Talk:Individualist anarchism/Archive 6

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1 ← Archive 4 Archive 5 Archive 6

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 33 external links on Individualist anarchism. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:23, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Individualist anarchism. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:04, 12 September 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 10 external links on Individualist anarchism. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:34, 10 April 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 7 external links on Individualist anarchism. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:10, 21 November 2017 (UTC)

Anarcho-capitalism section

The long-standing section on anarcho-capitalism seems quite balanced in treating the views of those who do and do not consider it a form of anarchism, and there are sources though I mostly don't have them at hand to check their quality. I think it should be restored, albeit possibly with improved sourcing. The action by Davide King to remove it does not strike me as adhering to the neutral point of view. --Trovatore (talk) 01:39, 19 March 2020 (UTC)

Addendum: I completely disagree with Davide's edit summary that says we should not include it if a "majority" of sources do not. That is entirely the wrong standard. If a significant minority include it, then it should be included, but with a mention of the sources that agree and disagree. Which is pretty much the way the section was prior to removal. --Trovatore (talk) 01:42, 19 March 2020 (UTC)

Looking at the other edits that Davide had complained I reverted at the same time: The removal of the "agorism" section was similarly unjustified. The removal of the bit about Borges was possibly justified on the basis of being out of place there and maybe a little trivial, but should have been in a separate edit and justified separately. The section on Joe Peacott, I agree, should be restored, but when there's a complicated edit like that with problematic parts, in my opinion the best thing is to undo the whole edit, and then treat the pieces separately. --Trovatore (talk) 01:56, 19 March 2020 (UTC)

Trovatore, thanks for your comments and apologise for any inconvenient. I think and hope to have found some compromise. I've moved the Anarcho-capitalism section to Criticism. I think it makes more sense as it fits well with Peacott's criticism. As for agorism, I don't know; I thought it's more relevant as the anti-statist wing of libertarianism in the United States rather than to anarchism, same for anarcho-capitalism. While some authors and anarcho-capitalists may see individualist anarchism and market anarchism as synonyms, I don't think that's really true as far as I'm aware. What do you think?--Davide King (talk) 23:25, 20 March 2020 (UTC)
I think we need a balanced treatment, one that does not assume that anarchism is the same as left-anarchism just because left-anarchists think so. We should include anarcho-capitalism and agorism, while acknowledging that one major current of anarchism does not accept them as being part of anarchism. --Trovatore (talk) 03:02, 21 March 2020 (UTC)
I'm not sure there's such a thing as left-anarchism and it's not just because [so-called] left-anarchists think so; I believe this should be discussed at Anarchism and capitalism, Anarcho-capitalism and Issues in anarchism as it's already done; and I think there should be some consistency between the related articles. Anarchism is an anti-capitalism movement, if not outright broad libertarian socialism, including co-operative, labour and socialist economic theories like collectivist, communism, free-market, mutualism and syndicalism. This doesn't necessarily mean that it's against free market and property; after all, market socialism is a thing and certainly more than just the Lange model or other type of market socialism that retains the state (mutualism is one form of market anarchism/socialism). It's not even the LTV vs. the STV. It's whether anarcho-capitalism supports profit, interest, rent, leasing and other forms of usury; it's whether someone should own things like factories or land as long as one uses it or whether someone can not only be an absentee-owner of such things but even earn a profit by the virtue of merely owning them; it's whether employers and employees would be co-equal business partners, not master and servant based on amount of property; it's whether everyone would actually own property and basically be an independent producer who could come together and merge properties to form privately-owned producer cooperatives whilst not having any power over his co-producers and not being paid more than them because there would be no profit, leasing or rent, with the surplus going to all producers involved and they would sell their products on a decentralized, freed market, or whether there would still be the have and the have nots, with the only difference from modern-day state capitalism being there would be no regulation, no public state, etc. So it's not just the name. However, one thing that I think many people don't get is that anarchism isn't merely a philosophy, it's an actual movement and that has to be considered. Both agorism and anarcho-capitalism seem to be much more relevant and related to the modern libertarian movement in the United States than to the anarchist movement, much less individualist anarchism.--Davide King (talk) 09:39, 21 March 2020 (UTC)
See, this claim that anarchism is an "anti-capitalism movement" is a position specific to left-anarchists, not all anarchists. It's a violation of NPOV to state it in Wikipedia's voice. It's fine to give it with attribution to particular thinkers or currents. --Trovatore (talk) 17:47, 21 March 2020 (UTC)
Trovatore, that's not really true. The anti-capitalist tradition of classical anarchism has remained prominent within contemporary currents. Furthemore, if anarcho-capitalism is considered part of anarchism, it would be because it's anti-capitalist. Just because it's called anarcho-capitalism it doesn't mean much, really; it seems they use different definition of capitalism and both are opposed to (state) capitalism; however, it just makes no sense to use capitalism as free markets when the anarchist movement, whether communist or individualist, has agreed on capitalism itself resulting from state privileges accorded to capital, something which was supported by Rothbard himself. So the issue is whether anarcho-capitalism is anti-capitalist and anarcho-capitalist principles are in line with anarchy or whether it results in private-state capitalism; and whether the society advocated by anarcho-capitalism is basically the same as that advocated by individualist anarchists (who supported free(d) markets, laissez-faire and free competition because it would result in anarchy; as can be seen by Tucker's later doubts about whether it can end concentrated capital, etc.), or whether it's pretty much modern-day capitalism and all its privileges but without any government (which isn't the same thing as a state), regulation and keeping all its resulting hierarchies in place.--Davide King (talk) 23:36, 21 March 2020 (UTC)
See, here you're arguing internal theory. I'd be happy to argue that with you in a different venue. But the important thing here from an NPOV perspective is that to exclude anarcho-capitalism and agorism would be to accept one anarchist tradition's claim to be the whole of anarchism. By way of an imperfect analogy, it would kind of like not including the Jehovah's Witnesses as a Christian school because they have a very incompatible Christology from more well-known branches Christianity. I don't think that would fly, and this shouldn't either. --Trovatore (talk) 23:48, 21 March 2020 (UTC)
I think the issue is still that in reliable sources they're much more relevant and related to the modern libertarian movement in the United States, so I don't think your example apply. Again, the anti-capitalist tradition of classical anarchism has remained prominent within contemporary currents (Williams 2018, p. 4) and anarchists oppose all centralized and hierarchical forms of government (e.g., monarchy, representative democracy, state socialism, etc.), economic class systems (e.g., capitalism, Bolshevism, feudalism, slavery, etc.), autocratic religions (e.g., fundamentalist Islam, Roman Catholicism, etc.), patriarchy, heterosexism, white supremacy, and imperialism" (Jun 2009, pp. 507–508). Are anarcho-capitalism and agorism actually discussed as important and notable in reliable sources that talk about the anarchist movement and its history, other than a passable mention that basically says what we already write here?--Davide King (talk) 00:00, 22 March 2020 (UTC)

Contradiction of labels

The page is very well-sourced in general, but I consider it a bit flawed regarding a few labels for certain thinkers and the ideology itself. To begin with, the ideology is labeled as a Libertarian Socialist ideology, to which by itself I don't have any issue with since many of its important writers identified themselves with that term (say, Benjamin Tucker or Pierre-Joseph Proudhon), but it also, in the second paragraph calls Herbert Spencer part of the Individualist Anarchists. It completely contradicts itself since, after all, Herbert Spencer was a supporter of Laissez-Faire economics and was staunchingly oppossed to Socialism, even going as far to call it enslavement to the community. To which I also find contradictory the exclusion of Rothbardian Anarchism/Anarcho-Capitalism from the ideology because it "Individualist Anarchism is a Socialist movement", while having a staunching anti-socialist as one of the examples. Furthermore, it also fits the fourth type of Individualist Anarchism which "retains a moderated form of egoism and accounts for social cooperation through the advocacy of market relationships" and "anarchist individualists 'are firm in the idea that the system of employer and employed, buying and selling, banking, and all the other essential institutions of Commercialism, centred upon private property, are in themselves good, and are rendered vicious merely by the interference of the State'. It seems to me that the exclusion of Capitalist Anarchism is a mere issue of semantics, specifically about the meaning of Capitalism, for the most part. Furthermore, and this would be more of a semantics issue as well, Lysander Spooner is also included (which by itself I have no issue with), but I think it also conflicts the idea of Individualist Anarchism being part of the Libertarian Socialist category. First off, there is no actual source of Lysander Spooner ever calling himself a "Socialist", and the claim of him being part of the First International is dubious at most, the only source being a book written in the 60s by George Woodbook with no citations; and second off, calling Lysander Spooner a Socialist contradicts the very definition of Socialism exposed in its respective page, the only thing that could make Lysander Spooner a Socialist is his criticism of wage labor, which he didn't oppose from a legal standpoint. Unless Lysander Spooner is the first ever Socialist to be pro-usury[1], pro-market, pro-interest, & pro-rent,[2] then either the Individualist Anarchism page being part of the category of Libertarian Socialism or both Lysander Spooner and Herbert Spencer being exposed as Individualist Anarchists should be changed, and I don't think anybody would say that Lysander Spooner isn't an Individualist Anarchist nor anyone would deny Herbert Spencer's influence. Thus, and also due to it being impartial (giving the opinion of authors in favor of the idea of Individualist Anarchism being Socialistic more importance than those that don't) I'd like to eliminate Individualist Anarchism from the Libertarian Socialist category. -- Coindorni (talk) 15:10, 24 August 2021 (UTC) -- Edited: 02:11, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

Herbert is presented as having an influence on individualist anarchism, however there aren't many people who actually describe his as an anarchist. BeŻet (talk) 09:24, 31 August 2021 (UTC)
I agree with Coindorni. Individualist anarchism is not necessarily socialist. Ancap is definitely a form of individualist anarchism. (See the new diagram.) Also, I agree that we have definitional issues with both "capitalism" and "socialism." Both terms have changed considerably in meaning over time, and what people called "socialism" in the 19th century is not what we generally call socialism today. The Wikipedia article on socialism defines it in terms of collective ownership. This article seems to play loose with the definition, construing it as support for some form of the labor theory of value. So we have people like Benjamin Tucker who supports private property (of the possession sort) but also has a labor theory of value. He is both capitalist and socialist? I would call him a capitalist, due to his support for private property and free markets, but not a socialist in the modern pro-collective (anti-private) property sense. PhilLiberty (talk) 21:09, 22 January 2022 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ Spooner, Lysander (1846). Poverty: Its Illegal Causes and Legal Cure. Boston: Bela Marsh.
  2. ^ Spooner, Lysander (1855). The Law of Intellectual Property; or An Essay on the Right of Authors and Inventors to a Perpetual Property in their Ideas. Boston: Bela Marsh. Section VI
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Individualist_anarchism/Archive_6&oldid=1168476390"