So there's this "anarchist" conference...

[Giggan]

The college next door to me is having this 'radical theory and practice' conference, April 24-26. I'll be pretty much done with school by then, and begin my drive back to NH from Sarasota, FL April 28th, so I've got nothing to lose.

Before researching it, I figured it would be not real anarchism, but rather state-reluctant socialism...and I appear to be right.

http://theoryandpracticeconference.wordpress.com/news/

With a little luck, I'll manage to stomach notions of voluntary exchange being wage slavery, and cutting down trees being terrorism, etc. I'm thinking maybe I can corrupt the minds of some socialists, just throwing some of the ideas of liberty out onto the table.

Anyone have any experience dealing with imitation anarchists? Anything I should know before entering the lion's den?

[BillKauffman]

Anyone have any experience dealing with imitation anarchists?

Anarchism is against all forms of authority - both in the political, economic and social spheres.

There is such a thing as a difference between state socialism and anarchism that leads to non-state socialism where labor is merely "put in possession of it's own".

http://praxeology.net/BT-SSA.htm

excerpt:
From Smith's principle that labor is the true measure of price – or, as Warren phrased it, that cost is the proper limit of price – these three men made the following deductions: that the natural wage of labor is its product; that this wage, or product, is the only just source of income (leaving out, of course, gift, inheritance, etc.); that all who derive income from any other source abstract it directly or indirectly from the natural and just wage of labor; that this abstracting process generally takes one of three forms, – interest, rent, and profit; that these three constitute the trinity of usury, and are simply different methods of levying tribute for the use of capital; that, capital being simply stored-up labor which has already received its pay in full, its use ought to be gratuitous, on the principle that labor is the only basis of price; that the lender of capital is entitled to its return intact, and nothing more; that the only reason why the banker, the stockholder, the landlord, the manufacturer, and the merchant are able to exact usury from labor lies in the fact that they are backed by legal privilege, or monopoly; and that the only way to secure labor the enjoyment of its entire product, or natural wage, is to strike down monopoly.

It must not be inferred that either Warren, Proudhon, or Marx used exactly this phraseology, or followed exactly this line of thought, but it indicates definitely enough the fundamental ground taken by all three, and their substantial thought up to the limit to which they went in common. And, lest I may be accused of stating the positions and arguments of these men incorrectly, it may be well to say in advance that I have viewed them broadly, and that, for the purpose of sharp, vivid, and emphatic comparison and contrast, I have taken considerable liberty with their thought by rearranging it in an order, and often in a phraseology, of my own, but, I am satisfied, without, in so doing, misrepresenting them in any essential particular.

It was at this point – the necessity of striking down monopoly – that came the parting of their ways. Here the road forked. They found that they must turn either to the right or to the left, – follow either the path of Authority or the path of Liberty. Marx went one way; Warren and Proudhon the other. Thus were born State Socialism and Anarchism.

[Giggan]

My definition:

If you're going to use force against me, whether you call it government or not, you're a statist. Or a criminal. One in the same.

It's not socialism if it's voluntary; it's charity, it's contracting to share capital, it's capitalism.

[AntonLee]

no matter how many times you tell people what you think an anarchist is, they'll still picture you putting on a black bandanna over your face and tossing bricks through windows.  They'll hear songs in their head like "Baby, I'm an anarchist" that spout off about destroying the local Starbucks.

I choose Voluntaryist, and it still takes a bit to not call myself an anarchist.  The word has been corrupted.  I still like the word, but too many posers, too many weird looks from the girlfriend's family. . . too much.

"oh but you're an anarchist Tony. . . oh no I'm a voluntaryist now!"

[BillKauffman]

My definition:

If you're going to use force against me, whether you call it government or not, you're a statist. Or a criminal. One in the same.

It's not socialism if it's voluntary; it's charity, it's contracting to share capital, it's capitalism.

In non-state socialism or mutualism (freed market, anti-capitalism) there would be very little wages labor. Labor would get it's full product and be in possession of capital (laborism).

http://www.mutualist.org/

In capitalism - capital commands labor with the help of the state.
In laborism - labor naturally commands capital without the help of a state.

[Lloyd Danforth]

In Reality:

Sometimes capital commands labor with the help of the state.
Sometimes capital commands labor due to  economic conditions at the time.
Sometimes labor commands capital with the help of the state.
Sometimes labor commands capital due to  economic conditions at the time.

[Russell Kanning]

he could also call himself a non-violent anarchist or revolutionary or radical who doesn't initiate force

[thinkliberty]

I like the term:  'non-violent statist,' which would make them violent statists. 

[Giggan]

In capitalism - capital commands labor with the help of the state.

Whatever Karl Marx! The state does not enable capitalism, it is the opponent of capitalism.

I use corporatism to define people profiting from statist protection.

In laborism - labor naturally commands capital without the help of a state.

Never heard of laborism before,but if there's no state, and it's voluntary, it would be voluntaryism/free marketeerism/anarcho-capitalism, and I guess agorism fits to (in ends, at least). What do you mean 'labor commands capital'? If an exchange is voluntary, I don't see anyone as inherently in control.

[Giggan]

The event wrapped up today...it ended up being a great experience, a lot of fun. Those pseudo-anarchists know how to party. I met tons of people, got in adventures, all just days before I'm leaving Florida...oh well.

There was a lot of positive rights, being rich isn't kosher, and tribalist stuff I had to roll my eyes about. This one dude I met at an afterparty had never met an anarcho-capitalist before, and to be honest, I'd never met an anti-capitalist anarchist before. We had a good, long, friendly chat, and realized how much we have in common.

The violence necessary to abolish 'capitalism' was an elephant in the room, as most of the attendees expressed non-violent, and sometimes claiming to be individualistic viewpoints. Also, lots of corporatist/capitalist confusion. In the end though, great meeting of the minds.

[nemoslaw]

DEFCON 17 Las Vegas end of August...non violent anarchists, someone needs to start a 2600 club in NH

[Bill St. Clair]

I call myself a crypto-anarcho-libertarian. Crypto because I'm into computers and cryptography. Anarcho because I believe in rules, not rulers. Libertarian because I practice the Zero Aggression Principle. But I've come to think that maybe "Agorist" is a better word to use, especially since it proposes action in denial of the state's authority. But voluntaryist works for me, too.

[akmisrmaadi]

people can make up labels for everything.

capitalism exists whether or not the government controls it or the private sector controls it.

capital will always exist or nothing could possible every get produced.

i think the closest thing to what you want is "free-market" capitalism.

[John Edward Mercier]

Without government intervention capitalism breaks down...

[akmisrmaadi]

Without government intervention capitalism breaks down...

um ok

so without government i wouldn't be able to produce a product and sell it to someone else.

interesting.

which type of economic system are you advocating?