On the Anarchist Writers blog, Iain McKay reflects on the fact that the term “Marxo-capitalists” might be a better term for the “anarcho”-capitalists than anything else, since they follow the same political tactics than the Marxists did…
Finally, I must note that Rothbard was at pains to argue for a Libertarian political party. So perhaps his ideology would be better termed “Marxo-capitalism”? After all, Rothbard urged its followers to organise into a political party and utilise “political action” to seize the state which would, in turn, dissolve into “anarchy”. As he put it: “I see no other conceivable strategy for the achievement of liberty than political action.” (Konkin on Libertarian Strategy)
Where have we heard that before? Who mocked anarchists like Proudhon and Bakunin for refusing to take part in “political action” and who suggested that by this action the state could be seized, reformed and finally disappear? Why, Marx and Engels! Given this, it would be false to state that “anarcho”-capitalism keeps the politics of individualist anarchism but rejects its economics. Rather, it keeps the politics of Marxism but rejects its economics.
Now, will “Marxo-capitalism” take off as the correct name for “anarcho”-capitalism? Or should we stick with anarcho-statism?