T Nation

Road to Libertarianisme/ Anarcho-Capitalisme?

I see there are many libertarians and anarcho-capitalists in here. They have explained many times what they
think society should look like, but I have not seen a explanation on there strategy on how to change the current society to a libertarian/anarcho-capitalist society.

can you libertarian guys in here explain this? It would be interresting.

Not an anarcho-capitalist, but I’ve looked into it a bit and this is one strategy I’ve heard of: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agorism

The views of the Cato Institute are a bit more realistic.

Awareness, that is the only possible way. However, with all the different strategies the thing that comes to light most often in conversation is that the only way to come to that state of society is by non-acceptance of aggression by anyone, especially by the states. Period.

Now, I know we have gone back and forth about what is best. And I think we can both agree that keeping the state out of the equation would work both for true communism and true capitalism equally. Anarchy is the absence of the State, not the direction of how the people co-operate. Capitalism and communism deal the with later.

Most of the stuff on Cato, yes.
We’re going to need some cuts to entitlement spending, some checks on executive power, elimination of some industrial/agricultural subsidies, reform of the penal system. There are definitely incremental steps to be made.

[quote]AlisaV wrote:
Most of the stuff on Cato, yes.
We’re going to need some cuts to entitlement spending, some checks on executive power, elimination of some industrial/agricultural subsidies, reform of the penal system. There are definitely incremental steps to be made.[/quote]

?? I could be reading his post wrong, but I’m fairly sure he’s talking about anarchy. Libertarianism is often used as just another name for anarcho-capitalism or market anarchy. I don’t think he’s referring to limited government here.

[quote]Dabba wrote:
Not an anarcho-capitalist, but I’ve looked into it a bit and this is one strategy I’ve heard of: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agorism[/quote]

ok. in the text you linked it was talked about a privat defence force who would challenge the state,
to me the state is the police and the military, if the state dont have this violent forces, its not a state
anymore. its sounds like they want to bring about a different form of state, a bit mafia-isch.

[quote]Dabba wrote:

[quote]AlisaV wrote:
Most of the stuff on Cato, yes.
We’re going to need some cuts to entitlement spending, some checks on executive power, elimination of some industrial/agricultural subsidies, reform of the penal system. There are definitely incremental steps to be made.[/quote]

?? I could be reading his post wrong, but I’m fairly sure he’s talking about anarchy. Libertarianism is often used as just another name for anarcho-capitalism or market anarchy. I don’t think he’s referring to limited government here.
[/quote]

I should have been clearer. I ment anarcho-capitalisme, not classical-liberalisme or what you americans
call libertarianisme.

[quote]florelius wrote:
I see there are many libertarians and anarcho-capitalists in here. They have explained many times what they
think society should look like, but I have not seen a explanation on there strategy on how to change the current society to a libertarian/anarcho-capitalist society.

can you libertarian guys in here explain this? It would be interresting.[/quote]

The only way to bring about a nonaggressive, naturally ordered society is to change people’s beliefs about the legitimacy of coercive authority.

It is not something that can be brought about by “policy” but rather only when people – by a very large majority – ignore authority.

[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:

[quote]florelius wrote:
I see there are many libertarians and anarcho-capitalists in here. They have explained many times what they
think society should look like, but I have not seen a explanation on there strategy on how to change the current society to a libertarian/anarcho-capitalist society.

can you libertarian guys in here explain this? It would be interresting.[/quote]

The only way to bring about a nonaggressive, naturally ordered society is to change people’s beliefs about the legitimacy of coercive authority.

It is not something that can be brought about by “policy” but rather only when people – by a very large majority – ignore authority.[/quote]

ok, then how do you as an anarchist work to change peoples minds about authority?

Have you read any of what I have written on the subject and do you agree with my ideas as I have written them?

That is the only way I know how to change people’s minds – with dialog, by pointing to reality and showing people (with logic) why things are the way they are.

There is no ‘e’ at the end of ‘libertarianism’.

Nor ‘Capitalism’, nor ‘Socialism’.

[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
Have you read any of what I have written on the subject and do you agree with my ideas as I have written them?

That is the only way I know how to change people’s minds – with dialog, by pointing to reality and showing people (with logic) why things are the way they are.[/quote]

I tried to get a bit more spesific answer from you. but ok, your strategy is to talk with people. but do you think about joining or forming a organisation/party for anarcho-capitalisme.

I asked about this after talking to erasmus ( a dutch anarcho-capitalist in here ) in the “liberty in socialisme” tread. as a communist my ideal society is also anarchisme ( offcourse anarcho-socialist ), but we have a more specific gameplan/strategy than other anarchists. And our strategy is offcourse socialisme.

[quote]Otep wrote:
There is no ‘e’ at the end of ‘libertarianism’.

Nor ‘Capitalism’, nor ‘Socialism’.[/quote]

I am norwegian, my english spelling is not perfect. sometimes I spell words like they are in norwegian.
socialism in norwegian is sosialisme. capitalism is kapitalisme and so on…

hope you did not get to butt hust because I spelled the words wrong :wink:

[quote]florelius wrote:

[quote]Otep wrote:
There is no ‘e’ at the end of ‘libertarianism’.

Nor ‘Capitalism’, nor ‘Socialism’.[/quote]

I am norwegian, my english spelling is not perfect. sometimes I spell words like they are in norwegian.
socialism in norwegian is sosialisme. capitalism is kapitalisme and so on…

hope you did not get to butt hust because I spelled the words wrong ;)[/quote]

I assure you, my butt was not hust due to your misspelling.

I understand your spelling is not perfect, and to be honest, I’m impressed with your grasp of English, though I assume it’s par for the course where you come from. But since it’s gone on for several months now, I can only assume no one has pointed out this mistake to you. I figured I’d be the first.

[quote]Otep wrote:

[quote]florelius wrote:

[quote]Otep wrote:
There is no ‘e’ at the end of ‘libertarianism’.

Nor ‘Capitalism’, nor ‘Socialism’.[/quote]

I am norwegian, my english spelling is not perfect. sometimes I spell words like they are in norwegian.
socialism in norwegian is sosialisme. capitalism is kapitalisme and so on…

hope you did not get to butt hust because I spelled the words wrong ;)[/quote]

I assure you, my butt was not hust due to your misspelling.

I understand your spelling is not perfect, and to be honest, I’m impressed with your grasp of English, though I assume it’s par for the course where you come from. But since it’s gone on for several months now, I can only assume no one has pointed out this mistake to you. I figured I’d be the first.[/quote]

I did point it out but I guessed he dismissed it as part of my bourgeous indoctrination.

[quote]Otep wrote:

[quote]florelius wrote:

[quote]Otep wrote:
There is no ‘e’ at the end of ‘libertarianism’.

Nor ‘Capitalism’, nor ‘Socialism’.[/quote]

I am norwegian, my english spelling is not perfect. sometimes I spell words like they are in norwegian.
socialism in norwegian is sosialisme. capitalism is kapitalisme and so on…

hope you did not get to butt hust because I spelled the words wrong ;)[/quote]

I assure you, my butt was not hust due to your misspelling.

I understand your spelling is not perfect, and to be honest, I’m impressed with your grasp of English, though I assume it’s par for the course where you come from. But since it’s gone on for several months now, I can only assume no one has pointed out this mistake to you. I figured I’d be the first.[/quote]

ok. I tought you were being a dick for the fun of it, but if you pointed it out to help, I am ok with it.

and orion: haha… very funny:)

[quote]florelius wrote:
ok. in the text you linked it was talked about a privat defence force who would challenge the state,
to me the state is the police and the military, if the state dont have this violent forces, its not a state
anymore. its sounds like they want to bring about a different form of state, a bit mafia-isch.[/quote]

To an anarcho-capitalist, the state is simply institutionalized violence. A business with a monopoly on force and coercion. What they want is a voluntary society, where people can opt out of laws and thus have the ability to not pay for a business’ services. Of course, then they don’t have the protection of laws. This is something you can’t do with a state. If you want to look into it more, you should look up David D. Friedman (son of Milton Friedman). He has some of the best ideas about how an anarcho-capitalist society would look like IMO. Unfortunately, he seems to be rather vague as to how to transition to that society, but I haven’t read THAT much from him yet.

IMO, the reason why anarcho-capitalists aren’t seen as anarchists by you guys on the left is because you view private property essentially as coercion. Therefore, you must have institutionalized violence in order to prevent private property from arising. Anarcho-capitalists on the other hand, view communal property as coercion due to this very reason! I’m probably not the best at summing up anarcho-capitalist ideas because I’m not one, but I think I got it mainly right.

[quote]florelius wrote:
I tried to get a bit more spesific answer from you. but ok, your strategy is to talk with people. but do you think about joining or forming a organisation/party for anarcho-capitalisme.

I asked about this after talking to erasmus ( a dutch anarcho-capitalist in here ) in the “liberty in socialisme” tread. as a communist my ideal society is also anarchisme ( offcourse anarcho-socialist ), but we have a more specific gameplan/strategy than other anarchists. And our strategy is offcourse socialisme.
[/quote]

That’s the beauty of anarchism! You can organise yourself in any way you want. As long as it is voluntary.

(small detail, I’m half swedish, half dutch, living in holland, om du vill snacka pÃ¥ norska/svenska, gÃ¥r det ocksÃ¥ bra! :wink: )

[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:

[quote]florelius wrote:
I see there are many libertarians and anarcho-capitalists in here. They have explained many times what they
think society should look like, but I have not seen a explanation on there strategy on how to change the current society to a libertarian/anarcho-capitalist society.

can you libertarian guys in here explain this? It would be interresting.[/quote]

The only way to bring about a nonaggressive, naturally ordered society is to change people’s beliefs about the legitimacy of coercive authority.

It is not something that can be brought about by “policy” but rather only when people – by a very large majority – ignore authority.[/quote]

x2