@@WeegeeSlayer123 anarchism is defined by the Deletion of hierarchy, hierchy who is defenintly needed in capitalism so by définition "anarcho'' capitalisme is just have a piece of land where the rule of stronger is always the best
@@WeegeeSlayer123 anarcho-capitalism more based on objectivism than anarchism. The only thing anarcho-capitalism and anarchism agree on is the abolition of the state. However many anarchists would argue that unregulated capitalism will lead to tyranny, hierarchy , and authoritarianism such as in the Belgian Congo and British East India where famines and genocides were the norm despite no state oversight. If anything unrestrained capitalism could be argued to be more dangerous than statism, though less stable and likely to last.
An-Syndicalism is a social anarchism (even the Wiki page for which that this video repeats doesn't deny it). As for egoism, it's a lot more complex than the common portrayal. For instance, the egoism articulated by Stirner is not an "ism" about the "ego." He never once uses "ego" as the biggest misconception about him says - he uses egoism and egoist because they existed as words, but the term he uses is Unique (Einzige). There is no "ism," no statement about what should be (what is thinkable), what is true or right, or what should be done in order to be a "good" egoist. Neither does this "egoism" have any fixed relations to any ideology, and as such, egoism is not limited to leftist anarchism. >The only meanings, aims, purposes, and universes are the very ephemeral, transient ones that individuals create for themselves. In the face of this overall absurdity, you could choose to ignore it and assume the universality of your own meanings, thus becoming what Stirner called a “duped egoist”; this is the path typical of the religious --Intro to The Unique and Its Property by Stirner
One thing I love about anarchism is that all variants (except ancapism) are compatible and are just different sets of priorities, and broadly speaking, everyone is their own type of anarchist.
Primitivism anarchism is what I truly believe but don’t have the courage to follow through with. The work it would require to obtain the skills needed to survive like our ancestors just seems beyond me. It is a shame we’re stuck on an endless treadmill, just like our parents and their parents before them. Where was my choice to opt in to this? Where was there’s? Most people can’t even comprehend a life without the 9-5 Mon-Fri grind.
@@l4zrh4wk The 9-5 grind is madness yeah...I guess in some parts of the world you could try to live this way, if you got your hunting skills straight 🧐
Living in the ozarks for a year proved to me that I A: could do it B: no longer wished to after the 2nd winter (started in January 2021) & C: coming back to civilization after a year away is equally refreshing and horrifically soul crushing
no matter what specific politics an anarchist takes, there is no monolithic path to anarchy. anarchism is a means with multiple end goals, and the only way to overcome intrinsic division within anarchist thought and action, is to realize the nonsectarian prospects of anarchy outweigh the mono-repression of a universal and holistic discussion and progression of such a movement. it's like what Subcommandante Marcos said: “Yes, Marcos is gay. Marcos is gay in San Francisco, black in South Africa, an Asian in Europe, a Chicano in San Ysidro, an anarchist in Spain, a Palestinian in Israel, a Mayan Indian in the streets of San Cristobal, a Jew in Germany, a Gypsy in Poland, a Mohawk in Quebec, a pacifist in Bosnia, a single woman on the Metro at 10pm, a peasant without land, a gang member in the slums, an unemployed worker, an unhappy student and, of course, a Zapatista in the mountains. Marcos is all the exploited, marginalized, oppressed minorities resisting and saying `Enough'. He is every minority who is now beginning to speak and every majority that must shut up and listen. He is every untolerated group searching for a way to speak. Everything that makes power and the good consciences of those in power uncomfortable -- this is Marcos.” Quintessentially what Marcos is agonizing here is that exact realization, anti-democratic top-down repression has no legitimacy, especially not in anarchism and even non-anarchism. (I would say though that Anarcho-capitalism are just the same psuedolibertarians on the right-wing, since "libertarianism" had it origins in anarchist-communist French thought)
@@jakobhoward2287 proudhon was not a communist, in fact he despised Marxism and even was critical of collectivist forms of anarchism. People forget that when Proudhon said "Property is theft" he was talking about property taken by force (which was normal in europe at the time when nobility took land without buying it or, because he also said "Property is Liberty", he later explained the distinction between the 2 forms of property, an ancap would agree with those statements. The only real difference between anarcho capitalism and Mutualism/Individualist anarchism is in economics. Also, words for political ideologies change as the political reality changes, if someone claimed i was a democrat while holding the same ideas of the democratic party of 1865 no one would take said person seriously
@@tugalord true! And he is claimed as the “Father of Anarchism” when contemporarily he’s known as a mutualist. It’s important to keep in mind the fluctuations of anarchist history. But without a doubt, he was anti-authoritarian (and a socialist for that matter), which is equidistant to anarchism to some degree, same as left-libertarianism. However, one discrepancy is he’s pro-free market, which wouldn’t have been severely worrying in his time, however its worry in our time, plus his social stances (on women and Jewish groups) aren’t quite progressive. But ultimately I think the best way to reconnoiter and support anarchism (and anarchism-adjacent philosophy) is to keep a critical mind and talk about what’s wrong and what can be right and progressive for everyone, without hierarchy or statism muddying the waters.
@@maliciouskey liberalism and anarchism aren’t directly compatible, even if all political ideologies and philosophies derived from classical liberalism (when it was considered leftward for its time), contemporarily, liberalism is overtly state-dependent, especially in its new shape (neoliberalism)
I used to be an anarchist. The Zapistas are heroes. But they cannot win. Foreign intervention. Invasions. A lack of a military. You gave a passionate speech...but very little of it would have convinced others. That was agitational. It only works for anarchists. You cannot defeat the imperialists. Your vunerable to cults, manipulation, An-caps (Which are actually more exploitative than traditional capitalism) and anarcho Nihilists (of which I used to be one, with ecoist tendencies). Im not trying to make you like being ordered around like a dog. Im pleading with you to think this through. How will other countries react? How will you create a rebellion with out co-ordinated action (please research warfare). Your a good person. But please dear gods. Chaos is unstable by nature. You can see the end goal, but butyour methods to reach it will only get us killed and villainised, if you dont abandon them in the class war (Ukraine during the October revolution for example) out of neccesity. Please drop this anti democratic petty bourgeouis madness before people are killed. You should look into Trotskyism. Its a communist enemy of Stalinisms tyranny. We are not Red faschists. We are your friends and comrades. We are a peoples army
I love telling people that I’m an anarchist because most people associate it with chaos and disorder. I can be true to myself and terrify my enemies at the same time. Win-win!
I used to think I was egoist , but only the part about taking responsibility for ones self, but I'm definitely anrarco syndicalist at heart :) Workers Rights!
Well, I do not know why you would think it is bad to take responsibility for your self’s actions. But If that’s because you interpret that meaning to be obedient or responsible in your actions and do What’s considered “good”, that is not What is meant at all. It’s all about the Individual again, Stirner was all about it, “being responsible for one’s self” basically means “I rob a bank, I am either prepared to do so successfully and have done the needed measures to prepare for my self’s success, or I am reconciled (in the case of failure) with the fact that I am responsible for not succeeding and for the authorities striking me down. Basically being responsible for one’s self and being an Egoist as a whole basically means “Do everything you want like a Karen, but recognize that you are not entitled to it like the Karen thinks she is, but that you Get entitlement through succeeding in doing whatever you want, whether by plan, luck or skill or might.”. It means basically “Do whatever you want - just don’t cry for yourself when it backfires on you, plan it through, or suffer being responsible for your doom - for your self’s doom”
@@anarcho-savagery2097 authoritarianism means absolute control with no compromise towards the people or anyone working with the dictators Anarchism means little to no government or control
@Ollyatlas Anarchism literally means No Rulers. So it's oxymoronic for an ideology that professes to have no rulers and to not rule over others, as being despotic in their ways of governing.
The theory of "Totalitarian Anarchism", or Nihilist Anarcho-Tyranny is too silly of a concept to be an actual ideology for people. Rather, it's just mental illness. Think of it as a state of fundamental chaos and discord that potentially exists in the wake of an apocalyptic event.. But it also has absolutely jack s#!+ to do with actual Anarchism, though. Case closed.
You mentioned and talked about mutualism but forgot to include Proudhon in it? the guy who literally started the anarchist movement and developed the theory of mutualism?
@@ExplainersEnigma Human supremacy. It's not very specific but it happens a lot in genres where societies of different species are present like in sci-fi or fantasy settings.
@Sarez____-it4ks best example of that is the imperium in the 40k with the extremes there In most sci fi settings that ideology is difficult to see especially somewhere like star wars where sure there are racists but usually either the republic is corrupt or the sith use hate to their advantage But with the imperium it's obvious since most humans in 40k are brainwashed into being fashi$t anyway
@@ExplainersEnigma aren’t there key differences between egoism and individualism? I’m still new on this but from what I’ve researched it seems more like egoism is about putting your needs above others whereas individualism (and by extension individualist anarchism) revolves around simply recognizing your own needs separate from the needs of others or how others perceive your needs to be
Like half of these ideologies fall flat on their face when you do even the slightest amount of thinking. The only ones that are actually plausible are anarcho-mutualism, anarcho-communism and anarcho-syndicalism. Even then, you need a state apparatus for basic functions like courts and defense. (Then again, one will develop in the form of warlordism). Anarchist societies never lasted long throughout history due to them being overtaken by a larger power.
»¡Viva el Frente Popular! ¡Viva la unión de todos los antifascistas! ¡Viva la República del pueblo! ¡Los fascistas no pasarán! ¡No pasarán!« -Dolores Ibárruri
ancap is the only true form of anarchism since it is the only one to be fully based off of the voluntary actions of acting man, therefore achieving the state of anarchy which can be directly translated into "no rulers" and also any form of anarcho-socialism is an oxymoron
@@WeegeeSlayer123 "We must therefore turn to history for enlightenment; here we find that none of the proclaimed anarchist groups correspond to the libertarian position, that even the best of them have unrealistic and socialistic elements in their doctrines. Furthermore, we find that all of the current anarchists are irrational collectivists, and therefore at opposite poles from our position. We must therefore conclude that we are not anarchists, and that those who call us anarchists are not on firm etymological ground, and are being completely unhistorical."- Murray Rothbard
@@WeegeeSlayer123 Real anarchism is all about opposing non consensual hierarchies, libertarians fail to realize the inherently coercive nature of capitalism.
@@ExplainersEnigma When the founder was alive anarchism was only left-wing no? He did not want to associate with communism. Right anarchy was established in the mid-20th century. The belief that every human interaction should be consensual is extremely anarchistic.
@@diamond_zoneI think you’re most likely very wrapped up in the online space bc in academia feminism is one of the most important lenses in order to look at history and the voicelessness of women throughout it. Feminism is a practice of understanding how patriarchy affects everything, which it does, and it will continue to do so until it does not exist anymore. You need feminists and feminist theory to understand that and if you don’t understand that you’ve gotten lost along the way.
@@alexleblanc2775 I'm not denying the history of feminism and how it positively influenced the U.S, heck I used to be one also, but I noticed a shift from positive change to dominance after the hashtag kill all men thing. I stopped believing in feminism ever since then. I made a whole speech about it for a college class. I explained how and when feminism came up and how positive it was, and I also criticized it because of the message from current feminism. If feminism didn't turn out like that, I would definitely still be a feminist and agree with it. But hey, something good can always spoil when the wrong person has ulterior motives for it
@@diamond_zonefeminism does not exist as an anti-man movement and it never has. That “kill all men thing” was a tiny group of dumb radical feminists attempting to agitate. 95% of feminists are fighting the same fight they always have which is to have women recognized within society and history as a whole and to dismantle the patriarchy which defines our current society
Bro, the only anarchism that is respect is the Pacifist version, but I don't respect the other version because it is nothing but a Atheistic Wokest Shenanigans, yeah Atheist Wokest are the only one will love people to go back in Unga dunga Era.
@klunni6834 personally in the illegalist Case I can understand graffiti and theft against the wealthy and other petty crimes as rebellious acts But stealing from someone with not much to spare or any violent crimes I can't see those as rebellious or anything moral by any good standards
@@Ollyatlas most illegalists wouldn’t steal from someone else who doesn’t have much because that’s immoral as opposed to stealing from a Walmart or an upperclassoid
Agorism falls under Free-Market Anarchism (subform of it), Anarcho Capitalism is rather something for a video on capitalism. For the last one: Apparently the founder rejected anarchism.
@@ExplainersEnigmaeven if rejected by leftist anarchism, anarcho capitalism just mixes individualist anarchism with austrian economics. They still have the same base idea, the difference being economic theory. Anarcho communism on the other hand is much further to proudhon's and tucker's ideas than what Rothbard or Hoppe believe.
anarcho-capitalism and voluntaryism aren't anarchist philosophies as they do not oppose hierarchy. They also come from an entirely different philosophical tradition. Agorism falls under market-anarchism and illegalism as I understand it.
It's over Anarbros, @Iron_Wyvem has dismantled this centuries old school of thought completely. Time to support the great leviathan in the dominion of the people instead.
Anarchism is based on anti hierchy and facism is from his nature based on hierarchy like ancap you're just want to sound leftist but having the most hateble speach ever
No, market anarchism is distinct from anarcho-capitalism, as market anarchists reject private property and want a market economy with individual and worker ownership of production (so you'd have people with a one-man firm, or a worker cooperative, but not a company with an owner/share holders and wage laborers.).
Most anarchisms are communist. Communism (as described by Marx and Engels) are is the same as what anarchists strive for: moneyless, classless, stateless society Anarcho-communism is an umberella term.
@@nikitasimonsen1459 interesting subtypes for sure, thanks for the addition. The National one I covered in my video about fascism subtypes as a neo-fascist one. The Monarcho one sounds like a paradox?
What the hell is "libertarian anarchism"? Libertarians want a minimal state while anarchists seek to abolish it altogether. If you truly merged these two it would just be minarchism.
@@ExplainersEnigma in monarcho anarchism monarch is the garant of common law. Has a function as a defwnder of law, nothing more. Like a sheriff, but with the hereditary function so there would be no power struggle.
Btw all anarchism are not Contradictory and many can be applied at the same time
I agree on that. There is no dogmatic reason for anarchism.
What about anarcho capitalism?
@@WeegeeSlayer123 anarchism is defined by the Deletion of hierarchy, hierchy who is defenintly needed in capitalism so by définition "anarcho'' capitalisme is just have a piece of land where the rule of stronger is always the best
@@WeegeeSlayer123 anarcho-capitalism more based on objectivism than anarchism. The only thing anarcho-capitalism and anarchism agree on is the abolition of the state. However many anarchists would argue that unregulated capitalism will lead to tyranny, hierarchy
, and authoritarianism such as in the Belgian Congo and British East India where famines and genocides were the norm despite no state oversight. If anything unrestrained capitalism could be argued to be more dangerous than statism, though less stable and likely to last.
@@aimless836 I'll just take regular capitalism over anarchism any day.
I find myself agreeing with aspects of anarco-syndicalism, social anarchism and egoism
The nice thing is, they're all compatible ;)
An-Syndicalism is a social anarchism (even the Wiki page for which that this video repeats doesn't deny it).
As for egoism, it's a lot more complex than the common portrayal. For instance, the egoism articulated by Stirner is not an "ism" about the "ego." He never once uses "ego" as the biggest misconception about him says - he uses egoism and egoist because they existed as words, but the term he uses is Unique (Einzige).
There is no "ism," no statement about what should be (what is thinkable), what is true or right, or what should be done in order to be a "good" egoist. Neither does this "egoism" have any fixed relations to any ideology, and as such, egoism is not limited to leftist anarchism.
>The only meanings, aims, purposes, and universes are the very ephemeral, transient ones that individuals create for themselves. In the face of this overall absurdity, you could choose to ignore it and assume the universality of your own meanings, thus becoming what Stirner called a “duped egoist”; this is the path typical of the religious
--Intro to The Unique and Its Property by Stirner
Seen in the west
One thing I love about anarchism is that all variants (except ancapism) are compatible and are just different sets of priorities, and broadly speaking, everyone is their own type of anarchist.
@@DefinitelySpirit that's actually true, quite consistent
True. I am an Anarcho-Syndicalist-Socialist
Primitivism anarchism is what I truly believe but don’t have the courage to follow through with. The work it would require to obtain the skills needed to survive like our ancestors just seems beyond me. It is a shame we’re stuck on an endless treadmill, just like our parents and their parents before them. Where was my choice to opt in to this? Where was there’s? Most people can’t even comprehend a life without the 9-5 Mon-Fri grind.
@@l4zrh4wk The 9-5 grind is madness yeah...I guess in some parts of the world you could try to live this way, if you got your hunting skills straight 🧐
Living in the ozarks for a year proved to me that I
A: could do it
B: no longer wished to after the 2nd winter (started in January 2021)
&
C: coming back to civilization after a year away is equally refreshing and horrifically soul crushing
no matter what specific politics an anarchist takes, there is no monolithic path to anarchy. anarchism is a means with multiple end goals, and the only way to overcome intrinsic division within anarchist thought and action, is to realize the nonsectarian prospects of anarchy outweigh the mono-repression of a universal and holistic discussion and progression of such a movement. it's like what Subcommandante Marcos said: “Yes, Marcos is gay. Marcos is gay in San Francisco, black in South Africa, an Asian in Europe, a Chicano in San Ysidro, an anarchist in Spain, a Palestinian in Israel, a Mayan Indian in the streets of San Cristobal, a Jew in Germany, a Gypsy in Poland, a Mohawk in Quebec, a pacifist in Bosnia, a single woman on the Metro at 10pm, a peasant without land, a gang member in the slums, an unemployed worker, an unhappy student and, of course, a Zapatista in the mountains. Marcos is all the exploited, marginalized, oppressed minorities resisting and saying `Enough'. He is every minority who is now beginning to speak and every majority that must shut up and listen. He is every untolerated group searching for a way to speak. Everything that makes power and the good consciences of those in power uncomfortable -- this is Marcos.” Quintessentially what Marcos is agonizing here is that exact realization, anti-democratic top-down repression has no legitimacy, especially not in anarchism and even non-anarchism.
(I would say though that Anarcho-capitalism are just the same psuedolibertarians on the right-wing, since "libertarianism" had it origins in anarchist-communist French thought)
Liberalism
@@jakobhoward2287 proudhon was not a communist, in fact he despised Marxism and even was critical of collectivist forms of anarchism.
People forget that when Proudhon said "Property is theft" he was talking about property taken by force (which was normal in europe at the time when nobility took land without buying it or, because he also said "Property is Liberty", he later explained the distinction between the 2 forms of property, an ancap would agree with those statements.
The only real difference between anarcho capitalism and Mutualism/Individualist anarchism is in economics.
Also, words for political ideologies change as the political reality changes, if someone claimed i was a democrat while holding the same ideas of the democratic party of 1865 no one would take said person seriously
@@tugalord true! And he is claimed as the “Father of Anarchism” when contemporarily he’s known as a mutualist. It’s important to keep in mind the fluctuations of anarchist history. But without a doubt, he was anti-authoritarian (and a socialist for that matter), which is equidistant to anarchism to some degree, same as left-libertarianism. However, one discrepancy is he’s pro-free market, which wouldn’t have been severely worrying in his time, however its worry in our time, plus his social stances (on women and Jewish groups) aren’t quite progressive. But ultimately I think the best way to reconnoiter and support anarchism (and anarchism-adjacent philosophy) is to keep a critical mind and talk about what’s wrong and what can be right and progressive for everyone, without hierarchy or statism muddying the waters.
@@maliciouskey liberalism and anarchism aren’t directly compatible, even if all political ideologies and philosophies derived from classical liberalism (when it was considered leftward for its time), contemporarily, liberalism is overtly state-dependent, especially in its new shape (neoliberalism)
I used to be an anarchist.
The Zapistas are heroes. But they cannot win.
Foreign intervention. Invasions. A lack of a military.
You gave a passionate speech...but very little of it would have convinced others.
That was agitational. It only works for anarchists.
You cannot defeat the imperialists. Your vunerable to cults, manipulation, An-caps (Which are actually more exploitative than traditional capitalism) and anarcho Nihilists (of which I used to be one, with ecoist tendencies).
Im not trying to make you like being ordered around like a dog. Im pleading with you to think this through.
How will other countries react? How will you create a rebellion with out co-ordinated action (please research warfare).
Your a good person. But please dear gods. Chaos is unstable by nature. You can see the end goal, but butyour methods to reach it will only get us killed and villainised, if you dont abandon them in the class war (Ukraine during the October revolution for example) out of neccesity.
Please drop this anti democratic petty bourgeouis madness before people are killed.
You should look into Trotskyism. Its a communist enemy of Stalinisms tyranny.
We are not Red faschists. We are your friends and comrades. We are a peoples army
I love telling people that I’m an anarchist because most people associate it with chaos and disorder. I can be true to myself and terrify my enemies at the same time. Win-win!
These poor souls...
I used to think I was egoist , but only the part about taking responsibility for ones self, but I'm definitely anrarco syndicalist at heart :) Workers Rights!
Well, I do not know why you would think it is bad to take responsibility for your self’s actions. But If that’s because you interpret that meaning to be obedient or responsible in your actions and do What’s considered “good”, that is not What is meant at all. It’s all about the Individual again, Stirner was all about it, “being responsible for one’s self” basically means “I rob a bank, I am either prepared to do so successfully and have done the needed measures to prepare for my self’s success, or I am reconciled (in the case of failure) with the fact that I am responsible for not succeeding and for the authorities striking me down. Basically being responsible for one’s self and being an Egoist as a whole basically means “Do everything you want like a Karen, but recognize that you are not entitled to it like the Karen thinks she is, but that you Get entitlement through succeeding in doing whatever you want, whether by plan, luck or skill or might.”. It means basically “Do whatever you want - just don’t cry for yourself when it backfires on you, plan it through, or suffer being responsible for your doom - for your self’s doom”
I think youre your own anarchist. Because thats the entire point, you dont have to subscribe to any specific type. No rulers.
Needed this.
Do one about every type of authoratarianism include both right winged, leftist and moderate ones.
Interesting, thanks for the suggestion.
You forgot the best one, anarcho totalitarianism…
That sounds like a VERY odd one, still interesting.
It's because it doesn't exist.
@@anarcho-savagery2097 authoritarianism means absolute control with no compromise towards the people or anyone working with the dictators
Anarchism means little to no government or control
@Ollyatlas Anarchism literally means No Rulers. So it's oxymoronic for an ideology that professes to have no rulers and to not rule over others, as being despotic in their ways of governing.
The theory of "Totalitarian Anarchism", or Nihilist Anarcho-Tyranny is too silly of a concept to be an actual ideology for people. Rather, it's just mental illness. Think of it as a state of fundamental chaos and discord that potentially exists in the wake of an apocalyptic event.. But it also has absolutely jack s#!+ to do with actual Anarchism, though. Case closed.
You could do one on every type of totalitarianism - Including the most based one, totalitarian transhumanism. One State marches on!
Noted, thanks!
I like how under each of these videos you comment the most absurd and disturbing political belief. W
is that a RED FLOOD REFERENCE
You mentioned and talked about mutualism but forgot to include Proudhon in it? the guy who literally started the anarchist movement and developed the theory of mutualism?
One issue is that many Market anarchists also draws heavily form Austrian economics, which is a big omission.
Do every fictional political ideology/theory
Noted down on the list, thanks buddy! Got 1-2 examples so I get an idea of what you mean exactly?
@@ExplainersEnigma ingsoc and armstrongism (metal gear solid) as just 2 examples
@@ExplainersEnigma Human supremacy. It's not very specific but it happens a lot in genres where societies of different species are present like in sci-fi or fantasy settings.
@Sarez____-it4ks best example of that is the imperium in the 40k with the extremes there
In most sci fi settings that ideology is difficult to see especially somewhere like star wars where sure there are racists but usually either the republic is corrupt or the sith use hate to their advantage
But with the imperium it's obvious since most humans in 40k are brainwashed into being fashi$t anyway
@Sarez____-it4ks that as an ideology is most obvious in 40k as "human imperiumism" and chaos undivided under abaddons leadership
Mutualism seems quite good, I’d probably be that if I was an anarchist
As a mutualist, I can confirm.
Just curious, you mentioned individualist anarchism but didn’t do a segment on it, how come?
Since it's kinda already covered by the Egoist type and it overlaps with others.
@@ExplainersEnigma aren’t there key differences between egoism and individualism? I’m still new on this but from what I’ve researched it seems more like egoism is about putting your needs above others whereas individualism (and by extension individualist anarchism) revolves around simply recognizing your own needs separate from the needs of others or how others perceive your needs to be
Like half of these ideologies fall flat on their face when you do even the slightest amount of thinking. The only ones that are actually plausible are anarcho-mutualism, anarcho-communism and anarcho-syndicalism. Even then, you need a state apparatus for basic functions like courts and defense. (Then again, one will develop in the form of warlordism). Anarchist societies never lasted long throughout history due to them being overtaken by a larger power.
Yeah I guess the disorganization would be the downfall of an anarchist society. power vacuums get filled quickly.
»¡Viva el Frente Popular! ¡Viva la unión de todos los antifascistas! ¡Viva la República del pueblo! ¡Los fascistas no pasarán! ¡No pasarán!«
-Dolores Ibárruri
You could change the name of this video to, "Why the writing at Marvel Ent and Lucas Arts sucks".
😂
I believe in alot of these types. Im anarchist?!
Apparently ☕
What about PLATFORMISM? If you mention Synthesists, it's worth talking about this other approach.
Categorizing anarchism isn't very anarchistic!
thanks for not including ancap since it's not real anarchism. also individualists are not against socialism.
ancap is the only true form of anarchism since it is the only one to be fully based off of the voluntary actions of acting man, therefore achieving the state of anarchy which can be directly translated into "no rulers" and also any form of anarcho-socialism is an oxymoron
How is anarcho capitalism not real anarchism?
@@WeegeeSlayer123 "We must therefore turn to history for enlightenment; here we find that none of the proclaimed anarchist groups correspond to the libertarian position, that even the best of them have unrealistic and socialistic elements in their doctrines. Furthermore, we find that all of the current anarchists are irrational collectivists, and therefore at opposite poles from our position. We must therefore conclude that we are not anarchists, and that those who call us anarchists are not on firm etymological ground, and are being completely unhistorical."- Murray Rothbard
@@WeegeeSlayer123 Real anarchism is all about opposing non consensual hierarchies, libertarians fail to realize the inherently coercive nature of capitalism.
@@costantinochianale4904 But with capitalism, I'm my own boss making my own capital.
Primitivist are based
Where is voluntaryism and right market anarchism like Ancap or agorism
@@MrTod1984 voluntaryism doesn't fall under anarchism, since the "founder" rejected anarchy. Ancap will be covered in a video about capitalism
@@ExplainersEnigma When the founder was alive anarchism was only left-wing no? He did not want to associate with communism. Right anarchy was established in the mid-20th century. The belief that every human interaction should be consensual is extremely anarchistic.
Egoism is the best
Can we talk about liberalism and conservatism?
Noted, thanks.
You also forgot Christian Anarchism.
Typically Anarcho-Pacifism and Christian Anarchism work together
0:01 The same people that complain about men's sitting positions and men explaining things to women 🙄
I agree with most of these types of anarchism except feminist anarchism in the modern society and illegalism
How can you possibly disagree with feminist anarchism
@@alexleblanc2775 mostly because of how feminism has currently shifted from equality to appropriating the abuse towards men by women
@@diamond_zoneI think you’re most likely very wrapped up in the online space bc in academia feminism is one of the most important lenses in order to look at history and the voicelessness of women throughout it. Feminism is a practice of understanding how patriarchy affects everything, which it does, and it will continue to do so until it does not exist anymore. You need feminists and feminist theory to understand that and if you don’t understand that you’ve gotten lost along the way.
@@alexleblanc2775 I'm not denying the history of feminism and how it positively influenced the U.S, heck I used to be one also, but I noticed a shift from positive change to dominance after the hashtag kill all men thing. I stopped believing in feminism ever since then. I made a whole speech about it for a college class. I explained how and when feminism came up and how positive it was, and I also criticized it because of the message from current feminism. If feminism didn't turn out like that, I would definitely still be a feminist and agree with it. But hey, something good can always spoil when the wrong person has ulterior motives for it
@@diamond_zonefeminism does not exist as an anti-man movement and it never has. That “kill all men thing” was a tiny group of dumb radical feminists attempting to agitate. 95% of feminists are fighting the same fight they always have which is to have women recognized within society and history as a whole and to dismantle the patriarchy which defines our current society
And Anarcho-capitalism.
Will be covered in a separate video on capitalism soon
Interested
Glad you like it!
Perfect system doesn't exis... 2:12
Anarcho Transhumanism is actually the best ideology ever
Sounds scary. Transhumanism is just too much I think
bruh forgot the most important one...
Which one?
@@ExplainersEnigma I was talking about anarchocapitalism, but u forgot agorism, anarchomonarchism etc too
@@rightwingpowerrNo way are you calling anarcho-capitaism “the most important” when its not even anarchist
Since when "anarkizem" became "anartshizem"?
Did I mispronounce again. Flipping egg....I'm an English noob sorry buddy
wait, where's anacho-capitalism lol j/k
Coming up in a separate video ☕☕
Where is religious anarchy?
Clear Morals enforced by noone and left at the individuals choice. That's how it should be
Bruh, where is Rothbardianism?
Missed that one, never heard of it
@@ExplainersEnigma That’s anarchocapitalism
Here is feudalism !
What about it?
Bro, the only anarchism that is respect is the Pacifist version, but I don't respect the other version because it is nothing but a Atheistic Wokest Shenanigans, yeah Atheist Wokest are the only one will love people to go back in Unga dunga Era.
Unga dunga ☕😂😂
Where tf is anarcho communism ? The most popular ?
Covered in our video about Communism types, check out the channel
Most of them are characteristics of anarchism??... and the rest of them are like clown anarchism (totalitarianism and stuff)
@@Diskaria these are all subtypes of anarchism yes
5:23 what about tape and murdr and assault?
They’d be morally reprehensible even if they were legal
morals
@klunni6834 personally in the illegalist Case I can understand graffiti and theft against the wealthy and other petty crimes as rebellious acts
But stealing from someone with not much to spare or any violent crimes I can't see those as rebellious or anything moral by any good standards
@@somedesertdude1308 agreed
@@Ollyatlas most illegalists wouldn’t steal from someone else who doesn’t have much because that’s immoral as opposed to stealing from a Walmart or an upperclassoid
All of those are tomfoolery
Where is Agorism? Anarcho Capitalism? Voluntaryism?
Agorism falls under Free-Market Anarchism (subform of it), Anarcho Capitalism is rather something for a video on capitalism. For the last one: Apparently the founder rejected anarchism.
@@ExplainersEnigmaeven if rejected by leftist anarchism, anarcho capitalism just mixes individualist anarchism with austrian economics.
They still have the same base idea, the difference being economic theory.
Anarcho communism on the other hand is much further to proudhon's and tucker's ideas than what Rothbard or Hoppe believe.
Not anarchist as they dont reject hierarchy
anarcho-capitalism and voluntaryism aren't anarchist philosophies as they do not oppose hierarchy. They also come from an entirely different philosophical tradition. Agorism falls under market-anarchism and illegalism as I understand it.
@@mythrum you simply cannot do away with hirearchy, its litterally impossible
More like "Every type of worthless, dead end ideology" lmao ROASTED
At this point its all dead end ideology. Humans are just too institutionalized to evolve. Evolution comes from hardship.
This isn't a capitalist or fascist compilation, you confused little authoritarianist.
It's over Anarbros, @Iron_Wyvem has dismantled this centuries old school of thought completely. Time to support the great leviathan in the dominion of the people instead.
where is anarcho fascism?
Anarchism is based on anti hierchy and facism is from his nature based on hierarchy like ancap you're just want to sound leftist but having the most hateble speach ever
Where is dry water? Where is religious atheism?
😂☕
@@KarlSnarksI don't know about dry water. But dry ice exist.
Wtf is a pacifist anarchist? Is that just a billionaire with a 20 in charisma?
😂😂
@@ExplainersEnigma pacifist anarchy is a pair of crying laugh emoji's?
Is market anarchism anarcho capitalism?
Cause if it is then you didn't describe it right, and if it isn't then it should be there
No, market anarchism is distinct from anarcho-capitalism, as market anarchists reject private property and want a market economy with individual and worker ownership of production (so you'd have people with a one-man firm, or a worker cooperative, but not a company with an owner/share holders and wage laborers.).
anarcho capitalism cannot be anarchist.
No it's not. Anarcho Capitalism will be included in a separate video on capitalism.
You forgot anarcho capitalism and anarcho communism
Anarcho Capitalism is more capitalism leaned, anarcho communism was covered in our communism video: ruclips.net/video/dE34-dovZ94/видео.html
Most anarchisms are communist. Communism (as described by Marx and Engels) are is the same as what anarchists strive for: moneyless, classless, stateless society
Anarcho-communism is an umberella term.
Im not a fan of anarchism but if i was a anarchist i would be primitive one because it would be pretty funny to be a caveman
You forgot liberterian anarchism, national-anarchism, monarcho-anarchism, minarchism to name a few. Very left leaned chart of anarcism subtypes.
@@nikitasimonsen1459 interesting subtypes for sure, thanks for the addition. The National one I covered in my video about fascism subtypes as a neo-fascist one. The Monarcho one sounds like a paradox?
What the hell is "libertarian anarchism"? Libertarians want a minimal state while anarchists seek to abolish it altogether. If you truly merged these two it would just be minarchism.
@@missk1697anarcho capitalism
@@ExplainersEnigma in monarcho anarchism monarch is the garant of common law. Has a function as a defwnder of law, nothing more. Like a sheriff, but with the hereditary function so there would be no power struggle.
@@missk1697 other name for libertarian anarchism is anarcho-capitalism, but I prefer just libertarianism. I am one myself
Where’s anarcho capitalism
It's "Anarchist" in name only, that's why. Capitalism is fundamentally antithetical and incompatible with actual Anarchist principle.
not actually anarchist, so not in the chart.
@@KarlSnarks in what way is not anarchist
Will be covered in a video on capitalism types
@@Sinfuldeathband Companies would became the state, that's why virtually every "anarchism" is anti-capitalist
Silly ideas, only authority works
Bro where is anarchofascism
Check out the video on Fascism types, I think I covered it there
Anarcho-Capitalism is not included but Queer Anarchism is?
That's more capitalism, and will be covered in a separate video on capitalism.
@@ExplainersEnigma Alright, thank you!