Broadly: Libertarian Socialist
Specifically: Agorist, Syndicalist, and anarchist-without-adjectives.
I sympathize with all three, and think all three have great aspects.
Agorism tends to bridge the divide between Left and Right anarchists, and advocates markets (the most efficient form of economic order) and counter economics, as well as direct action and education, while realizing that Marxists were wrong on the oppressive class, that not all capitalists are the source of societal problems, just primarily those that collude with the State.
Syndicalism is the trade union aspect of worker organization, which works very well if decentralized and widespread, such as the CNT and to a lesser extent the AK Press in Oakland.
Anarchism-without-adjectives is just the stateless aspect of anarchism, recognizing that economic disagreements aside, the single largest issue for ALL anarchists is ridding us of illegitimate authority in the form of government.
I recognize all three as vital to anarchist thought, and simply disregarding one in favor of the other ignores the issues that culminated in those ideologies.
The ideologies that I do not find tenable are pure anarcho-communism, anarcho-capitalism, and mutualism. I think these three might work in an idealistic society, but we do not live in an idealistic society. Money is a novel technology which is too easy to use to be rid of, trade unions are vital to workers rights, and just giving people shit without regards to the costs of labor, supply and demand, etc, does not seem like it would work very well on a large scale.
My believe is as such:
Society will be run according to markets, organized by workers, innovators, and consumers; not any central authority.
Federations of organizations would elect freely -recallable representatives, with no specific term limit. A good representative could represent that organization for as long as the workers like. A bad representative could be recalled immediately.
The application of interest would be abolished, seeing how it leads to recurring debts that are almost impossible to fully pay off for any society.
Fractional-reserve banking would be abolished as well, seeing how it is inherently inflationary.
Police would still have to exist in one form or another, though Im not sure exactly how that would work. Crime will continue to go on regardless of what the societal structure is. Crime will likely decrease with a voluntary anarchist society thanks to the elimination of poverty, but it will not simply cease to exist. We do not live in a vacuum, after all, and people are stupid enough to take advantage of the lack of central authority. This is where we desperately need a plan to protect the citizenry, without the possibility of it bringing them harm, or negating liberties in the process. Id like to say more guns for the public, but Im not sure that would suffice, as not everybody wants to carry a gun everywhere they go, being paranoid as shit. People like feeling protected, even though our current police have no legal obligation to protect them, the only legal obligation they have is to uphold the law.
anarchism is not a utopia. Utopia implies perfection, which requires a static society. We live in dynamic times, and therefore the idea of utopia is not compatible with anarchism in any way.
Did I miss anything? Any thoughts?
Obviously open to public debate and expansion upon ideas.
