I am particularly new to this, only having read New Liberty. What are the differences between anarcho-left, right, anarcho capitalist, libertarian, etc? Did not realize this all got so complicated. [:'(]
This might help you get your bearings.
I think that test is fail, personally.
It’s not complicated until you encounter revisionism from arguing sides on which is more correct.
Everything else is pretty cut & dry, & all the sides can be represented accordingly with varying compasses, not just one or two.
Anarchists don’t believe in positive rights. Libertarians believe in property rights (negative rights) where anarcho-leftists do not believe in property rights.
So you can make something, but it’s not yours. It belongs to ‘everyone’. I can only imagine that if such an ideology was widespread that you’d have grinding poverty and all-around starvation.
There have been debates on here about the terms. Libertarian is quite the stickler. Most small government people will claim to be libertarians. However, there are probably quite a few anarcho-capitalists that think libertarian should be reserved for anarcho-capitalists.
Minarchism is small government. Are anarchist and libertarian the same thing? It still feels complicated but I think I have a grasp. Thanks!
Anarchists and libertarians can be the same thing, and usually are
When the term anarchy was 1st used it was used by what we would call today the “anachro-left”. It was used by mutualists, anarcho-communists, individual anarchists, and anarcho-syndicalists. These groups were also the 1st to call themselves libertarian. Most of these groups involve opposition to capitalism and centralized govt.
Later (and most widley used in the USA) the terms “libertarian” and “anarchist” were adopted by people who were pro private property / capitalism. In the US, a libertarian does not have to be an anarchist but could be a minarchist. The libertarians / anarchists who endorse property are the “anarcho-right”
I thought the term was used to describe some utopia then chaos until the 18th Century. And wasn’t generally used to describe individualist strain until much later.
I suppose anything before the 1800’s, the word “anarchy” would have a completly different meaning / implication when used. But I don’t think it would have been associated with utpoia, in fact probably the opposite.
Poor wording on my part, yes before the 1800’s anarchy was a negative term basically meaning chaos, however the post-1800 political philosophy now know as “anarchy” has been found in various utopianish works, like Zeno’s Republic.
They are all just words.
The ideas they try to represent change depending on who you are talking to.
Anarchists do not advocate the state. “Anarcho capitalists” advocate what naturally occurs from the lack of the state–the free market.
“Anarcho-communists” have a belief that free markets bring poverty and ‘exploitation’–for this reason they oppose them. How exactly they plan on opposing them without the state is unknown to me.
“Libertarian” is generally a term which means someone who advocates a minimal state, also called “minarchists”. People also use this term to mean anything from fascists to conspiracy theorists, so be careful.
“Voluntaryists” generally advocate individual secession. They differ from Anarcho Capitalists by name and debating style only.
Now within the true anti state folks, there are tons of viewpoints. This is the reason why you will always find a debate about the nature and function of rights (or lack thereof), when nature becomes property, and (unfortunately) many debates which end with both parties being sent to their room.
Yes, we can find examples of philisophical and religious thought exercises where a govt wasn’t needed, but I intuitivly tend to catagorize that in a different school of thought. On top of that I don’t think they would identify what they were preaching was “anarchy” (a Greek word) as that word had a different connotation.
Exactly, they weren’t preaching “anarchy,” years later Kropotkin said it was anarchy by modern standards.
It may be useful/ interesting to see if there is anything that links all the ancient “no govt” strain of thoughts together and see if it can be catagorized under an appropriate term, assuming it hasn’t been done. It would take a considerable study though. But I think to use an ancient mentality and study with “modernism” in mind is missing the point (such as calling Zeno an "anarchist) and maybe unfair to the philosophy being presented.
Good luck with that, modern political strains of thought can’t even be categorized appropriately. We’ve got 100 different philosophies all called “anarchy.”
I like to think of it like this.
Take a big square…that would be the tradition of classical liberalism.
Now inside that square take a medium size circle…that would be the tradition of libertarianism
Now inside that circle take a triangle…that would be the tradition of anarcho-capitalism.
It is like going from a broad topic [ classical liberalism ] and then focusing it down to a specific school [ anarcho-capitalism ]
And you open the door and step inside. We’re inside our hearts. Now imagine your pain as a white ball of healing light… But I digress [H]