Today’s strip was inspired by a comment from setHcoHn. (He asked me to spell it like that.)
I don’t like the word “capitalism” and “anarcho-capitalist” means something else entirely than how it’s typically used. Self-proclaimed capitalists are typically people who favor mercantilism and corporatism, where the state favors companies who have spent millions lobbying and fostering an environment where small businesses and individuals almost can’t compete. The so-called free market of the U.S. actually enslaves us to big business interests and makes it particularly challenging to function except as a wage slave. So putting the two words “anarchy” and “capitalism” together creates an oxymoron. I prefer “free market anarchist” or “voluntaryist” to describe those who want to end institutionalized aggression. I admit you will catch me using it occasionally simply because I know it’s still a moderately common usage but there’s already a shift taking place in the language.
For that matter, the word “free market anarchist” has the opposite problem of being redundant. The free market merely describes all voluntary interaction without aggression, so the authoritarian model of government as well as other crime should not be considered part of it. That leaves a rather small portion of human interaction that can actually be considered as the free market. This also means “free marketeer” is another acceptable term for an anarchist as some who wants to favor and expand the free market in place of the institutionalized aggression of the state. Meanwhile, I still prefer redundancy to hypocrisy, if only for the sake of clarity.
Yeah, I’m for a free market aswell, but don’t like the name narcho capitalist, I’m actualy anti capitalism.
But I don’t think there just synonims, isn’t there a difference?
I’m more for Volyuntarism, Free market Anarchist or Agorism.
* anarcho capitalist, synonyms
I have no problems with the word ‘capitalism’ as long people are speaking about true free market economy, but I react strongly when they describe corporativism, and similar repressive state-supported economic models, as capitalism. The word capitalism is probably as hard to “save” as anarchism, due to communists, fascists, socialists religious cooks usually have no clue about what they are talking about when they use the word, just as the general population have no clue about what anarchism is.
I was looking for a secret message in the capital letters. Didn’t find anything.
I think that libertarians should stop trumpeting the ideal that capitalism is supposed to be, and condemn the reality of what it is. Free market anticapitalist awaaayyy!
I still remember a eureka moment in Economics class, when I realized what the teacher was describing as capitalism, free markets, was nothing like what we have. Among other things, in a free market there is little to no advertisement. Why? Because, almost the moment anyone puts out a product, there should be twenty competitors putting the exact same thing out. Perfect market replacements causing the sale price of goods to always equal the total cost of production. After the initial, natural, monopoly period while competitors gear up to produce their own goods, of course.
Also, in a free market the supply and demand curves are gradual J curves. Even assuming niche markets, like like life-saving medicine, where the demand curve is naturally inflexible, the supply curve should ensure much lower costs associated with the products and services.
The truth is that the mercantilists have in fact been poisoning Laissez-Faire and Capitalism for a long time. They ignored the idea of Laissez-Faire every time they asked for something, and then demanded to be “left to do” whenever someone demanded intervention in the other direction. And the fascists (I use in its original meaning, nobody seems to remember anymore that the Italian socialist party was the original Fascist Party) run with this because they want freedom no more than the mercantilists do. I highly recommend http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X3qKRI6UWNE for a decent demonstration of what capitalism is really all about. The maker of the film doesn’t even seem to realize, though, that the definition of capitalism has nothing to do with what the union’s doing, or the politician, or the tycoon. The best capitalist of the lot would probably be the farmer, but even he doesn’t really fit it. The politician, the tycoon, the union boss, the farmer, they’re all demanding special treatment or trying to pander with special treatment. And that even in its day, our “system of free enterprise” was getting quite far from free enterprise.
The irony here is that Mercantilism, at least as it was implemented in the US, is still mildly better than the “US fascist party” line would demand. Mercantilists only demand intervention in specific industries where they hold interest. Everywhere a front-runner hasn’t established itself firmly, we would be left free to do as we will so long as it harms none. The socialists want those same systems of all-pervasive control to extend to every branch of life.
The end result is, I couldn’t give a fuck what you call it… The true definitions, anarcho-capitalism is essentially synonymous with anarchism. Anarcho-Syndicalists have no mechanism to ensure a setup of economy-free exchange, the Georgists rely on democratic distribution of land. We need to be rid of government. No more kings! An-archon! I will voluntarily abide by my neighbors’ safety and liberties, and even voluntarily sign contracts to that effect. But any agreements entered into by my great great grandfathers should have no force on me unless voluntarily entered into by me.
I like it.
dOwn WiTH thE maN!
s/(.)(.)/\u\1\l\2/gi
PuCking PhuNNy MAn.
I’m happy with just “Anarchist” to those who “get it” or “Individualist” to those who don’t. Adding anymore adjectives is just a waste of time and air.
Good point about “free marketeer”, although I think you’ll run into the same problems as “capitalist”. I don’t see a problem with “anarcho-capitalist”, except that it’s a mouthful.
Fun Fact 1: the vast majority of businesses in the US are considered “small.”
Fun Fact 2: the vast majority of people looking for a job will be employed by businesses considered “small”
You paint a much graver picture than the reality. Only a few markets are dominated by super-powerful corporations. It just happens to be that these are the markets the consumer interfaces with the most. Large corporations are at a disadvantage with customer service. In an industry where this is prized, they can’t compete.
I work at a vet clinic. There are 10 employees working there. The business is doing fine.
Considered small by whom? Over 80% of all attempts at new businesses fail. The exact extent to which all the regulatory overhead, licensing requirements, unfair competition by established companies (who have managed to jump through those hoops) and other government-imposed impediments contribute to that is incalculable, but it’s undoubtedly significant.