Appendix : Anarchism and "anarcho"-capitalism 

This appendix exists for one reason, namely to explain why the idea
of "anarcho"-capitalism is a bogus one. While we have covered this topic
in section F, we thought that this appendix should be created in order to
discuss in more detail why anarchists reject both "anarcho"-capitalism
and its claims to being anarchist.

This appendix has three parts. The first two sections are our critique of 
Bryan Caplan's "anarcho"-capitalist "Anarchist Theory FAQ." Caplan's FAQ is 
the main on-line attempt to give the oxymoron of "anarcho"-capitalism some 
form of justification and so it is worthwhile explaining, using his FAQ as 
the base, why such an attempt fails. The last part of this appendix is the 
original version of section F. 

As we will prove, Caplan's FAQ fails in its attempt to show that "anarcho"
capitalism can be considered as part of the anarchist movement and in fact 
his account involves extensive re-writing of history. This appendix is in 
two parts, a reply to Caplan's FAQ release version 5.2 and an older reply 
to version 4.1.1 (which was originally section F.10 of the FAQ). The 
introduction to the reply to version 4.1.1 indicates what most anarchists
think of Caplan's FAQ and its claims of "objectivity" so we will not
repeat ourselves here.

We decided to replace the original version of section F with an edited 
version simply because the original section was too long in respect to 
the rest of the FAQ. While this FAQ may have started out as a rebuttal 
to "anarcho"-capitalist claims of being anarchist, it no longer is. As 
such, in an *anarchist* FAQ section F became redundant as 
"anarcho"-capitalism is a fringe ideology even within the USA. If it 
were not for their presence on the web and some academics taking their 
claims to being anarchists at face value, we would only mention them in 
passing.

We have decided to include this appendix as it is really an addition to 
the main body of the FAQ. Parties interested in why "anarcho"-capitalist
claims are false can explore this appendix, those who are interested 
in anarchist politics can read the FAQ without having to also read 
too many arguments between anarchists and capitalists. We should, 
perhaps, thank Caplan for allowing us an opportunity of explaining the 
ideas of such people as Proudhon and Tucker, allowing us to quote them 
and so bring their ideas to a wider audience and for indicating that 
anarchism, in all its forms, has always opposed capitalism and always will.


* Replies to Some Errors and Distortions in Bryan Caplan's "Anarchist Theory   
  FAQ" version 5.2

	1 Individualist Anarchists and the socialist movement
	2 Why is Caplan's definition of socialism wrong?
	3 Was Proudhon a socialist or a capitalist?
	4 Tucker on Property, Communism and Socialism
	5 Anarchism and "anarcho"-capitalism
	6 Appendix: Defining Anarchism

			***********************

* Replies to Some Errors and Distortions in Bryan Caplan's "Anarchist Theory 
  FAQ" version 4.1.1.

	1 Is anarchism purely negative?
 	2 Anarchism and Equality
 	3 Is anarchism the same thing as socialism?
 	4 Anarchism and dissidents
 	5 How would anarcho-capitalism work? 

			***********************

* Is "anarcho"-capitalism a type of anarchism?

	1 Are "anarcho"-capitalists really anarchists?
		1.1 Why is the failure to renounce hierarchy the Achilles Heel 
 		    of right-wing libertarianism? 
		1.2 How libertarian is right-Libertarian theory?
		1.3 Is right-Libertarian theory scientific in nature?
      	1.4 Is "anarcho"-capitalism a new form of individualist anarchism?

	2 What do "anarcho"-capitalists mean by "freedom?"
		2.1 What are the implications of defining liberty in  
	          terms of (property) rights?
		2.2 How does private property affect freedom?
		2.3 Can "anarcho"-capitalist theory justify the state?
		2.4 But surely transactions on the market are voluntary?
		2.5 But surely circumstances are the result of liberty  
	          and so cannot be objected to?
		2.6 Do Libertarian-capitalists support slavery?
		2.7 But surely abolishing capitalism would restrict liberty?
		2.8 Why should we reject the "anarcho"-capitalist definitions 
	          of freedom and justice?

	3 Why do 'anarcho'-capitalists generally place little or no 
	  value on equality?"
		3.1 Why is this disregard for equality important?
		3.2 But what about "anarcho"-capitalist support for charity?

	4 What is the right-libertarian position on private property?
	   	4.1 What is wrong with a "homesteading" theory of property?
		4.2 Why is the "Lockean Proviso" important?
		4.3 How does private property affect individualism?
		4.4 How does private property affect relationships?
		4.5 Does private property co-ordinate without hierarchy?

	5 Will privatising "the commons" increase liberty?

	6 Is "anarcho" capitalism against the state?
		6.1 What's wrong with this "free market" justice?
 		6.2 What are the social consequences of such a system?
 		6.3 But surely Market Forces will stop abuse by the rich?
 		6.4 Why are these "defence associations" states?
 		6.5 What other effects would "free market" justice have?

	7 How does the history of "anarcho"-capitalism show that
        it is not anarchist?
		7.1 Are competing governments anarchism?
		7.2 Is government compatible with anarchism?
		7.3 Can there be a "right-wing" anarchism?

	8 What role did the state take in the creation of capitalism?
		8.1 What social forces lay behind the rise of capitalism?
 		8.2 What was the social context of the statement "laissez-faire"?
 		8.3 What other forms did state intervention in creating 
 		    capitalism take?
		8.4 Aren't the enclosures a socialist myth?
		8.5 What about the lack of enclosures in the Americas?
 		8.6 How did working people view the rise of capitalism?
		8.7 Why is the history of capitalism important?

	9 Is Medieval Iceland an example of "anarcho"-capitalism working in 
        practice?

	10 Would laissez-faire capitalism be stable?
		10.1 Would privatising banking make capitalism stable?
		10.2 How does the labour market effect capitalism?
		10.3 Was laissez-faire capitalism stable?

	11 What is the myth of "Natural Law"?
		11.1 Why "Natural Law" in the first place?
 		11.2 But "Natural Law" provides protection for individual 
 	           rights from violation by the State. Those against 
 	           Natural Law desire total rule by the state.
 		11.3 Why is "Natural Law" authoritarian?
		11.4 Does "Natural Law" actually provides protection for 
	           individual liberty?
	 	11.5 But Natural Law was discovered, not invented!
		11.6 Why is the notion of "discovery" contradictory?
