So for the poll, count me as "other" until I explore this a little more.
http://irishliberty.wordpress.com/
Market anarchist. But I believe some government is necessary to keep those who would band together and terrorize the peaceful at bay.
Rothbardian Anarchist, with strong Hoppean influences.
Individualism is my religion.
I am just a libertarian with with pro-Austrian economic views. I'm not Right, Left, Center, or anything like that because I think those terms have been skewed.
Perhaps for this thread you can consider me a 'Minarchist.' That doesn't mean I'm against Anarchocaptialism, in fact, I think its the next logical step after Minarchy. I'm not fan of government in general and ideally I would love to see anarchocapitalism rule the day but I just don't think its realistic and hence I still refer to it as an ideal. In this day in age, no matter how much we hate to admit it, some government is neccessary. Almost inevidably we have to choose some sort of government and I would rather choose far less government than more of it. For me, less government ( moving toward anarchy) always equals more freedom. However, that doesn't mean we need even a little government forever. Perhaps one day we can do a peaceful transition into anarchocapitalism but its not likely now. Its rather absurd to go directly to a government-less anarchocapitalism from a large statist government like we have today. There needs to be a transition period and I think small government, or minarchy, is the way to go. Perhaps under minarchy we can gradually move towards the direction of anarchocapitalism in due time. Anyway, thats makes the most sense to me.
PS: I'd say were all on the right track here if Minarchy is the most government some of us will tolerate.
Actually, it is much more likely that the current government will collapse and we will find ourselves in anarchy, at which point rapidly establishing the proper judicial institutions will be a critical necessity, then it is likely that the current government, which is controlled by an entrenched ruling class, will shrink itself back to a minarchy.
History doesn't run backwards. Empires collapse. They do not revert to republics. Government can no more be shrunk than a tree can go back to a seed.
The question that faces us is to determine what type of seed is most desirable after the current tree has been burnt.
Microsecession as a strategy for revolution | Challenge to minarchist | How would a private road system work?
Agreed but unlike the past, we are a different civilization now. In the past it was unheard of for the common folk to have a voice let alone freely organize together for a stated purpose. It was always the elitists calling the shots. Granted, the people have less say in the U.S. today than ever before but we can still organize much better than civilizations before us. Perhaps, I'm a bit too optimistic but I believe we can still make a peaceful change without all the chaos that follows the destruction of an empire. Fortunatly the fight has not progressed to arms and ammunition but rather still remains a battle of ideas. I think the majority of us here can contribute a lot with ideas and helping people realize that liberty is the way to go. I think the ideas of Mises and Rothbard are just the right medicine for reinstituting liberty and I think it would be benificial for all of us to work to make these ideas mainstream.
Anarcho-capitalist.
#1 Minarchist
With Anarcho-Capitalist leanings, although as a newbie to the Austro-Libertarian scene, I'm having a hard time reconcilling certain aspects of full-bore Anarchism.
Anarcho-Capitalism is my view of a "perfect society" to which we should strive towards.
I am a fifth level Half-Elf Anarchist.
I have been really enjoying the scrolls of Hoppe and Rothbard lately.
http://www.comebackalive.com/phpBB2 Travel, Adventure Travel, Arguments, Recipes.
Agorist.
I'll also note that I'm a Christian, and believe that the church should also be non-hierarchical and non-authoritarian.
Pro Christo et Libertate integre!
Position: If one had to label oneself, probably 'anarcho-capitalist' with purer anarchist leanings. (The 'ideal' world argument etc.) DRO's were a large influence and assuaged my fears over previously unresolved issues I'd had regarding property rights, disputes, security, free markets, conservationism, etc.
I'm new to the economics and arguments of Rothbard et al (and Mises for that matter - first post!) but what I've heard so far is exciting. I hang out at freedomainradio.com quite a bit although I'm not in total agreement with those folks over certain philosophical assumptions. Naturally I am absolutely against the state in any shape or form whatsoever, without exception - on strict moral grounds; which must, I believe come before any other. I'd be more than happy to converse, debate and swap ideas with you folks over IM, email etc anytime as I strongly believe in communities, the power of the open dialogue and the interactions which shape them.
Anarchist
Z Man:Agreed but unlike the past, we are a different civilization now. In the past it was unheard of for the common folk to have a voice let alone freely organize together for a stated purpose. It was always the elitists calling the shots. Granted, the people have less say in the U.S. today than ever before but we can still organize much better than civilizations before us.
Sorry to say, but it is still the elitists calling the shots. The people on this forum at least all have undergraduate education, and I'd wager a whole lot of them have graduate education as well. You are not going to convert Joe Nascar to the validity of the philosophy of freedom. He will not pay attention to you long enough, because he just doesn't care. He goes to vote because the elites tell him to, and the elites pick what candidates he is or isn't allowed to vote for. That is not going to change. We are not going to beat the ruling class at a game where they are the referees. Give up on that idea immediately.
The good news is that when the revolution is underway, it will be a struggle involving only the elites, us versus them, with the people mostly standing aside to watch in awe. That's the way all revolutions go. There may not be a single bullet fired in the process.
MacFall:Agorist. I'll also note that I'm a Christian, and believe that the church should also be non-hierarchical and non-authoritarian.
I think my relatives fit that description. They were members of the Haugian sect of Lutherans and they left Tinn in Telemark Norway in the 1860s to get away from the state run church and its laws (religious and state) about the heirarchy of the clergy.
They were war resistors in WWI, would not take any secular oaths or pledges and the only prayer they would say was the Lord's Prayer as they viewed other prayers as having priorities in the secular world.
Anarchist in the original sense. I'm a socilist who believes the free market is a myth- it does not exist, and never could. No rational being coul possibly teake it seriously, because any attempt to bring about a "free market" fails and creates mass inequality and much injustice.
Twirlcan: MacFall: Agorist. I'll also note that I'm a Christian, and believe that the church should also be non-hierarchical and non-authoritarian. I think my relatives fit that description. They were members of the Haugian sect of Lutherans and they left Tinn in Telemark Norway in the 1860s to get away from the state run church and its laws (religious and state) about the heirarchy of the clergy. They were war resistors in WWI, would not take any secular oaths or pledges and the only prayer they would say was the Lord's Prayer as they viewed other prayers as having priorities in the secular world.
MacFall: Agorist. I'll also note that I'm a Christian, and believe that the church should also be non-hierarchical and non-authoritarian.
Well... I wouldn't take it that far. I mean that the church should not have any ties to the state (and in fact should oppose it), and also that I am opposed to denominationalism. I favor Watchman Nee's view that the church should resemble the early, apostolic-era church, where each community had a church whose pastors were all mutually accountable. There was no real hierarchy beyond that. Constantine turning the church into a political organization was, I think, a major (and very intentional) setback. It has prevented the maturation of the church for more than a thousand years now, and I see the existence of the modern state as one of the roadblocks that must be cleared before it can be undone.
(If it was in poor taste for me to bring an old topic like this back up just let me know!)
I identify as an anarchist. If we take into account the secondary nature of the economic function.. well then I identify as an AnCap. (But I find that label a mixed bag..and am not sure what is a better title other than maybe Free-Market Extremist?) haha.
"Ordo est ordinem non servare."
Well, I find myself in the minority again . I am currently a Minarchist. However, since spending time on this site I am pretty close to switching changing my beliefs to anarcho-capitalism.
...And nobody has ever taught you how to live out on the street, But now you're gonna have to get used to it...
Ludwig von Mises Institute | 518 West Magnolia Avenue | Auburn, Alabama 36832-4528
Phone: 334.321.2100 · Fax: 334.321.2119
contact@Mises.org | webmaster | AOL-IM MainMises
Mises.org sitemap