Q: So you guys are Anarchists?

A: From a substance point of view, yes, Agorists must be Free-Market Anarchists, or rather they must reject any form of initiated aggression or violence - they must reject the violent and coercive state. Though there does seem to be a difference between engaging in Agorist strategy to overthrow the state and being an Agorist, the two are different. Though a State-Communist may indeed practice counter-economics with the intent of the overthrow of the state, because he does not maintain an Agorist outlook on the desired state of existence, one without a coercive institution known as 'a state,' he can not be considered an Agorist, but rather he must be considered a statist utilizing Agorist strategy. Practicing Agorism as a means to overthrow the state is a prerequisite to being an Agorist; however, being an Agorist means more than that, as Agorism is an ideology dictating that the Agorist society - pure free-markets - is the end goal of Agorism as an ideology.

From a semantics point of view, however, it has been expressed by philosophers such as, Robert LeFevre, that Anarchism is not the proper etymological reference for a libertarian, but rather libertarians must consider themselves Autarchists - maintaining a position of self-rule. Though this interpretation of Autarchism vs. Anarchism may be etymologically correct, however, from the layman point of view, and the general sentiment of most libertarian-anarchist/autarchists, Anarchism is a fine enough definition for libertarians to take, as it maintains a position of rejecting external authority.