On Sat, 11 Jun 2016 21:59:07 -0700 Kurt Buff <kurt.buff@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sat, Jun 11, 2016 at 9:07 PM, eden <edenw@gal3.com> wrote:
On Sun, Jun 12, 2016 at 3:54 AM, Kurt Buff <kurt.buff@gmail.com> wrote:
Anarchism is hard for some people to differentiate from nihilism.
I agree.
Try reading Lysander Spooner, Benjamin Tucker, Ludwig von Mises and, most especially, Murray Rothbard. Maybe a bit of David Friedman, too.
Once you've made your way through their works, you can call yourself educated in anarchism.
Ignore Emma Goldman, the various Russian anarchist, the anarcho-syndicalists, etc. - they aren't serious.
Are you serious?
Von MISES? How would you distinguish between Anarchism and Libertarianism (and nihilism)?
Yes, I'm serious, including about von Mises. He's extraordinarily influential
mises was a second rate utiliarian **statist**. His only connection to anarchism is that he made some of the most stupid criticism of anarchism you could ever read. looks like now we have a bot from the austrian cult of economics , and Rothbard cites him as a primary influence. You must
grant him (as you must with other historical figures, especially those of intellectual stature) the limitations of his time and place. See especially https://www.amazon.com/Mises-Liberalism-J%C3%B6rg-Guido-H%C3%BClsmann/dp/193.... He was not prepared to take the last few steps toward repudiating government, but he laid the foundation for those who would.
Libertarians (both big and small 'L') usually postulate some form of minimalist government - usually of the "night watchman" strain.
Nihilism (as opposed to both regular libertarianism and individualist anarchism) seems to eschew both personal responsibility and the logic of causality, preferring the dream state of absolute freedom, without consequence.
Kurt