Market Anarchist pamphlets

[johnny_red]

In further answer to the last post in this community,
William Gillis has brought us the Market Anarchy Series of pamphlets.

(Introducing The Market Anarchy Series)

The state of Market Anarchist propaganda has been pretty dismal. Despite a ton of resources on the internet, there are few books, pamphlets and articles available in the real world. And--

Comments

[mmoneurere]

I might be more interested in a basic-principles explanation of "market anarchism" in terms of how it departs from anti-authoritarian anti-capitalism. In particular, most defenses of property as pre-governmental seem to rely on a labor theory of value, which is directly contradicted by the alienation of labor from ownership required for a functioning capitalist market economy. Even without this contradiction, the market/capitalist model of property as a pre-social phenomenon seems almost to represent property as a kind of metaphysical essence inhering in objects. Finally, does a market-anarchist perspective suggest that if all functions of authoritarian government (defense of private property, enforcement of contracts, general policing) are devolved to "private" entities, government no longer exists? It would seem, rather, that the entities which then claim a right/authority to police their "spheres" continue to function as a state, with the primary difference being the dismissal of even the appearance of control by the people

[chris_acheson]

Well, "market anarchism" is an umbrella term, so if you want to examine basic principles, you have to look at the tendencies that the term applies to.

That said, even "anarcho-capitalism", when consistently applied, is anti-capitalist. By the historical definition typically used by anarchists, capitalism is an economic system in which the government favors capital (and its owners) over the other factors of production, land and labor. Principled anarcho-capitalists recognize and oppose this meddling.

If a private entity acts to maintain elite control through the use of force and fraud (the only way to do it, really), then it's not really a private entity at all. As you note, it's a government, or at least an attempt at one. However, this is still an improvement, in my opinion. The appearance of popular control where none exists is a bad thing, not a good thing. If this illusion is dropped, the legitimacy of the governing entity disappears with it. Such groups would be widely seen as the criminal gangs that you and I already

[mmoneurere]

Is there any way to maintain the private ownership of productive property (the basic requirement for a market or a capitalist system) without a state (official or unofficial)? This is what has always struck me about claims of a non-statist propertarian system.

[chris_acheson]

Well, if we were to get rid of the government, but maintain all government-issued property titles, there would obviously be a lot of hostility towards such property rights. As Kevin Carson is fond of saying, "No stealing allowed, starting... now!"

But this isn't what the (consistent) anarcho-capitalists are proposing. If you take a look at the first pamphlet, it contains some of Rothbard's thoughts on when it is appropriate to confiscate capitalist property. Agorists take this even further, presenting a strategy for popular expropriation.

As for whether non-usufruct productive property could exist in this context, I don't see why not. It seems like a consensus that equal people could reasonably come to.