I’m aware of that, yet it may have been a mistake regardless.
All anarchism means is no rulers. The economic possibilities of such a system are open.
And a capitalist organization would contradict that.
You see capitalism as involuntary? The definition of a ruler is a monarch, a dictator, one of authority.
I think MNR is the first to put it all together.
And a capitalist organization has these. The difference is that under Molinari’s system, you can choose which authority you are under. Under anarchy, you are alone against the world.
Someone advocating open entry and competition is not proof that they understand how capitalism works. Such a person could be characterized as an anarcho-liberal, or a market anarchist. But giving the name “anarcho-capitalism” to an ideology only makes sense if the people who formulate, advocate, and advance the ideology actually understand thoroughly how capitalism works. Murray Rothbard did. Molinari and Spooner did not.
Molinari was an ‘economist’ who fully defended laissez-faire. He was not an individualist anarchist a la Spooner.
I take it that you and Stranger have not read much if any Molinari.
I think Molinari was the first to present the idea of a stateless libertarian order. People who came after him didn’t add much.
Molinari did not understand ‘capitalism’ ? Are you out of your mind ?
Stranger, WRONG as usual. You never read Molinari did you ?
With this logic, a full understanding of XYZ is necessary to be attributed the father/founder of XYZ.
However, let us examine Menger and Austrian Economics. Menger had the basics of Austrian Economics down. A fuller understanding of Austrian Economics did not exist until Mises, yet Menger is bestowed the honor as Father/Founder of the Austrian School.
Molinari could be seen in similar light, he had the basics of anarcho-capitalism down, but not necessarily a fuller understanding. The fuller understanding came to light through Rothbard.
There is no need for histrionics.
Nobody thoroughly understood capitalism until Mises. Understanding economic calculation is a requisite for thoroughly understanding capitalism. I would call Molinari a market anarchist.
Yes, I think perhaps you are actually correct in this. Thank you.
Although, it still might be problematic to call Molinari the father of anarcho-capitalism, even if he is considered anarcho-capitalist. Usually the “father” of something is someone at the beginning of a long chain of influence. Many anarcho-capitalists were influenced by Rothbard, but as far as I’m aware Rothbard became an anarcho-capitalist independently of Molinari’s influence, and only discovered Molinari’s work later. Just as Aristarchus is not considered the father of heliocentrism, even though he preceded Copernicus by a millennium and a half.
I suggest you keep your stylistic considerations to yourself.
People like Bastiat and Molinari were key figures in ‘french libertarianism’ and were key figures in libertarianism with no adjectives.
“Nobody thoroughly understood capitalism until Mises.” is an assertion which is both unfounded and laughable.
So, I take it, you haven’t got the slightest idea who Molinari was, and from now on I’ll assume that your knowledge of history in general is as good as your knowledge of the French ‘economists’.
Do you disagree, Juan?
Disagree with what ?
Juan, your last ban was 3 days. This one is 5. The next one will be a week.
This is not just for this last mocking, belittling post directed at me, but also for other posts in your recent general relapse into rudeness (which is a shame, since you were being fairly decent for a while following your last ban).
And obviously this has nothing to do with your disagreeing with me, because I freely admit that I was in error, as I expressed to ViennaSausage who corrected me CIVILLY.
Rothbard said that he figured out free market anarchy on his own:
http://bkmarcus.com/blog/2007/10/how-rothbard-became-an-anarchist
So not based on someone else’s writings, and therefore Rothbard probably remains the ‘father’ of anarcho-capitalism. Didn’t he also coin the term?
He is not the first anarcho-capitalist though. And I fail to see what is different between pro-property rights anarchists, ‘market anarchists’, anarcho-capitalists and what have you.
Rothbard wrote a preface to The Production of Security:
[..] The most “extreme” and consistent, as well as the longest-lived and most prolific of the French laissez-faire economists
was the Belgian-born Gustave de Molinari (1819-1912), who edited the Journal des Economistes for several decades. The
initial article of the young Molinari, here translated for the first time as “The Production of Security,” was the first
presentation anywhere in human history of what is now called “anarcho-capitalism” or "free market anarchism**."** Molinari
did not use the terminology, and probably would have balked at the name. In contrast to all previous individualistic and
near-anarchistic thinkers, such as La Boetie, Hodgskin or the young Fichte, Molinari did not base the brunt of his
argument on a moral opposition to the State. While an ardent individualist, Molinari grounded his argument on free-
market, laissez-faire economics, and proceeded logically to ask the question: If the free market can and should supply all
other goods and services, why not also the services of protection? [..]
Rothbard seems to answer this in the very quote you posted…
A pro-property rights anarchist, according to Rothbard’s conception, wouldn’t be an anarcho-capitalist if he based his pro-property stance wholly on moral concerns, without regard to economics.
The reason he says Molinari was the first anarcho-capitalist is because he was … the first; not because he took an economic stance (note that he says those other guys are ‘near-anarchistic’). And if he did say or meant to say that (like you do), then I think that is simply wrong anyway. If you’re opposed to the state and for private property, then you are anarchistic and you are capitalistic, i.e. anarcho-capitalistic; it doesn’t matter what reasons you have for it.
PS To me, morality and economics are the same thing. http://www.vforvoluntary.com/wiki/MoralityFromASocietalPerspective