From: triley@weber.ucsd.edu (Tristan Riley)
Newsgroups: alt.society.anarchy
Subject: Re: Booklist + What is Anarchy (long)
Date: 26 Dec 1992 00:03:12 GMT
Organization: University of California, San Diego
NNTP-Posting-Host: weber.ucsd.edu

In article <PMETZGER.92Dec25134143@snark.shearson.com> pmetzger@shearson.com writes:
>
>cjohnson@lars.acc-admin.stolaf.edu (Carrie L Johnson) writes:
>
>>I'd love to hear what all of your definitions of anarchy are....
>
>
>I think there are pretty much agreed to definitions; I just think that
>there are lots of different subtypes of anarchist.
>
>Anarchism is best defined as the belief that it would be best if
>society were structured without a large organization claiming a
>monopoly on the legitimate use of force ("The Government").

this is a definition which few contemporary self-defined anarchists 
i know, have read, etc. would agree with--it's perhaps more accurate
when applied to 'classical' (i.e., 19th century) folks like
Kropotkin, et. al., but in the wake of thorough critiques of other
oppressive institutions (work, school, the family, etc.) which could
and likely would go on relatively untouched by a mere dismantling of
'political' authority, many now speak of anarchism as a challenge of
all oppressive and illegitimate hierarchy and authority (you perhaps
remember that little catch phrase: 'the personal is political') and
envision its goal as replacing such institutions and relations with
voluntary, non-oppressive ones.


>For instance, I'm a propertarian anarchist (read, anarchocapitalist,
>free market anarchist, voluntarist, or whatever). I'm basically what
>is now called a libertarian (different from what the old meaning of
>the word was, as it used to just mean "anarchist"), desiring to see a
>society in which anyone can do anything they like that does not
>involve the initiation of violence against others. This would include
>a free market economy (not what we have now, which is a government
>controlled and regulated "mixed economy"), with people purchasing
>security forces on the open market in lieu of having publically funded
>police and defense forces.
>

well, see bob black's essay "the libertarian as conservative" on the
differences between libertarianism and anarchism.  some criticisms:
"the initiation of violence against others", many would argue, is
just what hoarding of capital, resources, whatever you call it,
consists of--you taking all you want  (and then defending it with
police force? in an anarchist society? : (   ) automatically creates
the likelihood of severe power disparities which are illegitimate
and contributes to the kind of fetishization of property/commodities
which has helped construct the 'iron cage' we find ourselves in in
the advanced capitalist West.  it's been my experience that
libertarians i've met mistakenly understand the state as the only
(or perhaps just the central) oppressive institution/apparatus
operating on humans and keeping them from freedom, when in fact (as
black points out in the essay mentioned above) the 'free' market
they advocate so vociferously is driven by a work ethic and
occupational regimentation and oppression far more experientially
repressive than the often-abstract (but of course still real and
powerful) state apparatus.

just a little counter that was likely expected,

tristan