• rottingleaf@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    3 months ago

    I think you have a fundamental misunderstanding of what private property is.

    That’s damn certain, I’ve only seen any discussion on the possible separation of such 1) in Russian language, 2) it’s specific to your ideology, so requires clarification of terms.

    Also I’m not sure if you understand exactly where capitalism begins and ends compared to other concepts like money, trade, and markets.

    Same with this. People mean all kinds of things saying “capitalism”. It requires clarifying which exact meaning you are using.

    It’s shocking to me how much trouble people have imagining non-capitalist systems, propaganda has successfully conflated the idea of capitalism with economy, and with freedom. You’re more a victim of that than anything else, so no hard feelings.

    Well, no hard feelings, but when I try to extract specific statements from this sentence, I get none. A bit similar to the Imperial ambassador’s words from “Foundation” book.

    Anarcho-capitalism is a contradictory ideology and there’s no way to reconcile those two things together. Capitalism must be rejected in any egalitarian society.

    Anarcho-capitalism does not necessarily involve capitalism (depends on the definition of that). It’s a name that stuck.

    • jorp@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      3 months ago

      Yikes dawg how does one communicate with someone whose ideological landscape is full of missing definitions and contradictory definitions? There’s a lot to untangle here and I’m not willing or able to do that for you. I can only suggest reading more anarchist sources. I typically share this one as a decent conceptual intro https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/peter-gelderloos-anarchy-works although I don’t agree with everything it says.

      I’m finding it difficult to be talking to an “anarcho-capitalist” who doesn’t seem to agree or identify with either anarchism or capitalism nor have confidence in their understanding of the terms.

      Maybe don’t be so quick to label yourself, let your mind explore without the baggage of assuming what you are a priori.

      • rottingleaf@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        3 months ago

        Yikes dawg how does one communicate with someone whose ideological landscape is full of missing definitions and contradictory definitions?

        That’s not what I’ve said. I’ve said that your definitions are subjective to your own ideology. Thus they require clarification when used.

        There’s a lot to untangle here and I’m not willing or able to do that for you. I can only suggest reading more anarchist sources. I typically share this one as a decent conceptual intro https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/peter-gelderloos-anarchy-works although I don’t agree with everything it says.

        I’ve read Kropotkin. For everything good, against everything bad, no specifics, no mechanisms, and how animals don’t hurt each other for power (in fact they do).

        I’m finding it difficult to be talking to an “anarcho-capitalist” who doesn’t seem to agree or identify with either anarchism or capitalism nor have confidence in their understanding of the terms.

        I’ve even explained to you how ancap is just a common name and what the ideology called that actually is. That your brain skips anything you don’t expect from this conversation is your own flaw, sorry.

        Maybe don’t be so quick to label yourself, let your mind explore without the baggage of assuming what you are a priori.

        That’s amazing.