You’re dancing around the issue. Some groups you disagree with use the word “anarchist” to refer to themselves. They fit with the colloquial term for anarchism and ordinary people are going to refer to them by that term. Like it or not, they are now some kind of anarchist just based on how language is used.
Nobody except left-anarchists accept the narrowly politicized definition of the term “anarchy”. Attempting to impose this definition against consensus is decidedly non-anarchist.
You should stick with bespoke terms like mutualism and syndicalism that have a distinct meaning.
(It is annoying how humans do this with language, especially when it’s forced, but I guess that’s just how it goes.)
> Nobody except left-anarchists accept the narrowly politicized definition of the term “anarchy”.
Can you find me a single example of a sizable anarchist community that doesn't explicitly reject capitalism? Try actually familiarizing yourself with anarchist spaces
Hell, even try asking an LLM. The acceptance of "ancap" as anarchism is an extremely niche and disingenuous position.
---
The attempt to co-opt language is not just typical language evolution. It's purposeful. Here's, Murray Rothbard in The Betrayal of the American Right
> one gratifying aspect of our rise to some prominence is that, for the first time in my memory, we, 'our side,' had captured a crucial word from the enemy
At first I was going to say maybe these don’t exist because individualist anarchists and rightward tend to be loners, but then I remembered the Union of Egoists, and a search actually turned up a number of real world voluntaryist and ancap groups.
The Free State Project is mostly libertarians, but there’s a large ancap presence. You could also argue that many of the attempts at things like seasteading and crypto-communities are primarily ancap affairs, especially the seasteading concepts that revolved around building a “raft” of independently owned vessels. Apparently there was also something called the Acadian Community that has later been regarded as ancap.
The voluntaryist groups tend to be small local communities, and quiet online, but there are several of them in Western states. Apparently there were several that became publicly active during Covid, providing mutual aid. There was at least one online community run by a voluntaryist free speech absolutist (it was similar to Reddit but without rules except “don’t get the owner arrested”) and it had a respectable user base until he eventually disappeared and shut it down, for predictable reasons.
There’s also the bizarre case of national-anarchism, whatever that means! I doubt this has any real-world examples. Perhaps some backwoods enclave in Idaho that doesn’t exist publicly.
Maybe the problem is that anarchists don’t have words like “revisionist” and “deviationist” to describe similar ideologies that use the label, but which don’t fit your understanding of it. Like, Posadism is certainly some kind of communism, but it’s also certainly both revisionist and deviationist according to basically all other communists. Muslims who fight other Muslims are takfiri, but both are Muslims; liberals distinguish “classical” liberals from the mainstream, but both are liberals; etc.
Let's talk irl spaces. Go to any "anarchist book store" or fare or whatever space that describes itself as "anarchist" and I guarantee you'll find hostility towards the idea of ancaps. That's because ancaps are not a branch of anarchism but a branch of neoliberalism. Anarchism in all its history has been opposed to capitalism and the capitalist class.
Murray Rothbard, who popularized the term, and who I quoted above explicitly admitted that its an example of co-opting leftist language. It is not a "branch" or "deviation" of anarchism. It's a wholly independent movement that does not borrow from any existing anarchist thinker.
