Forums of the Libertarian Left

What school of thought do you support? Only 1 vote, to keep the numbers representative.

I'm somewhere between a mutualist and an agorist, leaning towards agorism. I like the idea of a free market economy made up of small workers' cooperatives and self-employed entrepreneurs, and I support the idea of radical labor activity to bring the large-scale factories and whatnot into the counter-economy.

Although Agorist and Left-Rothbardian would both describe my views I'd have to say Voluntaryist describes them the best.

Ultimately, I'm an individualist anarchist. Anarchism is ultimately about the individual and what he chooses to do.

I'm an anarchist without adjective. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarchism_without_adjective My ideological influences range from mutualism to autonomism http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autonomism.

I mostly identify as a libertarian socialist. I'm not sure what is meant by "please specify?" I find myself in agreement with Marx, Tucker, Spooner, and Kropotkin on a lot of issues. Probably more than I would Von Mises, Rand, or Rothbard.

Mutualist, more than any other label.

I came from Marxism, through anarcho-syndicalism, and I don't reject syndicalism, though I'm increasingly critical of Marxism.

Libertarian socialist, and more specifically mutualist (not sure why these have been made two categories: I voted mutualist).

I'm an Agorist and I'd say that's about it.

I'd define myself as more of a Mutualist to Left Rothbardian than anything, but my main concerns for left libertarianism are almost entirely relegated to strategy and tactical execution.

I don't care if you're a left Rothbardian or a libertarian socialist. If we can use you, great.


I'd like to be the Errico Malatesta of Left-Libertarianism.

Niccolo wrote:I'm an Agorist and I'd say that's about it.

I'd like to be the Errico Malatesta of Left-Libertarianism.

Well you're certainly half way there with the Italian ancestry.


I voted Agorist, though I'm not so much influenced by Anarcho-Capitalism any more. The one thing idea I still hold onto is the non-coercion principle, as I think this is absolutely imperative.

RoyceChristian wrote:

Niccolo wrote:I'm an Agorist and I'd say that's about it.

I'd like to be the Errico Malatesta of Left-Libertarianism.

Well you're certainly half way there with the Italian ancestry.


I voted Agorist, though I'm not so much influenced by Anarcho-Capitalism any more. The one thing idea I still hold onto is the non-coercion principle, as I think this is absolutely imperative.

Just curious: what disagreements do you have with anarcho-capitalism?

I'm a libertarian socialist, more specifically an anarchist. But I don't define myself as anything further then that.

Just curious: what disagreements do you have with anarcho-capitalism?

Mainly things like self ownership -- it's a rather simplistic way of explaining property, freedom and opposition to the state. Then there's the arrogance of some Anarcho-Capitalists. Of course not all are arrogant, but I've noticed that a certain know-it-all streak exists amongst some groups of Anarcho-Capitalists. Unless I am mistaken, I also have a problem with their rejection of 'common property' and staunch support of hard propertarianism that doesn't allow for communal ownership, even when voluntary. Even the defence of corporations is somewhat of a put off.

Lastly, you have Anarcho-Capitalisms lack of any method to achieve a stateless society, with the exception of education. Some Anarcho-Capitalists would prefer to debate online, which I would not normally have a problem with except that they refuse to eve entertain the notion of getting involved in some form of activism.

Though I'm aware that Agorism and Agorists are supposed to be, 'more Rothbardian than Rothbard,' Agorism to me is a distinct and unique evolution of Anarcho-Capitalism, taking the best it has to offer and taking it to a new level.

I would say I am an agorist...

Holding the principles of property and economic of anarcho-capitalism,
Trying to practice the non-agression principle to both myself and others,
Subscribing to agosrist class theory with an addition to capitalist, bureaucrats and politicians as ultimate evil ruling class,
Want to bring up my children(if I get any) using the methods of the TCS(Taking Children Seriously),
Having a syndicalist influenced viewpoint of business,
Revolutionary practices of Stefan Molyneux and Konkin
And at all cost do not break, vandalize or destroy in anyway any kind of goods(Even unkowned goods such as which state and corporations illegitimately claim to own) cause it took effort and work from someone to create that and I do not want to dimminish the general welfare of society.

I am mutualist in most everyway except on the question of land where I am a geo-libertarian...so I am a "geo-mutualist"

JosiahWarren wrote:I am mutualist in most everyway except on the question of land where I am a geo-libertarian...so I am a "geo-mutualist"

Likewise though I think Kevin Carson is persuading me that geo-mutualism is better suited as a transitional stance. I guess for now I'll vote mutualist.

Also, it's interesting to hear autonomism mentioned. Very cool to see it represented here.

I am rather ignorant in these matters, but how does geo-mutualism not contradict itself? Mutualism is against rent, and georgism is based on the concept of rent.

Francois Tremblay wrote:I am rather ignorant in these matters, but how does geo-mutualism not contradict itself? Mutualism is against rent, and georgism is based on the concept of rent.

Geo-mutualism, which is a term I've only heard twice (this forum and here) but as I understand it it would require a rejection of the part of mutualism that deals with property in land or natural resources (you could remain mutualist concerning non-natural property) and substituing into it the Georgist idea. This wouldn't defeat other mutualist pillars (Tucker's big four) such as rejection of the monopoly on money, patents and tariffs. It would also take the mutualist position on capitalism (something that is different from Georgism proper, I believe) and the LTV. How funny, I just realized it's the LTV and LVT (land-value tax).

Kevin Carson wrote:It's a great intermediate stage [Georgism used to fund a basic dividend]: so long as there are taxes, taxes on rent and negative externalities are the least unjust, and so long as there is welfare a guaranteed income is the least bureaucratic and authoritarian way of doing it. Since I have no principled objection to Georgism, I also believe a basic income funded by land rent would be perfectly consistent with a stateless society in those areas that chose to adopt it. I just don't buy the principled arguments *for* it.

There is more on his blog on the left panel.

Random question - is Voluntaryist just another name for Agorist?

No, Agorist is defined by their support, promotion and/or practice of counter economics to agitate for change. A voluntaryist is someone who believes that all decisions should be voluntary. Voluntaryist is a more general category than Agorist, and doesn't focus on counter economics, though one can also be a proponent of the other. Or at least that's how I understand it.

i believe the Voluntaryists are followers of robert lefevre who are pacifists rather than allowing force is legitimate in defense. and they abstain from voting and any other political activities. i haven't looked into it much, but i am a pacifist myself.
see: http://www.voluntaryist.com/

of course royce is right & as i see it one could easily be a voluntaryist, agorist, left-rothbardian mutualist as i dont see any of them contradicting each other (though there might be some tension between left-rothbardian and mutualism i dont think they are irreconcilable) the same cant be said of the endless permutations of social/communist/etc/etc/ anarchisms that populate infoshop can it? bless their hearts.

as for myself i see value in all the above and while not a practicing agorist i hope to begin working towards tax protesting and self employment. i also identify w/christian anarchists like dorothy day, ammon hennacy and tolstoy though i am not strictly a believer myself.

Actually, I have argued with people who support "anything voluntary" because they support voluntary capitalism. Voluntaryism is definitely not compatible with mutualism. But I still support them anyway.

what is your definition of voluntary capitalism and why do you put anything voluntary it in scare quotes?

if we take capitalism to mean only state capitalism then voluntary capitalism is a contradiction in terms if it means the free market then whats the problem?

Ceapmann wrote:Random question - is Voluntaryist just another name for Agorist?

Actually, as far as I know, it started as a anti-voting group of anarcho-capitalists, independent of Konkin and agorism. George H. Smith was (is?) a prominent Voluntaryist. It seems that the term has gained a wider meaning as of late, to basically be a synonym of "market anarchist" without using the A-word. On a side note, I once saw a "Ron Paul Revolution" banner with a Voluntaryist-V. The person using apparently didn't get the irony .