. Even if they have different ideas about how property should be handled, they should just call themselves something weird like “post-capitalist” . The events leading up to world war 2 and world war 2 itself can be defined in various leftist groups slaughtering one another.

Leviathan, I also find it interesting that you would post on a forum littered with people who have a “oxymoronic” ideology. I don’t hang around paleo-conservative forums.

The Machinery of Freedom is by David Friedman, Davidson & Rees-Mogg wrote The Sovereign Individual.

The Voluntary City by Beito, Gordon and Tabarrok

There is nothing oxymoronic at all about freedom and voluntary trade. In fact voluntary trade implies freedom to do so, it implies a level of anarchy.

Understanding basic English I am not sure how you could confuse that.