You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: Defeat Socialism, before it is too late!
I wrote a paper about anarchism in college. In order to address all the nuance properly, I separate out non-socialist variants as being distinctly separate philosophically and then focused on the socialist variants. In short, I found all socialist variants of anarchism to be completely untenable (effectively they ride the coat-tails of capitalism and serve well as counter-cultural movements to curb the excesses of capitalism, but they would be completely unsustainable on their own).
In practice I'm rather moderate because I think radical social change would be too disruptive to result in philosophically 'pure' outcomes, but philosophically I'm an anarcho-capitalist. (Which you see in the voluntaryist design of my work here on Steem).
Any links to your work?
I'm interested in knowing the parameters of your research because some things you say are incongruent with my understanding of anarchism.
For instance, an-crap is a contradiction in terms.
Ultimately, for me, it comes down to being ruled by force, or not.
Rule by force is the disease, who and how are symptoms.
Keep working, stop paying.
I think the contradiction in terms was why I excluded the whole ancap movement from my paper, but it was at least fifteen years ago. It was just a paper for a class, not a full thesis or anything. I checked my old blog from college and I never published it there, which means it remains unpublished.
Anarchist, or not an anarchist?