Who here wants to revive the spirit of individualist anarchism?
Posted by UniteAgainstMer... on Thu, 07/31/2008 - 7:58pm in The individualist anarchists put a very pro-labor, populist, left-wing twist on free market economics. They criticized capitalism for being inconsistent, and argued that the capitalist class got its wealth from government intervention in the market. Some of their ideas are outdated today - such as the labor theory of value - but I'm talking about reviving the spirit of that movement, not unquestioning agreement with every minor detail.
To understand what I mean, you've got to compare it with the spirit of modern libertarianism. Modern libertarianism is coming dangerously close to becoming a kind of "rich supremacism," with the idea that rich people are rich because they're super-productive Ubermenschen and the state only serves to persecute and plunder from them. This kind of thinking rests on the unstated assumption that the current system is a free market - a falsity on its face. Some libertarians do recognize that a lot of rich people are beneficiaries of government intervention, but the pro-corporate apologist libertarians get all the publicity. I believe that this is a huge factor in why libertarianism is struggling to become popular.
As Roderick Long explains here http://mises.org/story/2099 , the main reason libertarianism changed from pro-labor individualist anarchism to modern right-wing libertarianism was because of its alliance with conservatives against communism. Now that communism is dead and conservatives have totally trashed liberty, it's high time we went back to the pro-labor populism of the individualist anarchists. After all, the left has been confused and disoriented ever since the fall of communism, and they've been looking for something new. Perhaps we can be that something new.
Subscribe to this thread- Flag as offensive
- Login or register to post comments
- 261 reads
****
I wanted to add that I think without conditioning people's natural inclination would be in most cases to take the side of American Labor/workers over foreigners. A good example might be found in the Mexican Trucker situation. But on the whole I think that the labor vs. management divisions might be artificially enhanced. And by ignoring the inventor, the entrepreneur, the one man operation, ect... we may be manifesting the divisions even further.
"And by ignoring the inventor, the entrepreneur, the one man operation, ect... we may be manifesting the divisions even further."
As I explained in an earlier post, there's a political philosophy called Agorism that's closely related to individualist anarchism but includes entrepreneurs in the broader "productive class." Even the individualist anarchists themselves were supportive of self-employed entrepreneurs, though they lived in a time before the role of entrepreneurs was fully understood by economists.
"I wanted to add that I think without conditioning people's natural inclination would be in most cases to take the side of American Labor/workers over foreigners. "
That's precisely the opposite of what we should be doing. Nationality is an artificial construction of our statist overlords, and it's best not to buy into their lies. We should be smashing myths, not trying to use them in our favor.
"That's precisely the opposite of what we should be doing."
(But I came here 'cause I don't like being told what to do. :( )
As a lifelong conservative it's been a bumpy ride shedding some of my "control" instincts, but in many ways I've embraced libertarian philosophy and now understand that it's simply a matter of where our swords are pointed (either at each-other or at the "control freaks") So now I'm more inclined to support "chaos" within the boundaries of existing political institutions which are designed for the people and as a limitation on governmental and quasi-governmental authority. And here's an amusing video from my blog which may sort of explain my thoughts a little better. Because in reality the "control" crowd are often the worst kind of bumbling idiots.
http://tectonicforces.blogspot.com/search?q=chaos
that "the working class" would seem to include everyone except for those who are independently wealthy and don't work.
I agree with your slant but isn't this pro-populist stance basically accomplished by ending gov't intervention into the markets on behalf of the large corporate interests?
It is certainly another way to emphasize the benefits of libertarianism.
What baffles me is why so many people are happy to vote against their own interests, for sacrifice, temporary hardship, etc. if they are told that it will benefit the nation - which usually boils down to corporate interests. If people just voted on what was best for them (no income tax) then we'd have a strong economy and a functioning libertarian system. The mentality of "I'm fine but we need to take care of these other people (whom I've never met) that can't take care of themselves" seems to rule the day.
the name alone makes me cringe...
Government has solved the age old dilemma of the alchemists. In order to turn lead into gold, just add blood.
I grow weary hearing politicians speak of "labor" and "working Americans" ... I mean, who besides the retired, the young, and the unemployed doesn't work? Is a "working person" defined only as someone who wears overalls and works in a factory? If so, only 12 % of the US population now works. The truth is we're all members of the "working class" -- yes, even those who wear white collars -- and the Marxist distinction between managers and workers was always questionable is now just laughable. In fact, well over half the working populaton are even owners of capital by way of their participation in ESOPs, 401k plans, pension plans, and their own occasional stock purchases.
Libertarianism, not mercantalism or corporatism, provides the one and only path to freedom and prosperity. Anything else, as Hayek so famously told us, is a fatal conceit.
David
If ever a time should come when vain and aspiring men shall possess the highest seats in government, our country will stand in need of its experienced patriots to prevent its ruin. (Samuel Adams)
The working class isn't just factory workers. It's also farmers, construction workers, mechanics, etc...
According to Agorism - a philosophy closely related to individualist anarchism - even entrepreneurs and merchants are part of the broader "productive class." It's the managerial class, both government and corporate, that is the parasitic class (along with the fractional reserve bankers, of course.) Corporate managers, through the government's absurd notions of corporate personhood, control capital that they do not own. And government bureaucrats, of course, work for the government directly. Both suppress the price system, so both are anti-market.
but I'm betting on Neo-liberalism. :)
Tom Mullen
www.tommullen.net
www.myspace.com/skepticsongs
"Question with boldness even the existence of a god; because if there be one he must approve of the homage of reason more than that of blindfolded fear."
-Thomas Jefferson
Shouldn't we focus on dispelling the leftist notion that capitalism requires a permanent underclass of poor workers? I hear this all the time.
Another thing we should emphasize is that the real victims of taxation are not the rich, who know how to work the system, but everyone else: those in the middle class who feel the pinch every time they pay their taxes, and those in lower tax brackets who can't find jobs in the sluggish economy.
The problem with idealizing labor is that in a vibrant free market economy that is the condition most people want to work their way up from. Even now, there is a great deal of upward mobility in America, and low wage jobs are for most people just a rung on the ladder. Recent longitudinal studies have proven this. I would hate for us to have a class system like they do in England, where you are supposed to be proud of your working class roots and want to remain there in support of your own people.
"Shouldn't we focus on dispelling the leftist notion that capitalism requires a permanent underclass of poor workers? I hear this all the time.
Another thing we should emphasize is that the real victims of taxation are not the rich, who know how to work the system, but everyone else: those in the middle class who feel the pinch every time they pay their taxes, and those in lower tax brackets who can't find jobs in the sluggish economy."
That's essentially the idea. The individualist anarchists argue that government intervention created the underclass in the first place. For example, see "The Iron Fist behind the Invisible Hand," http://www.mutualist.org/id4.html , an article written by a contemporary individualist anarchist.