How is anarchy left-wing?

Hi, i wonder how anarchy is left-wing and share alot of interest with for example socialists and communists. Alot of punk music has often anarchy and left-wing messages. I'snt anarchy a extreme form of libertarianism? Also how would the economy work? I'm not bashing at anarchy at all, i just wonder about the details. In Norway where i live, i know some anarchist who vote for the progress party. This is a libertarian party, but the most right-wing in Norway.

Anarchism (as in libertarian-socialism or socialist-libertarianism) is left-wing because it stands for a free society both economically and socially.

The party you are talking about is probably Anarcho-capitalist (mostly referred to as Libertarianism). They do not want social-freedom, just economic-freedom.

So where left-wing anarchists want to abolish capitalism, (most) libertarian-parties do not.

Look at this chart:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...l-spectrum.png

The left is (how surprising) to the left. Right is capitalism, left is communism.
Important here is the y-axis. It represents "libertarian" and "authoritarian".

Fascism would be in the right-bottom corner, Stalinism in the left-bottom corner (i'll be probably strung up by supporters for this, but hey).
The left-wing anarchists are in the top-left corner and the libertarians you are talking about are in the top-right corner.

So, to sum up: there is a difference between libertarians and libertarians.

Anarchism is inherently socialist, in which most anarchists believe that capitalism is an institution of the state as capitalism can not exist without the state (despite what right-wing libertarians believe). Anarchists are for the abolishing of private property and believe that the means of production (such as wood, coal, metals, etc.) should be available to everyone rather than just a select few who can afford it...which is socialist.

Anarcho-Capitalists are not in any sense really anarchists. Most of them don't even really believe in anarchy themselves, but rather minarchy. Without a state, capitalism cannot exist because then you could not enforce private property laws nor the existence of classes nor any medium of exchange (money).

@Domela: What a stupid chart, putting communism as "authoritarian".

It's got that "I went to high school so I know what I'm talking about here!" feel to it.

Know what's even worse? It was the best i could find! Most of 'em were even worse! Some of them actually discribed the entire left as pro-government! :laugh::laugh::laugh:

I swear, soon i'll make a good one! (maybe even tonight)

Anarchism is a political philosophy which opposes the state, but, more importantly in its definition, is its opposition to hierarchy.

Of course, revolutionary left wing politics aims to abolish hierarchy and is thus anarchistic in nature.

One could of course talk for hours about the false dichotomy that is authoritarian and libertarian. Authoritarian against what class? The working class? the capitalist class?
Authoritarian measures against the capitalist class may very well be libertarian measures for the working class, and vice versa.

This graph makes a fundamental error by displaying "communism" as remotely authoritarian since it is stateless. Obviously Socialism is more authoritarian than anarchism, yet only Marxist-Leninism and its derivations come close to the same amount of authoritarianism displayed by the ruling classes these days.

I think these charts oversimplify things far too much. I don't think you can say that communism is necessarily authoritarian, OR libertarian, due to tendencies such as Stalinism existing (despite Stalinism not actually being communist in my opinion). Same with anarchism, except on the right and left wings. I don't think anyone can definitively say s anarchism is a left wind ideology due to the lolbertarians (even though, as an anarchist, I would say is distinctly not anarchist). It really is subjective- if you're a Stalinist (or a supporter), then Stalinism is communism, but to an anarcho-communist you are not communist. If you are a lolbertarian, then you are (from your point of view) an anarchist. But from a leftist-anarchist point of view, you are.

In other words those charts are bullshit.

Why do you see libertarianism and leftism as excluding each other, as opposites? They are one and the same, in my opinion. Right-wing psuedo-libertarianism is not at all libertarian, neither politically nor economically.

I don't think that anarchism isn't necessarily left-wing, but a lot of the anarchists on this forum are in fact left-wing anarchists. While all anarchists want an end to the current system, there's a question as to what should happen after this - whether an anarcho-capitalist system would be introduced, or a stateless socialist/communist type society.

I wasn't trying to say they excluded each other, I'm just saying that the charts are subjective to your point of view.

Well, due to capitalism advocating hierarchies, I wouldn't consider them anarchist. But others may.

I suppose it depends whether or not you say anarchism is simply about destroying the state/government, or whether its more about abolishing all forms of hierarchy and authority. If the latter, then I'd say its reasonable to argue that anarcho-capitalism is not in fact anarchism but more of an extreme flavor of neoliberalism.

If we're to define anarchism based upon the theory and movement itself it's definitely the latter.

However, even if we were to claim that anarchism is solely anti-stateism it would necessarily be opposed to all class society due to class society necessitating the existence of the state.

Anarchism opposes all forms of hierarchy and authoritarianism. Which means that it's anti-capitalist, because a boss is a form of authority.

Anarchism includes abolishing private property, the state, money, and transforming all production into a gift economy. It's probably as far left on the political spectrum as you can go.

As far as I'm concerned the "political spectrum" is nonsense. To be certain, "Left" and "Right" are useful insofar as they describe distinct traditions, have been used by partisans of a whole mess of politics to identify themselves, and have historical interest; that doesn't mean they have descriptive value.
Anarchists are "left" only insofar as the historic relationship between anarchists and the left - trying to map politics along the simplistic (in the pejorative sense) axes of left/right, authoritarian/libertarian, or whatever only serves to confuse things. After all, what can we possibly learn about practice, strategic orientations, or vision from this? Are some communists really in the authoritarian camp because they see a particular use for the state, despite a longer term vision of statelessness? Do various liberal ideologies really belong on the "libertarian" side of the spectrum because of their espoused values, in spite of the historic relationship between liberal democracy and jackbooted authoritarianism?

In any case, are so-called "libertarians" anarchists? The answer is abolutely not, not (only) on account of definitions, but because of their real relationship to anarchist struggles - there is none. "Libertarians" and "anarcho-capitalists" (ha!) are entirely absent from anarchist spaces and projects. Their politics are irrelevant to real on-the-ground anarchist organizing, and always have been. I am willing to bet that the "anarchists" you know who vote (?!) for the Progress Party aren't part of any anarchist movement in any meaningful way. What anarchist projects, collectives, or organizations do they participate in? "Anarchist" isn't just a vague beliefs about freedom - it's a living international struggle. Those who aren't part of it are no more anarchists than NHL Fans are Hockey Players, or couch potatoes are TV Stars.

'twas not to you.

The thing is they want economic freedom for themselves, but they don't care whether that freedom is accessible to anyone else.