âCapitalism is a word which means âhierarchy defined by property.â
Thereâs absolutely no precedent for this definition applying to capitalism outside of various anti-capitalist theology.
The word capitalism is derived from the word capital, which is itself derived from an late Latin word Capitale, which was a derivative of the Latin word for head, caput. Of the various uses and adaptations of capital and capitalism across the globe, âhierarchy defined by propertyâ off the top of my head Iâd say itâs maybe suggested by Marx in Das Kapital, but given that Iâve never read Das Kapital cover to cover, I donât know for sure. (Nor do I plan to read it cover to cover, because in my opinion itâs trash.)
In âAnarchyâ, you donât get to tell other people how to live their lives, a point ancoms continuously seem to miss. If a group of anarchists want to establish a community based on trade and currency, they have the right to do that. You donât get to tell them itâs ânot allowed in anarchyâ, because thatâs not how anarchy works.
Anarcho-communists and anti-capitalist anarchists, in general, spend waaaaaaay too much god damn time trying to privately own the word Anarchy and keep it exclusive, which is pretty ironic for a group of people who insinuate that private ownership and exclusivity is âproblematic and creates hierarchies.â
Anarchy does not mean âlack of hierarchyâ, it means an âabsence of governmentâ aka, âno rulersâ. Rulers, and by extension hierarchies, are completely dependent on the existance of pre-existing power structures, from which theyâre able to gain a foothold and establish dominance through using said power structures to coerce others into doing what they want. This is not to be confused with voluntary trade, including voluntarily exchanging your labor/services/products for agreed upon compensation. The hierarchies you see in capitalist countries could not exist without the state to provide a platform from which to base themselves. The massive corporations you so adamantly rally against are a direct result of said state-backed power structures, the same state so many anti capitalists beg to come save them from âthe 1%â, or whatever tired out rhetoric theyâre using for people who have money they want. Rhetoric that is about as tired out as the notion that capitalism is bad because the global economy is finite and ârich people prevent others from getting moneyâ.
In an anarchist society, people would be free to participate in whatever economic systems they see fit, so long as they can do so voluntarily and without coercion- coercion that is not an âinherentâ part of capitalism anymore than hierarchies. And for all of the shit talking about the oppressive nature of capitalism, and for all the shit you and your kin give anarcho-capitalists, I canât think of a single ancap Iâm personally familiar with who wouldnât adopt a âlive and let live mindsetâ, should another group of anarchists choose to form a community around collectivism and communist principles, so long as said community is voluntary.
Moreover, if capitalism âhas no rulesâ, but communism does, then by your own logic capitalism would be more compatible with Anarchy because it doesnât impose rigid restrictions on how people are allowed to exchange goods and services. And, as it turns out, humanity actually thrives in conditions where advancement and work are rewarded with incentive, as a opposed to making âsacrifices from his abilityâ to appeal to some emotionally dependent concept of a âgreater good.â
I donât know what kind of point you were expecting to get across with this post, because the only thing youâve defectively managed to demonstrate is that you have a fundamental misunderstanding of both capitalism and anarchy.
izzy806
gummygunk
amandla
dailybridgerton
prguitarman
theartofmadeline
