Why Anarchists and Voluntaryists Can Never Agree on Anything

Social Anarchist Analysis

If you’re a libertarian of any kind who’s been on the Internet, you’ve no doubt either seen or participated in a long and frustrating debate between the merits of two traditions which have been categorised under the L-word: social anarchism (or just anarchism) and voluntaryism (or anarcho-capitalism).
The former root themselves intellectually in the traditions of the wider anti-authoritarian left, in figures such as Mikhail Bakunin, Peter Kropotkin, and Emma Goldman, rejecting both the state and capitalism as domineering barriers to personal autonomy and social freedom. The latter root themselves in the traditions of the so-called old right, classical liberalism, and Austrian economics, looking to Murray Rothbard and Ludwig von Mises as founding fathers.

99% of the time, at least in my experience, these debates achieve nothing, entail both parties talking past one another, leave everybody fuming at the cornucopia of bad feeling and petty insults, and later make anyone…

View original post 4,034 more words

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 191 other followers