What are you on about? All I have said is anarchism as an ideology, called anarchism, when people identified as the anarchist movement, emerged from socialism. There was no anarchism before socialism or apart form socialism until free makrteers stole the word later on
there was no anarcho-capitalist movement. free markets have been rpacticed throughout history, but that wasn't the intellectual roots of anarchism. it was free market capitalism. it wasn't as though when the IWA were arguing the an caps were around
free market capitalism existed, libertarian socialism emerged from the IWA under bakunin, which adopted the name of anarchism (which was coined by proudhon)
what i am saying is anarchism as an ideolgoy was created solely as libertarian socialism, there was no original anarchism which split into left and right, it has always been left wing, and free marketeers stole the name later.
Nah you clearly don't have much of a clue. Anarchism was libertarian socialism. Thats the ideological roots. You don't seem to understand it, and now you seem to be offering me some sort of quasi-randroid argument. what excactl are your politics?
and yes i will quite comfortably tell you if you are misusing a word, and yes, i will tell you if i know more about a subject than you if you dmeonstrate to me your ignorance
the fact your taking a dictionary definition to me hilights how little you know about anarchism
for example, you clearly remain entirely ignorant of its historical roots. anarchism never existed outside of the socialist movement. I really think you should read more ebfore engaging in this argument because trust me I know alot more about this than you, and I am right.
No, anarchy is not the lack of a state. Anarchy is the situation of a classless, stateless society. If there remains capitalism it is not anarchy. Its a right wing myth that you can have right wing anarchism. It wouldn't be anarchism with capitalist economics. You've made an absurd claim about an absurd situation.