You're a pinko commie? Shit; I'm not gonna talk to you.... (Just kidding). I love you, my pinko commie brother, because you are not a sheep. You are awake.
BTW, communism works great "in the small", i.e. within nuclear families and, historically, also with race-based clans and tribes. It works when there are emotional bonds that unite people so that they don't "free ride". Absent such bonding, such love, incentives inevitably ruin the "brotherhood". IOW, brotherhood only works if it is real, biological brotherhood.
I'd like to hear more of your economic viewpoint. Would you say that you are a communist because you think that communism in the large can work well, or are you a communist mainly because the alternative, "crapitalism", is even worse?
This book presents a viable picture of communism.
It is what finally explained why all the more senior anarchists were communists.
https://archive.org/details/lookingbackward01bellgoog
If you havent embraced communism, you havent fully stepped out of the matrix.
This one gives a more ancrap vision, but it doesnt use money, either.
http://www.abelard.org/e-f-russell.php
The first ten pages of "Looking Backward" are delightful. On page 10, the author introduces his theme with the view that income from an investment should be viewed as "a species of tax ... upon the product of those engaged in industry...".
I would counter that the fallacy of this view can be exposed by pointing out that in a "free market" there is no coercion; all participants participate voluntarily, including the investors, the entrepreneurs who borrow and issue shares, the workers in the factory, and the purchasers of product. All of the relationships are voluntary, and hence presumably mutually beneficial, exchange relationships.
There is no doubt that this happy state of affairs does not fully manifest in the real world. My point is only that living on the income from one's "capital" cannot be fairly characterized, per se, as a tax on workers. Workers might well be taxed and otherwise oppressed in capitalism as it exists in the real world, but the oppression cannot logically be attributed to capitalism itself.
The book is so delightfully written that I will keep it bookmarked for a while in the hope that I will continue to read, so that I give it a more fair chance to persuade me of its thesis and also so I can understand how you see the world.
The choice of submit to exploitation by a crapitalust or starve is not a free choice.
We have no choice but to eat and the crapitalust system has a lock on that.
Emma Goldman and Alex Berkman are the authorities on the subject i most rely on.
http://theanarchistlibrary.org/category/author/emma-goldman
http://theanarchistlibrary.org/category/author/alexander-berkman
I also see our social system as a slave system. If our thinking differs at all, it differs only in the analysis of the nature and structure of the slave system. If by "capitalism" (or "crapitalism" :) ) you mean simply to identify the current system that actually exists, then I agree with you without reservation. But if by "capitalism" you intend to blame theoretical capitalism, which is nothing more than a perfect market regime in which the coercive power of the State is ONLY used to establish and defend individual rights, including the right to possess property, then we differ in our opinions as to what causes the current enslavement.
'Perfect theoretical capitalism' lifts people out of poverty, but doesnt solve the issue of who cleans the toilets.
If the bottom is raised so that we are all millionaires, it will be millionaires cleaning the toilets of the trillionaires.
Nor does it solve the havenots being slaves of the haves.
Ancom theory says if you want a toilet cleaned you are going to have to do it yourself or it might not get done.
Everybody has, as far as the basics, and we are only enslaved by life's necessity.
Ie, somebody has to do the work if we want work done.
Crypto may make this largely accademic provided the haves dont press their advantage over the have nots, but the majority are crapitalust and see this as their chance to be the ruling uberlords.
There is a chance for ancoms to get heard in the din, we will have to grab our chance, or miss it.
If you are not willing to be wrong, then you will not alter the course of history. I have a vision and a plan. I know that there have to be flaws in both my vision and my plan. But if people join with me for community action toward the vision that I can articulate, I know that something good will happen, that we will get to a place that is better than were we are headed if we DON'T act. The vision and the plan just serves to enable us to act coherently.
The important thing is that we act. You might envision anarchy communism, a vision that differs from mine. But if we both want to empower people to be able to determine their own lives and destinies, then we can work together on the aspects of our respective plans that promote individual empowerment.
As we make progress in empowering everyday people, we can sort out the difference in our visions and adjust our level of cooperation (or competition).
Mostly i look to end rule by force, then we can all do as we please.
This book presents a viable picture of communism.
It is what finally explained why all the more senior anarchists were communists.
https://archive.org/details/lookingbackward01bellgoog
If you havent embraced communism, you havent fully stepped out of the matrix.
This one gives a more ancrap vision, but it doesnt use money, either.
http://www.abelard.org/e-f-russell.php
Russell's story is also engaging. I read up to the point where farmer #2 is released and the Ambassador orders the ship moved. I can guess that the colonists have "established" (if that word can indeed be used) anarchy on the planet and that the Ambassador will eventually discover that his search for an authority is futile as there is none.
I will keep this bookmarked also, but it is frankly unlikely that I will find the time for this "pleasure reading", as I am fully engaged in a hot battle in both State court and now in Federal District Court, and also am more than a month behind in my administrative work.
If we continue our conversation, that will remind me of these links and those reminders will enable me to find moments to read farther.
Yes, it works on 'obs'.
If i do some work for you i have planted an obligation on you and honor requires that you get it up off of you as quick as you can by either trading my ob for his, or working yourself.
Its quite ingenous.
Good luck in court, dont forget to ask for the prosecutor's evidence that you surrendered to his jurisdiction.
Otherwise he has failed to meet his burden to bring the issue to court at all.
Unless he can show for the record that you agreed to abide by the law the judge has no choice but to dismiss, if hes not a crook.
Is it in essence a "pay forward" barter system? Does it require individual morality, in that paying forward is not enforced? How does one know how much to pay forward; what is the unit of account and how are the units of "obs" associated with each receipt of something determined?
Hmm, im not sure it got specific that one hour of doctoring equaled ten hour of plumbing, it may have, but its been ten years since i last took time to read it.
Mostly it was about rejecting authority as a matter of freedom.
F-IW!
In the reality of my life yesterday, I used a beautiful and empowering authority (the Law) to defeat a renegade judge who was threatening me with the "awesome coercive power of the State" (also associated with the Law). He was disobeying the Law, and I was able to stop him by threatening (credibly) to bring enforcement of the Law onto him.
The duel was all about force and power and violence. The Law was my weapon. Anarchy was his weapon. I took the Law and I struck him, cutting off his head.
Anarchy doesnt use coercion, you mean chaos.
Anarchy is the mother of order.
Chaos is where foks run amok.