Center For a Stateless Society

[presence]

http://c4ss.org/wp-content/themes/center2013/C4SSLogo2.png

http://c4ss.org/


The Center for a Stateless Society (C4SS) is an anarchist think-tank and media center. Its mission is to explain and defend the idea of vibrant social cooperation without aggression, oppression, or centralized authority.


In particular, it seeks to enlarge public understanding and transform public perceptions of anarchism, while reshaping academic and movement debate, through the production and distribution of market anarchist media content, both scholarly and popular, the organization of events, and the development of networks and communities, and to serve, along with the Alliance of the Libertarian Left and the Molinari Institute, as an institutional home for left market anarchists.


To date, C4SS has documented almost 800 reprints of our articles (http://c4ss.org/press-room) in mainstream media, or citations to them from major news websites.


Our translation team has translated and/or produced original content in eleven languages and our editorials are regularly published around the world in countries such as Bangladesh and Taiwan.


We loathe intellectual property and find copyleft licenses troubling in their implicit threat of state violence. Feel free to share everything, not just our content! But for legal purposes all commentary published on this site is freely available for republication under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License.
You can follow updates on what the Center is up to here. (http://c4ss.org/content/category/center-updates)

Contact Us
General inquiries about this web site: admin@c4ss.org
Media inquiries: media@c4ss.org | spanish_media@c4ss.org | dutch_media@c4ss.org
Technical/Website Inquiries: mike.gogulski@c4ss.org | rechelon@c4ss.org

[Keith and stuff]

A former leader of the group was a police informant. I think the current group is OK for leftist. I've seen worse liberals. I'm not really into liberals, though.

[heavenlyboy34]

I'm a bit familiar with it. Pretty nice site in my experience. :)

[heavenlyboy34]

A former leader of the group was a police informant. I think the current group is OK for leftist. I've seen worse liberals. I'm not really into liberals, though.C4SS folks aren't "liberal" in the modern sense in my experience.

[compromise]

C4SS folks aren't "liberal" in the modern sense in my experience.

They're far-left extremists.

[heavenlyboy34]

They're far-left extremists.
Is that necessarily bad? A number of GOPers think we RP fanboys are "far-leftists". (that's not entirely wrong either, as libertarianism began as a radical left movement)

[Austrian Econ Disciple]

LOL. C4SS kicks ass.

'Far-leftists' and 'liberals'? You guys are not only wrong, but are starting to sound more and more like Redstate with each passing year. Gary Chartier, Thomas Knapp, Roderick Long, Brad ********, Sheldon Richman, etc. are all fantastic.

I'm also sick and tired of hearing extremely binary terms like left and right. Oh, those far-right racists Lew Rockwell, HH Hoppe, those far-leftists Gary Chartier and Kevin Carson, conjuring images of racial genocide, stalinist-authoritarianism, and all sorts of ridiculous distortions and manipulations. The fact is, both C4SS and LvMI carry a long storied tradition of libertarian thought, and they're practically identical except for what each emphasize.

Next, you'll be calling Benjamin Tucker the devil, and for the stoning of Lysander Spooner.

I can't believe some of you are even using that non-sense...

[heavenlyboy34]

LOL. C4SS kicks ass.

'Far-leftists' and 'liberals'? You guys are not only wrong, but are starting to sound more and more like Redstate with each passing year. Gary Chartier, Thomas Knapp, Roderick Long, Brad ********, Sheldon Richman, etc. are all fantastic.

I'm also sick and tired of hearing extremely binary terms like left and right. Oh, those far-right racists Lew Rockwell, HH Hoppe, those far-leftists Gary Chartier and Kevin Carson, conjuring images of racial genocide, stalinist-authoritarianism, and all sorts of ridiculous distortions and manipulations. The fact is, both C4SS and LvMI carry a long storied tradition of libertarian thought, and they're practically identical except for what each emphasize.

Next, you'll be calling Benjamin Tucker the devil, and for the stoning of Lysander Spooner.

I can't believe some of you are even using that non-sense...
+rep Not even RP takes the Left-Right paradigm seriously. Sad to see it invoked so often on a site named after him. :(

[Uriah]

Some good stuff. Enjoying the read.

[IDefendThePlatform]

I just posted another insightful c4ss article in Political Philosophy. Probably my new favorite website.


And calling them "liberals" or "leftists" is a misnomer. The name of the website is pretty straight-forward: Center for a Stateless Society. I've heard them called "Left Libertarians", but that's mostly window dressing. If you follow the non-aggression principle then you're a libertarian/anarchist/voluntaryist of some kind. The distinctions at that point are mostly regarding how to consider property and how to treat absentee land owners, etc...

[presence]

A former leader of the group was a police informant.

1/30 people in the US were arrested last year and threated with hard time for non-crime. So what?





I think the current group is OK for leftist. I've seen worse liberals. I'm not really into liberals, though.


You're looking left and right and forgetting up and down.

stateless and statist have nothing to do with liberal and conservative

[Rothbardian Girl]

C4SS is my favorite site next to Radgeek. Yes, some of the articles have a distinctly leftist flavor to them, especially Carson's, but I get so much more satisfaction out of C4SS compared to Rockwell's or the Mises site nowadays.

[NewRightLibertarian]

I was involved with their student group for a bit, and I like the organization overall even though they approach things from a more leftist perspective.

[PaulConventionWV]

I was involved with their student group for a bit, and I like the organization overall even though they approach things from a more leftist perspective.

Listen to you guys: "Left this, right that." It would be funny if it wasn't sad.

[heavenlyboy34]

Listen to you guys: "Left this, right that." It would be funny if it wasn't sad.
+rep :cool:

[NIU Students for Liberty]

I've never heard of the organization but I did check out the website and so far I'm intrigued.

[green73]

LOL. C4SS kicks ass.

'Far-leftists' and 'liberals'? You guys are not only wrong, but are starting to sound more and more like Redstate with each passing year. Gary Chartier, Thomas Knapp, Roderick Long, Brad ********, Sheldon Richman, etc. are all fantastic.

I'm also sick and tired of hearing extremely binary terms like left and right. Oh, those far-right racists Lew Rockwell, HH Hoppe, those far-leftists Gary Chartier and Kevin Carson, conjuring images of racial genocide, stalinist-authoritarianism, and all sorts of ridiculous distortions and manipulations. The fact is, both C4SS and LvMI carry a long storied tradition of libertarian thought, and they're practically identical except for what each emphasize.

Next, you'll be calling Benjamin Tucker the devil, and for the stoning of Lysander Spooner.

I can't believe some of you are even using that non-sense...

Fuck compromise. He's just a cognitive infiltrator (at best!).

[green73]

That rotten leftist Kinsella is there too.

eta: /s

[NewRightLibertarian]

Listen to you guys: "Left this, right that." It would be funny if it wasn't sad.

Huh?

[PaulConventionWV]

Huh?

I got 2 +reps for that quote. What's your deal?

[NewRightLibertarian]

I got 2 +reps for that quote. What's your deal?

My deal is that your comment made no sense. I personally don't give a shit how many reps you have.

[The Free Hornet]

My deal is that your comment made no sense. I personally don't give a shit how many reps you have.



There is general consensus that the Left includes progressives, social-liberals, greens, social-democrats, socialists, democratic-socialists, civil-libertarians (as in "social-libertarians"; not to be confused with the right's "economic-libertarians"), secularists, communists, and anarchists,[5][6][7][8] and that the Right includes conservatives, reactionaries, neoconservatives, capitalists, neoliberals, economic-libertarians (not to be confused with the left's "civil-libertarians"), social-authoritarians, monarchists, theocrats, nationalists, Nazis (including neo-Nazis) and fascists.[9]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Left%E2%80%93right_politics

https://lh3.ggpht.com/_bP7Y38nM7hQ/TNTnD0Q-eSI/AAAAAAAAAwM/8Emqsas5DhU/s320/everybody+got+that.jpg

Now Paul has 3 +reps. Left-right makes no fucking sense.

[PaulConventionWV]

My deal is that your comment made no sense. I personally don't give a shit how many reps you have.

It made perfect sense. The left/right paradigm is a farce. What did you think I meant?

[Rothbardian Girl]

It made perfect sense. The left/right paradigm is a farce. What did you think I meant?
I think there's a definite schism (though it may seem minor in the grand scheme of things to you, but that's not my point) between libertarians who tend to defend actually-existing business and societal arrangements, and others who see these arrangements as something artificial. Libertarians who self-identify as leftist can get tired of seeing certain businesses glorified while the unsavory effects of their actions (most of which are results of state-granted privilege anyway) in the marketplace are often ignored. Or, they may see cultural issues from a different perspective. Whether you personally agree is really of no consequence here; I'm just trying to explain that people do not always hold the same viewpoint as the prevailing ones on these forums and on other libertarian sites. So that is where the 'split' comes from. The main problem is that depending on your viewpoint, a right-libertarian may miss certain nuances, or interpret actually-existing conditions differently, and it sometimes comes off as if he or she simply doesn't care to entertain other perspectives. This can be particularly annoying when the right-libertarian denigrates others who don't toe his or her ideological line.

Anyway, not sure if you're going to read all of this; I have read some of your other posts, and I know you likely won't agree that differences of perspective can exist within this movement without it necessarily meaning "leftists have infiltrated and are trying to pit us all against each other". I personally don't care that much anymore, which is why I've kind of stopped talking about libertarian issues recently. Just thought I'd try to offer a counter-argument for the post that got oodles of +reps. :D

[heavenlyboy34]

I think there's a definite schism (though it may seem minor in the grand scheme of things to you, but that's not my point) between libertarians who tend to defend actually-existing business and societal arrangements, and others who see these arrangements as something artificial. Libertarians who self-identify as leftist can get tired of seeing certain businesses glorified while the unsavory effects of their actions (most of which are results of state-granted privilege anyway) in the marketplace are often ignored. Or, they may see cultural issues from a different perspective. Whether you personally agree is really of no consequence here; I'm just trying to explain that people do not always hold the same viewpoint as the prevailing ones on these forums and on other libertarian sites. So that is where the 'split' comes from. The main problem is that depending on your viewpoint, a right-libertarian may miss certain nuances, or interpret actually-existing conditions differently, and it sometimes comes off as if he or she simply doesn't care to entertain other perspectives. This can be particularly annoying when the right-libertarian denigrates others who don't toe his or her ideological line.

Anyway, not sure if you're going to read all of this; I have read some of your other posts, and I know you likely won't agree that differences of perspective can exist within this movement without it necessarily meaning "leftists have infiltrated and are trying to pit us all against each other". I personally don't care that much anymore, which is why I've kind of stopped talking about libertarian issues recently. Just thought I'd try to offer a counter-argument for the post that got oodles of +reps. :D
There are tons of schisms in the libertarian movement. Rothbard's famous joke about libertarians is true and telling-put 2 libertarians in a room together and they'll come up with at least 3 opinions on any issue. lolz :D

[Origanalist]

Hmmm, article at the site; Where Right-Libertarianism Goes Wrong

[heavenlyboy34]

Hmmm, article at the site; Where Right-Libertarianism Goes Wrong
That term usually refers to conservatives with libertarian leanings. I'll have to look at the site for context since you conveniently left it out... :P

ETA: Read a bit of it, and it seems I was correct. :D

[Origanalist]

That term usually refers to conservatives with libertarian leanings. I'll have to look at the site for context since you conveniently left it out... :P

ETA: Read a bit of it, and it seems I was correct. :D

Lol, I was just commenting on the article title.

You libertarians are so touchy..........:toady:

[heavenlyboy34]

Lol, I was just commenting on the article title.

You libertarians are so touchy..........:toady:
you lolcats are so feely.....:toady:

[Origanalist]

you lolcats are so feely.....:toady:

So together we're touchy-feely?

[heavenlyboy34]

So together we're touchy-feely?
It seems so! :D ~hugs~

[Lucille]

It's a great site. LOL @ "far-left extremists."



Contributors

Alan Furth
Anna Morgenstern
Anthony Gregory
Brad ********
Darian Worden
David S. D'Amato
Dawie Coetzee
Gary Chartier
James Tuttle
Jason Byas
Keith Taylor
Kevin Carson
Mike Gogulski
Natasha Petrova
Nathan Goodman
Charles Johnson
Roderick Long
Ross Kenyon
Sebastian A.B.
Sheldon Richman
Thomas L. Knapp
Trevor Hultner
William Gillis


Technical/Website Inquiries: mike.gogulski@c4ss.org

Vice wrote about Gogulski. Started a thread on him here: http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?452977-Mike-Gogulski-The-Stateless-Man

[helmuth_hubener]

I think there's a definite schism (though it may seem minor in the grand scheme of things to you, but that's not my point) between libertarians who tend to defend actually-existing business and societal arrangements, and others who see these arrangements as something artificial. Libertarians who self-identify as leftist can get tired of seeing certain businesses glorified while the unsavory effects of their actions (most of which are results of state-granted privilege anyway) in the marketplace are often ignored. Or, they may see cultural issues from a different perspective. Whether you personally agree is really of no consequence here; I'm just trying to explain that people do not always hold the same viewpoint as the prevailing ones on these forums and on other libertarian sites. So that is where the 'split' comes from. The main problem is that depending on your viewpoint, a right-libertarian may miss certain nuances, or interpret actually-existing conditions differently, and it sometimes comes off as if he or she simply doesn't care to entertain other perspectives. This can be particularly annoying when the right-libertarian denigrates others who don't toe his or her ideological line.

Anyway, not sure if you're going to read all of this; I have read some of your other posts, and I know you likely won't agree that differences of perspective can exist within this movement without it necessarily meaning "leftists have infiltrated and are trying to pit us all against each other". I personally don't care that much anymore, which is why I've kind of stopped talking about libertarian issues recently. Just thought I'd try to offer a counter-argument for the post that got oodles of +reps. :D

I would say that everything you have said here is accurate and also useful for us to understand. Thanks.

"+rep" :D :p