La Enciclopedia Libre Universal en Español dispone de una lista de distribución pública, enciclo@listas.us.es

Anarcocapitalismo

De la Enciclopedia Libre Universal en Español
Artículo de la Enciclopedia Libre Universal en Español.
(Redirigido desde Anarco-capitalismo.)
Saltar a: navegación, buscar
En este momento, este artículo está siendo traducido a partir de fuentes libres, por lo cual partes del mismo podrían estar aún incompletas. Disculpe los inconvenientes.

Este artículo forma parte de la serie sobre
Liberalismo
Corrientes principales

Gobierno Limitado Minarquismo Anarcocapitalismo

Escuelas de Pensamiento

Liberalismo clásico
Objetivismo
Libertarianismo
Liberalismo censitario
Liberalismo radical
Moderantismo
Liberalismo progresista
Social liberalismo
Neoliberalismo

Teoría e Historia

Escuela de Salamanca
Liberalismo Clásico
Escuela Austríaca
Escuela de Chicago

Temas

Libertad
Libertades Civiles
Individualismo
Propiedad Privada
Libre Mercado
Libre Comercio
Laissez-faire

Otros enlaces

Categoría Liberalismo

Se conoce por anarcocapitalismo a una corriente del liberalismo, que propugna la total desaparición del Estado y el regirse voluntariamente sólo por las leyes del mercado sin traba monopólica alguna. La apuesta por la no intervención del Estado se radicaliza hasta el punto de abogar por su desaparición, como propugna el anarquismo. Se conoce también como anarquismo de mercado[1] o anarquismo de propiedad privada[2]) a una corriente del liberalismo libertario y del anarquismo individualista,[3][4][5][6][7] que propugna la propiedad del individuo sobre sí mismo y la total desaparición del Estado y el regirse voluntariamente sólo por las leyes del mercado sin traba monopólica alguna.[8]

Aboga por la eliminación del Estado, por el suministro de policía, de tribunales, de defensa nacional y de cualquier otro servicio de seguridad a través de competidores financiados voluntariamente antes que por impuestos; por la completa desregulación de las actividades personales y económicas no invasivas; y por un mercado autoregulado.[9] Los anarcocapitalistas abogan por una sociedad basada en el intercambio voluntario de propiedad privada (incluyendo moneda, bienes de consumo, tierras y bienes de capital) y de servicios con el fin de maximizar la libertad individual y la prosperidad, aunque también reconocen a la caridad y a los acuerdos comunales como parte de la misma ética voluntaria.[10] Aunque los anarcocapitalistas son conocidos por defender el derecho a la propiedad privada (ya sea individual o no pública), las propiedades colectivas no estatales también pueden existir en una sociedad anarcocapitalista.[11] Para ellos lo importante es cómo la propiedad es adquirida y transferida; piensan que la unica forma justa de adquirir una propiedad es a través del intercambio voluntario, el regalo o donación o la apropiación original basada en el trabajo, antes que por la agresión o el fraude.

Los anarcocapitalistas visualizan el capitalismo de libre mercado como la base de una sociedad libre. Murray Rothbard, un anarcocapitalista, define el capitalismo de libre mercado como "el intercambio voluntario pacífico" por contraste con el capitalismo de Estado el cual dice que es "expropiación violenta". "Capitalismo", en el sentido en que los anarcocapitalistas usan este término, no debe confundirse con capitalismo monopólico estatal, crony capitalism o con las economías mixtas contemporáneas, en las cuales, según los anarcocapitalistas, los incentivos y desincentivos naturales del mercado son distorsionadas por la intervención del Estado.[12] Por lo tanto rechazan al Estado basados en la creencia de que los Estados son entidades agresivas que roban la propiedad (a través de los impuestos y las expropiaciones), inician el uso de la fuerza, son monopolios compulsivos del uso de las fuerzas defensivas o de represión, usan su poder de coacción para beneficiar negocios e individuos a expensas de otros, crean monopolios y restringen el comercio.

Varios teóricos tienen filosofías similares, aunque difieren en algunos puntos, que puede considerarse que caben dentro del anarcocapitalismo. La primera versión mejor conocida del anarcocapitalsimo fue desarrollada por el economista de la Escuela Austríaca y libertariano, Murray Rothbard a mediados del siglo XX, sintetizando elementos de la Escuela Austríaca de Economía, del Liberalsimo Clásico y de los anarquistas individualistas del siglo XIX Lysander Spooner y Benjamin Tucker (desechando su teoría del valor-trabajo, y las implicaciones que derivan de ésto y su anticapitalismo).[13] En el anarcocapitalismo rothbardiano en primer lugar estaría la implementación de un "código legal [libertariano mutuamente acordado] que sería de aceptación general y al cual las cortes de plegarían".[14] Este código reconocería la soberanía individual y el principio de no agresión. Sin embargo, en el anarcocapitalsimo propuesto por David D. Friedman, "los sistemas de leyes se crearán por [buscando] ganancia en el libre mercado",[15] lo cual conduciría a una sociedad libertariana generalizada si no es que absoluta. Rothbard basa sus filosofía sobre las bases de la Ley Natural absoluta pero también aporta explicaciones económicas de por qué piensa que el anarcocapitalismo es preferible desde un punto de vista pragmático. Friedman afirma que no es un teórico de los derechos absolutos pero que también "no es un utilitarista", aunque piensa que "los argumentos utilitaristas frecuentemente son la mejor forma de defender los puntos libertarios".[16] Por su parte, Hans-Hermann Hoppe utiliza argumentaciones éticas para fundamentar su "anarquismo de propiedad privada",[17] y es más cercano a la visión de ley natural de Rothbard.

Filosofía

El axioma de no agresión

El término anarcocapitalismo fue acuñado a mediados de la década de 1950 por el economista Murray Rothbard.[18] Otros términos usados por esta filosofía, aunque no necesariamente fuera de los círculos anarcocapitalistas, son:

  • capitalismo antiestatal
  • mercado antiestatal
  • anarcoliberalismo
  • anarquismo capitalista
  • anarquismo de mercado
  • anarquismo de libre mercado
  • anarquismo individualista[19]
  • sociedad de ley privada[20]
  • anarquía de propiedad privadaError en la cita: Etiqueta de apertura <ref> sin su correspondiente cierre </ref>
  • capitalismo sin estado
  • sociedad sin estado
  • liberalismo sin estado
"Defino sociedad anarquista como aquella donde no existe posibilidad legal para ejercer la agresión contra la vida o propiedad de cualquier individuo. Los anarquistas se oponen al Estado porque éste tiene su razón de ser en tal agresión, como la expropiación de propiedad privada por medio de los impuestos, la exclusión forzada de otros proveedores de defensa de su territorio y en todas las otras depredaciones y coacciones que se soportan en estos focos gemelos de la invasión de los derechos individuales". Murray Rothbard, en Society and State

El anarcocapitalismo, tal como es planteado por Rothbard y otros, se adhiere con fuerza al axioma de no agresión, central para el libertarianismo:

[...] El axioma básico de la teoría política libertaria afirma que todo hombre se posee a sí mismo, teniendo absoluta jurisdicción sobre su propio cuerpo. Esto significa que nadie más puede puede invadir o agredir con derecho el de otra persona. Por consiguiente, toda persona puede poseer con derecho cualquier recurso sin propietario previo del que se apropie o "mezcle con su trabajo". En estos dos axiomas gemelos -autopropiedad y apropiación originaria- se apoya la justificación de todo el sistema de títulos de derechos de propiedad en una sociedad de libre mercado. Este sistema establece el derecho de todo hombre a su propia vida, elderecho de donación, dedejar en herencia (y, concomitantemente, el derecho de recibir en herencia) y el derecho al intercambio contractual de títulos de propiedad.[21]

La defensa de Rothbard del principio de autopropiedad se sostiene frente a otras opciones, como lo serían que un grupo de personas posea a otro grupo o que ninguna persona tenga plena propiedad sobre sí misma. Rothbard descarta estos casos sobre la base de que no pueden generar una ética universal, es decir, una ley natural que pueda regir a las personas independientemente del lugar y la época. La única alternativa que permanece es la autopropiedad, que Rothbard considera tanto axiomática como universal.[22]

En general, puede decirse que el axioma de no agresión es una prohibición de la iniciación del uso de la fuerza, o de la amenaza de iniciación de la fuerza, en contra de las personas (esto es, violencia directa, asalto, asesinato) o de la propiedad (esto es, fraude, allanamiento, robo, tasas).[23] El inicio de lafuerza generalmente hace referencia a la agresión y a la coacción. Las diferencias entre anarcocapitalistas y otros libertarianos es ante todo una diferencia en el grado en que cada cual asume este axioma. Los minarquistas, conservarían un Estado más pequeño y menos invasivo, con policía, tribunales y ejército públicos; otros, sin embargo, permitirían otros programas gubernamentales. Por contraste, los anarcocapitalistas rechazan cualquier nivel de intervención estatal, definiendo al Estado como un monopolio coactivo y como la única institución de la sociedad humana que percibe ingresos por la agresión legal, lo cual viola el axioma principal del libertarianismo.[24]

Algunos anarcocapitalistas, como Rothbard, aceptan el axioma de no agresión sobre la base de una moral intrínseca o ley natural. Es en términos del principio de no agresión que Rothbard define al anarquismo; para él "anarquismo es un sistema que no provee sanción legal para tales agresiones ['contra las personas y propiedades']" y que "lo que propone el anarquismo, por lo tanto, es abolir el Estado, esto es, abolir la institución reglamentaria de la coacción agresiva".[25] En entrevista con el New Banner, Rothbard afirmó que "el capitalismo es la expresión más plena del anarquismo y el anarquismo es la expresión plena del capitalismo".[26] Por otro lado algunos, como Friedman, asumen una aproximación consecuencialista o egoista; antes que sostener que la agresión es intrínsecamente inmoral, afirman que una ley contra la agresión solo puede surgir del contrato entre las partes interesadas que acuerdan reprimirse de iniciar la agresión de unos contra otros.

Propiedad

Propiedad privada

De principal importancia para el anarcocapitalismo son los conceptos de autopropiedad y apropiación original:

Cada quien es dueño de su propio cuerpo así como también de todas las tierras y bienes de la naturaleza que ocupe y ponga en uso mediante su cuerpo, siempre y cuando nadie más haya ocupado o usado las mismas tierras o bienes antes que él. Esta propiedad de tierras y bienes "apropiados originalmente" por una persona implica su derecho a usarlos y transformarlos de la manera que crea más conveniente, siempre y cuando no modifique sin permiso la integridad física de las tierras y bienes apropiadas originalmente por otra persona. Específicamente, cuando una tierra o bien ha sido apropiada por primera vez, en palabras de John Locke, mezclando el propio trabajo con ellos, la propiedad de tales tierras o lugares solo puede adquirirse por medio de la transferencia voluntaria --contractual-- de sus títulos de propiedad del previo propietario al siguiente.[27]

El anarcocapitalismo utiliza los siguientes términos que pueden diferir del uso común o de algunos movimientos anarquistas.

  • Anarquismo: cualquier filosofía que se opone a toda forma de iniciación de la coacción (incluye la oposición al Estado)
  • Contrato: un acuerdo voluntario obligante entre personas
  • Coacción: fuerza física o amenaza de uso de fuerza física contra personas o propiedades
  • Capitalismo: sistema económico en el cual los medios de producción son de propiedad privada, y en donde las inversiones, la producción, la distribución, los ingresos y los precios son establecidos por medio del funcionamiento de un libre mercado antes que por el gobierno
  • Mercado libre: un mercado en el cual todas las decisiones referentes a la transferencia de dinero, bienes (incluyendo bienes de capital) y servicios, son voluntarias
  • Fraude: inducir a alguien a compartir algo de valor con medios deshonestos
  • Estado: una organización que tasa y se traba en la coacción agresiva sistematizada e institucionalizada
  • Voluntario: cualquier acción no influenciada por la coacción o el fraude cometidos por alguna institución humana

Esta es la raíz de los derechos de propiedad en el anarcocapitalismo y donde éste se diferencia de las formas colectivistas del anarquismo tales como el anarco-comunismo, donde el producto del trabajo es colectivizado en un conjunto de bienes y distribuido "en función de la necesidad". Los anarcocapitalistas abogan por la propiedad individual del producto del trabajo, independientemente de lo que el individuo "necesite" o no. Como dice Rothbard, "si todo hombre tiene el derecho a poseer su propio cuerpo y si él debe utilizar y transformar objetos materiales naturales para sobrevivir, entonces tiene el derecho a poseer el producto de lo que él ha hecho". Después de que la propiedad se crea a través del trabajo, ésta entonces sólo puede cambiar de mano legítimamente por el comercio o el regalo; las transferencias forzadas se consideran ilegítimas. Original appropriation allows an individual to claim any "unused" property, including land, and by improving or otherwise using it, own it with the same "absolute right" as his own body. According to Rothbard, property can only come about through labor, therefore original appropriation of land is not legitimate by merely claiming it or building a fence around it; it is only by using land — by mixing one's labor with it — that original appropriation is legitimized: "Any attempt to claim a new resource that someone does not use would have to be considered invasive of the property right of whoever the first user will turn out to be."[24] As a practical matter, in terms of the ownership of land, anarcho-capitalists recognize that there are few (if any) parcels of land left on Earth whose ownership was not at some point in time obtained in violation of the homestead principle, through seizure by the state or put in private hands with the assistance of the state. Rothbard says in "Justice and Property Right" that "any identifiable owner (the original victim of theft or his heir) must be accorded his property." In the case of slavery, Rothbard says that in many cases "the old plantations and the heirs and descendants of the former slaves can be identified, and the reparations can become highly specific indeed." He believes slaves rightfully own any land they were forced to work on under the "homestead principle." If property is held by the state, Rothbard advocates its confiscation and return to the private sector: "any property in the hands of the State is in the hands of thieves, and should be liberated as quickly as possible." For example, he proposes that State universities be seized by the students and faculty under the homestead principle. Rothbard also supports expropriation of nominally "private property" if it is the result of state-initiated force, such as businesses who receive grants and subsidies. He proposes that businesses who receive at least 50% of their funding be confiscated by the workers. He says, "What we libertarians object to, then, is not government per se but crime, what we object to is unjust or criminal property titles; what we are for is not "private" property per se but just, innocent, non-criminal private property." Likewise, Karl Hess says, "libertarianism wants to advance principles of property but that it in no way wishes to defend, willy nilly, all property which now is called private...Much of that property is stolen. Much is of dubious title. All of it is deeply intertwined with an immoral, coercive state system."[28] By accepting an axiomatic definition of private property and property rights, anarcho-capitalists deny the legitimacy of a state on principle:

"For, apart from ruling out as unjustified all activities such as murder, homicide, rape, trespass, robbery, burglary, theft, and fraud, the ethics of private property is also incompatible with the existence of a state defined as an agency that possesses a compulsory territorial monopoly of ultimate decision-making (jurisdiction) and/or the right to tax."[27]

Common property

Though anarcho-capitalists assert a right to private property, some anarcho-capitalists also point out that common property can exist by right in an anarcho-capitalist system. Just as an individual comes to own that which was unowned by mixing his labor with it or using it regularly, many people can come to own a thing in common by mixing their labor with it collectively, meaning that no individual may appropriate it as his own. This may apply to roads, parks, rivers, and portions of oceans.[29] Anarcho-capitalist theorist Roderick Long gives the following example:

"Consider a village near a lake. It is common for the villagers to walk down to the lake to go fishing. In the early days of the community it's hard to get to the lake because of all the bushes and fallen branches in the way. But over time the way is cleared and a path forms - not through any coordinated efforts, but simply as a result of all the individuals walking by that way day after day. The cleared path is the product of labor - not any individual's labor, but all of them together. If one villager decided to take advantage of the now-created path by setting up a gate and charging tolls, he would be violating the collective property right that the villagers together have earned."[30]

Nevertheless, since property which is owned collectively tends to lose the level of accountibility found in individual ownership to the extent of the number of owners - or make such accountibility proportionately more complex, anarcho-capitalists generally distrust and seek to avoid intentional communal arrangements. Air, water, and land pollution, for example, are seen as the result of collectivization of ownership. Central governments generally strike down individual or class action censure of pollutors in order to benefit "the many". Legal and economic subsidy of heavy industry is justified by many politicians for job creation, for example.

Privatization, decentralization, and individualization are anarcho-capitalist goals. But in some cases, they not only provide a challenge, but are considered impossible. Established ocean routes provide an example of common property generally seen as unavailable for private appropriation.

The contractual society

Archivo:Althing-stamp.jpg
A postage stamp celebrating the thousandth anniversary of the Icelandic parliament. According to a theory associated with the economist David Friedman, medieval Icelandic society had some features of anarcho-capitalism. Chieftaincies could be bought and sold, and were not geographical monopolies; individuals could voluntarily choose membership in any chieftain's clan.

The society envisioned by anarcho-capitalists has been called the Contractual Society — "... a society based purely on voluntary action, entirely un­hampered by violence or threats of violence."[24] — in which anarcho-capitalists claim the system relies on voluntary agreements (contracts) between individuals as the legal framework. It is difficult to predict precisely what the particulars of this society will look like because of the details and complexities of contracts.

One particular ramification is that transfer of property and services must be considered voluntary on the part of both parties. No external entities can force an individual to accept or deny a particular transaction. An employer might offer insurance and death benefits to same-sex couples; another might refuse to recognize any union outside his or her own faith. Individuals are free to enter into or reject contractual agreements as they see fit.

One social structure that is not permissible under anarcho-capitalism is one that attempts to claim greater sovereignty than the individuals that form it. The state is a prime example, but another is the current incarnation of the corporation — defined as a legal entity that exists under a different legal code than individuals as a means to shelter the individuals who own and run the corporation from possible legal consequences of acts by the corporation. It is worth noting that Rothbard allows a narrower definition of a corporation: "Corporations are not at all monopolistic privileges; they are free associations of individuals pooling their capital. On the purely free market, such men would simply announce to their creditors that their liability is limited to the capital specifically invested in the corporation ...."[24] However, this is a very narrow definition that only shelters owners from debt by creditors that specifically agree to the arrangement; it also does not shelter other liability, such as from malfeasance or other wrongdoing.

There are limits to the right to contract under some interpretations of anarcho-capitalism. Rothbard himself asserts that the right to contract is based in inalienable human rights[31] and therefore any contract that implicitly violates those rights can be voided at will, which would, for instance, prevent a person from permanently selling himself or herself into unindentured slavery. Other interpretations conclude that banning such contracts would in itself be an unacceptably invasive interference in the right to contract.[32]

Included in the right of contract is the right to contract oneself out for employment by others. Unlike anarcho-communists, anarcho-capitalists support the liberty of individuals to be self-employed or to contract to be employees of others, whichever they prefer and the freedom to pay and receive wages. David Friedman has expressed preference for a society where "almost everyone is self-employed" and "instead of corporations there are large groups of entrepreneurs related by trade, not authority. Each sells not his time, but what his time produces."[33] Rothbard does not express a preference either way but justifies employment as a natural occurrence in a free market that is not immoral in any way.

Law and order and the use of violence

Different anarcho-capitalists propose different forms of anarcho-capitalism, and one area of disagreement is in the area of law. Morris and Linda Tannehill, in The Market for Liberty, object to any statutory law whatsoever. They assert that all one has to do is ask if one is aggressing against another (see tort and contract law) in order to decide if an act is right or wrong.[34] However, Murray Rothbard, while also supporting a natural prohibition on force and fraud, supports the establishment of a mutually agreed-upon centralized libertarian legal code which private courts would pledge to follow. Such a code for Internet commerce, called The Common Economic Protocols was developed by Andre Goldman.

Unlike both the Tannehills and Rothbard who see an ideological commonality of ethics and morality as a requirement, David Friedman proposes that "the systems of law will be produced for profit on the open market, just as books and bras are produced today. There could be competition among different brands of law, just as there is competition among different brands of cars."[35] Friedman says whether this would lead to a libertarian society "remains to be proven." He says it is a possibility that very unlibertarian laws may result, such as laws against drugs. But, he thinks this would be rare. He reasons that "if the value of a law to it supporters is less than its cost to its victims, that law...will not survive in an anarcho-capitalist society."[36]

Anarcho-capitalists only accept collective defense of individual liberty (i.e., courts, military or police forces) insofar as such groups are formed and paid for on an explicitly voluntary basis. But, their complaint is not just that the state's defensive services are funded by taxation but that the state assumes it is the only legitimate practitioner of physical force. That is, it forcibly prevents the private sector from providing comprehensive security, such as a police, judicial, and prison systems to protect individuals from aggressors. Anarcho-capitalists believe that there is nothing morally superior about the state which would grant it, but not private individuals, a right to use physical force to restrain aggressors. Thus, if competition in security provision were allowed to exist, prices would be lower and services would be better according to anarcho-capitalists. According to Molinari, "Under a regime of liberty, the natural organization of the security industry would not be different from that of other industries."[37] Proponents point out that private systems of justice and defense already exist, naturally forming where the market is allowed to compensate for the failure of the state: private arbitration, security guards, neighborhood watch groups, and so on.[38] These private courts and police are sometimes referred to generically as Private Defense Agencies (PDAs).

The defense of those unable to pay for such protection might be financed by charitable organizations relying on voluntary donation rather than by state institutions relying on coercive taxation, or by cooperative self-help by groups of individuals.[39]

Archivo:Bunkertrumbull.jpg
Many anarcho-capitalists admire the American Revolution and believe it is the only U.S. war that can be justified.

Like classical liberalism, and unlike pacifism, anarcho-capitalism permits the use of force, as long as it is in the defense of persons or property. The permissible extent of this defensive use of force is an arguable point among anarcho-capitalists. Retributive justice, meaning retaliatory force, is often a component of the contracts imagined for an anarcho-capitalist society. Some believe prisons or indentured servitude would be justifiable institutions to deal with those who violate anarcho-capitalist property relations, while others believe exile or forced restitution are sufficient.[40]

One difficult application of defensive aggression is the act of revolutionary violence against tyrannical regimes. Many anarcho-capitalists admire the American Revolution as the legitimate act of individuals working together to fight against tyrannical restrictions of their liberties. In fact, according to Murray Rothbard, the American Revolutionary War was the only war involving the United States that could be justified.[41] Anarcho-capitalists, i.e. Samuel Edward Konkin III also feel that violent revolution is counter-productive and prefer voluntary forms of economic secession to the extent possible.

History and influences

Classical liberalism

Classical liberalism is the primary influence with the longest history on anarcho-capitalist theory. Classical liberals have had two main themes since John Locke first expounded the philosophy: the liberty of man, and limitations of state power. The liberty of man was expressed in terms of natural rights, while limiting the state was based (for Locke) on a consent theory.

In the 19th century, classical liberals led the attack against statism. One notable was Frederic Bastiat (The Law), who wrote, "The state is the great fiction by which everybody seeks to live at the expense of everybody else." Henry David Thoreau wrote, "I heartily accept the motto, 'That government is best which governs least'; and I should like to see it acted up to more rapidly and systematically. Carried out, it finally amounts to this, which also I believe, 'That government is best which governs not at all'; and when men are prepared for it, that will be the kind of government which they will have."[42]

The early liberals believed that the state should confine its role to protecting individual liberty and property, and opposed all but the most minimal economic regulations. The "normative core" of classical liberalism is the idea that in an environment of laissez-faire, a spontaneous order of cooperation in exchanging goods and services emerges that satisfies human wants.[43] Some individualists came to realize that the liberal state itself takes property forcefully through taxation in order to fund its protection services, and therefore they it seemed logically inconsistent to oppose theft while also supporting a tax-funded protector. So, they advocated what may be seen as classical liberalism taken to the extreme by only supporting voluntarily funded defense by competing private providers. One of the first liberals to discuss the possibility of privatizing protection of individual liberty and property was France's Jakob Mauvillon in the 18th century. Later, in the 1840s, Julius Faucher and Gustave de Molinari advocated the same. Molinari, in his essay The Production of Security, argued, "No government should have the right to prevent another government from going into competition with it, or to require consumers of security to come exclusively to it for this commodity." Molinari and this new type of anti-state liberal grounded their reasoning on liberal ideals and classical economics. Historian and libertarian Ralph Raico asserts what that these liberal philosophers "had come up with was a form of individualist anarchism, or, as it would be called today, anarcho-capitalism or market anarchism."[44] Unlike the liberalism of Locke, which saw the state as evolving from society, the anti-state liberals saw a fundamental conflict between the voluntary interactions of people — society — and the institutions of force — the State. This society versus state idea was expressed in various ways: natural society vs. artificial society, liberty vs. authority, society of contract vs. society of authority, and industrial society vs. militant society, just to name a few.[37] The anti-state liberal tradition in Europe and the United States continued after Molinari in the early writings of Herbert Spencer, as well as in thinkers such as Paul Émile de Puydt and Auberon Herbert.

Ulrike Heider, in discussing the "anarcho-capitalists family tree," notes Max Stirner as the "founder of individualist anarchism" and "ancestor of laissez-faire liberalism."[45] According to Heider, Stirner wants to "abolish not only the state but also society as an institution responsible for its members" and "derives his identity solely from property" with the question of property to be resolved by a 'war of all against all'." Stirner argued against the existence of the state in a fundamentally anti-collectivist way, to be replaced by a "Union of Egoists" but was not more explicit than that in his book The Ego and Its Own published in 1844.

Later, in the early 20th century, the mantle of anti-state liberalism was taken by the "Old Right". These were minarchist, antiwar, anti-imperialist, and (later) anti-New Dealers. Some of the most notable members of the Old Right were Albert Jay Nock, Rose Wilder Lane, Isabel Paterson, Frank Chodorov, Garet Garrett, and H. L. Mencken. In the 1950s, the new "fusion conservatism", also called "cold war conservatism", took hold of the right wing in the U.S., stressing anti-communism. This induced the libertarian Old Right to split off from the right, and seek alliances with the (now left-wing) antiwar movement, and to start specifically libertarian organizations such as the (U.S.) Libertarian Party.

Nineteenth century individualist anarchism in the United States

Rothbard was influenced by the work of the 19th-century American individualist anarchists[46] (who were also influenced by classical liberalism), and anarcho-capitalism is regarded as a form of individualist anarchism by many scholars.*. Rothbard said in 1965: "Lysander Spooner and Benjamin T. Tucker were unsurpassed as political philosophers and nothing is more needed today than a revival and development of the largely forgotten legacy they left to political philosophy." However, he thought they had a faulty understanding of economics. The 19th century individualists had a labor theory of value, as influenced by the classical economists, but Rothbard was a student of neoclassical economics which does not agree with the labor theory of value. So, Rothbard sought to meld 19th century individualists' advocacy of free markets and private defense with the principles of Austrian economics: "There is, in the body of thought known as 'Austrian economics', a scientific explanation of the workings of the free market (and of the consequences of government intervention in that market) which individualist anarchists could easily incorporate into their political and social Weltanschauung".[47] Rothbard held that the economic consequences of their political system they advocate would not result in an economy with people being paid in proportion to labor amounts, nor would profit and interest disappear as they expected. Tucker thought that unregulated banking and money issuance would cause increases in the money supply so that interest rates would drop to zero or near to it. Rothbard, disagreed with this, as he explains in The Spooner-Tucker Doctrine: An Economist's View. He says that first of all Tucker was wrong to think that that would cause the money supply to increase, because he says that the money supply in a free market would be self-regulating. If it were not, then inflation would occur, so it is not necessarily desirable to increase the money supply in the first place. Secondly, he says that Tucker is wrong to think that interest would disappear regardless, because people in general do not wish to lend their money to others without compensation so there is no reason why this would change just because banking was unregulated. Also, Tucker held a labor theory of value. As a result, he thought that in a free market that people would be paid in proportion to how much labor they exerted and that if they were not then exploitation or "usury" was taking place. As he explains in State Socialism and Anarchism, his theory was that unregulated banking would cause more money to be available and that this would allow proliferation of new businesses, which would in turn raise demand for labor. This led him to believe that the labor theory of value would be vindicated, and equal amounts of labor would receive equal pay. Again, as a neoclassical economist, Rothbard did not agree with the labor theory. He believed that prices of goods and services are proportional to marginal utility rather than to labor amounts in free market. And he did not think that there was anything exploitative about people receiving an income according to how much others subjectiely value their labor or what that labor produces, even if it means people laboring the same amount receive different incomes.

Benjamin Tucker opposed vast concentrations of wealth, which he believed were made possible by government intervention and state protected monopolies. He believed the most dangerous state intervention was the requirement that individuals obtain charters in order to operate banks and what he believed to be the illegality of issuing private money, which he believed caused capital to concentrate in the hands of a privileged few which he called the "banking monopoly." He believed anyone should be able to engage in banking that wished, without requiring state permission, and issue private money. Though he was supporter of laissez-faire, late in life he said that State intervention had allowed some extreme concentrations of resources to such a degree that even if laissez-faire were instituted, it would be too late for competition to be able to release those resources (he gave Standard Oil as an example).[48] Anarcho-capitalists also oppose governmental restrictions on banking. They, like all Austrian economists, believe that monopoly can only come about through government intervention. Individualists anarchists have long argued that monopoly on credit and land interferes with the functioning of a free market economy. Although anarcho-capitalists disagree on the critical topics of profit, social egalitarianism, and the proper scope of private property, both schools of thought agree on other issues. Of particular importance to anarcho-capitalists and the individualists are the ideas of "sovereignty of the individual", a market economy, and the opposition to collectivism. A defining point that they agree on is that defense of liberty and property should be provided in the free market rather than by the State. Tucker said, "[D]efense is a service like any other service; that it is labor both useful and desired, and therefore an economic commodity subject to the law of supply and demand; that in a free market this commodity would be furnished at the cost of production; that, competition prevailing, patronage would go to those who furnished the best article at the lowest price; that the production and sale of this commodity are now monopolized by the State; and that the State, like almost all monopolists, charges exorbitant prices."[49] But, again, since anarcho-capitalists disagree with Tucker's labor theory of value, they disagree that free market competition would cause protection (or anything else) to be provided "at cost." Like the individualists, anarcho-capitalists believe that land may be originally appropriated by, and only by, occupation or use; however, most individualists believe it must continually be in use to retain title. Lysander Spooner was an exception from those who believed in the "occupation and use" theory, and believed in full private property rights in land, like Rothbard.[50]

The Austrian School

The Austrian School of economics was founded with the publication of Carl Menger's 1871 book Principles of Economics. Members of this school approach economics as an a priori system like logic or mathematics, rather than as an empirical science like geology. It attempts to discover axioms of human action (called "praxeology" in the Austrian tradition) and make deductions therefrom. Some of these praxeological axioms are:

  • humans act purposefully;
  • humans prefer more of a good to less;
  • humans prefer to receive a good sooner rather than later; and
  • each party to a trade benefits ex ante.

Even in the early days, Austrian economics was used as a theoretical weapon against socialism and statist socialist policy. Eugen von Böhm-Bawerk, a colleague of Menger, wrote one of the first critiques of socialism ever written in his treatise The Exploitation Theory of Socialism-Communism. Later, Friedrich Hayek wrote The Road to Serfdom, asserting that a command economy destroys the information function of prices, and that authority over the economy leads to totalitarianism. Another very influential Austrian economist was Ludwig von Mises, author of the praxeological work Human Action.

Murray Rothbard, a student of Mises, is the man who attempted to meld Austrian economics with classical liberalism and individualist anarchism, and is credited with coining the term "anarcho-capitalism". He wrote his first paper advocating "private property anarchism" in 1949, and later came up with the alternative name "anarcho-capitalism." He was probably the first to use "libertarian" in its current (U.S.) pro-capitalist sense. He was a trained economist, but also knowledgeable in history and political philosophy. When young, he considered himself part of the Old Right, an anti-statist and anti-interventionist branch of the U.S. Republican party. When interventionist cold warriors of the National Review, such as William Buckley, gained influence in the Republican party in the 1950s, Rothbard quit that group and formed an alliance with left-wing antiwar groups, noting an antiwar tradition among a number of self-styled left-wingers and to a degree closer to the Old Right conservatives. He believed that the cold warriors were more indebted in theory to the left and imperialist progressives, especially in regards to Trotskyist theory.".[51] Later, Rothbard was a founder of the U.S. Libertarian Party. In the late 1950s, Rothbard was briefly involved with Ayn Rand's Objectivism, but later had a falling out. Rothbard's books, such as Man, Economy, and State, Power and Market, The Ethics of Liberty, and For a New Liberty, are considered by some to be classics of natural law libertarian thought.

Ejemplos históricos que presentan similitudes con el anarcocapitalismo

Archivo:Law speaker.jpg
Interpretación del siglo XIX del Althing en la Mancomunidad Islandesa, en la cual autores como David Friedman y Roderick Long consideran que existieron elementos de una sociedad anarcocapitalista.

Basados en que el anarcocapitalismo es una teoría o una ideología antes que un proceso real, sus críticos dicen que nunca pasará de ser un ideal utópico. Otros, sin embargo, destacan situaciones reales en donde la protección de la libertad y propiedad individuales fueron voluntariamente financiadas antes que provistas por el Estado a través de los impuestos.

La Islandia medieval

Según David Friedman, "las instituciones islandesas medievales tuvieron varias características peculiares e interesantes; podrían haber sido creadas por un economista chiflado para probar los alcances en los cuales los sistemas de mercado podrían suplantar al gobierno en la mayoría de sus funciones fundamentales".[52]Aunque no la califica directamente como anarcocapitalista, Friedman arguye que la Mancomunidad Islandesa entre los años 930 y 1262 presentó "algunas características" de la sociedad anarcocapitalista (debido a la existencia de un sistema legal sencillo, la seguridad era enteramente privada y capitalista), aportando algunas evidencias de cómo una sociedad de ese tipo funcionaría. "Aún cuando el sistema legal islandés reconocía una ofensa esencialmente "pública", la manejó otorgándole a algunos individuos (elegidos a veces de entre los afectados) el derecho a llevar el caso y recolectar las multas, encajando de esta manera en un sistema esencialmente privado".[52]

El salvaje oeste norteamericano

Según la investigación de Terry L. Anderson y P. J. Hill, el Antiguo Oeste de los Estados Unidos de Norteamérica durante el período que va de 1830 a 1900 tuvo similitudes con el anarcocapitalismo ya que "las agencias privadas proveían la base necesaria para una sociedad ordenada donde la propiedad era protegida y los conflictos resueltos", y que la percepción popular común de que el antiguo oeste era caótico con poco respeto hacia los derechos de propiedad es incorrecta.[53]

Conflicts within anarcho-capitalist theory

The only significant dispute within the anarcho-capitalist movement concerns whether an anarcho-capitalist society is based on deontological or consequentialist grounds. Natural-law anarcho-capitalism (such as that advocated by Rothbard) holds that a universal system of rights can be determined through natural law. Consequentialists such as Friedman disagree, maintaining that rights are merely human constructs that rational humans create through contracts and individual relationships, resulting in the system that leads to the best consequences for all parties. Hence, Rothbardian anarcho-capitalists lean toward libertarian political deactivism while Friedmanites prefer polycentric law centered on tort and contract law.

In The Machinery of Freedom, Friedman describes an economic approach to anarcho-capitalist legal systems. His description differs with Rothbard's because it does not use moral arguments — i.e., it does not appeal to a theory of natural rights to justify itself. In Friedman's work, the economic argument is sufficient to derive the principles of anarcho-capitalism. Private defense or protection agencies and courts not only defend legal rights but supply the actual content of these rights and all claims on the market. People will have the law system they pay for, and because of economic efficiency considerations resulting from individuals' utility functions, such law will tend to be libertarian in nature but will differ from place to place and from agency to agency depending on the tastes of the people who buy the law. Also unlike other anarcho-capitalists, most notably Rothbard, Friedman has never tried to deny the theoretical cogency of the neoclassical literature on "market failure," nor has he been inclined to attack economic efficiency as a normative benchmark.[38]

Anarcocapitalismo hoy

Archivo:RoderickLong2006.jpg
Roderick Long, fundador del Instituto Molinari, es uno de los muchos anarcocapitalistas contemporáneos.

Además del reconocido David D. Friedman, otros muchos continuan y desarrollan las tradición anarcocapitalista. Entre ellos se encuentran Ian Bernard, Walter Block, Per Bylund, Gene Callahan, Bryan Caplan, Scott Horton, Stephan Kinsella, Roderick Long, Carlo Lottieri, Wendy McElroy, Stefan Molyneux, Robert P. Murphy, Jan Narveson, Justin Raimondo, Lew Rockwell, Joseph Salerno, Joseph Sobran, Mark Thornton, Jeffrey Tucker, Thomas Woods y Jeremy Sapienza.

Críticas al anarcocapitalismo

Las críticas al anarcocapitalismo comprenden varias categorías: aquellas que afirman que el anarcocapitalismo no puede funcionar en la práctica; otras que afirman que el capitalismo necesita un Estado coercitivo para existir y que una sociedad puede ser anarquista o capitalista pero no ambas; críticas generales sobre moralidad en el capitalismo y el liberalismo que pueden aplicarse al anarcocapitalismo; y las críticas utilitaristas que afirman que el anarcocapitalismo no maximiza la utilidad.

Los objetivistas afirman que, en ausencia del Estado, una sociedad anarcocapitalista degeneraría en una "guerra de todos contra todos". Otros críticos arguyen que el problema de las externalidades hacen que sea impráctico el suministro de servicios de protección en una sociedad anarcocapitalista.

Polémica sobre el anarcocapitalismo como un tipo de anarquismo

El anarcocapitalismo presenta similitudes con el anarquismo y es considerado por algunos perteneciente a dicho movimiento, sin embargo existe una gran polémica sobre si se debe considerar al anarcocapitalismo como una corriente del anarquismo o no.

Si bien es cierto que tanto el anarquismo como el anarcocapitalismo tienen en común su oposición al Estado y la defensa de una sociedad sin dicho estado, en un análisis profundo es evidente que el anarcocapitalismo es completamente diferente del anarquismo original,[54] ya sea de las corrientes más cercanas al socialismo (como el colectivismo de Bakunin o el anarcocomunismo de Kropotkin), como del mutualismo de Proudhon[55] o el anarquismo individualista de Max Stirner.[56] El anarco-capitalismo está desligado de las temáticas clásicas del anarquismo,[57] y hunde sus raíces en la antigua tradición liberal y librecambista.[51][58]

Los anarcocapitalistas se dicen convencidos de que su propuesta es la única por la cual sería posible alcanzar de forma concreta el ideal de la ausencia del estado,[59] que compartirían con el anarquismo tradicional. Aun así, ante la cuestión de si es el anarcocapitalismo una corriente más del anarquismo, dentro del movimiento anarcocapitalista hay diversidad de opiniones: por un lado están quienes afirman que el anarcocapitalismo es una corriente del anarquismo,[60] y también los hay quienes remarcan las diferencias entre ambas ideologías y consideran el anarcocapitalismo como ajeno al anarquismo. Entre los últimos está el propio Murray Rothbard, que prefirió abandonar la denominación de anarquista precisamente a fin de evitar cualquier confusión o identificación con el anarquismo tradicional, al que ubica ideológicamente en un polo opuesto.[51] Entre las corrientes anarquistas tradicionales, se niega cualquier relación del anarcocapitalismo con el anarquismo,[61][62][54] por considerar que sus ideas son histórica y políticamente exteriores al anarquismo y pertenecientes a otro movimiento diferente, el liberalismo,[54] y por tanto no tienen ningún punto en común con los suyos, siendo prácticamente todo lo opuesto. Las críticas al anarco-capitalismo desde el anarquismo se basan en impugnar la posibilidad de combinar el anarquismo con el capitalismo, por considerar a este último una forma de explotación.[61][54]

Fuera de estas dos doctrinas, los investigadores y académicos no han llegado a un acuerdo o consenso sobre si el anarcocapitalismo deba ser incluido dentro de la categoría de anarquismo, o como una doctrina aparte, perteneciente al liberalismo. Teniendo en cuenta las enciclopedias y obras generales sobre la ideología, la filosofía y la historia del anarquismo escritas por autores cualificados y académicos prestigiosos desde 1960 hasta el presente, es decir, desde que existe el anarcocapitalismo, las opiniones y actitudes varían desde la omisión total dentro del ideario anarquista, hasta el reconocimiento pleno como tendencia. Actualmente es mayoritaria la opinión de que el anarcocapitalismo no pertenece al conjunto de corrientes del anarquismo.

Entre los autores que excluyen al anarcocapitalismo del movimiento anarquista están los historiadores George Woodcock,[63] Daniel Guerin,[64] Ángel Cappelletti[65] y Sharif Gemie,[66] al sociólogo Irving Horowitz,[67] a los filósofos Félix García Moriyón, [68] Carlos Díaz, [69] Christian Ferrer,[70] al antropólogo Brian Morris, [71] los teóricos René Furth[72] y Albert Meltzer.[73] Entre los que expresan sus reservas o lo incluyen como una tendencia de escasa significación dentro del anarquismo se encuentran Andrew Vincent,[74] Paul Avrich,[75] Paul McLaughlin, [76] Sean Sheehan,[77] William Outhwaite.[78] Sí incluyen al anarcocapitalismo como una tendencia del movimiento anarquista Terry M. Perlin,[79] Sergio Ricossa,[80] Edward Craig[81] y Ronald Hamowy.[82] No obstante, casi ninguna enciclopedia menciona al anarcocapitalismo como tendencia anarquista.[83]

También se han producido numerosas confusiones con los términos libertario y libertariano, debido a la ambigüedad con la que a veces son utilizados. Desde el siglo XIX el término libertario ha sido utilizado como sinónimo de anarquismo en todo el mundo, y ha sido usado casi exclusivamente en este sentido hasta la década de los 70 en los Estados Unidos. El término libertario es aplicable tanto al anarquismo individualista como a las tendencias colectivistas y organizadas (anarcosindicalismo, anarcocomunismo, mutualismo, etc.).[84] El anarquismo clásico ha utilizado este término para referirse a sí mismo y a sus ideas desde 1857.[85]

Sin embargo, en la segunda mitad del siglo XX en los Estados Unidos, se adoptó la acepción liberalismo libertario, que es un sinónimo de libertarianismo, denominación con la que finalmente se conocerá en Europa por las traducciones del economista francés Henri Lepage, con la intención de evitar las evidentes confusiones. Los términos libertarianismo y libertario fueron entonces utilizados a partir de la década de 1960 por los políticos y filósofos anglosajones que provenían de diferentes y opuestas tradiciones culturales. Principalmente en lengua inglesa, tales términos señalan movimientos culturales y políticos que a pesar de definirse como libertarios, son la absoluta antítesis uno del otro.[51] Filósofos y políticos definidos libertarios provienen de diversas tradiciones culturales entre las que se hayan el liberalismo, el socialismo, el comunismo y el anarquismo: este último movimiento utilizó el término libertario para referirse a sí mismo y autodefinirse.[86][87] El término libertariano, por el contrario, ha sido aplicado al anarcocapitalismo desde que fue fundado por Murray Rothbard en la década de 1950 en los Estados Unidos,[62] y debido a la homonimia con libertario en inglés (libertarian), se han generado algunas confusiones y disputas. Esto explica que, tanto en textos escritos en inglés como en obras basadas en ellos, a veces se denominen como libertarios personas que en realidad son libertarianos, y viceversa.

Estabilidad de las instituciones legales anarcocapitalistas

Dos de los mas prominentes académicos que han dedicado una reflexión seria a las instituciones legales esencialmente anarcocapitalistas son Richard Posner, que es Juez Federal de Apelaciones y prolífico erudito legal , y el economista William Landes. En su ensayo de 1975 "The Private Enforcement of Law",[88] discuten un previo gedankenexperiment emprendido Becker y Stigler en el cual se propuso que la ejecución de la ley sería privatizada y explican porque consideran que tal sistema no sería económicamente eficiente. Según una respuesta posterior de David Friedman, "Efficient Institutions for the Private Enforcement of Law",[89]

Plantilla:Cquote Friedman, sin embargo, prodcede a argumentar que "la ineficiencia que Landes y Posner demostraron en las instituciones privadas de aplicación de la ley que describen pueden eliminarse con cambios menores en las instituciones".

Obras anarcocapitalistas

No ficción

La siguiente es una lista parcial de obras resaltantes que tratan sobre anarcocapitalismo.

Ficción

El anarcocapitalismo ha sido tratado en algunas obras literarias especialmente de ciencia ficción. Uno de los primeros ejemplos es la novela de Robert A. Heinlein The Moon Is a Harsh Mistress (1966), donde el autor expone lo que él llama "anarquismo racional".

Autores cyberpunk y post-cyberpunk han sido fascinados por la idea de la caída de la nación-estado. Muchas historias de Vernor Vingel, tales como Marooned in Realtime, describen sociedades anarcocapitalistas frecuentemente de una manera favorable. En las obras Snow Crash y The Diamond Age de Neal Stephenson, Jennifer Government de Max Barry, Down and Out in the Magic Kingdom de Cory Doctorow y The Probability Broach de L. Neal Smith, también se exploran las ideas anarcocapitalistas. La representación cyberpunk de la anarquía puede variar desde lo más sombrío hasta el optimismo más gozoso y no necesariamente implica algo específico sobre los puntos de vista políticos del autor. En particular , Neal Stephenson evita las declaraciones políticas claras cuando es confrontado.[90][91]

Referencias

Artículos relacionados

General

Fuentes empleadas y notas

  1. "Este volumen rinde homenaje al principal exponente contemporáneo del anarquismo de libre mercado. Un contribuyente describe acertadamente a Murray Rothbard como "el economista de cero-Estado más comprometido ideológicamente sobre la tierra"." Review by Lawrence H. White of Man, Economy, and liberty: Essays in honor of Murray N. Rothbard, published in Journal of Economic Literature, Vol XXVIII, June 1990, page 664; "[El libro de Rothbard, Hacia una nueva libertad,] sintetiza una promoción de los derechos lockeanos a la vida, la libertad, la propiedad, y la defensa, una apelación al libre mercado como el dispositivo "social" más eficiente y descentralizado para la asignación de recursos, y un análisis histórico y sociológico del Estado como intrínsecamente agresivo y explotador. El producto de esta síntesis es el anarquismo de libre mercado de Rothbard." Reseña de Eric Mack de Hacia una nueva libertad de Murray Rothbard, American Political Science Review, Vol 71, p. 332
  2. Anarchy and the Law: The Political Economy of Choice, by Edward Stringham. Transaction Publishers, 2007 "Private-property anarchism, also known as anarchist libertarianism, individualist anarchism, and anarcho-capitalism, is a political philosophy and set of economic and legal arguments that maintains that markets and contracts should provide law and that the rule of law itself can only be understood as a private institution. Anarchist libertarians argue that, to check government against abuse, the state itself must be replaced by a social order of self-government based on contracts. Anarchy and the Law presents the most important essays explaining, debating, and examining historical examples of these stateless orders. Encyclopedic, Anarchy and the Law features the work of key figures in the libertarian canon: Murray Rothbard, Anthony de Jasay, Ayn Rand, Robert Nozick, David Friedman, Edmund Burke, Gustave de Molinari, Lysander Spooner, Bruce Benson, Jeffrey Rogers Hummel, Voltairine de Cleyre, Randy Barnett, Benjamin Tucker, and Tyler Cowen, among many others."
  3. Anarchy and the Law: The Political Economy of Choice, by Edward Stringham. Transaction Publishers, 2007
  4. Anarcho-capitalism. The Encyclopedia of Libertarianism p. 13, escrito por Ronald Hamowy, SAGE
  5. Individualist anarchism (p. 13), "Anarchism", The Blackwell Dictionary of Modern Social Thought. Escrito por William Outhwaite.
  6. "Anarchism as a tradition of political thought", Resisting the Nation State, escrito por Geoffrey Ostergaard, Peace Pledge Union: "Indeed, one form of anarchism, individualist, may be seen as liberalism taken to its extreme - some would say - logical conclusion. Individualist, as distinct from socialist, anarchism has been particularly strong in the USA from the time of Josiah Warren (1798-1874) onwards and is expressed today by Murray Rothbard and the school of 'anarcho-capitalists'."
  7. A Companion to Contemporary Political Philosophy, Anarchism (Varieties and options within anarchism, p. 231) escrito por Robert E. Goodin, Philip Pettit, Ed. Wiley-Blackwell
  8. Anarcho-capitalism (p. 131). Anarchism, Political Ideology Today. Escrito por Ian Adams
  9. Anarcho-capitalism. The Encyclopedia of Libertarianism p. 13, escrito por Ronald Hamowy, SAGE
  10. Hess, Karl. The Death of Politics. Interview in Playboy Magazine, March 1969
  11. Holcombe, Randall G., Common Property in Anarcho-Capitalism, Journal of Libertarian Studies, Volume 19, No. 2 (Spring 2005):3-29.
  12. Adams, Ian. Political Ideology Today. Manchester University Press 2001. p. 33
  13. "A student and disciple of the Austrian economist Ludwig von Mises, rothbard combined the laissez-faire economics of his teacher with the absolutist views of human rights and rejection of the state he had absorbed from studying the individualist American anarchists of the nineteenth century such as Lysander Spooner and Benjamin Tucker." Blackwell Encyclopaedia of Political Thought, 1987, ISBN 0-631-17944-5, p. 290
  14. Rothbard, Murray. For A New Liberty. 12 The Public Sector, III: Police, Law, and the Courts
  15. Friedman, David. The Machinery of Freedom. Second edition. La Salle, Ill, Open Court, pp. 116-117.
  16. Friedman, David D. The Machinery of Freedom. Chapter 42
  17. Hans-Hermann Hoppe "Argumentation Ethics" Retrieved 6 February 2007
  18. Rothbard, Murray N. (1988) "What's Wrong with Liberty Poll; or, How I Became a Libertarian", Liberty, July 1988, p.53
  19. "Murray N. Rothbard (1926-1995), American economist, historian, and individualist anarchist." Avrich, Paul. Anarchist Voices: An Oral History of Anarchism in America, Abridged Paperback Edition (1996), p. 282 "Although there are many honorable exceptions who still embrace the "socialist" label, most people who call themselves individualist anarchists today are followers of Murray Rothbard's Austrian economics, and have abandoned the labor theory of value." Carson, Kevin. Mutualist Political Economy, Preface.
  20. Hoppe, Hans-Hermann (2001)"Anarcho-Capitalism: An Annotated Bibliography" Retrieved 23 May 2005
  21. Rothbard, Murray N. (1982) "Law, Property Rights, and Air Pollution" Cato Journal 2, No. 1 (Spring 1982): pp. 55-99. Retrieved 20 May 2005
  22. Rothbard, Murray N. (1982) The Ethics of Liberty Humanities Press ISBN 0-8147-7506-3:p162 Retrieved 20 May 2005.
  23. Rothbard, Murray N. (1973) For a new Liberty Collier Books, A Division of Macmillan Publishing Co., Inc., New York: pp.24-25. Retrieved 20 May 2005.
  24. a b c d Rothbard, Murray N. (1962) Man, Economy & State with Power and Market Ludwig von Mises Institute ISBN 0-945466-30-7 ch2 Retrieved 19 May 2005
  25. Rothbard, Murray N. (1975) Society Without A State (pdf) Libertarian Forum newsletter (January 1975).
  26. Exclusive Interview With Murray Rothbard The New Banner: A Fortnightly Libertarian Journal (25 February 1972).
  27. a b Hoppe, Hans-Hermann (2002) "Rothbardian Ethics" Retrieved 23 May 2005
  28. Hess, Karl (1969) Letter From Washington The Libertatian Forum Vol. I, No. VI (June 15 1969) Retrieved 5 August 2006
  29. Holcombe, Randall G., Common Property in Anarcho-Capitalism, Journal of Libertarian Studies, Volume 19, No. 2 (Spring 2005):3-29.
  30. Long, Roderick T. 199. "A Plea for Public Property." Formulations 5, no. 3 (Spring)
  31. Error en la cita: Etiqueta <ref> inválida; no se ha definido el contenido de las referencias llamadas Rothbard-1982.2
  32. Nozick, Robert (1973) Anarchy, State, and Utopia
  33. Friedman, David. The Machinery of Freedom: Guide to a Radical Capitalism. Harper & Row. pp. 144-145
  34. Brown, Susan Love, The Free Market as Salvation from Government: The Anarcho-Capitalist View, Meanings of the Market: The Free Market in Western Culture, edited by James G. Carrier, Berg/Oxford, 1997, p. 113.
  35. Friedman, David. The Machinery of Freedom. Second edition. La Salle, Ill, Open Court, pp. 116-117.
  36. ibid pp. 127-128
  37. a b Molinari, Gustave de (1849) The Production of Security (trans. J. Huston McCulloch) Retrieved 15 July 2006
  38. a b Friedman, David D. (1973) The Machinery of Freedom: Guide to a Radical Capitalism Harper & Row ISBN 0-06-091010-0 ch29
  39. Rothbard, Murray N. (1973) For a new Liberty Collier Books, A Division of Macmillan Publishing Co., Inc., New York: pp.223. Retrieved 5 August 2006
  40. O'Keeffe, Matthew (1989) "Retribution versus Restitution" Legal Notes No.5, Libertarian Alliance ISBN 1-870614-22-4 Retrieved 19 May 2005
  41. Rothbard, Murray N. (1973) Interview Reason February 1973, Retrieved 10 August 2005
  42. Thoreau, Henry David (1849) Civil Disobedience
  43. Razeen, Sally. Classical Liberalism and International Economic Order: Studies in Theory and Intellectual History, Routledge (UK) ISBN 0-415-16493-1, 1998, p. 17
  44. Raico, Ralph (2004) Authentic German Liberalism of the 19th Century Ecole Polytechnique, Centre de Recherce en Epistemologie Appliquee, Unité associée au CNRS
  45. Heider, Ulrike. Anarchism: Left, Right and Green, San Francisco: City Lights Books, 1994, pp. 95-96
  46. "...only a few individuals like Murray Rothbard, in Power and Market, and some article writers were influenced by these men. Most had not evolved consciously from this tradition; they had been a rather automatic product of the American environment." DeLeon, David. The American as Anarchist: Reflections on Indigenous Radicalism. Johns Hopkins University Press, 1978, p. 127
  47. "The Spooner-Tucker Doctrine: An Economist's View", Journal of Libertarian Studies, vol. 20, no. 1, p. 7[1] (1965, 2000)
  48. Tucker, Benjamin. State Socialism and Anarchism
  49. Tucker, Benjamin. "Instead of a Book" (1893)
  50. Watner, Carl. Spooner Vs. Liberty in The Libertarian Forum. March 1975. Volume VII, No 3. ISSN 0047-4517. pp. 5-6.
  51. a b c d Rothbard, Murray N. [2], Retrieved 10 September 2006
  52. a b Friedman, David D. (1979) Private Creation and Enforcement of Law: A Historical Case, Retrieved, 12 de agosto, 2005
  53. Anderson, Terry L. y Hill, P. J. An American Experiment in Anarcho-Capitalism: The Not So Wild, Wild West, The Journal of Libertarian Studies.
  54. a b c d Are "anarcho"-capitalists really anarchists? - Traducción
  55. Proudhon, Pierre J.. El principio federativo, 1863, 89.  (leer aquí)
  56. Sean Sheehan; Anarchism. Reaktion Books, 2003. [3]
  57. Andrew Vincent; Modern Political Ideologies. Wiley-Blackwell [4]
  58. Error en la cita: Etiqueta <ref> inválida; no se ha definido el contenido de las referencias llamadas grant
  59. Paul McLaughlin; Anarchism and Authority. Ashgate. [5]
  60. Respuesta al FAQ anarquista, por Richard A. Garner
  61. a b Bob Black; The libertarian as conservative [6]
  62. a b David Miller, Janet Coleman, William Connolly, Alan Ryan. The Blackwell encyclopaedia of political thought [7]
  63. Anarchism.Broadview Encore Editions (2004)
  64. El anarquismo. Anarres, ISBN: 987-20875-0-4
  65. La ideología anarquista
  66. Counter-Community: an aspect of anarchist political culture. Journal of Contemporary History, 1994; 29; 349. Gemie es Doctorado en Historia de la Universidad de Glamorgan, Gales, y editor asociado de Anarchist Studies.
  67. The Anarchists. Aldine Transaction, 2005 ISBN 0202307689
  68. Del socialismo utópico al anarquismo. Cincel (1985)
  69. Las teoría anarquistas. Zero, Madrid (1975)
  70. El lenguaje libertario.
  71. El 'anarcocapitalismo' simplemente reemplaza el Estado por empresas de seguridad privada, y difícilmente puedan ser descritos como anarquistas, tal como el término es normalmente entendido. Brian Morris, "Global Anti-Capitalism", pp. 170-6, Anarchist Studies, vol. 14, no. 2, p. 175
  72. René Furth Formas y tendencias del anarquismo
  73. La filosofía del 'anarcocapitalismo' soñada por la Nueva Derecha 'libertariana', no tiene nada que ver con el movimiento anarquista, según lo que los anarquistas proponen. Es una mentira... un patente desenfrenado capitalismo... que necesita de la fuerza a su disposición para mantener los privilegios de clase, sea por el mismo Estado o por ejércitos privados. Anarchism: Arguments For and Against, p. 50 [8]}}
  74. Modern Political Ideologies; Blackwell (2008), p. 116: hay un gran desacuerdo sobre el número de tendencias anarquistas, prefiriendo la clasificación entre individualistas, colectivistas, mutualistas, anarcosindicalistas y comunistas, pero incluyendo como “sub-variante” del individualismo al anarcocapitalismo de Rothbard, aclarando que “no encaja fácilmente en esta categoría, teniendo en cuenta su particular obsesión por el capitalismo”; más adelante (p. 119) señala el rechazo de los anarquistas hacia el anarcocapitalismo.
  75. Anarchist Voices: An Oral History of Anarchism in America, Abridged Paperback Edition (1996), p. 282. En este libro figura la única mención a un anarcocapitalista en toda la prolífica obra de Avrich, dedicada principalmente a la historia del anarquismo en Rusia y los EEUU: "Murray N. Rothbard (1926-1995), economista americano, historiador, y anarquista individualista."
  76. Anarchism and Authority; Aldershot: Ashgate, (2007) ISBN 0754661962. P. 165 y 166. Recoge la opinión de David Miller, en Anarchism (London, 1984, p. 30.), mencionando al anarcocapitalismo de Rothbard y Friedman, como una forma de individualismo, que aunque internamente coherente, no es propiamente anarquismo.
  77. Anarchism; Reaktion Books (2004). Menciona al anarcocapitalismo en las páginas 39, 43 y 58, sin desarrollar el concepto.
  78. The Blackwell dictionary of modern social thought; Blackwell (2006). El anarcocapitalismo es mencionado brevemente en el artículo "Anarquismo", y luego completado en la entrada "Libertarianismo".
  79. Contemporary anarchism; Transaction Publishers (1979). Incluye al libertarianismo de Rothbard como una forma contemporánea de anarquismo, e incorpora textos de Rothbard en su antología.
  80. Diccionario de economía, Siglo XXI Editores (1990). En la entrada "Anarquismo" se incluye al anarcocapitalismo de Rothbard como una forma de librecambismo muy cercana al anarquismo, desarrollando brevemente sus ideas, pero dedicando casi la totalidad del artículo al anarquismo clásico.
  81. Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy; tomo 1; Routledge (1998). En la entrada "Anarquismo" dedica un breve párrafo al anarcocapitalismo, incluyéndolo en la tradición individualista anarquista, fuertemente conectado con el libertarianismo.
  82. The Encyclopedia of Libertarianism; SAGE publications (2008). Dedica toda la entrada de "Anarquismo" al desarrollo de las ideas del anarcocapitalismo y el libertarianismo, mencionando muy superficialmente al anarquismo clásico.
  83. El anarcocapitalismo no es mencionado entre las corrientes anarquistas por la Encyclopaedia Britannica, por la Enciclopedia Espasa Calpe, la Encyclopedia of Social History (Taylor & Francis , 1994, ISBN 10:0815303424) de Peter N. Stearns, la Encyclopedia of the United Nations and international agreements (Routledge, New York, 2003) de Edmund Jan Osmańczyk y Anthony Mango; todas estas enciclopedias incluyen en su artículo "Anarquismo" solo a las corrientes clásicas. En la The Blackwell encyclopaedia of political thought escrita por David Miller, Janet Coleman, William Connolly, Alan Ryan, en el artículo de “Anarquismo” solo menciona a los anarco-capitalistas como una variante moderna del individualismo y como formando parte de un movimiento mayor: el libertarianismo, y consigna el rechazo de los anarquistas (p.11). En cambio, les dedica un breve comentario en la sección “Libertarianismo”. El anarcocapitalismo sí está incluido dentro del artículo "Anarquismo" de la Encyclopedia of Libertarianism (SAGE publications, 2008) de Ronald Hamowy.
  84. Para los diferentes significados y contextos en que se aplica la denominación de libertario, ver El lenguaje libertario de Christian Ferrer (comp.), Terramar, 2005
  85. "Le Libertaire, Journal du Mouvement sociale", fue publicado en [[Nueva York (Nueva York)|]] desde 1858 a 1861 por el revolucionario anarco-comunista Joseph Dejacque (Max Nettlau, A Short History of Anarchism, p. 75)
  86. George Woodcock, L'anarchia: storia delle idee e dei movimenti libertari , Feltrinelli Editore, 1966.
  87. (Barry Norman, Del liberalismo classico e del libertarianismo, ELiDiR , Roma, 1993 )
  88. William Landes and Richard Posner. "The Private Enforcement of Law." 4 Journal of Legal Studies 1. [9]
  89. David D. Friedman. "Efficient Institutions for the Private Enforcement of Law." 13 Journal of Legal Studies 379. [10] [11]
  90. Mike Godwin. "Neal Stephenson's Past,Present, and Future; The author of the widely praised Baroque Cycle on science, markets, and post-9/11 America." Reason Magazine, February 2005. (http://www.reason.com/news/show/36481.html).
  91. Roblimo. "Neal Stephenson Responds With Wit and Humor." Slashdot, October (year unclear). (http://interviews.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=04/10/20/1518217).

Bibliografía

Fuentes que consideran al anarcocapitalismo un tipo de anarquismo

Como una forma de anarquismo individualista

  • Alan and Trombley, Stephen (Eds.) Bullock, The Norton Dictionary of Modern Thought, W. W. Norton & Company (1999), p. 30
  • Outhwaite, William. The Blackwell Dictionary of Modern Social Thought, entrada: Anarchism, p. 21 & pp. 13-14, 2002
  • Bottomore, Tom. Entrada: Dictionary of Marxist Thought, Anarchism, p.21 1991.
  • Blackwell Encyclopaedia of Political Thought, 1991, ISBN 0-631-17944-5, p. 11
  • Barry, Norman. Modern Political Theory, 2000, Palgrave, p. 70
  • Adams, Ian. Political Ideology Today, Manchester University Press (2002) ISBN 0-7190-6020-6, p. 135
  • Grant, Moyra. Key Ideas in Politics, Nelson Thomas 2003 ISBN 0-7487-7096-8, p. 91
  • Heider, Ulrike. Anarchism:Left, Right, and Green, City Lights, 1994. p. 3.
  • Ostergaard, Geoffrey. Resisting the Nation State - the anarchist and pacifist tradition, Anarchism As A Tradition of Political Thought. Peace Pledge Union Publications [12]
  • Avrich, Paul. Anarchist Voices: An Oral History of Anarchism in America, Abridged Paperback Edition (1996), p. 282
  • Brooks, Frank H. (ed) (1994) The Individualist Anarchists: An Anthology of Liberty (1881-1908), Transaction Publishers, Prefacio p. xi
  • Sheehan, Sean. Anarchism, Reaktion Books, 2004, p. 39
  • Avrich, Paul. Anarchist Voices: An Oral History of Anarchism in America, Abridged Paperback Edition (1996), p. 282
  • Tormey, Simon. Anti-Capitalism, One World, 2004, pp. 118-119
  • Raico, Ralph. Authentic German Liberalism of the 19th Century, Ecole Polytechnique, Centre de Recherce en Epistemologie Appliquee, Unité associée au CNRS, 2004
  • Offer, John. Herbert Spencer: Critical Assessments, Routledge (UK) (2000), p. 243
  • Busky, Donald. Democratic Socialism: A Global Survey, Praeger/Greenwood (2000), p. 4
  • Foldvary, Fred E. What Aren't You an Anarchist?, Progress Report, reimpreso en The Free Liberal, 14 February 2006
  • Levy, Carl. Anarchism, Microsoft® Encarta® Online Encyclopedia 2006 [13] MS Encarta (UK).
  • Heywood, Andrew. Politics: Second Edition, Palgrave (2002), p. 61

Como un tipo de anarquismo en general

  • Sylvan, Richard. Anarchism. A Companion to Contemporary Political Philosophy, editores Goodin, Robert E. and Pettit, Philip. Blackwell Publishing, 1995, p.231
  • Perlin, Terry M. Contemporary Anarchism. Transaction Books, New Brunswick, NJ 1979, p. 7
  • DeLeon, David. The American as Anarchist: Reflections of Indigenous Radicalism, Capítulo: The Beginning of Another Cycle, Johns Hopkins University Press, 1979, p. 117 & 123
  • Brown, Susan Love, The Free Market as Salvation from Government: The Anarcho-Capitalist View, Meanings of the Market: The * Free Market in Western Culture, editado por James G. Carrier, Berg/Oxford, 1997, p. 99
  • Kearney, Richard. Continental Philosophy in the 20th Century, Routledge (UK) (2003), p. 336
  • Sargent, Lyman Tower. Extremism in America: A Reader, NYU Press (1995), p. 11
  • Sanders, John T.; Narveson, For and Against the State, Rowman and Littlefield Publishers, 1996, ISBN 0-8476-8165-3
  • Goodwin, Barbara. Using Political Ideas, fourth edition, John Wiley & Sons (1987), p. 137

Otras fuentes de información