I am interested in your thoughts on anarchism. What form do you prefer? Voluntarism - free market Agora, minarchism, anarcho syndacalism, collectivism? I also note you speak a lot about class. How does that fit into an anarchist perspective? Don't concepts of class perpetuate division?
oh you're one of those conspiracy theory types....I see why I had you muted now...Well back on muted you go
The basis of all those alt-right conspiracy theories was the fact that capitalism itself cannot be the problem.
the idea of overpopulation is an example of this
Oh dear! How sad. You won't read this of course because you seem to have decided that debate with people you don't agree with serves no purpose. I would respectfully suggest to you that the dialectic is essential to the evolution of thought. I engaged with you in a genuine way because I am aware that you find my views repugnant and was interested to know why. But it really doesn't matter. I wish you well.
The division is the class themselves, not the concepts of them.
"anarchist" capitalism is an oxymoron. Anything to the right of market socialism cannot be considered anarchist. Private property is the basis of those systems, and the basis of capitalist hierarchy. (It requires a state to maintain, is what separates people into classes, etc)
The word anarchist has been treated in the same way as libertarian.
If I were to fit into a group, it would likely be anarchist without adjectives. Anarchism of all kinds can, and likely will, co-exist. If I were given the options of which one to live in once established, I would say syndicalist.
I agree. The Paul Ehrlich 'Population Bomb' view of humanity is an absurd nonsense. It always was but the recent, rapid decline in global birth rate just underlines it. I think there is a danger in trying to understand anarchism in terms of any existing Statist ideology. Not least of all because it can end up spiraling towards semantics.
I also agree that different models of anarcho-communities could well coexist in peace. I don't reject Proudhon's concept of property but believe he was railing against the state's violent enforcement of class structure built upon the ownership, and distribution, of property. In post-revolutionary France, enthused by the emergence of radical socialism, his view was a reflection of the era and made a strong political statement.
Like you, I am reluctant to 'self identify' as being part of any group. The 'labeling' of people seems to me to serve the agenda of supreme Statist and globalists. It promotes the process of 'divide and rule' to keep us all at each other’s throats, while the state (however you define it) gets on with the business of farming us.
So for me it doesn’t matter which ‘model’ of anarcho-community you work to create. I personally favour voluntarist collectives based upon Samuel Konkin’s theory of the libertarian Agora. Not because these would be perfect, free market counter economics are potentially no less corruptible than global capitalist collectivism, but because I believe anarcho-communities based upon contractual exchange are most likely to work in reality.
What matters most is that we move away from statism, ignore the ‘government’ wherever possible and build autonomous communities based upon ‘order without power.’
I think you should study what "class" actually is
Absolutely. We should never stop studying such important issues.