V is for Vitriol ...
... in a Wall Street Journal Editorial Page piece that is very solid on facts and history and astonishingly shallow on analysis. 
I consider his criticism of left-anarchism dead-on-accurate (though never labeled accurately), but his criticism of right-anarchism (equally unlabeled) is either absent or simply guilt-by-association. The author, Todd Seavey, needs to review the fallacy of false aggregates. While he mentions both Spooner and Rothbard, the economic analysis of state and statelessness doesn't even rate a mention. Still, the piece is well worth reading as a sort of Cliff Notes from the Loyal Opposition ...
I consider his criticism of left-anarchism dead-on-accurate (though never labeled accurately), but his criticism of right-anarchism (equally unlabeled) is either absent or simply guilt-by-association. The author, Todd Seavey, needs to review the fallacy of false aggregates. While he mentions both Spooner and Rothbard, the economic analysis of state and statelessness doesn't even rate a mention. Still, the piece is well worth reading as a sort of Cliff Notes from the Loyal Opposition ...
1 Comments:
Hey, well, what can one expect from mainstream media? I wish I would hear somebody other than an anarchist talk about anarchism in terms other than shoe-throwing or disorder and whatnot, and at least realize that there are many great thinkers associated with the notion. But still the public is mislead - public schools can hardly help with the "shoe-thrower complex"
Still, I think sites like this are funny; no mention of right-anarchism from what I see, and if it is mentioned, there's probably some left-anarchist potshot about right anarchism not being "real" anarchism...
Still looking forward to seeing the picture, in any event.
Post a Comment
<< Home