1
Appendix - Is "anarcho"-capitalism a type of anarchism?
3
Anyone who has followed political discussion on the net has probably
4
come across people calling themselves libertarians but arguing from a
5
right-wing, pro-capitalist perspective. For most Europeans this is
6
weird, as in Europe the term "libertarian" is almost always used in
7
conjunction with "socialist" or "communist." In the US, though, the
8
Right has partially succeeded in appropriating this term for itself.
9
Even stranger, however, is that a few of these right-wingers have
10
started calling themselves "anarchists" in what must be one of the
11
finest examples of an oxymoron in the English language:
12
'Anarcho-capitalist'!!
14
Arguing with fools is seldom rewarded, but to allow their foolishness
15
to go unchallenged risks allowing them to deceive those who are new to
16
anarchism. That's what this section of the anarchist FAQ is for, to
17
show why the claims of these "anarchist" capitalists are false.
18
Anarchism has always been anti-capitalist and any "anarchism" that
19
claims otherwise cannot be part of the anarchist tradition. So this
20
section of the FAQ does not reflect some kind of debate within
21
anarchism, as many of these types like to pretend, but a debate between
22
anarchism and its old enemy, capitalism. In many ways this debate
23
mirrors the one between Peter Kropotkin and Herbert Spencer, an English
24
pro-capitalist, minimal statist, at the turn the 19th century and, as
25
such, it is hardly new.
27
The "anarcho"-capitalist argument hinges on using the dictionary
28
definition of "anarchism" and/or "anarchy" - they try to define
29
anarchism as being "opposition to government," and nothing else.
30
However, dictionaries are hardly politically sophisticated and their
31
definitions rarely reflect the wide range of ideas associated with
32
political theories and their history. Thus the dictionary "definition"
33
is anarchism will tend to ignore its consistent views on authority,
34
exploitation, property and capitalism (ideas easily discovered if
35
actual anarchist texts are read). And, of course, many dictionaries
36
"define" anarchy as "chaos" or "disorder" but we never see
37
"anarcho"-capitalists use that particular definition!
39
And for this strategy to work, a lot of "inconvenient" history and
40
ideas from all branches of anarchism must be ignored. From
41
individualists like Spooner and Tucker to communists like Kropotkin and
42
Malatesta, anarchists have always been anti-capitalist (see [1]section
43
G for more on the anti-capitalist nature of individualist anarchism).
44
Therefore "anarcho"-capitalists are not anarchists in the same sense
47
Of course, we cannot stop the "anarcho"-capitalists using the words
48
"anarcho", "anarchism" and "anarchy" to describe their ideas. The
49
democracies of the west could not stop the Chinese Stalinist state
50
calling itself the People's Republic of China. Nor could the social
51
democrats stop the fascists in Germany calling themselves "National
52
Socialists". Nor could the Italian anarcho-syndicalists stop the
53
fascists using the expression "National Syndicalism". This does not
54
mean that any of these movements actual name reflected their content --
55
China is a dictatorship, not a democracy, the Nazi's were not
56
socialists (capitalists made fortunes in Nazi Germany because it
57
crushed the labour movement), and the Italian fascist state had nothing
58
in common with anarcho-syndicalists ideas of decentralised, "from the
59
bottom up" unions and the abolition of the state and capitalism.
61
Therefore, just because someone uses a label it does not mean that they
62
support the ideas associated with that label. And this is the case with
63
"anarcho"-capitalism -- its ideas are at odds with the key ideas
64
associated with all forms of traditional anarchism (even individualist
65
anarchism which is often claimed as being a forefather of the
68
All we can do is indicate why "anarcho"-capitalism is not part of the
69
anarchist tradition and so has falsely appropriated the name. This
70
section of the FAQ aims to do just that -- present the case why
71
"anarcho"-capitalists are not anarchists. We do this, in part, by
72
indicating where they differ from genuine anarchists (on such essential
73
issues as private property, equality, exploitation and opposition to
74
hierarchy) In addition, we take the opportunity to present a general
75
critique of right-libertarian claims from an anarchist perspective. In
76
this way we show up why anarchists reject that theory as being opposed
77
to liberty and anarchist ideals.
79
We are covering this topic in an anarchist FAQ for three reasons.
80
Firstly, the number of "libertarian" and "anarcho"-capitalists on the
81
net means that those seeking to find out about anarchism may conclude
82
that they are "anarchists" as well. Secondly, unfortunately, some
83
academics and writers have taken their claims of being anarchists at
84
face value and have included their ideology into general accounts of
85
anarchism. These two reasons are obviously related and hence the need
86
to show the facts of the matter. As we have extensively documented in
87
earlier sections, anarchist theory has always been anti-capitalist.
88
There is no relationship between anarchism and capitalism, in any form.
89
Therefore, there is a need for this section in order to indicate
90
exactly why "anarcho"-capitalism is not anarchist. As will be quickly
91
seen from our discussion, almost all anarchists who become aware of
92
"anarcho"-capitalism quickly reject it as a form of anarchism (the
93
better academic accounts do note that anarchists generally reject the
94
claim, though). The last reason is to provide other anarchists with
95
arguments and evidence to use against "anarcho"-capitalism and its
96
claims of being a new form of "anarchism."
98
So this section of the FAQ does not, as we noted above, represent some
99
kind of "debate" within anarchism. It reflects the attempt by
100
anarchists to reclaim the history and meaning of anarchism from those
101
who are attempting to steal its name (just as right-wingers in America
102
have attempted to appropriate the name "libertarian" for their
103
pro-capitalist views, and by so doing ignore over 100 years of
104
anti-capitalist usage). However, this section also serves two other
105
purposes. Firstly, critiquing right-libertarian and
106
"anarcho"-capitalist theories allows us to explain anarchist ones at
107
the same time and indicate why they are better. Secondly, and more
108
importantly, the "ideas" and "ideals" that underlie
109
"anarcho"-capitalism are usually identical (or, at the very least,
110
similar) to those of neo-liberalism. This was noted by Bob Black in the
111
early 1980s, when a "wing of the Reaganist Right has obviously
112
appropriated, with suspect selectivity, such libertarian themes as
113
deregulation and voluntarism. Ideologues indignant that Reagan has
114
travestied their principles. Tough shit! I notice that it's their
115
principles, not mine, that he found suitable to travesty." [The
116
Libertarian As Conservative] This was echoed by Noam Chomsky two
117
decades later when while "nobody takes [right-wing libertarianism]
118
seriously" as "everybody knows that a society that worked by . . .
119
[its] principles would self-destruct in three seconds" the "only
120
reason" why some people "pretend to take it seriously is because you
121
can use it as a weapon." [Understanding Power, p. 200] As
122
neo-liberalism is being used as the ideological basis of the current
123
attack on the working class, critiquing "anarcho"-capitalism and
124
right-libertarianism also allows use to build theoretical weapons to
125
use to resist this attack and aid the class struggle.
127
A few more points before beginning. When debating with "libertarian" or
128
"anarchist" capitalists it's necessary to remember that while they
129
claim "real capitalism" does not exist (because all existing forms of
130
capitalism are statist), they will claim that all the good things we
131
have -- advanced medical technology, consumer choice of products, etc.
132
-- are nevertheless due to "capitalism." Yet if you point out any
133
problems in modern life, these will be blamed on "statism." Since there
134
has never been and never will be a capitalist system without some sort
135
of state, it's hard to argue against this "logic." Many actually use
136
the example of the Internet as proof of the power of "capitalism,"
137
ignoring the fact that the state paid for its development before
138
turning it over to companies to make a profit from it. Similar points
139
can be made about numerous other products of "capitalism" and the world
140
we live in. To artificially separate one aspect of a complex evolution
141
fails to understand the nature and history of the capitalist system.
143
In addition to this ability to be selective about the history and
144
results of capitalism, their theory has a great "escape clause." If
145
wealthy employers abuse their power or the rights of the working class
146
(as they have always done), then they have (according to "libertarian"
147
ideology) ceased to be capitalists! This is based upon the
148
misperception that an economic system that relies on force cannot be
149
capitalistic. This is very handy as it can absolve the ideology from
150
blame for any (excessive) oppression which results from its practice.
151
Thus individuals are always to blame, not the system that generated the
152
opportunities for abuse they freely used.
154
Anarchism has always been aware of the existence of "free market"
155
capitalism, particularly its extreme (minimal state) wing, and has
156
always rejected it. As we discuss in [2]section 7, anarchists from
157
Proudhon onwards have rejected the idea of any similar aims and goals
158
(and, significantly, vice versa). As academic Alan Carter notes,
159
anarchist concern for equality as a necessary precondition for genuine
160
freedom means "that is one very good reason for not confusing
161
anarchists with liberals or economic 'libertarians' -- in other words,
162
for not lumping together everyone who is in some way or another
163
critical of the state. It is why calling the likes of Nozick
164
'anarchists' is highly misleading." ["Some notes on 'Anarchism'", pp.
165
141-5, Anarchist Studies, vol. 1, no. 2, p. 143] So anarchists have
166
evaluated "free market" capitalism and rejected it as non-anarchist for
167
over 150 years. Attempts by "anarcho"-capitalism to say that their
168
system is "anarchist" flies in the face of this long history of
169
anarchist analysis. That some academics fall for their attempts to
170
appropriate the anarchist label for their ideology is down to a false
171
premise: it "is judged to be anarchism largely because some
172
anarcho-capitalists say they are 'anarchists' and because they
173
criticise the State." [Peter Sabatini, Social Anarchism, no. 23, p.
176
More generally, we must stress that most (if not all) anarchists do not
177
want to live in a society just like this one but without state coercion
178
and (the initiation of) force. Anarchists do not confuse "freedom" with
179
the "right" to govern and exploit others nor with being able to change
180
masters. It is not enough to say we can start our own (co-operative)
181
business in such a society. We want the abolition of the capitalist
182
system of authoritarian relationships, not just a change of bosses or
183
the possibility of little islands of liberty within a sea of capitalism
184
(islands which are always in danger of being flooded and our activity
185
destroyed). Thus, in this section of the FAQ, we analysis many
186
"anarcho"-capitalist claims on their own terms (for example, the
187
importance of equality in the market or why capitalism cannot be
188
reformed away by exchanges on the capitalist market) but that does not
189
mean we desire a society nearly identical to the current one. Far from
190
it, we want to transform this society into one more suited for
191
developing and enriching individuality and freedom. But before we can
192
achieve that we must critically evaluate the current society and point
193
out its basic limitations.
195
Finally, we dedicate this section of the FAQ to those who have seen the
196
real face of "free market" capitalism at work: the working men and
197
women (anarchist or not) murdered in the jails and concentration camps
198
or on the streets by the hired assassins of capitalism.
202
1. file://localhost/home/mauro/baku/debianize/maint/anarchy/secGcon.html
203
2. file://localhost/home/mauro/baku/debianize/maint/anarchy/append137.html
added
removed
txt/append13int.txt
