No.76128
Would anyone like to see an actual debate between Anarchist philosophers. Most of the debates I have seen between AnComs and AnCaps have been between "amateurs" to say the least. It seems like kind of a shame because there are really influential thinkers on both sides and it would be an interesting watch.
The topics could include the ethics of capitalism, tactics for achieving a stateless society, economic calculation problem, problems with democratic unions, etc.
I can think of a team made up of Hans Herman Hoppe, Jeffrey Tucker, and David Friedman vs Noam Chomsky, Slavoj Zizek, and one other influential left anarchist if leftypol wants to make a suggestion.You could also use more intermediate thinkers like Tom Woods or Lew Rockwell for the AnCap side with whoever the left wants to add.
For real fun you could have a celebrity match up with the likes of Alan Moore and Dan Harmon vs Glenn Jacobs and Penn Jillette or something. Thoughts?
No.76129
>>76128
> Alan Moore
He is an ancom? Never knew that. Generally it seems like those into hermeticism and the occult become more individualists. Don't forget to throw Robert Murphy into the mix as well. For the leftists I would also add in Richard Wolff as he is probably one of their better speakers on Marxism.
No.76133
Zizek is not an anarchist.
No.76138
>>76128
What I would really like to see is a reality show where about 100 capitalists and communists are given their own islands to develop for a year. They will build, farm, fish, make useful stuff, etc… and at the end of the year various things like living comfort, work conditions, productive output, total price of exports, etc… will be measured to see which side was more prosperous. Each side will also be divided into three teams of slightly different types of communism/capitalism so that no one could say "that wasn't real communism/capitalism".
No.76144
>>76138
You do know Commies insist that their society can only exist as a result of stealing everything from capitalists, right? Commies don't believe in communism from the ground up last I checked, only from the top down in an existing system.
No.76148
Speaking of debates, how would /liberty/ feel about organizing one with /pol/ or /leftypol/ using some kind of streaming service? Each board sends up one representative that has been coached for a week in talking points and rebuttles, and each board also sends up one individual to moderate and ask ideological questions. We can first advertise and then broadcast the event online and generate publicity for the entire site. Plus it would be fun and I like fun things.
No.76152
>>76148
I like this idea a lot. Does anyone know if formal logic anon is still around? He needs to be on our short list.
No.76155
>>76148
You could even have /pol/ moderate if it is between /liberty/ and /leftypol/ or /leftypol/ moderate if it is the other way around. Where and how would you advertise though?
No.76156
>>76155
Firstly, Id make a thread on all the relevant boards sitewide, /pol/, /leftypol/, /liberty/, /b/ and /sudo/, then do the same on the halfchan analogs. Then Id probably send emails to any internet personalities who might be interested in watching, Mr Mekotour, Styx, etc. and ask them to do a mention. As long as we can guarantee a spectacle, get the other boards locked in and not pussied out, Im sure there are plenty of other places we can throw this around.
No.76159
>>76155
If you ask Ron very nicely, he will make a sitewide announcement about it, and if you ask Jim even nicer, he will make a Pisswater article.
No.76162
>>76156
Like a weekly 8chan debate tournament that would advertise the winner in the same vein as the Hungry Games?
No.76165
>>76155
wouldn't work, /leftypol/ would just say that /pol/ is biased towards /liberty/, and that you guys are the same thing.
No.76169
>>76144
Whatever you say man.
No.76173
>>76128
I would prefer not to.
>>76169
If you are indeed a Marxist, then it's absolutely correct. Doesn't necessarily have to apply to all other flavors of the Socialist rainbow. Most of Socialism is concerned solely with redistribution, not production.
No.76174
>>76173
But it is not. Marxist analysis is that communism can only be made after a long process of economic development. Through a classical slave society to a feudalist to mechantilist to capitalist to socialist to communist society. It is stealing from the Captialist in thé system of capitalism in the same sense that it is stealing from the king in a feudal or from a slaver in a slave society. The slaver may claim ligitmacy over the things that the slave produces but it is the slave that produces it. It may be the merchant that claims a commonwealth colony but it is the private owners that produces in it and psys back thier debt.
No.76175
>>76174
A employee at a company is given his choice of employers and is compensated for his labor. Slaves and serfs get neither.
No.76176
>>76129
I think Moore was an anarcho-syndicalist or something. Either way the guy has always been a lefty.
No.76178
>>76144
the soviets had to develop large sectors of their economy from the ground up. not saying it was a great system, but it has been done.
No.76184
>>76174
>Marxist analysis is that communism can only be made after a long process of economic development.
Right, because you can't really have a system of theft if there's nothing actually there to steal.
No.76187
>>76128
>Thoughts?
Not really a fan of debates. They're quite overrated, especially when both sides have fundamentally different beliefs. At least the ancaps would understand the ancoms, but not vice versa. I think so because I have never talked to or read any non-ancap who understands ancaps, with the possible exception of Edward Feser. What good is a debate when you spend half of it just clearing up what "capitalism" and "anarchism" mean to you?
>>76176
I think he was more anarchist than leftist, though.
No.76190
>>76187
I agree with this. The only 'debates' I enjoy are more like discussions with people of similar but differing values. So you're not spending an hour deciding what words mean and quarreling over every little point but instead you have a meaningful buildup as ideas are expanded upon.
Though it is fun to see someone make a fool of another person who you disagree with.
No.76191
>muh debate
that never works out
instead, let's play chess. Capitalists vs. Commies vs. Nazis
https://lichess.org/
No.76192
>>76174
So what he said was true then, you need capitalism first before you can have socialism. Socialism depends on a pre-existing capitalist system.
No.76195
>>76187
In my post put forward some of the best both camps of anarchists have to offer for a potential debate. Yes the majority of debates play out like the two caricatures in the black and white photos with neckbeard ancap vs ancom rich bitch stereotype. Even if it was just a discussion, you would expect it to be better than the average one you find on youtube or here because the best of their field should at least understand the opposing ideology and have the professionalism to spout real arguments instead of memes.
No.76196
>>76195
If you really want to do this perhaps you should get a moderator to keep things on track and prevent it from turning into a shouting match.
No.76233
>>76187
Anarchists are leftists.
No.76253
>>76187
All I know is that Moore hated Margaret Thatcher with a passion.
No.76271
>>76253
Alan (((Moore))) is a cumguzzling soyfaggot and a Mossad agent. Did you know that the amount of xenoestrogens in one soybean is equal to a tablespoon of virile nigger (((semen)))?
No.76278
No.76302
>>76278
don't misuse that quote retard, anarchism and leftism do not inherently contradict each other, not to mention those are broad as fuck terms.
reminder that Orwell was a democratic socialist who fought alongside marxists in the spanish civil war.
No.76304
>>76302
>reminder that Orwell was a democratic socialist who fought alongside marxists in the spanish civil war.
And how is that relevant, except to stroke your e-penis because someone famous was also a lefty?
No.76862
>>76302
>anarchism and leftism do not inherently contradict each other
No.76895
>>76148
/pol/ is kind of dead nowadays
No.76897
>>76869
"educate yourself shitlord"
No.76912
>>76128
is chomsky an anarchocommunist?
No.76919
>>76895
What makes you say something like that? If it is dead, it's only as "dead" as the rest of the board, if anything.
No.76924
>>76302
He also reported USSR sympathizers to the authorities, and spent the rest of his life roasting leftists.
No.76926
>>76304
It's not relevant at all, but it does trigger illiterate ancaps.
>>76862
Pfffft.
No.76931
>>76926
I wonder if Orwell collected royalties for his works.
No.76940
>>76931
Orwell did collect soyalties for his (((works))).
No.76996
>>76129
communism is individualist
No.77001
>>76996
I seriously hope you're not serious… Please for the love of God be trolling; no one can be this stupid, can they?
No.77006
>communism or captalism
I laugh at both of you ,but ofc I would side with the caps. Till the Rope Day ends he who fights be my side shall be my brother.
No.77025
No.77038
>>76912
That or an anarcho-syndicalist.
No.77103
>>76128
I like the idea
Hello /liberty/ :)))))
>>77006
>Give up your culture
Nope in fact Communists preserve culture better then capitalists since capitalists will commoditize and globalize it. Many Communists dislike the cultural power America and the English language have spread over the world. Communists want people to be painting and writing etc rather then working away to produce excess yodeling pickles to be sold to children in mcdonalds toys then dumped in landfill. Pic related
Also see CIA funding of modern art to combat the evil degenerate Socialist Realism. Pic related
>Give up your land
Private property ≠ Personal property. No Communist wants your house or your Mothers antique spoon collection
>Give up your people
Preference for your family is not "racist" in fact Communists are more family orientated since Communists desire communal living rather then the separated,distant ""nuclear family"" which is only a recent development in human society.
>Social bonds are bourgeois
Absolute top lel. Made by a spooked af nazi who probably thought the frankfurt school was anti-culture as well
No.77106
>>77103
>Private property ≠ Personal property.
<renting out my house is illegal
No.77107
>>77103
>spooked
<communist quoting a book called "a man and his property"
No.77109
>>77107
<All spooks are bad
No.77110
>>77108
>>77109
The economic failure and starvation caused by communism is not a spook
No.77117
>>77110
>The economic failure
Sure Capitalism crashes every few decades and requires constant growth impacting on the environment or invading other countries to find cheaper ways to get profits and siphon oil and shit out of the ground and and every few cycles it completely shits itself throwing hundreds of millions into poverty and fueling fascism cause only Jews and immigrants ruin Capitalism of course. But it's okay because we have yodeling pickles :) as long as you ignore the drug epidemics, the unemployed the homeless the neo-colonisation of Africa and the Middle-east for cheap resources which without our system would collapse the mental health problems and the destruction of the Environment then it's all fine.
>starvation caused by communism
Greatly overblown and more then often those suffering from it literally caused themselves to fucking die
ie kulaks burning tons of grain and slaughtering tens of millions of sheep along ignoring cows and chickens and whatever else they could kill.
Math errors in the calculation of the Chinese famine literally adding 0's on to kill counts and not even bothering to go back and fix, counting potential population growth as casualties and counting those who moved to the cities and the coast (In large numbers) as casualties. Along with 100+ years of red scare and McCarthyism propaganda
No.77120
>>77117
>capitalism requires constant growth
Uhh, this is the Austrian economics board.
>>>/keynes/ is down the street
No.77121
>>77110
Communist governments have abolished famines, which were common before their rule. They did not cause the starvation, they prevented them!
No.77122
>>77117
>communism was actually good and the failures are capitalist propaganda
capitalism has great track record of global expansion over hundreds of years and is still around, communism globally failed
No.77129
>>77122
A good track record in the global expansion of misery, maybe.
No.77130
>>77129
that is communism you are thinking of, and it cant even keep that up
No.77132
>>77117
Source the BBC (Black book Communism. Sounds very unbias) Which the West has taken as absolute undeniable truth.
>>77120
Have fun competing when the other guy can produce cheaper shit cause he's got some middle-east oil or artificially created unemployment so people will work for almost nothing cause some poor fucker over the border wants too as well. Just watch out for those damm Communist Unions
>>77122
China drags literally a Billion + people out of literal backward farming warlord (lol) shitholes torn apart by infighting and Japanese invasion moving the average life rate up from like 50 to 75 turning it into a super power.
No.77143
>Have fun competing when the other guy can blah blah blah…
Keynsian problems. No wonder you're a socialist. You think Keynsian economics is the only alternative.
No.77145
>>77132
>China
Saved by capitalist dengism, it was doing shoot before then
>Source the BBC
Plenty of other sources
>Have fun competing when the other guy can produce cheaper shit cause he's got some middle-east oil
The 3rd world shit holes can produce simple things while we do important things
No.77150
>>77143
Buy more expensive product
Or
Buy cheaper product
Hmmmmmm which one to buy with my working class wage? Now where did my home made manufacturing go???
>>77145
>Saved by capitalist dengism, it was doing shoot before then
Dengism
Capitalism
Choose one
Try market Socialism. See Yugoslavia
>Plenty of other sources
All estimates, mainly based on the book itself
The critics of the book’s claim of 94 million people killed by communism includes some the book’s own authors. One of them that is particularly noteworthy is Nicholas Werth, who is responsible for writing much of the book. Werth is on record as saying that the allegations of a death toll of communism during the 20th century of beyond 85 million as being ‘non-clarified’ and ‘unjustified’. Continuing, he says from the book that the highest possible estimate is 93 million while the lowest being 65 million. In another instance he also admitted that he alleged 15 million deaths by the Soviet Union and Courtois, the editor, seemingly pulled 5 million deaths out of thin air, which just so coincidentally happens to be about as many nazi/axis soliders that were killed in WWII by the USSR, and added it to reach 20 million. Margolin, another main writer of the book, also admitted in the previous Le Monde article that Courtois’s claim of one million killed in Vietnam is also bogus, stating that he ‘never reported a million’. In explaining why Courtois lied, they admitted that the editor was “obsessed” with trying to reach 100 million. Various authors of the book have also protested Courtois’s comparison of communism and naziism with comments such as ‘extermination camps did not exist in the USSR’ and ‘the more you compare communism and nazism, the more the differences are obvious.’
The claim that communism killed 94 million people during the 20th century, for all intents and purposes, is an outright lie that hinges on counting thousands of deaths that were not caused by communism and by having sympathies for nazis and their genocidal collaborators during WWII, as if they were victims of anything but justice. But that is a whole discussion for another time — even with the Black Book of Communism’s fake death toll, many people have taken it upon themselves to stretch that lie even more, attempting to place the death toll at 100 million. The false and inflated number of 100 million people being killed by communism over 100 years will be the number I will use just because it is the most common myth perpetuated.
>The 3rd world shit holes can produce simple things while we do important things
Using neo-conialism and debt to keep them controlled and cheap resources coming out. You sure as hell don't want the African countries getting control over all that computer wiring and over valuable resources
No.77153
>>77150
>le holocaust
>You sure as hell don't want the African countries getting control over all that computer wiring and over valuable resources
Not worried about it Africans will never take over anything unless the world collapses around them.
>Try market Socialism. See Yugoslavia
China is state capitalism
>Now where did my home made manufacturing go???
3rd world produces simple shit, 1st world produces important / hard shit.
No.77155
>>77153
>Not worried about it Africans will never take over anything unless the world collapses around them.
Idiot doesn't know about Thomas Sankara or the French still in Africa. I wonder why those US soldiers were in Niger? It's not like right next door is plenty of oil or anything or it's not like the IMF keep these countries constantly in debt spirals so cheap resources can be dug from the ground. They certainly have a LOT of money to be gained from doing so.
>China is state capitalism
Nope it's a mixed economy with plans to move back into more Socialism in 20 years, plenty of Chinese workers run the businesses themselves.
No.77156
>>77155
>Idiot doesn't know about Thomas Sankara or the French still in Africa
cause its cheaper to steal things and govern by proxy than it is to buy them outright
>Nope it's a mixed economy with plans to move back into more Socialism in 20 years, plenty of Chinese workers run the businesses themselves.
lololollo no, its run by an upper class of wealthy businessmen who drive their workers to suicide
No.77158
>>77156
>cause its cheaper to steal things and govern by proxy than it is to buy them outright
Correct especially when you don't even have to set foot inside the country to steal from it using the world bank and IMF to control these countries using debt.
>lololollo no, its run by an upper class of wealthy businessmen who drive their workers to suicide
Nope Socialist market economy with State ownership as well. You fell for an American meme.
No.77160
>>77158
>Nope Socialist market economy with State ownership as well. You fell for an American meme.
You know how little socialism there is in china? Its a mix of state capitalism, and wealthy business men.
No.77164
>>77160
>You know how little socialism there is in china? Its a mix of state capitalism, and wealthy business men.
And local business ownership on a community level is the basis of local industry. And the Government has made it clear it will be moving into more "socialism" in the next two decades as it outgrows America as a power.
Anyway I'm off to bed, you guys should organize this debate thing, just round up some shitty youtubers or something
No.77215
>>77164
I was thinking more along the lines of the intellectuals mentioned in the original posts or something. I guess that is kind of out the window. The reason why is because most of the debates between youtubers devolve into pissing contests and real thinkers would be better suited.
No.77222
>>77164
Moving back into socialism would be a suicidal move. They're going to keep saying they're about to do it, but never actually go through with it.
No.77283
>>77006
Your "third way" is just soft-socialism. You aren't a unique and special snow flake, you're just in between economic freedom and commie-cuckery.
No.77284
>>77164
>And local business ownership on a community level is the basis of local industry
Its not the average man that owns those business. Its the wealthy upper class.
>in the next two decades
Okay so its not socialist now but in 20 years they say it will be. Good to know. The capitalism seems to be working pretty well now though.
No.77352
>>77006
turd position is just special snowflake capitalism
No.77364
>>77352
>special snowflake socialism
FTFY
No.77381
>>77006
>I would side with the caps
Yeah all leftists already realize this. Historically fascism is just a tool in the hands of the capitalist class to destroy the only truly anti-system movement, socialism.
>>77364
No.77385
>>77383
The Nazis expanded gun rights for most of their citizens compared to the Wiemar Republic, but not jews. You wouldn't say that they were pro gun, would you? When privatizing, they always handed it over to a friend of the regime who would follow their orders. That on top of the several cases where they nationalized companies run by dissidents and frequent use of subsidies/price controls paints a picture of a regime that only wanted private property in the hands of people they liked.
No.77391
No.77400
>>77383
That's some disingenuous shit right there. Both Mises and Hayek were of the opinion that the Nazis were socialists. To quote them as somehow saying the opppsite must be a deliberate lie. And this paper, on Nazi privatization, says at one point that the Nazis only formally privatized businesses, but that substantially, they were the owners of the means of production.
The main text is also mainly about Italian fascism, not national socialism. Whoever made this was an idiot.
No.77406
>>76128
>Implying picture on the right on pic #1 is a good thing
Fucking fedora fags.
No.77464
>>77383
Saying National Socialism is special economically is fucking retarded, especially when basically every modern country in the world ascribes the to same Keynesian trash. China is the best example of what national socialism looks like in the modern world.
The problem is that government circlejerking with the biggest companies is a great recipe for corruption. There's no mechanism by which inefficient companies can be culled like they are in a free market.
>but that's what the all knowing benevolent dictator does!
<yeah when he's not invading random countries and telling the factories to spend all their production making unreliable meme weapons
No.77468
No.77566
>actual philosophers
>lists ecelebs
>only semidecent philosopher is zizek
the state of rightwingers
No.77625
>>77566
Since when was Zizek right wing?
No.77633
>>77566
Chomsky, Hoppe, and David D Friedman are eceleb tier?
No.77634
>>77633
No but they are not philosophers either
OK, Hoppe is definitely eceleb tier though
No.77661
>>77625
since he dislikes sjw xd
No.77676
>>77634
David Friedman isn't a philosopher. I think Chomsky isn't one, either, but I am not sure. Hoppe not only studied philosophy, he has also shown indepth knowledge on such topics as argumentation ethics and kantian empistemology. So, on what basis do you say he's not a philosopher? Because he's wrong? If that's your premise, then you could've just pointed this out.
PDF related is eceleb-tier, according to you.
No.77693
>>77364
>>77383
>>77385
>>77400
>lolbergs and commies calling eachother nazis
Every fucking time, kek.
No.77694
No.77704
No.77717
>>77633
none of those have any citations in philosophy journals you brainlet
No.77722
>>77693
First time in here and I saw your comment and this banner.
Guess this place is no different than kikebook. Or /leftpol/.Or /soyboys/.
No.77729
>fascists, nat socs and leftards want to destroy the State and their place
>lolbertarians want to destroy the state and that things will magically work out after that
really makes you think
No.77741
No.77747
No.77757
>>77566
Philosophy is gay anyway. I reject e-celebs, philosophers, and gay little Youtube "debates."
No.77759
>>77757
>Can your philosophy stop me from killing you?
My philosophy is what is driving you to want to kill.
No.77760
>>77103
I can't tell if roleplaying or legit
No.77875
>>77717
Point is to to get people more qualified than ecelebs to speak on the topic. It doesn't have to be philosophers but anyone who has sufficient background knowledge or influence in each movement. Instead of having "pee wee" debates, let's bring out the "varsity" so to speak.
No.77899
>>77747
>austrian
>economics
>pick one
Why did you link this article? Bryan Caplan is not an Austrian, but he never said that the Austrians aren't legitimate economists. His criticism is that they haven't aged well. Those are two completely different things.
Also, we talked about this article here: >>70397
Turns out that he committed several major errors. Caplan doesn't have a very strong grasp on the methodology.
No.77902
>>77899
This same idiot keeps dropping these around thinking that all libertarians are austrians. It just goes to show how much of a brainlet he is. Caplan would eviscerate his ideology, whatever it happened to be. I think this guy is a /pol/ troll.
No.77913
>>77760
Unironically believing Solzhenitsyn, I would sooner believe a Goebbels speech then that hack of a "writer". He was basically a neo-fascist Ukrainian.
You should read up on how he screeched out at the Spanish for getting rid of Franco. Or how his wife called all his writings false and based on folklore so he got some nice gibes and book sales from the fbi and West for complaining about the East
No.77914
>>77760
>Also implying since their Jewish their bad.
Nice alt-right tier jew's are naturally greedy and sneaky tier thinking
No.77924
>>76924
Because he saw what Lenin's vision of """Communism""" was, which was anti-Communist. But it was always considered a right wing deviation even before it was instituted. State capitalism was the most oppressive force in the world. There has never been a true capitalist country in existence if you follow the exist works of muh Adam Smith. The only places that have had the """free"""" market forced on them are areas that have thinks western countries want to steal and """reasonable""" price, OY VEY!
No.77925
>>77924
exact*
things*
at a* not and before """reasonable"""
No.80963
>ancap philosopher
oxymoron, the best they get is michael huemer and no academic takes him seriously
No.82784
Most forms of left wing anarchism aren't rationally intelligible ideogies and are thus not worth debating.
No.82794
Fedoras and neckbeards are very much left-wing…
No.82833
>>82794
>bumping this shit thread