ARCHOCAPITALISM- Jersey Flight

I have crossed paths with several anarchists in my time, but they all seem to exemplify the same traits: superficial theory secured by authentic devotion. I know the anarchist to be a man or woman of conviction, but this does not exempt them from ignorance or shallow politics. I am as the hammer to the anarchist mirror.

"The anarchist has no belief in authority." This seems to be the Anarchist contradiction; the great Anarchist lie. Poor ignorant fellow, someone told you you could bypass the means of authority. Confusion! You simply want to replace collective authority with private authority. In all truth, your system is a system of tyranny!

Where does the individuality of Anarchism lead as one seeks to multiply the variables of a group so as to become a society? Anarcho-Capitalism cannot scale up; it is a violent formula to scale down!

Suppose a man wants to take your goods by force; who should stop him? Suppose a man rejects your capitalist theology/ will you force him to abide by Capitalist rules?

I suspect you will think I'm confused, but the reality is that the Archocapitalist has been duped (indoctrinated) into a shallow system of theology.

[Citing an instance of governmental abuse is not an argument for the abnegation of government.]

ANARCHO-CAPITALISM IN CONTEXT

"Anarcho-capitalism, in my opinion, is a doctrinal system which, if ever implemented, would lead to forms of tyranny and oppression that have few counterparts in human history. There isn't the slightest possibility that its (in my view, horrendous) ideas would be implemented, because they would quickly destroy any society that made this colossal error."-Noam Chomsky

Rational Wiki: "Anarcho" -capitalism is a fringe political philosophy that mainly exists online and at reactionary think tanks. It has never constituted a social movement or organized power. It's one of the youngest philosophies to place itself under the umbrella of "anarchism", having only existed as a discrete philosophy for a few decades...

"Anarcho-capitalism faces criticism from capitalists who support the existence of the state. On the other hand, anarcho-capitalists have accused them of not being true capitalists. Critics claim private defense agencies could create defense monopolies. Some critics claim they will be like mafia groups, and a "gang war" will arise among them. Anarcho-capitalists have dismissed this criticism by claiming that free market competition will prevent monopolies. Additionally, the other anarchist schools of thought stand united in critiquing anarcho-capitalism as not anarchism, since the rest view capitalism as inherently oppressive and hierarchical. Some have labeled anarcho-capitalism to be merely "private state capitalism." Minarchist (minimal government) libertarians may support most of the same things as anarcho-capitalists - private roads, private certification associations replacing occupational licensing - but view complete anarchism as unworkable and recognize a need for a small government remaining in place to prevent the emergence of tyranny out of a power vacuum." [Rational Wiki] 

THE TRUTH ABOUT ARCHOCAPITALISM

"The philosophy of "anarcho-capitalism" dreamed up by the "libertarian" New Right, has nothing to do with Anarchism as known by the Anarchist movement proper." Meltzer, Albert. Anarchism: Arguments For and Against AK Press, (2000) p. 50

"In fact, few anarchists would accept the 'anarcho-capitalists' into the anarchist camp since they do not share a concern for economic equality and social justice. Their self-interested, calculating market men would be incapable of practising voluntary co-operation and mutual aid. Anarcho-capitalists, even if they do reject the State, might therefore best be called right-wing libertarians rather than anarchists." Peter Marshall. Demanding the impossible: A history of anarchism. Harper Perennial. London. 2008. Pg. 565

"It is important to distinguish between anarchism and certain strands of right-wing libertarianism which at times go by the same name (for example, Murray Rothbard's anarcho-capitalism)."Saul Newman, The Politics of Postanarchism, Edinburgh University Press, 2010, pg. 43

"'Libertarian' and 'libertarianism' are frequently employed by anarchists as synonyms for 'anarchist' and 'anarchism', largely as an attempt to distance themselves from the negative connotations of 'anarchy' and its derivatives. The situation has been vastly complicated in recent decades with the rise of anarcho-capitalism, 'minimal statism' and an extreme right-wing laissez-faire philosophy advocated by such theorists as Murray Rothbard and Robert Nozick and their adoption of the words 'libertarian' and 'libertarianism'. It has therefore now become necessary to distinguish between their right libertarianism and the left libertarianism of the anarchist tradition." Anarchist seeds beneath the snow: left libertarian thought and British writers from William Morris to Colin Ward by David Goodway. Liverpool University Press. Liverpool. 2006

Anacho-Capitalists represent the fundamental branch of the Libertarian line.

Archocapitalists are not Anarchists.

Capitalism does not equal freedom. Capitalism does not lead to social justice, by its very nature it is a system of inequality (ruthless and violent competition); it is the very antithesis of cooperation!

It is always telling to ask an Ultra Conservative (Libertarian) what it would take to falsify the system of capital. Indeed, for the true capital-fascist the real problem is that capitalism has not been capitalistic enough!

It stands to reason that people in general are superficial, just the term, anarcho-capital, is enough to make some people converts (as they fancy the anarcho part).

The very nature of this term stands against all that capitalism is. Capitalism is a system of arbitrary authority, that is to say, power based on wealth which has been accumulated by the exploitation of people.

And one day you will be a vagrant in the Rich Man's streets, and He will throw you into prison by the power of purchasing law, and you will work for the rest of your days, and He will own you, and He will exact the profits of your labor.

Where is the criticism of capital? Poor thinkers have no knowledge of the internal tension between their ideas... they cannot see where their propositions contradict. If you are an anarcho-capitalist then you have need of greater consciousness... you have need of greater comprehension when it comes to the topic of capitalism and all that capitalism entails.

By "free market" the Archocapitalist simply means "unregulated market," but the worse part is that the Archocapitalist attempts to conclude a Utopia from this!

ARCHOCAPITALISM IS STATISM

"...a society without an organized government would be at the mercy of the first criminal who came along and who would precipitate it into the chaos of gang warfare... it is the need of... an arbiter for honest disagreements among men that necessitates the establishment of a government." Ayn Rand,"The Nature of Government,” The Virtue of Selfishness, pg. 112

The Archocapitalist (as in Archocapitalism) must protect the principle of (C). That is to say, in order to have Archocapitalism one must deal with those who dissent; those who would thwart the methods of capital. And in order to do this it will be absolutely necessary to "enforce" the claim of capital (those who claim the exclusive right of accumulation). Should one protest the claim of capital, the Archocapitalist must have a way to "protect" this so-called "freedom" or else surrender his model of capital.

The point is that there is no way around it; the violence the Archocapitalist would seek to protest is the same kind of violence his capitalism creates!

(C) is not a universal principle, but must be "enforced" if a society would be capitalistic. [Enter here the existence of the State.]

(S) is necessary to secure the existence of (C). And because the emphasis of (A) is that of (C), just so long as (S) is necessary to (C), then the existence of (A) will automatically entail the existence of (S). The damning conclusion is that (S) is necessary to the system of (A)!

This means the complaint against (S) (as so generated by the Archocapitalist) is contradictory. The point is that Archocapitalism is not a form of Anarchism, but merely another version of Statism!

In order to refute this the Archocapitalist must show that (S) is not necessary to the existence of (C). But how can he do this when the very essence of capitalism is that of private property?

Archocapitalism is the rhetorical invention of Libertarians. 

-
-