About: This is “Echo of Freedom, Radical Podcast (Эхо Свободы, Радикальный Подкаст)”. In each podcast episode a different issue is discussed. Each episode can stand by itself, but there is a direction of the whole podcast towards the complete liberation. Additionally this is the space where poetry will be uploaded.
Author: My name is VolodyA! V Anarhist, i am politically anarchist, ethically vegan, spiritually ex-buddhist, religiously atheist, epistimologically agnostic, artistically poetic, sexually perverted, and queer gender-wise. But this podcast is not about myself, but rather about my ideas.
Contact: Anybody is more than welcome to contact me with your thoughts and comments. Please use the comment facility of LibSyn or send me an e-mail (Volodya_Ⓐ_When Gendarme Sleeps.org) (PGP key fingerprint: 0DDF C0B2 A699 E6E7 C154 567A D5BD 548F B099 86AC). I will accept and play audio comments sent as OGG Vorbis/FLAC (or MP3/Wave if you must).
Disclaimer: All that i discuss here is my opinion, i do not condone nor condemn any action(s) by this podcast, i simply speak my mind. Please respect that and be respectful if disagree. Trolling behaviour and spam do not constitute a form of speech and will not be tolerated.
Copyright: All the content that is made by me for this podcast is in public domain at the moment of publication unless stated otherwise. I would appreciate it if while using any of the things you find here, you provide reference back to me, but that is only a request.
Important: This podcast is not affiliated with LibCom.org.
Wed, 14 September 2011
I have already talked about anarcho-capitalism in Echo of Freedom, Radical Podcast multiple times. But here i bring many of my critiques into a single monologue, which i believe is quite important knowing that i did come into anarchist movement with some capitalist ideas.
Direct download: EchoOfFreedom_101_2011Sep14_AnarchoCapitalism.vorb.oga
Category:podcasts -- posted at: 4:52am EST
As usual, 90% of the confusion here lies in definitions. You seem to be suggesting that "socialism" is "being nice and cooperative and helping your neighbours" -- in that case, great, I'm a "socialist" too! But I could have sworn the more common definition was essentially state-socialism -- and you even imply this yourself elsewhere in your podcast -- when you mention doomsday starvation events in which "nobody should eat more than they need". Now, in spirit, obviously -- but, really, how would this work? Would people voluntarily ration things among themselves? (That's pretty voluntaryist/anarcho-capitalist in my books!) Would there be a central group of thugs (or 51% of a mob) violently beating the others into submission to enforce this equal distribution of food? (That's state-socialism.) And what about when this doomsday event ends -- does society still need a ration-police to make sure everyone is getting their "fair share"? And who calculates this "fair share" anyways? You also offer the strawman argument that (anarcho-)capitalism puts capital above all else. That's simply misguided. Anarcho-capitalism is a very very basic skeletal framework, for the lowest-common-denominator for social interaction. It really is a synonym for voluntaryism/freedom. On top of this freedom-framework (free-trade, bla bla bla), you have everything else, like your own personal values. If you value money more than people, that's your own personal fault -- it says nothing about the anarcho-capitalist (which I should really call voluntaryist) system itself. I for one love my neighbours, love co-operating, and only ask that others leave me alone -- much like you! That is essentially all (anarcho-)capitalism is. You seem to acknowledge this at some points, but then deviate to fearful scenarios which implicitly necessitate violence to correct. The issue of property (you brought up fences), is a bit tricky. I'm sorry, but you can't just walk into my "private bedroom property" whenever you feel like it. You probably can't even walk over my garden. My driveway--I might let that slide. Me owning a vast unused plot of land gets tricky, I have to admit. But, I am confident that such problems will get solved voluntarily. Although you brought up the criticism, you failed to offer a solution. Should nobody be able to own parts of the Amazon rain-forest? Wasn't most of the land we currently live on forest and pristine nature once? Should we never have been able to cut down a single tree? And do you seriously think a large company/monopoly could own something that big, for long enough to do major damage, and still retain it's monopoly? Your fears of a bad monopoly are somewhat valid, but extremely weak. You have to explain to me how you think a company could earn the loyalty of so many customers to grow into such a powerful force. In particular, at what point do you suppose their badness would begin to manifest? After they've won the hearts of the entire market? (If they begin being bad before that, surely some customers will jump ship to a competitor??) For example, let's take a hypothetical example of a "private defense agency". (A "private military".) Before this company ever leaves the ground, surely it's customers will demand explicit transparency in their contracts -- perhaps even include a 1M$ award for anyone who discovers fowl play (if, let's say, the company secretly begins amassing a force that it eventually intends to oppress people with.) There can be countless other clauses to limit these companys' power. I really think your fears here, about freedom-founded-monopolies are unfounded. Finally, I have to say that as an anarcho-capitalist, I most currently do not support the current regimes! I am very radical. And viva bitcoins :D. (A stateless currency that will revolutize the world!) (Oh, a bunch of the ideas I mentioned above were shamelessly stolen from Stefan Molyneux -- I think you'd like him.)