Would Benjamin Tucker Be an Anarcho-Capitalist if He Were Alive Today?

The term anarcho-capitalist has become a buzzword in modern political discourse, but its adherents often misunderstand the concept of capitalism. This misunderstanding can be traced back to a historical context and the misuse of terminology by earlier theorists. Benjamin Tucker, a prominent individual in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, offers a unique perspective on these concepts.

Understanding the Misuse of Terms

When Pierre-Joseph Proudhon coined the term capitalism, his usage differs significantly from the modern interpretation. Proudhon, along with Benjamin Tucker and other socialists of their era, saw capitalism as a system where the state monopolized capital, control of property, and implemented corporatist policies. Tucker, in particular, was vehemently opposed to such state control and advocated for a free market.

Pierre-Joseph Proudhon and the Original Definition of Capitalism

Proudhon used the term capitalism to describe a political class that utilized the Sovereign Right of Property, corporatism, chartering, and other methods to take control of capital away from the people. The socialists of that time, including Tucker, wanted to restore a free market by ending this state-led capitalist control. In this context, socialism referred to the desire to reclaim control of property and capital from the state, returning it to society.

Marx’s Subversion of Terms

Enter Karl Marx, whose theories and manipulation of language played a significant role in the modern connotations of these terms. Marx understood that people hated state control of property but perverted this sentiment by using the term capitalism to describe what he desired—centralized state control. Meanwhile, he took the term socialism, traditionally meant to restore control of capital to the people, and applied it to the opposite. This inversion of terminology makes it difficult to discern the original meanings and intentions of these terms.

Modern Anarcho-Capitalism and Anarcho-Socialism

Today, anarcho-capitalists are diametrically opposed to the type of state control that Tucker criticized. They seek to restore a free market, but their use of the term capitalist conflates it with the abuse of power that Proudhon and Tucker opposed. If modern anarcho-capitalists had not adopted Marx’s terminology, they would likely identify as anarcho-socialists. Despite the terminology, their beliefs and goals would align with the original meaning of anarcho-socialism, which aims to restore individual freedoms and property.

Benjamin Tucker and the Four Monopolies

Benjamin Tucker, a key figure in this debate, coined the term Four Monopolies to describe the state-granted control over land, banking, finance, and trade. Tucker believed that these monopolies represented a form of capitalism and sought to undermine them to restore individual liberty and property rights. Tucker referred to this state control as capitalism, advocating instead for a system where these freedoms were returned to the individuals who comprised society.

Land Ownership and Anarcho-Socialism

It is important to note that Tucker opposed state-granted land ownership. He believed in a society where land was free, and individuals had the right to occupy and use it according to their needs. While he did not necessarily oppose all forms of property ownership, he firmly believed that state-granted monopolies over land were unjust and hindered individual freedom.

In conclusion, if Benjamin Tucker were alive today, his position would align more closely with the principles of anarcho-socialism. His original intention, to restore individual freedom and property rights by ending state-granted monopolies, would be consistent with this lens. The modern confusion surrounding the terms capitalism and socialism can be attributed to historical manipulation, and a clearer understanding of the original meanings can help us appreciate the true intentions behind these concepts.