It’s not a thing, excepting people who don’t know the meaning of the word.
Anarchism is about deconstruction of social hierarchies. This is completely incompatible with all right-wing movements which are fundamentally about strengthening some or all of them.
First, no, actually most right-libertarians do not oppose the existence of the nation-state, they just think it should be more limited than it currently is—often in favor of strong state government, which anarchists also oppose.
But again, anarchism is about opposition to all social hierarchies, not just the state. So this includes racial hierarchies, patriarchy, class stratification, and most importantly for this discussion, capitalism. Right-libertarians are pro-capitalist, and they are generally not opposed to several of the other hierarchies I mentioned.
Beyond both being at least somewhat skeptical of state power, there is little agreement between the two ideologies.
Also, I would argue that MAGA’s emphasis on executive power is incompatible with even right-libertarians, so it’s not really possible to support trump and be a libertarian unless you are profoundly ignorant or your commitment to libertarianism is completely performative.
So the bottom part of this meme just doesn’t make any sense at all.
Agree 100% but wanna add that some right wing libertarians like to glob on to the A because they fashion themselves as chaotic or watched V for Vendetta one time and now have Batman complexes. Obviously they are completely ignorant of anarchist philosophy. I think the OP is similarly ignorant here (sorry OP, not meaning that as a slight against you – most people think anarchy just means no government or chaos or whatever)
Edit: oh yeah, as others have mentioned there are also ancaps, which are oxymoronic but I’m sure they don’t really care
Yeah I get that there are right-wing people who call themselves anarchists, and some who are called this by others like OP.
The problem is that none of these people are educated at all on the history or principles of anarchism, so they are using the word incorrectly. They are no more anarchist than North Korea is democratic.
I agree but also I think you’re getting at a broader issue of the cooption/reclaimation of words, and the problem of language being fluid.
Unfortunately for anarchism, its been an uphill battle. In Plato’s The Republic, Socrates refers to anarchy in the negative context we mostly see it used today, similar to just pure chaos.
The term was reclaimed by Proudhon in the 19th century as he developed anarchist philosophy, but I’m not sure the term ever really got divorced from the negative connotation it had. And so I think we still see people use anarchism to refer to any anti state belief, or chaos, in general. Are they wrong or right? Eh. Id like to say they’re wrong because I was really moved when I read Kropotkin and Graeber and whatever. But then again, I’m not gonna really get mad when someone uses “gentleman” for a polite man instead of a member of the landed gentry or whatever the term “gentleman” used to mean.
This is all me being an armchair linguist though and kinda talking outta my ass so take that for what you will
Edit: I just read your objection about the mischaracterization of anarchism as a movement because of all this – and yeah that is a problem for sure. It does make it difficult to describe to people, “I’m not talking about anarchism like you normally think, like pure chaos. I’m talking about anarchism as a political philosophy. See, in the 19th century there were these dudes…” Yeah, that gets pretty old. But idk my opinion is conflicted on this because my personal philosophy around language tends liberal due to their fluid nature
Yeah that’s all fair, although I will note that Aristotle was not writing in English, so the implication that this is the same word seems a little questionable.
Sometimes I wish that there was a different and better word to describe the movement, but that’s the one early theorists chose. I think their ideas remain foundational to the movement, and the linguistic connection remains important. Feminism sometimes suffers from a similar if less severe version of this issue.
There is libertarian socialism which is not exactly the same but could be used instead. But it’s a mouthful and those words have their own baggage, some of which has already come up in this thread.
Ultimately, the point of words is to communicate clearly and be understood by as many people as possible. There might be other solutions or ways to communicate but with all this in mind I still feel the best solution is asking people to use the word only for the movement and not these other ideas. But I’m happy to hear if anyone has an alternative.
I knew what you meant but as an anarchist I have to object because you are contributing to this widespread misunderstanding of our movement and what we’re actually advocating for. The Trump administration is a perfect example of the abuses that the state empowers, so I think it’s a crucial time for people to learn about alternatives. This is difficult if people think anarchist just means some violent anti-government mass-shooter type. It is a specific, historical political tradition with lots of deep, insightful thinkers and practical solutions to a wide variety of today’s problems.
It’s not a thing, excepting people who don’t know the meaning of the word.
Anarchism is about deconstruction of social hierarchies. This is completely incompatible with all right-wing movements which are fundamentally about strengthening some or all of them.
Have you never heard of the US Libertarian party? lol
I’ve heard of them, they’re just not anarchists. Especially the MAGA ones.
They want to more or less end the government, what else would you call them? Sorry, but anarchists come in a variety of flavors
They want to replace the government with capitalist business. That is not anarchy; it’s a different form of hierarchy. Those two words are opposites.
First, no, actually most right-libertarians do not oppose the existence of the nation-state, they just think it should be more limited than it currently is—often in favor of strong state government, which anarchists also oppose.
But again, anarchism is about opposition to all social hierarchies, not just the state. So this includes racial hierarchies, patriarchy, class stratification, and most importantly for this discussion, capitalism. Right-libertarians are pro-capitalist, and they are generally not opposed to several of the other hierarchies I mentioned.
Beyond both being at least somewhat skeptical of state power, there is little agreement between the two ideologies.
Also, I would argue that MAGA’s emphasis on executive power is incompatible with even right-libertarians, so it’s not really possible to support trump and be a libertarian unless you are profoundly ignorant or your commitment to libertarianism is completely performative.
So the bottom part of this meme just doesn’t make any sense at all.
Agree 100% but wanna add that some right wing libertarians like to glob on to the A because they fashion themselves as chaotic or watched V for Vendetta one time and now have Batman complexes. Obviously they are completely ignorant of anarchist philosophy. I think the OP is similarly ignorant here (sorry OP, not meaning that as a slight against you – most people think anarchy just means no government or chaos or whatever)
Edit: oh yeah, as others have mentioned there are also ancaps, which are oxymoronic but I’m sure they don’t really care
Yeah I get that there are right-wing people who call themselves anarchists, and some who are called this by others like OP.
The problem is that none of these people are educated at all on the history or principles of anarchism, so they are using the word incorrectly. They are no more anarchist than North Korea is democratic.
I agree but also I think you’re getting at a broader issue of the cooption/reclaimation of words, and the problem of language being fluid.
Unfortunately for anarchism, its been an uphill battle. In Plato’s The Republic, Socrates refers to anarchy in the negative context we mostly see it used today, similar to just pure chaos.
The term was reclaimed by Proudhon in the 19th century as he developed anarchist philosophy, but I’m not sure the term ever really got divorced from the negative connotation it had. And so I think we still see people use anarchism to refer to any anti state belief, or chaos, in general. Are they wrong or right? Eh. Id like to say they’re wrong because I was really moved when I read Kropotkin and Graeber and whatever. But then again, I’m not gonna really get mad when someone uses “gentleman” for a polite man instead of a member of the landed gentry or whatever the term “gentleman” used to mean.
This is all me being an armchair linguist though and kinda talking outta my ass so take that for what you will
Edit: I just read your objection about the mischaracterization of anarchism as a movement because of all this – and yeah that is a problem for sure. It does make it difficult to describe to people, “I’m not talking about anarchism like you normally think, like pure chaos. I’m talking about anarchism as a political philosophy. See, in the 19th century there were these dudes…” Yeah, that gets pretty old. But idk my opinion is conflicted on this because my personal philosophy around language tends liberal due to their fluid nature
Yeah that’s all fair, although I will note that Aristotle was not writing in English, so the implication that this is the same word seems a little questionable.
Sometimes I wish that there was a different and better word to describe the movement, but that’s the one early theorists chose. I think their ideas remain foundational to the movement, and the linguistic connection remains important. Feminism sometimes suffers from a similar if less severe version of this issue.
There is libertarian socialism which is not exactly the same but could be used instead. But it’s a mouthful and those words have their own baggage, some of which has already come up in this thread.
Ultimately, the point of words is to communicate clearly and be understood by as many people as possible. There might be other solutions or ways to communicate but with all this in mind I still feel the best solution is asking people to use the word only for the movement and not these other ideas. But I’m happy to hear if anyone has an alternative.
Think of this way, I’m specifically speaking about the ones who don’t understand it yet claim it.
I knew what you meant but as an anarchist I have to object because you are contributing to this widespread misunderstanding of our movement and what we’re actually advocating for. The Trump administration is a perfect example of the abuses that the state empowers, so I think it’s a crucial time for people to learn about alternatives. This is difficult if people think anarchist just means some violent anti-government mass-shooter type. It is a specific, historical political tradition with lots of deep, insightful thinkers and practical solutions to a wide variety of today’s problems.
Wiggler, please see my reply to your first post
Yeah yeah, I gotchu. Overall, great meme
Anti-statists.
Anarchism is explicitly anti-capitalist.
Ending federal government != ending hierarchy or the state. As you said yourself, they’re radical libertarians, not anarchists.
They stole ‘libertarian’ too, used to mean anarchist.