46 lines
2.5 KiB
Plaintext
46 lines
2.5 KiB
Plaintext
![]() |
|
||
|
"But while anarchism is a broad river, it is possible to discern a number of
|
||
|
distinctive currents. What principally divides the family of anarchists
|
||
|
is their different views of human nature, strategy and organisation. The
|
||
|
mainstream is occupied by the social anarchists, but the individualists
|
||
|
form an important part of the flow. Amongst the social anarchists, there
|
||
|
are mutualists, collectivists, communists, and syndicalists, who differ
|
||
|
mainly on the issue of economic organization. Some may be grouped
|
||
|
according to their strategies, like pacifist anarchists.
|
||
|
The social anarchists and individualists often work together but
|
||
|
bear differing emphases. The individualists see the danger of obligatory
|
||
|
cooperation and are worried that a collectivist society will lead to the
|
||
|
tyranny of the group. On the other hand, the social anarchists are
|
||
|
concerned that a society of individualists might become atomistic and that
|
||
|
the spirit of competition could destroy mutual aid and general solidarity.
|
||
|
Such differences do not prevent both wings coming together in the notion
|
||
|
of communal individuality, which attempts to achieve a maxim um degree of
|
||
|
personal freedom without destroying the community."
|
||
|
|
||
|
Peter Marshall, 'Demanding the Impossible', page 6
|
||
|
|
||
|
"In the absence of a professional police force, communites are quite
|
||
|
capable of maintaining public security for themselves and have done so
|
||
|
for centuries."
|
||
|
|
||
|
Peter Marshall, 'Demanding the Impossible', p645
|
||
|
|
||
|
|
||
|
|
||
|
Anarcho-capitalists are against the State simply because they are
|
||
|
capitalists first and foremost. Their critique of the State ultimately
|
||
|
rests on a liberal interpretation of liberty as the inviolable rights to
|
||
|
and of private property. They are not concerned with the social
|
||
|
consequences of capitalism for the weak, powerless and ignorant. Their
|
||
|
claim that all would benefit from a free exchange in the market is by no
|
||
|
means certain; any unfettered market system would most likely sponsor a
|
||
|
reversion to an unequal society with defence associations perpetuating
|
||
|
exploitation and privilege. If anything, anarcho-capitalism is merely a
|
||
|
free-for-all in which only the rich and cunning would benefit. It is
|
||
|
tailor-made for 'rugged individualists' who do not care about the damage
|
||
|
to others or to the environment which they leave in their wake. The
|
||
|
forces of the market cannot provide genuine conditions for freedom any
|
||
|
more than the powers of the State. The victims of both are equally
|
||
|
enslaved, alienated and oppressed."
|
||
|
Peter Marshall in "Demanding the Impossible: A History of Anarchism"
|