Individualists don't hold to the idea of property at all. Max Stirner famously declared that everything is his and everything is yours.
I know what Stirner wrote, all aphorism and no real life. Meanwhile, real Individualists in the real world were going about trying to get as much property as possible for themselves.
In the eyes of an egoist, everything in the world is his property and this idea is mutual amongst egoists.
Yes, ''Clash of the Titans'', man, winner take all. So far from their minds is the idea of property not being real at all.
I'm not particularly sure you understand human nature. Especially with the modern information we have now.
I especially understand human nature because there's absolutely nothing new under the sun, nothing, and especially in the realm of human thought. That comment makes you something of a philosophical Idealist, btw. Give yourself some time, you'll see.
Also if you've read Stirner you know what an actual individualist is so you have no excuse for calling ancaps "individualists" to any degree.
''Actual'' as in something in a book by some poor fool who killed himself, or ''actual'' as in genuinely lived ''Individualism''?
I can believe that the public bus is an extension of my individual being but that doesn't make it so.
But you're not an egoist Individualist who believes in private property, either. Nor am I, for that matter, which makes this exchange particularly curious.
From an egoist perspective, property is an extension of individuals but it is also tyranny as well. As Proudhon said, "Property is theft! Property is liberty!". It's a juxtaposition.
Again, making Marx's commentary on Proudhon all the more correct. Nor was Proudhon or Stirner's views identical by any means.
Then why spend all this time writing a book on PoFo when you should just write on paper?
Would you read it? As I said, it's not for you that I write, or even myself.
For an anti-civilizationist, you are remarkably technological. You write to your online friends on an internet forum on a thread which resembles a full book.
And Engels owned a factory. But the best reply I can make is, while I know the sickness, it does not mean that I will survive the illness myself. For me it's either ''Socialism or Barbarism'' as Rosa Luxemburg once said, and I will be fine either way.
Anti-Civilization =/= anti-technology anyways
It's quite ironic.
You reach people better where they are, not where they're not.
What do you think "human nature" is? I take an anti-essentialist perspective on human nature. Given that we have reached a point where we are self aware of the fact that we evolve
I refuse the alleged ''fact'' that we ''evolve''. You really haven't been reading this thread intently.
as well as being technologically capable of creating whatever environment suits our needs, human nature can be anything.
And the skies will turn to cotton candy and the seas will turn to lemonade
Total Bullshit. You wish it to be so, doesn't make it so.
I'm Syrian being all optimistic and you're a Westerner living in a cushy apartment building talking about "the fragility of human civilization" with a solemn face.
You assume I'm a ''Westerner'' in a ''cushy apartment'', and i've actually lived
the ''fragility of human civilization''. Do you think I'm a Socialist because I'm some dreamy eyed enthusiast, some college kid whose experience of life equals donkey shit up to that point in their short existence?
No. You're flat out wrong. About many, many things. But life is going to teach you.
For God's sake Anarcho-capitalists literally stole the term Anarchism from actual Anarchists. The guy who made Ancapism gloated about the theft in one of his books.
The Anarchist said; ''they stole''
... Oh, the horror, the horror... . They saw a term that fit their Ideology, like myself and others who took the word ''Bolshevik'' and made a new ideological descriptive term; ''National Bolshevik''.
Of course, if there's anything Capitalists are good at, it's theft.
They're not the only ones who do it, theft, but yes of course.
No, it's not. For starters the American pioneer thing is a myth and was encouraged by the state so it's not very individualist.
No, it is a myth, but it's a believed myth, a myth that comes from Protestantism. But being a 15 year old Syrian in A.H. 1441 you might not know much about the impact of Protestantism upon the American experience
Secondly, American individualism started with anti-capitalism.
No, it did not. Read Max Weber if you can. It was Protestant Christianity.
Furthermore, Ancapism literally gets money from the Koch brothers. That's the only reason anyone even knows about it.
It does? Does it get it in nice gold bars too?
No, ''Anarcho-Capitalism'' is akin to what many societies go through, like Medieval Japan, Western Europe during the Middle Ages, and the ''Old West'' during the phase of settlement of North America. Later, some radical Libertarians put a name on it and an intellectual and philosophical pedigree.
Now, I'll be talking about Anarchism some more in a month or so, but for now, I'm going to be focused on some pretty eschatological and apocalyptic stuff; the rise of President Donald Trump and what it means to my worldview and to the rest of the world in general.
As I say, relevant and engaged with the real world.
But man is a fickle and disreputable creature and perhaps, like a chess-player, is interested in the process of attaining his goal rather than the goal itself.