Means of production; Except anyone in a true free society (not the Statism we have now) anyone can produce value for someone else to buy, asks others to help out (or not)...
In a free society, there are only voluntary exchange of goods and services, not theft, coercion, violence, kidnapping and murder, like (I presume!) you are advocating in form of Socialism/Communism.
Instead of demanding the State to steal for you; Start a commune, labor-owned means of production and so on
>>...not theft, coercion, violence, kidnapping and murder, like (I presume!) you are advocating in form of Socialism/Communism.<<
Why would you presume this? If you had just taken a quick look at the profile of the person you're replying to you would see information that contradicts this presumption. It may or may not make sense to you but it should be a clue to lead you to questions, maybe about some of your own assumptions and adopted narratives.
I mean right there in their pinned toot it explains that they believe in "rejection of both state authority and class distinctions" and "a stateless, classless society where the means of production are collectively owned and managed by the community through direct democracy, voluntary association, and decentralized decision-making."
Maybe don't be so quick to presume, at least if you're actually engaging in good faith.
I try to engage in good faith. And no Socialist/Communist ever have explained how their proposed system can work without State Violence.
Scenario; Community owns means of production. I start making hand-made shoes. Are the tools I create mine, or will they be stolen? At which point does "personal property" (stuff that isn't taken by others) becomes "community property"?
How to enforce that? Coercion? No, then how?
All such details are never mentioned.
@niclas @Radical_EgoCom @passenger
You can keep your tools. But if you're an asshole about it, there will probably be consequences.
Well, at some point those tools might make me wealthier, and you are no longer in the class-less society that you aspire so much.
"being an asshole"; Does providing value, by mutually voluntary exchange of goods and services, to others considered "being an asshole"? Because that is how the vast majority of capitalist enterprise is conducted today.
@niclas @Radical_EgoCom @passenger
I'm not going to indulge your fantasy version of capitalism.
@RD4Anarchy @Radical_EgoCom @passenger
The problem isn't that capitalism or communism are good or bad. Both function perfectly fine in small egalitarian situations. The problem is in scale. They scale differently but ultimately result in the same issue of wealth disparity.
Without an answer to "how does this work at scale with evil people throughout the system" the whole discussion is moot.
@shadowsonawall @RD4Anarchy @passenger
Communism doesn't result in wealth disparity. Within a Communist system the means of production are collectively owned, and the products produced are given to everyone without exception instead of being exchanged for money. Wealth disparity is an impossibility with Communism.
@Radical_EgoCom @RD4Anarchy @passenger in an egalitarian situation, absolutely. It's also very easy to abuse which means, past a certain scale, it will always be abused. If a system can not function with evil people sprinkled throughout the system, it can't handle humanity.
@Radical_EgoCom @shadowsonawall @RD4Anarchy @passenger The problem imho is what humans already connect in the brain with the term. If it will work - then only if nobody knows, that it's actually "communism".
@Radical_EgoCom @RD4Anarchy @passenger so, me and my charismatic buddies all manage to get ourselves into positions where we are responsible for distributing the goods of the society. We do it to our advantage, and to the advantage of people who support us. Now we have an upper class and a lower class (my friends, everybody else) and that just continues to spiral.
@shadowsonawall @RD4Anarchy @passenger
That's an inaccurate analysis of how Communism works. The people in your scenario won't be able to use their position of making bread against anybody because in the system that they reside in food is free. A person won't be able to form a monopoly in any industry because all production would be collective.
@Radical_EgoCom @RD4Anarchy @passenger you're still thinking in egalitarian terms. A more direct example then. My buddies and I simply beat the hell out of anyone who isn't giving us what we want, which is more than we should have because "we deserve it" and other people are trash to be abused.
@shadowsonawall @RD4Anarchy @passenger
In order for a Communist society to be created in the first place, the people would need to be united and willing to defend each other from violence from anyone, whether it be in the form of community defense groups or just common solidarity, etc. So, in your scenario where a group of people decide to beat people up for their things, whatever defense group(s) the community has created for situations like this would take action against the individuals.
@shadowsonawall @Radical_EgoCom @RD4Anarchy @passenger And you get beaten back? Same with any other system? People are capable of defending themselves. Yeah, if you're more powerful you can just oppress people and take control but that's just like...War? And colonialism? It's not like Communism would just delete fighting and violence and war. It's up to the people who live in that system to defend each other. It's not like that's not true in any other economic system.
@MothWaves @Radical_EgoCom @RD4Anarchy @passenger what size of society are we talking about here?
@shadowsonawall @Radical_EgoCom @RD4Anarchy @passenger The size doesn't matter for the example you gave. If it's a society of ten people and in-fighting breaks out, people still just need to band together and defend themselves. Same with countries going to war or civil war. Selfishness can not be eliminated. But we can fight for a cooperative system that seeks to fight selfishness rather than one that seeks to promote it.
@shadowsonawall @RD4Anarchy @Radical_EgoCom @passenger
Why would they not simply kill you in self-defense?
@Radical_EgoCom @shadowsonawall @RD4Anarchy @passenger
I agree with the fundaments, but my ideals lie withing a structure where I don't bother the "government" and they stay the feck out of my life. That does not happen in a communist regime. It's all about interference. Which is what prevents me from even entertaining the possibility of communism whilst utterly rejecting fascism.
Same doctrine, one solo, one by committee.
"Stay the feck out of my life"
will get me your vote.
@mafeesh @shadowsonawall @RD4Anarchy @passenger
What you described isn't Communism though. What you described sounds more like the Soviet Union which did not function within a Communist system; they were using the state and a state controlled capitalist economy to try and achieve Communism, and failed. An actual Communist society is stateless and non-hierarchal, meaning every interaction would be voluntary, i.e. no interference.
@Radical_EgoCom @mafeesh @RD4Anarchy @passenger I understand what the ideal communist system looks like. It's glorious. It's also impossible in the face of evil/abusive people. Which exist, in large number, and need to be managed in any system.
@shadowsonawall @mafeesh @RD4Anarchy @passenger
It's not impossible. I believe I've already explained the alternative decentralized organization model and direct democracy systems that could also handle evil people.
@Radical_EgoCom @mafeesh @RD4Anarchy @passenger I believe you severely underestimate the quantity of evil people in the world and the lengths they are willing to go to make themselves more than others. What size of a system are we talking about?
@shadowsonawall @mafeesh @RD4Anarchy @passenger
I don't think I'm underestimating anything. A lot of the evil people that exist are only able to harm people the way they do because of the hierarchical structures that give them the ability to do so, which won't exist in a Communist society. As for size, for this argument let's say the size of America.
@mafeesh @Radical_EgoCom @shadowsonawall @passenger
As long as you're voting for things under a system where the losers will be forced to comply with the results, then the idea that you could vote for government to completely stay out of your life is hilariously nonsensical.
@shadowsonawall @RD4Anarchy @passenger
I believe that Communism is very capable of functioning properly, even with people attempting to take advantage of the system, which would be very unlike since the entire structure of a Communist system would be decentralized and would have a system of direct democracy, making it much harder, or downright impossible, for people to exploit or take advantage of others, especially without consequence.