Comments on: UK “Anarchists” Protest Government Spending Cuts

By: Michael Suede

Michael Suede — Fri, 01 Jul 2011 16:13:00 +0000

So by your logic, reducing the size of the State is bad, but you don’t want a State.

That is an illogical viewpoint to have.

Rothbard felt that any step toward liberty was good, which is why he supported the libertarian party’s ideals. However, Rothbard wouldn’t have advocated rioting if the State cut handouts, he would have applauded it.

I could understand rioting because the banks got huge bailouts, but I can not understand rioting because a bunch of socialist leeches are getting fired.

Socialist anarchists are idiots. You can’t have socialism without a State. It is logically impossible. Someone has to direct the structure of production. Someone has to allocate resources. There is no possible way for the market to rationally allocate resources without a price structure under a socialist construct. It necessarily requires a State to accomplish this feat. This was demonstrated by Mises in his Socialist Economic Calculation Problem.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economic_calculation_problem

By: Charles

Charles — Fri, 01 Jul 2011 15:33:00 +0000

Anarchists see the cuts as a direct attack on the working class. While the state continues to bail out banks and fund wars with tax payers money they cut services that weaken the working/middle classes. When this sector of society is divided and weak there is no chance of ending statism. Defending the mechanisms in the state that protect and strengthen the working class is one step on the road to eventually abolishing the state.

This is a very leftist view but it does not make it illogical or an oxymoron (you can’t have oxymoronic concepts, only oxymoronic phrases, what you mean is ‘contradictory’). Class politics can be used as a way off changing the status-quo and should not be neglected just because of it’s popularity with the left.

Of course I could argue that Rothbard’s support of a politcal party as a means of Libertarian change was inherently statist and contradictory, but that would be an unfair, over-simplified misrepresentation of his views wouldn’t it?

The state can be seen as coercive monopoly or an institution to defend capital. Both are a valid analytical perspectives. To dogmatically assert one as the ‘correct’ analysis is naive and impetuous.

Oh and don’t lump all socialists in with authoritarian centralists and marxists. A business could be run co-operatively, democratically and not for profit without any involvement from a state institution and thus be socialist. But that’s one step closer to North Korea isn’t it? Oh and if a country was ‘socialist’ it would be ’2nd world’ not ’3rd world’ but these terms not longer have academic credibility.

Anyway, just worried about your misrepresentation of the anarchist viewpoint on the cuts.

By: The Digital Glebe

The Digital Glebe — Fri, 01 Jul 2011 08:56:00 +0000

Spot on Mr Suede, it’s an ‘entitlement culture’ gone mad over here. Pretend anarchists rioting for more state handouts is pretty hilarious…….but this is a recurring theme in the uk & there’ll be no end to it until we become Albania.

Best,
GD