Anarcho-capitalists are not democrats. Start a new thread.
I call anarcho-capitalism individualist democracy. The reason being that existing democracies are collectivist: they legislate according to majority vote, and they do not allow individuals to opt out of the government that is chosen by the majority and start competing agencies to protect their rights.
What do y’all think?
Perhaps you should explicate what you mean by democracy as such, and its relation to anarcho-capitalism. They have little in common as I understand them.
It’s a big improvement on anarcho capitalism.
Democracy = the people rule
Individualist democracy = each individual person rules himself and his property
Anarcho-capitalism sounds technical, but it’s not. Every “political” system has some element of anarchy in it: it just depends on how the anarchy is placed. It is much better for anarchy to be in “private” hands than in the hands of the state. I suppose using anarchy to mean a particular structuring of anarchy is all right: after all, socialism is just a particular structuring of society. To distinguish between two types of anarchism, the terms anarcho-socialist and anarcho-capitalist are used. But if every “political” system has an element of anarchy in it, the term does not communicate that the state or people who benefit from the state do not have a right to that stolen property to invest as they see fit.
Criticism of this observation welcomed.
Of course, there is the question, “Does anarchy mean lawlessness or statelessness?”
How about “self-rule”?
The name needs to be likely to catch on. I don’t see self-rule doing that.
Rubbish. Anarcho-capitalism is very clear. And I resent being labeled democratic in any way. Democracy = socialism. Socialism = Statism.
Statism teh uber bad.
Anarchism means lack of coercion, without coercion PDAs or other providers of defense would be meaningless.
Good job for the anarchists to reconcile that one.
You do realise, LS, that 99% of the people who understand that “anarcho” part isn’t about throwing bombs and bricks through windows (which, to a large extent it is anyway), equate anarchism with socialism anyway, right?
No it doesn’t.
You can, of course, redefine it to serve whatever agenda you’re currently seeking on these forums, but that does not mean that self-labelled anarchists are specifically referring to your definition to describe themselves.
Haven’t I lectured you yet on this?
I don’t care what idiots, statists and socialists think. If they get to define the language I can use, I am screwed. It will be impossible to win any rhetorical battles with that lost in advance.
Regardless, I will not identify as a democrat in any way shape or form.
I’m going to show you all three definitions of anarchism on dictionary.com
Not applicable, since “government” and “state” aren’t synonomous, in fact, Nock used the word government to describe what most people on these forums would refer to as PDAs.
I don’t even need to comment.
and 3. I’ve already commented.
But in this case, anarchism has historically been a leftist movement. Who was the first self described anarchist? Proudhon. Up until Murray Rothbard no capitalist would ever use the word anarchist to describe themself. Even Tucker and Spooner bought into anti capitalist economics.
That seems to me an unfair statement. They weren’t anticapitalist so much as capitalism had not been formulated properly yet. Austrianism had not yet left the European continent. They were individualist on economics, 80% of the time. Their main weak points: interest rates and land. In the pre-Bohm-Bawerk world the former is somewhat forgivable. The later is not. But I heard Block quote Rothbard on the media about every dog having his bite: every libertarian being able to support one unlibertarian thing and still being able to keep the name. I think the same should hodl true for capitalist economics. Granted, they did take a big bite. But they’re still capitalists.
I despise democracy.
To insert my $0.02, I like the term “participatory democracy”. I think it sums up a lot of my views very nicely.
You’re not an anarcho-capitalist. You are an anti-capitalist.
You don’t get a vote. [;)]
Hear, hear!