With every discussion nowadays, first we would have to establish the terms we are using.
Is capitalism possible with a government?
Is anarchy possible in socialism/communism?
"Anarchists are against capitalism".
I do not think so. I think anarchists are against abusive assholes who twist capitalism into authoritarian mad ape circus.
I think this would be the common ground for all moral humans.
I want the least amount of violence in society possible. The state proven itself to be the most violent both in number of incidences and the severity. It is fundamental philosophy of a developed human to want less aggression and more cooperation and this should always be our main priority. Everything else will fall into place.
Anarchists can only be against imposing the authority. "No rulers", is the only thing an anarchist can advocate for.
Anything else would be a discussion on how to organize the rules of society, to not impose authority on anyone.
The only way to do it, is by respecting choices of each and every individual, unless they harm someone and we use force in defense against them.
I think the premise that we can achieve more freedom by giving the power over our lives to other people, is an insane concept.
By definition, this is not anarchy.
History has shown, that anarchy does not work with economy based on socialism.
If all anarchy means is "no rulers", because some people in the past made the mistake of applying "no rulers", while trying to build a grotesque society, where everyone is the ruler of everyone, many people today still think that economy based on socialism, is what anarchy is about.
Socialism, Communism or even collectivism in general, is the only ideology that has proven to fail every single time it is applied, while freedom of every individual and free market has proven to create the world with least poverty humans have ever achieved... and all we have, including internet or blockchain I'm using right now.
Do we need more than 300 million dead bodies in last 100 years to get that?
Anarchy means freedom, so also freedom to exchange my time, which is my capital. Therefore the only anarchy that can ever exist, could only be exercised with individual freedom to trade of one's capital.
Capitalism in my understanding means "free trade of my time".
It is my natural right to exercise this freedom. It is my anarchy. If you tell me it is not, you are anything but an anarchist.
The negative impact of human interaction on society is always the consequence of existence of tiny minority of sociopathic assholes, abusing others. They are genetically retarded. It causes their emotional underdevelopment.
These are the people who want the control.
I think giving them that power and expecting they will not use it, is another definition of insanity.
In capitalism you have a personal choice to do so. If you do it, it stops being capitalism.
In any other pseudo anarchy with an adjective, you are a subject to other people's decision about your life from the start. What kind of anarchy is it?
How can anyone give power to anyone in a free market, voluntary society, the real capitalism?
You will always have some assholes, but how would they become rich and powerful without what makes them powerful and rich, which is hiring actors, who write legal favors for their business, call them laws, turning them into corporations that are enforced with their mercenaries; military and police?
This is the abuse of capitalism and as soon as it is abused it stops being capitalism.
A bazaar gives you a chance to trade. Neither robbing, raping nor killing someone in a bazaar turns it into a concentration camp.
If someone is a murderer and kills and/or robs someone in a bazaar, I still do not think bazaar is an evil idea.
I think one of things that make human ape the most successful in the animal kingdom is the trade of one's capital/time.
I own my life. It is my capital. The time, which is my life, can be exchanged for learning skills and creating things, that I can exchange, as it is my capital/life/time.
If I create something with my life that was not, this is the transformed piece of my life I used to create it. It is me. I own me. I can exchange a piece of me, my time. This is capitalism.
Other definitions include some coercion or control, which is not capitalism.
In free market, when you are free to exchange your time for time of others without imposed authority of a regulator etc, no one can control you. No one can impose their rule.
Capitalism is the only way of applying principles of "no-rulers".
There can never be any other anarchy.
What isn't anarchy is when majority can decide what to do with your life. It is an imposed authority. A mob rule. A gang-rape if you will. They become the state, your rulers.
If someone starts a community based on the principle that what is yours is mine, this is where competing against each other starts. People will compete with violent force to have the same as you and take from you whatever you may have more.
If you happen to work harder or be smarter etc. according to resentful people, you will not deserve to have more than a useless, abusive, lazy asshole.
Should sharing be voluntary or extorted with threat of death.
"Help or die" is a non-anarchy.
Of course if you are deciding about your life, you can help the mentally challenged asshole, by giving him a piece of your life; your capital.
I cannot imagine any other anarchy, but Voluntaryism.
Voluntaryism is based on the moral principle that each person owns themselves, isn't a slave to anyone else for anything. That infers the moral right to self-defense and defense of others whenever that principle is violated. It also implies that each owns the fruits of their labor, and has the moral right to freely transact such fruits with others in ways that don't violate the self-ownership of others. It also implies that no one has a right to the fruits of another's labor. Personal responsibility. Live and let live. Golden rule.
Why be surprised, that even if the most noble ideology of not being ruled, when applied to lack of knowledge of economics, cannot possibly work?
Why continue this delusional definition of anarchy?
I do not recognize the government's definition, that what we have now is capitalism. This is fasco-socialistic cryonism by all common sense.
I do not see capitalism as people competing against each other. I see it as competing with obsolete product, by inventing a better one that will best suit the needs of people.
I cannot imagine more cooperation with the society.
Do you disagree with all the entrepreneurs, who create solutions like blockchain, Steemit, that improve your life, are capitalist and do not believe in imposed authority, nor they would ever harm anyone?
Are we not anarchists, because some "capitalists" are sociopaths... and... not really capitalists, because they hallucinate they own the capital they do not own, which is another human's life?
I do not recognize government's definition of what capitalism is and I do not recognize their authority on terms, because twisting reality is their main job. They twist the history and... anything they touch really, like a religious cult they are... which always end with deaths of sheeple they "represent".
"We are the government". So 300 million people committed suicide in last 100 years?
With honest language it is more like "I represent you by murdering you".
Their very involvement in free market capitalism, automatically makes it a fasco-socialistic cryonism.
Surely freedom of exchange is part of freedom, therefore anarchy.
Could pure capitalism turn into statism? Sure. If people start believing others can control their capital, like in the old anarchy, or anarcho-communism if you prefer.
My capital is the time I have. This is why I believe everyone is a capitalist.
When someone decides what to do with your life, it is slavery. You can call it AnCom or whatever you like.
It is not my definition of anarchy.
So it is either capitalism or slavery in my opinion. Selfownership, AnCap, Voluntaryism, or pure free market, is the only philosophy consistent with the Golden Rule.
Or scrap all that. I am telling you, that I am a free individual that can exchange his capital.
What kind of anarchy would impose the authority to rule over me, that I am not free to do that?
The non-anarchy one.
Non-anarchy is every ideology that imposes authority to rule me, to not engage in voluntarily exchange of my time, which is my capital.
Will some greedy assholes abuse capitalism? Sure. But without lawmakers, they would have no way of getting rich, other than by being useful and offering product or service everyone wants. People will exchange their time (money) when they decide voluntarily they prefer that thing/service rather than a piece of time they exchanged for that money.
Competing for best solutions to best meet human needs is cooperation.
You will not be competitive if people will not want or need what you are competing with.
If you are ill, competing with others... or even competing with the previous medicine to create a better one... is not competing against people. It is being motivated to be first to help. It is competing with an obsolete product and creating a better one as quick as possible to the best knowledge available.
So in capitalism, you do not compete which politician you will buy, who will give you advantages on the market or let you legally destroy countries, environment etc.
You just decide you do not want that product and they starve. You do not hallucinate they are a good business because they did everything legally. Hitler and Stalin were legal too.
In free market capitalism all you have left if you want to be successful, is being the most beneficial to humans, as you possibly can.
Deciding about my life/time/capital also means that I can decide if I wish to support the less fortunate. I can give them a part of my capital. NOT be forced with threat of death to give it to some sociopaths because they promised to give it to the needy... which creates welfare and lack of motivation... it is an intensive for abuse.
By competing for achieving your own well-being, you are competing to create best situations benefiting others. Otherwise you will not be appreciated with the "time of others" (money).
I own my life. It is my capital. I cannot imagine how someone telling me what to do with my life could not violate NAP and be anarchy...
If I'm wrong, please change my mind.
Straight from horse's mouth:
I believe that every interaction between humans should be voluntary. I want for each individual to be the only controller of their lives and their property.
I am an individual. I want to create stuff for myself and others. I want to be rewarded according to how my time is useful to others. My life is mine. I own myself. What I create is extension of me. My time is my currency. I can exchange it or keep it. It is my capital. I do not believe in imposed authority.
Labels that fit to my individual choices make me an anarchist, a capitalist, a voluntaryist, but most of all, I AM AN INDIVIDUAL, who does not judge your value by the status you achieved in an imposed, imaginary collective. No matter who you are; if you respect others, respect me, I will always respect you.
This is what I want. It is the best for me. I don't care what the collective wants me to do. I choose to interact if I wish. I am the owner of me.
I do not want to harm others in ANY way.
Please do not impose your rule on me.
Tread on me or others and I will will feel morally obligated to stop you.
PEACE AND LOVE IN ANARCHY