I describe my ideology as Free Market Anti-Capitalism and I would like to explain what it is and see how this community responds to it.

First, given the choice between the state and the market I will choose the market. But just because I think Markets are relativly better doesn't mean I must enthusiastically embrace all parts of common free market theory. I don't believe that property accumulation is a fundamental right on par with life and liberty. I am also not convinced that free markets are always more efficient then moderately regulated economies under liberal democracy. I choose free markets because I believe state violence is an absolute bad not because I believe markets are necessarily an absolute good.

Ancaps often talk of the state as though it was some alien entity which descended onto society from outer space. The state is not special, it is simply the largest violent agent in society, no fundamentally different then any other mafia other then it happens to be the largest. A true free market would require that all market actors follow the NAP but in the absence of the state what stops other agents from employing violence and coercion? Ancaps commonly argue to me that violence is too expensive to be employed by private firms without the ability of the state to socialize the costs of that violence onto the larger population. Bollocks! Any intelligent mafia organization would socialize the costs of its violent doings onto the communities it is already intimidating. Any intelligent mafia can find a way to profit off of their violence, any intelligent mafia will try to become the new state in the absence of the old state. Free markets may be preferable to state violence but free markets dont eliminate the problem that some individuals will see an economic insentive in the use of violence.

Ancaps are also completely untroubled by wealth inequality. I don't have an intrinsic problem with wealth inequality but I am concerned that individuals with large supplies of wealth will be more capable and more capable of hiring thugs to employ violence on their behalf, intimidating workers, customers, and competitors. This connects back to my point in the previous paragraph.

There is however a solution to this problem which I can see: Labor Unions! Large robust Labor Unions (I believe) would be capable of organizing boycotts and strikes to eliminate firms which employ mafia tactics. They also, by negotiating higher paying contracts for lower level workers, fix the problem of rampant income inequality. I would describe my ideology perhaps simply as pro-Unionism. And one of my major reasons for choosing markets over the state is that I believe Unions have the best opportunity to grow in a free market compared to under the state. And I also think that Unions are necessary for the preservation of a free market. I think Unions are the most capable of eliminating mafia like practices. When one firm begins to employ coercion, their competitors may rally to put them out of business, but I believe personally that the Unions will be what put them out of business.

Unions are certainly part of the market but lets not pretend that they are born of Capitalist thinking. Unions ask their members to give up immediate marginal self interest for the good of the community of unionized workers. Unions represent a deviation from the model of human behavior that predicts that we are all rational self maximizing agents. Unions are born of a socialist-collectivist mentality of sacrificing personal benefit (don't be a scab) for the long term group interest. Unions are voluntary collectivist entities! Unions may be compatible with free markets but "Capitalist" because they represent a deviation from individualist-profit-seeking behavior. Another reason they are anti-capitalist is because they are in direct opposition to the business interests of the capitalists (business owners). Ancaps like to define Capitalism = Free Markets but clearly capitalism has other implications beyond that of free markets. I dont think its reasonable given the historical connotations of the word capitalist to say that a Unionist is pro-Capitalist. I am an anti-state pro-Unionist = a Free Market Anti-Capitalist.

In theory I should be able to join an Ancap community because I support free markets and have a personal preference for unions. However, the overwhelming majority of Ancaps have a personal preference against Unions. The overwhelming number of ancaps I have met are pro-individualism, pro-entrepreneurs, pro-business leadership, and generally hope that Unions will wither out in the free market. We may both agree that markets are preferable to the state but if you see the world through the perspective of the business leadership and I see the world through the eyes of the Labor Unions then we are not going to be good friends. We represent competing interests within the market. And this is my bigest problem with this page, it should in theory be a place for all free market supporters but I find that my pro union views are unwelcome.

I find myself much more at home in the Anarcho-communist community. They, despite what you might believe, are usually verry willing to listen to and agree with my free market position so long as they know I am speaking from a pro-Union perspective. The reason I beleive they are hostile to Ancaps is not because the inherently reject the market but rather they reject the ancap pro-business-leadership views and reject free market theory if it is coming from the perspective of someone who is anti-union.

So long as the market exists there will be a constant tension between the Unions and business owners over their conflicting economic interests for higher wages on one end and higher profits on the other. business leaders have in the past hired thugs to intimidate unions. They don't necessarily need the state to do this. I believe the main reason Ancoms reject free market theory when it comes from Ancaps is because they think your simply lying. You claim to suport the NAP but most of you think personaly well of the business leadership and private business owners, the very people Ancoms suspect will violate the NAP to intimidate Labor Unions.

Not all Ancoms support free markets, this is true, but I have found a number who will if markets are put forward from a pro-union perspective. Meanwhile, I tend to agree with Ancoms that I am highly suspicouse of anyone who claims to support free markets but holds personal negative opinions of Labor Unions.