Talk:Fred Woodworth

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale. [FAQ]


[edit] individualist anarchism

This is the second time I removed this from the article because no one has been able to source it: "Woodworth, in the tradition of several 19th century American individualist anarchists, supports private property in the form of possession, opposes profit in economic relations and opposes ownership rights to raw land.[citation needed] Consequently, he opposes both leninist communism and capitalism - similar to such individualist anarchists as Joe Peacott and Larry Gambone, and British individualist anarchist and cartoonist Donald Rooum, and past individualist anarchists such as Benjamin Tucker, Josiah Warren and Ezra Heywood.[citation needed]"

Note that one can't conclude anything about an "individualist anarchist" other than he opposes state and collective control over the individual. So, any claims about his economic ideas need to be cited. By the way, "supports private property in the form of possession" is meaningless. Either he supports private property or not. "Possession" is not private property. Tucker supported "possession" for land (and I think homes too), and private property for other products of labor. There are individualist anarchists who disagree with the "possession" thing. "Individualist anarchism" can apply to a wide range of beliefs.Anarcho-capitalism 06:40, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

I can't even find a source saying he's an individualist. Let's get that first of all. I've requested a source for that.Anarcho-capitalism 02:06, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Is Fred still publishing?

I subscribed years ago and thought I'd sign up again if he's still publishing. Mr Christopher 22:12, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Quotes

I have removed the following from the article per WP:NOT. Feel free to re-integrate into the body of the article. Skomorokh incite 16:50, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Government is an unnecessary evil. Human beings, when accustomed to taking responsibility for their own behavior, can cooperate on a basis of mutual trust and helpfulness.
It seems like such a terrible shame that innocent civilians have to get hurt in wars, otherwise combat would be such a wonderfully healthy way to rid the human race of unneeded trash.
If human beings are fundamentally good, no government is necessary; if they are fundamentally bad, any government, being composed of human beings, would be bad also.
Fundamentalists never wonder why, if herpes is sent by "god" to scourge "adulterers," whooping cough and measles weren't purposely created to lambaste children.
The very god who, according to those who believe in him, made every last electron spin in its orbit everywhere throughout the universe, still cannot write a clear, unmistakable volume of instructions to human beings who are supposed to follow his wisdom.