Refuting anarcho-leftism moral arguments?

[The_Late_Andrew_Ryan]

I would assume that he’s talking about most collectivist types of anarchism, especially things like anarcho communism.

Also, just adding this but I don’t consider mutualism in any way shape or form “left wing” as we are defining it in this context which is mainly anti free market and anti private property, I classify mutualism as merely a specific outlook for the voluntaryist.

[Conza]

@Brainpolice

I reject the very premise of this thread - namely, that there is such thing as “anarcho-leftism”, as this singular nebulous position that is in an absolute duality with “anarcho-capitalism”. What specific position do you actually want to address? Anarcho-communism? Anarcho-collectivism? Anarcho-syndicalism? Post-left anarchism? Mutualism? Geo-anarchism? Roderick Long style Left-Libertarian Market Anarchism? These are all distinct ideas, all of which can vaguely be called “leftist” in some way relative to ancap orthodoxy. “Anarcho-leftism” is just being used as a perjorative through which to lump “everything but ancap” into a vague category that doesn’t do the specific ideas justice. If you’re looking to debunk something without understanding it, you’re not going to get anywhere, other than perhaps an excersize in confirmation bias.

Well said. I don’t go with “anarcho-left” or “anarcho-right” either. False paradigm, just like the current “left wing” & “right wing”. Basically, it tends to be left over baggage people have from when they convert / shift to anarchism.

[ladyattis]

I prefer romano to parmesan. :3

Seriously, is the person anarcho-communist or what? Anarcho-leftism is as silly a term as anarcho-statist or atheistic Christian. It holds no strict defining features, it simply is a strawman of its own kind.

[Nitroadict]

@Brainpolice

I reject the very premise of this thread - namely, that there is such thing as “anarcho-leftism”, as this singular nebulous position that is in an absolute duality with “anarcho-capitalism”. What specific position do you actually want to address? Anarcho-communism? Anarcho-collectivism? Anarcho-syndicalism? Post-left anarchism? Mutualism? Geo-anarchism? Roderick Long style Left-Libertarian Market Anarchism? These are all distinct ideas, all of which can vaguely be called “leftist” in some way relative to ancap orthodoxy. “Anarcho-leftism” is just being used as a perjorative through which to lump “everything but ancap” into a vague category that doesn’t do the specific ideas justice. If you’re looking to debunk something without understanding it, you’re not going to get anywhere, other than perhaps an excersize in confirmation bias.

Then I think one should reject “anarcho-rightism”, & right-libertarianism, on similar grounds.

[SilentXtarian]

@ladyattis

I prefer romano to parmesan. :3

Seriously, is the person anarcho-communist or what? Anarcho-leftism is as silly a term as anarcho-statist or atheistic Christian. It holds no strict defining features, it simply is a strawman of its own kind.

Does it really matter what kind of leftist anarchist they are? I wasn’t using the term leftist anarchist as a prerogative term to describe anarchists. I was talking about collectivist anarchists here. I’ve been debating with a number of them on some forums I go to, and, I don’t know exactly what they all are.

I know there are many different kinds of collectivist anarchism… but in no means am I using this as a straw-man, and, I’m just using the left label as a description of where their position is. I’m not saying they’re left and we’re right or anything like that. I’m just using that as a description.

[Nitroadict]

@SilentXtarian

@ladyattis

I prefer romano to parmesan. :3

Seriously, is the person anarcho-communist or what? Anarcho-leftism is as silly a term as anarcho-statist or atheistic Christian. It holds no strict defining features, it simply is a strawman of its own kind.

I’m just using that as a description.

Despite your reasonable OP & sub-sequent replies to carify what you meant, this will be ignored by a lot of people. It’s much too easier to assume you are strawmanning than attempting to describe something you object to, & to imply that you must be politically (or apolitically? lol) correct regarding the use of terms.

A serious question on the legitimacy of other arguments eventually becomes socially popular to deride.

[Solid_Choke]

@Jackson LaRose

@SilentXtarian

shouldn’t we spending more time refuting their moral arguments?

Good luck. That’s like proving Islam is wrong. Moral sentiments are statements of faith, not of fact. They are impossible to prove, or disprove, as objectively “correct”.

People have rejected Islam after hearing a good enough argument and I have rejected much of what I thought was moral after being shown that my “morals” are inconsistent. “Impossible” is an exaggeration to be sure.

[apehead]

@Solid_Choke

People have rejected Islam after hearing a good enough argument and I have rejected much of what I thought was moral after being shown that my “morals” are inconsistent. “Impossible” is an exaggeration to be sure.

I’m not saying it’s impossible to convert to a different faith, or to decide to be agnostic, but it is impossible to completely disprove a faith. That’s why they exist.