Roger, Erin and others.
As many times earlier, you guys have a very different understanding of
political ideas than me.
Roger wrote:
>PS -- How can a fan of the MOQ be an anarchist? this makes no sense and
>undermines the top two levels (lowering your proposed solution below even
the
>social)
I can understand why a fan of the MoQ can be an anarchist, but I do not
agree in anarchism. I started out not able to understand why a fan of MoQ
could be a Libertarian, but very many members of this list do not agree with
me. In many ways I would say that Libertarianism and Anarchism only differ
in the way they define "Freedom". In libertarianism freedom to own property
are very important, but in anarchism freedom of property ownership are very
important.
Roberson (1996) in his PhD thesis on Anarchism states that "Capitalist
anarchism, like statist libertarianism, is based upon an ideal of negative
liberty. Right-wing anarchists believe that the functions currently in the
hands of the state could be adequately (or better) provided by private
businesses. This would require the parceling-out of some of the authority
currently in the hands of the state to the businesses which would provide
public services. Some, but not all: although in the right-wing anarchist
picture the state would be entirely dismantled, not all of its authority
would be placed into the hands of private organizations. Since right-wing
anarchists are dedicated to the libertarian ideal of a society based
entirely on voluntary relations, some of the state's powers, such as eminent
domain or military conscription, would be done away with entirely."
I still not agree with anarchism or libertarianism, but according to
Robertson the story is not as easy as anarchism equals chaos.
Thanks for reading,
Gerhard
PS:
For those that do not agree on the basis that they don't know what Anarchism
is, I have included a chapter from Roberson (1996).
What is anarchism?
Anarchism is often briefly glossed as the doctrine that opposes state power
and authority. But this brief definition only hints at the rich content of
the theory. The classical anarchists shared common ground with a
surprisingly wide variety of political views. Like classical liberals, they
viewed the state as frequently burdensome and potentially oppressive of
individual rights. Like socialists, including Marx, they opposed the
exploitative capitalist economic system. And like some conservatives, they
considered small local communities the ideal locus of social and political
life. These apparently eclectic views have led some commentators to regard
anarchism as an ad hoc mingling of fashionable positions; or, worse, an
inherently confused jumble because of the internal tensions between the
incompatible goals of liberalism, socialism, and conservatism.
As if this were not enough to render it undesirable as a political
philosophy, anarchism also seemed fixated on an impractical and dangerous
goal, the abolition of the state. Indeed, the attack upon state authority
has generally been understood to be the single defining characteristic of
anarchism, and the one from which most of its other positions could be
derived. This critique of the state itself relied upon implausible
assumptions about the malleability of human nature and people's ability to
interact socially and politically with only reason to guide them.
If this popularly accepted view is correct, anarchism should be doomed by
its impracticality and internal inconsistencies to, at best, an existence on
the margins of social and political life. It would not be worth serious
consideration alongside the mainstream political philosophies. But this view
is inaccurate. As I will demonstrate in the following chapters, anarchism is
grounded in a distinctive and original view of the values of society and
individuality, and of the good life for humanity. Its social and political
recommendations have an internally compelling rationale, and are not merely
ideas appropriated from different political theories. Furthermore, it is not
inherently utopian; and its most important goals may be achievable within
the confines of the state.
References
Roberson, Christopher Joseph " Godwin Revisited: Anarchism for the Real
World", A dissertation submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements
for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy at The University of Michigan, 1996
This thesis can be found at http://www.enteract.com/~robchr/diss/index.html
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat Aug 17 2002 - 16:01:41 BST