Talk:Individualist anarchism in Europe

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Europe  
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Europe, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Europe on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's quality scale.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Philosophy  
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Philosophy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related to philosophy on Wikipedia. If you would like to support the project, please visit the project page, where you can get more details on how you can help, and where you can join the general discussion about philosophy content on Wikipedia.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's quality scale.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
 
 

I don't know if this article is accurate but what about:

--Nihilo 01 (talk) 19:59, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

The anarcho-capitalists don't seem to be major theoretical contributors, but there probably should be a short paragraph on them. Not sure though. Only two of the links for the brits actually went to the people, and one was about two sentences long. I don't think there's quite enough there to warrant more than a brief mention at this point. Zazaban (talk) 23:26, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

it is like they always get trown out of the party. but theykeep coming back. i sugesta going to neoliberalism and there you will find your friends. viv a la camaraderia amorosa. all of those peple are liberals. enemies of anarchism. "Property is theft!"--190.155.53.167 (talk) 08:49, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

This isn't really the place for these sort of comments, thank you. Zazaban (talk) 09:23, 22 May 2009 (UTC)
In the present anarcho-capitalists are the mayor anarcho-individualists, even in Europe. And market anarchists had been always the most representative anarcho-individualist in UK. This is another attepmt of essay, very suspect of anti-market and anti-americanism. Very sad. --Nihilo 01 (talk) 23:08, 22 May 2009 (UTC)
I'm not entirely certain you know what the word 'essay' means. Also, this is an attempt to cover forms of Individualist anarchism native to Europe, which anarcho-capitalism isn't. Also, I think at some point you should read WP:GOODFAITH. Zazaban (talk) 00:11, 23 May 2009 (UTC)
And what about UK market anarchists, they are native also. And, why the european figures of anarcho-capitalism are excluded? Remeber that anarcho-individualism in Europe, currently, have no mayor representative figures, with exception of some anarcho-capitalists. --Nihilo 01 (talk) 03:23, 24 May 2009 (UTC)
But anarcho-capitalism as a philosophy isn't native to Europe, nor have any of its major contributors lived there. Note that I support a mention of anarcho-capitalism. Individualism in general doesn't have much support in Europe lately, and hasn't really since the time of the people covered here. But the traditions in historical European individualist anarchism ought to be given the coverage that they have. But I am totally not against a bit on anarcho-capitalism. Zazaban (talk) 08:06, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

POV fork[edit]

This article seems to be a POV fork created in an attempt to circumvent a content dispute over at Individualist anarchism which is currently under protection due to edit warring. -- Vision Thing -- 11:11, 23 May 2009 (UTC)

I disagree. It is an expansion on what is explained in summary at Individualist anarchism. Likewise, Individualist anarchism is not a POV-fork of Anarchist schools of thought. Zazaban (talk) 20:47, 23 May 2009 (UTC)
Totaly agree with VisionThing, It is very dfficult to pressume goodfaith with the kind of comments of the author of the essay and his historial int this issue. I say "essay" because of the intention of the article not because of the issue. --Nihilo 01 (talk) 03:30, 24 May 2009 (UTC)
That isn't what Essay means. Also, I don't see how Eduen's comments detract from the article. I have found many of Eduen's comments to be more than a bit iffy, but I quite like this article. Zazaban (talk) 08:03, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

-Nihilo:"In the present anarcho-capitalists are the mayor anarcho-individualists, even in Europe." prove this. individualism in europe follows old individualist currents such as ilegalism, naturism, egoism, mutualism, etc.

-"And market anarchists had been always the most representative anarcho-individualist in UK." Well, Nihilo´s "Donisthorpe" is a city. i hope the people there dont find someone is calling their city an "individualist anarchist" "Herbert", mmm which one? "Henry Appleton": in the article it says he is from the United States.

-the other persons from other countries seem to be mostly active in neoliberal economics and show no connection with anarchist circles (actually as neoliberals are in reality active in the right wing and so are funded in their research by the rich). anyway all of them are contemporary authors and their only connection to anarchism seems to be Rothbard who is in himself a too many times excluded person from anarchism and in europe almost totally ignored within anarchist circles.

this article is well referenced and reflects history. i dont see how can you challenge anything thats written in it right now. you can only complain here that those recent neoliberal authors are not named.--Eduen (talk) 07:48, 25 May 2009 (UTC)


PD: Zarzaban, the last comment of Eduen is an indication of what I told you (POV-biased article). --Nihilo 01 (talk) 18:09, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

Auberon Herbert and Wordsworth Donisthorpe. One could certainly challenge the credentials of each, but there are probably sufficient sources to merit the consideration of their inclusion. Ambrose C. Cudden, an English associate of Warren who published one of the very first anarchist publications in England (see Nettlau), could and almost certainly should be included. Libertatia (talk) 18:31, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

Well, lets include a section on those people close to the tucker magazine liberty. anyway i once tried to research individualist anarchism in the UK.--Eduen (talk) 04:34, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

Criticisms[edit]

This article has many names but very little about their contributions. It's nice to know who influenced who, but shouldn't the nature of the influence be discussed? There is also insufficient focus on the evolution of the ideas themselves. E.g., where is violentism today?

The 10-syllable phrase individualist anarchism(t) appears over and over throughout the article. Would anyone object to substituting IA as an acronym after first defining it? I'll focus on cleaning up references for now.

I'd like see the since 1945 section merged into the individual sections. Lfstevens (talk) 19:12, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

If by "violentism" you mean individual propaganda of the deed, individual reclamation and ilegalism, this continues today in the forms of insurrectionary anarchism and sometimes post-left anarchy which are influenced by Stirner and insurrectionaru anarchists also pay homage to people like Renzo Novatore. This is shown in the "Since 1945" section. Anarcho-naturism was more of an european current but it was influenced by the american Henry David Thoreau. Anarcho naturism was a current within individualist anarchism but now green anarchism and anarcho-primitivism have established themselves on their own. In Europe anarcho-primitivists and green anarchists do trace their roots back to european anarcho-naturism just as insurrectionary anarchists do with illegalism.--Eduen (talk) 20:16, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for the info. I hope you can include more like this in the article itself. Any comments about the other items? Lfstevens (talk) 21:25, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

maybe illegalism should have a section on the "Thought" part or the "thought" could be retitled "thought and practice". the part on illegalism could have the explanation of individual reclamation as being based on the positions of proudhun "property is theft" and stirner´s "disrespect for private property".--Eduen (talk) 04:09, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

Finally, I found it difficult to maintain Wikipedia's NPOV policy in making my copy-edits—although I did—given that I find this ideology on the evil side of dumb... Lfstevens (talk) 10:37, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned references in Individualist anarchism in Europe[edit]

I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Individualist anarchism in Europe's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

Reference named "freelove":

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT 05:23, 3 January 2011 (UTC)