From: "Mark Waller" <malcontent-AT-ev1.net>
Subject: RE: New book on anti-capitalism
Date: Tue, 15 Jun 2004 11:42:20 -0500


Pro-capitalist viewpoints are off-topic for an anarchist list.  I reject
attempts to redefine anarchism to support capitalism.  Everyone has the
right to express their view in a free market of ideas.  But anarchists
should be allowed a safe place to dialogue amongst ourselves, unmolested by
those who try to tell us that unchecked profiteering somehow creates the
best society for everyone.  I don't go to Libertarian lists and tell them to
abandon capitalism; nor do I go to Socialist lists and tell them to abandon
the state.  I would hope that non-anarchists will likewise refrain from
coming in and preaching their views.  It is as welcome as Satanists
recruiting at the Southern Baptist Convention.  Maybe they could be allowed
one round of coming in and respectfully letting us know about views
different from our own, but beyond that, if they persist in pushing their
unwelcome ideas, it is abuse of the medium.

I recognize that Mr. Johnson has at least been respectful in tone.  Thank
you.

I recommend that anarchists on this list ignore the Libertarian spammer(s).
Anyone who is genuinely interested in the arguments and counterarguments on
this topic might benefit from consulting the Anarchist FAQ,
(http://www.infoshop.org/faq/) a document that was originally written to
explain the fallacy of the whole concept of anarcho-capitalism.

I am not telling anyone what to do.  My preference is that anyone who wants
to debate anarcho-capitalism do so off-list.  In my opinion, it is
distracting, divisive, and inappropriate for the list.  That's all I'll say
on the topic, and if anyone wishes to persist with it on the list, I will
just ignore it from here on out.

I include below the table of contents of section F of the FAQ.  If any of
the listed topics/questions appeal to you, go to the link above and read the
details.

-Mark Waller
Houston

Section F - Is "anarcho"-capitalism a type of anarchism?

Introduction

F.1 Are "anarcho"-capitalists really anarchists?

F.1.1 Why is the failure to renounce hierarchy the Achilles Heel of
right-wing libertarianism and "anarcho"-capitalism?
F.1.2 How libertarian is right-Libertarian theory?
F.1.3 Is right-Libertarian theory scientific in nature?

F.2 What do "anarcho"-capitalists mean by "freedom?"

F.2.1 What are the implications of defining liberty in terms of (property)
rights?
F.2.2 How does private property affect freedom?
F.2.3 Can "anarcho"-capitalist theory justify the state?
F.2.4 But surely transactions on the market are voluntary?
F.2.5 But surely circumstances are the result of liberty and so cannot be
objected to?
F.2.6 Do Libertarian-capitalists support slavery?
F.2.7 But surely abolishing capitalism would restrict liberty?
F.2.8 Why should we reject the "anarcho"-capitalist definitions of freedom
and justice?

F.3 Why do "anarcho"-capitalists generally place little or no value on
"equality," and what do they mean by that term?
F.3.1 Why is this disregard for equality important?
F.3.2 But what about "anarcho"-capitalist support for charity?

F.4 What is the right-libertarian position on private property?
F.4.1 What is wrong with a "homesteading" theory of property?
F.4.2 Why is the "Lockean Proviso" important?
F.4.3 How does private property affect individualism?
F.4.4 How does private property affect relationships?
F.4.5 Does private property co-ordinate without hierarchy?

F.5 Will privatising "the commons" increase liberty?

F.6 Is "anarcho" capitalism against the state?
F.6.1 What's wrong with this "free market" justice?
F.6.2 What are the social consequences of such a system?
F.6.3 But surely Market Forces will stop abuse by the rich?
F.6.4 Why are these "defence associations" states?
F.6.5 What other effects would "free market" justice have?

F.7 What is the myth of "Natural Law"?
F.7.1 Why "Natural Law" in the first place?
F.7.2 But "Natural Law" provides protection for individual rights from
violation by the State. Those against Natural Law desire total rule by the
state.
F.7.3 Why is "Natural Law" authoritarian?
F.7.4 Does "Natural Law" actually provides protection for individual
liberty?
F.7.5 But Natural Law was discovered, not invented!
F.7.6 Why is the notion of "discovery" contradictory?

F.8 What role did the state take in the creation of capitalism?
F.8.1 What social forces lay behind the rise of capitalism?
F.8.2 What was the social context of the statement "laissez-faire"?
F.8.3 What other forms did state intervention in creating capitalism take?
F.8.4 Aren't the enclosures a socialist myth?
F.8.5 What about the lack of enclosures in the Americas?
F.8.6 How did working people view the rise of capitalism?
F.8.7 Why is the history of capitalism important?

F.9 Is Medieval Iceland an example of "anarcho"-capitalism working in
practice?

F.10 Would laissez-faire capitalism be stable?
F.10.1 Would privatising banking make capitalism stable?
F.10.2 How does the labour market effect capitalism?
F.10.3 Was laissez-faire capitalism stable?