You must log in or register to comment.


gamebox3000 wrote

Semi-serious answer:

Neolibrals want to use the government as a tool of violence against the poor wielded collectively by the rich so there isn't literal infighting.

An-caps want to abbolish the government and let corporations directly and individually act in violence to the poor with no oversight from their peers.


ziq wrote

..which would make the corporations into governments for all intents and purposes.


RosaReborn wrote

Shhhh....They get mad when you point out all power hierarchies are bullshit


edmund_the_destroyer wrote

In practical terms, if the only power structure in the land is concentration of wealth by individuals or corporations then those individuals or corporations will buy themselves a new government that they control.

So an-cap policy leads to neoliberalism anyway.


rtsn wrote

At least here in sweden, in the sense that one even can talk about self-identifying neo-liberalists now days, they are almost always pro-state in some respect while "anarcho"-capitalists are explicitly against the state, to put the difference simply.

I don't I've ever seen an ancap self-identify as neo-liberal or vice versa here. Regarding self-identification I think there is a greater overlap of "classical liberal" and ancap.


RedEmmaSpeaks wrote

I never got how they got the label "Neo-Liberal." Given that their ideology is pretty much the Ayn Rand version of Conservatism, it feels odd for them to have the label "liberal" at the end of their name. We can talk about how the Democratic Party sucks and how so many Liberal groups do not go far enough, but the philosophy governing Liberalism is that everyone should be free to live their lives as they see fit, so long as it harms no one else in the process, and power is dangerous, regardless of whether it is a government organization or a corporation, and needs to be kept in check. How is anything about the Neo-Liberals, well, liberal?