[ / / / / / / / / / / / / / ] [ dir / agatha2 / animu / arepa / ausneets / tacos / vg / vichan / zoo ]

/liberty/ - Liberty

Non-authoritarian Discussion of Politics, Society, News, and the Human Condition (Fun Allowed)
Name
Email
Subject
Comment *
File
Password (Randomized for file and post deletion; you may also set your own.)
* = required field[▶ Show post options & limits]
Confused? See the FAQ.
Flag
Embed
(replaces files and can be used instead)
Oekaki
Show oekaki applet
(replaces files and can be used instead)
Options
dicesidesmodifier

Allowed file types:jpg, jpeg, gif, png, webm, mp4, pdf
Max filesize is 16 MB.
Max image dimensions are 15000 x 15000.
You may upload 5 per post.


WARNING! Free Speech Zone - all local trashcans will be targeted for destruction by Antifa.

File: 9a282e85e505bfe⋯.png (153.71 KB, 1626x1438, 813:719, 1431358729633.png)

 No.59999

"Anarcho"-capitalism is not real anarchism

 No.60000

File: 320447238a6a4f6⋯.png (4.46 MB, 1500x2125, 12:17, 320447238a6a4f61fa00dd608f….png)


 No.60002

>>59999

Considering that there was no decent anarchist since Tucker, I don't even care if that's true. Enjoy the company of anarchafeminists and tankies, faggots.


 No.60003

>>60002

>anarchafeminists

That flag is literally only used by /pol/ falseflaggers, /leftypol/ does not allow idpol faggots.


 No.60005

>>60003

As opposed to being abstractly used by /pol/ falseflaggers, I suppose?


 No.60006

the colours are the wrong way around on this flag smh


 No.60008

"Anarcho"-socialism is not real anarchism.


 No.60009

>>60008

Wrong


 No.60010

>>60009

Wrong


 No.60011

>>60010

Not true


 No.60013

great thread


 No.60014

File: 37da41bae4874e7⋯.png (725.56 KB, 653x635, 653:635, 19412749124.png)

>>59999

>>60000

gommie get


 No.60016

File: 5ca461c19931890⋯.png (110.09 KB, 500x377, 500:377, 5ca461c1993189080b9f37e0f4….png)

>>60014

Communism will win


 No.60022

>>60016

It hasn't even been able to get off the ground without failing.


 No.60031

>>60016

Socialism is one execution away from True Communism®


 No.60035

>>59999

<Not this shit again

How?


 No.60036

File: 53e37d06cb2c081⋯.png (6.64 KB, 56x56, 1:1, quan.png)

>>59999

ok, bye


 No.60057

>>59999

>>60000

/liberty/ "An"claps and lolberts get fucked in the ass with a rake.


 No.60060

Cool. Whatever.

Fuck off.


 No.60062

>>59999

>>60000

Did you just sit around and lurk for hours just to steal a get? Nobody on this board cares for those anyway, you had your fun now leave and dont come back


 No.60066

>>60062

I care about satanic trips, but I don't go out of my way to get them.


 No.60068

File: 7f15a5854c9ab19⋯.png (89.83 KB, 245x189, 35:27, wow that's awesome.png)


 No.60079

File: c47184175f25410⋯.png (18 KB, 780x620, 39:31, 1463118688631.png)

>>59999

>>60000

KEK HAS BESTOWED /LEFTYPOL/ WITH DOUBLE QUADS OF TRUTH

COMMUNISM IS THE BEST AND THE ONLY FUNCTIONAL SYSTEM

RETARDED ANCAPS ETERNALLY BTFO


 No.60082

>>60079

Pents have already confirmed that anarchomonarchism is the truth. Repent thy sins, serf!


 No.60085

File: 7f0ce82096daf6c⋯.jpg (16.14 KB, 236x248, 59:62, 1478013669300.jpg)

>>60079

>communism

>the only functional system

Wew. I have seen a lot of retarded shit in my life but this takes the cake. There has never existed anything "communist" according to you, because whenever a collective calls itself communist and fails you cry out that it wasn't really "communist" and hence not functional.


 No.60091

File: 87e05190608c059⋯.jpg (143.07 KB, 1200x800, 3:2, prawdziwy anarchizm.jpg)


 No.60098

>>59999

<BEING THIS ASSMAD

LOL FUCK YOU. DON'T STEP ON SNEK, NIGGER


 No.60107

>>60079

>comes here to frogpost and look at number sequences

How do you still claim you're not a bunch of shitposting retards? Contain your autism to your board.


 No.60113

File: 527c6b07cc3ad6c⋯.jpg (6.94 KB, 250x241, 250:241, 1432724756686s.jpg)

>it's another YX is not real X episode


 No.60114

>>60113

And you bumped it up because?


 No.60158

>>60114

because fuck you


 No.60161

>>60158

That's a great argument in favor of continued saging of shitposts.


 No.60202

File: 660aead9a4d5046⋯.jpg (10.62 KB, 480x480, 1:1, 1499089283299.jpg)

>>60000

Seriously might be some of the most cringeworthy shit I've seen. Why is it that /leftypol/ tends towards cringe-inducing content? is it just an unreconcilable aspect of all leftists?

>>60014

>literal miniscule board where most conversations take up consecutive post numbers

>not even an actual get

you… sure showed us??

and what's with the whole "ancap isn't realanarchism :(" shit anyway? It comes off as really embarrassingly childish tbh. Like ancoms are so distraught over someone "stealing" something they think they own that they're willing to throw a temper tantrum over semantics. Okay, if you don't think we're anarchists, call us rothbarianists or voluntaryists or free-market-libertarians. no one will dispute it because no one will care. language is only what people use it as; if the vast majority recognizes ancaps as anarchists then we are, and within anarchism a separate distinction is made for collectivist-anarchies or non-hierchical-anarchies because that's how words work.


 No.60203

File: ddcf2645c751131⋯.jpg (104.27 KB, 1400x807, 1400:807, r5lJFIZ (1).jpg)


 No.60204

>>60202

*rothbard

lol my bad


 No.60216

>>60202

Would Privaterist count as a name as well?


 No.60217

File: 25227a99d77bdc4⋯.png (657.25 KB, 600x473, 600:473, 25227a99d77bdc45160d043bfd….png)

But you guys these Marx quotes prove that you're stupid for being ancaps:

"The tolls for the maintenance of a high road, cannot with any safety be made the property of private persons." or

"It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion" is a good one, or

"All for ourselves, and nothing for other people, seems, in every age of the world, to have been the vile maxim of the masters of mankind." or

"Labour was the first price, the original purchase-money that was paid for all things. It was not by gold or by silver, but by labour, that all the wealth of the world was originally purchased" or

"As soon as the land of any country has all become private property, the landlords, like all other men, love to reap where they never sowed, and demand a rent even for its natural produce." or

"No society can surely be flourishing and happy, of which the greater part of the members are poor and miserable. It is but equity, besides, that they who feed, cloath and lodge the whole body of the people, should have such a share of the produce of their own labour as to be themselves tolerably well fed, clothed, and lodged." or

"A great stock, though with small profits, generally increases faster than a small stock with great profits. Money, says the proverb, makes money. When you have a little, it is often easier to get more. The great difficulty is to get that little." or

"Our merchants and master-manufacturers complain much of the bad effects of high wages in raising the price, and thereby lessening the sale of their goods both at home and abroad. They say nothing concerning the bad effects of high profits. They are silent with regard to the pernicious effects of their own gains. They complain only of those of other people." or

"Corn is a necessary, silver is only a superfluity." or

"The importation of gold and silver is not the principal, much less the sole benefit which a nation derives from its foreign trade." or

"Mercantile jealousy is excited, and both inflames, and is itself inflamed, by the violence of national animosity" or

"It cannot be very difficult to determine who have been the contrivers of this whole mercantile system; not the consumers, we may believe, whose interest has been entirely neglected; but the producers, whose interests has been so carefully attended to; and among this later class our merchants and manufactures have been by far the principal architects. In the mercantile regulations, which have been taken notice of in this chapter, the interest of our manufacturers has been most peculiarly attended to;and the interest, not so much of the consumers, as that of some other sets of producers, has been sacrificed to it." or

"Civil government, so far as it is instituted for the security of property, is in reality instituted for the defence of the rich against the poor, or of those who have some property against those who have none at all."

Oh wait that's all Adam Smith


 No.60218

I swear, this board has some sadomasochistic infatuation with bumping up shitposts. Either that or OP is roleplaying to keep the act going.

It's probably the first.


 No.60219

>>60217

>If Adam Smith said it, it mist be true


 No.60222

File: bdb075dbb373be8⋯.jpg (46.5 KB, 640x480, 4:3, le snek econ.jpg)

>>60217

I don't even think the concept of exchange of goods occurred to Marx.


 No.60224

>>60219

It's not even argumentation. Just statements. They really are inept at discerning them.


 No.60229

File: 6f786e6cb648f75⋯.png (381.04 KB, 459x425, 27:25, 57649847aafc03618247688644….png)

Holy shit, I have never seen any board this assblasted over losing their gets. If you pretentious idiots didn't want to eternally wallow in shame like sore losers, maybe you should have secured those quads before a superior board utterly destroyed you memetically.


 No.60230

>>60229

>pretentious

I think a careful look at the definition of that word would show the hubris of your post.


 No.60238

>>60229

Says /leftypol/ whose BO filtered the words "/sp/ get" into "/leftypol/ get"


 No.60239

>>60229

>LOOK AT HOW MAD YOU ARE

>uhh..okay…

>TROLOLOLOL XDDD I DID IT! I MADE YOU MAD!!! XDDDDD YOURE SO MAD I DID IT I GOT YOU XDDDD BTFO MY SIDES XDDDDD


 No.60266

>>60229

>comes here to shitpost

>What's wrong with you people? Why do you hate shitposting?

A shitposer wouldn't understand.You have to go back. Nobody's going to check your digits here. Nobody ever does.


 No.60271

>>60219

Lol the point is you're not capitalists, you're mercantilists. Capitalism was invented to critique the feudal mercantilism that essentially was anarcho-capitalism.


 No.60273

>>60271

>capitalism was invented to critique anarcho-capitalism

So these are the mental gymnastics of the left. Truly remarkable.


 No.60283

File: f8bdb419ae98205⋯.jpg (7.96 KB, 230x170, 23:17, what.jpg)

>>60271

>feudal mercantilism that essentially was anarcho-capitalism

There was nothing Anarchical about large property owners being granted government privileges and regulations in their favor for centuries to have exclusive monopolies on trade along with massive protectionist tariffs. Absolute Anarchy, right? You're sinking further down the retard hole.

>the old AnCap is feudalism meme

Prove it for once.


 No.60296

Fascists are the only true anarchists.


 No.60297

File: aa8a9d801ff3b50⋯.png (195.98 KB, 850x850, 1:1, ovp3nUm.png)


 No.60368

File: 796c5d117f56a18⋯.jpg (326.35 KB, 1024x768, 4:3, Shadowrun.jpg)

>Commies will NEVER have something as cool as this as a fantasy world for their political orientation, only dumpy post-commie dystopian fantasies

Commies, I can only weep for you and your loss.


 No.60370

>>60368

I know this has been a complete shitshow of a thread and asking this doesn't make sense, but what does this have to do with anything?


 No.60372

>>60370

Showing our orientation's supremacy, even in its depiction in art and books. It's not really meant to have much depth beyond that.


 No.60981

>>60202

there is already a distinction for right and left wing anarchy


 No.61045

>>60217

>implying I'm not okay with public goods

>quotes taken out of context prove that I'm right.


 No.61051

>>60079

>l-look guys I stole another meme from /pol/!1!1!


 No.61093

File: e6de0ff4dee36fb⋯.webm (7.57 MB, 1280x720, 16:9, wew.webm)

>>60271

>capitalism was invented

Capitalism is just human nature; how can somebody invent human nature? As an economic viewpoint, the most that needed to be done was to write it down in a coherent manner. Socialism is the one that had to be invented, since it's counter-intuitive economic fan-fiction that goes completely against any sense of normal human action.


 No.61095

>>60229

>getting gets on a board as slow as this

>implying we care

/leftypol/ confirmed for being children.


 No.61097

>>60271

>Lol the point is you're not capitalists, you're mercantilists. Capitalism was invented to critique the feudal mercantilism that essentially was anarcho-capitalism.

What kind of bait is that? I hope it's bait. Anyway, this: >>60283


 No.61098

File: a2f1b221753e360⋯.png (559.62 KB, 553x458, 553:458, cool cat 911.png)

>>55555


 No.61772

>>60000

D I G I T S

I

G

I

T

S


 No.61796

File: 19e62530315146c⋯.jpg (66.63 KB, 960x802, 480:401, 19e62530315146cb1039a65857….jpg)


 No.64610

>>59999

>b-but getting rid of a state entity =/= real anarchism


 No.64647


 No.64662

File: c9c376c62224475⋯.jpg (43.87 KB, 600x346, 300:173, quotes.jpg)


 No.71976

damn


 No.71980

File: 871a0cda139bd6c⋯.png (271.83 KB, 511x697, 511:697, egoandprim.png)

>regarding anarchism as a set of guidelines that one must submit oneself to in order to be considered a "real" member of the group

>not seeing it as the consequence of pursuing one's desires and passions

I shiggy


 No.71983

File: ff486377e85cd6d⋯.jpg (7.04 KB, 268x188, 67:47, ancapball.jpg)

>>71980

whatever you say, mein property :^)


 No.71984

>>71976

>>71980

>bumping this dumb fucking thread


 No.71991

>>59999

This is not even a get


 No.72121

There was nothing Anarchical about large property owners being granted government privileges and regulations in their favor for centuries to have exclusive monopolies on trade along with massive protectionist tariffs. Absolute Anarchy, right?

Best thing in this thread


 No.72122

>>72121

yep thats true, its why anarcho socialism is an oxymoran


 No.72123

>>72122

How does that work?


 No.72281

True, since "anarchos" means "one without rulers". In an anarcho-capitalist society there would be many different rulers, ranging from de facto aristocratic rulers to formal monarchs within voluntary organisations.


 No.72324

>>72281

Seems like panarchy would work better in that sense.


 No.72342

BO just needs to start banning gommies on sight.


 No.72396

>>72122

it is not assuming everything is voluntary


 No.72409

The "anarcho" means that it's anarchism.

The "capitalism" means that people think property exists.


 No.72419

People can each have their property and at the same time not rule over each other.

On the other hand, how would you resolve the conflict that arises if multiple people want to use the same thing if property doesn't exist without rulers?


 No.72420

>>72419

>On the other hand, how would you resolve the conflict that arises if multiple people want to use the same thing if property doesn't exist without rulers?

Ah so a tragedy of the commons eh? Well I think having private property as a concept there at leas would work since the resource wouldn't be used up immediately.


 No.72523

>>72419

>On the other hand, how would you resolve the conflict that arises if multiple people want to use the same thing if property doesn't exist without rulers?

https://mises.org/library/future-decentralized-0


 No.72542

>>60082

>>60091

>He doesn't even know what Anarchism means.

Also, you can't violate someone's private property rights if there isn't any private property.


 No.72546

>>72542

Go out in the wilderness and stumble upon a mountain man, and then see what happens when you try to take his property.


 No.72585

File: f1b63299e01bff6⋯.png (121.2 KB, 500x395, 100:79, heh heh ya know jimbo.png)

>>72409

>means that people think property exists.

>means that people think property exists.

FTFY. The way you wrote it almost made it sound like the definition of a system based on the ownership of property contained an implicit assumption that property doesn't exist. Ain't that just quackin' crazy?

>>72419

>how would you resolve the conflict that arises if multiple people want to use the same thing if property doesn't exist without rulers?

haha just like share it my dude its easy


 No.72603

>>72585

>haha just like share it my dude its easy

Awesome. So if I decided one night to enter your home at 2 AM, turn the volume up and throw a party, you'd let me? Even if you wrote an important exam the very next day? Or, would you let me give the last remaining picture of your great-grandmother to my three year old nephew, so he can draw on it?


 No.72663

>>72603

>enter your home at 2 AM, turn the volume up and throw a party, you'd let me?

go for it buddy that's what real freedom is

>Even if you wrote an important exam the very next day?

haha for sure my man you've got just as much claim over stuff as i do

>give the last remaining picture of your great-grandmother to my three year old nephew, so he can draw on it?

no issues here pal self expression is something people will actually value when money isn't a thing any more and it's not like it's my picture anyway because property doesn't exist

isn't anarcho-socialism fun? we've basically solved every single problem ever


 No.72666

>>59999

What is a good starting point for understanding how 'real anarchism' would start in practical terms? I never see any practical information on how it would deal with any issues. It seems very pie-in-the-sky.

Also it seems like the vast majority of 'real anarchists'/anarcho-communists/leftist anarchists do not place value on individual liberty. Most do not support freedom of speech, as a very basic example. Only old guys like Noam Chomsky still do. The problem is, when you say property is theft you lose the dividing lines that allow liberty. With property rights freedom of speech makes sense because I can say what I want on my property, or on 'public' property. But if I'm at work or at a mall and my boss or the mall owner doesn't want me ranting about niggers, they have every right to fire me/kick me out. However when you decide property is not a valid concept, you lose the ability to say "X is okay here but not okay there". Hence antifa, which I think is mostly leftist anarchists, want to physically attack people for having marches or speaking at universities. Same applies to any other type of freedom, like doing drugs. It's fair to say someone should be able to do drugs in the privacy of their own home but not disturb other people by acting inebriated in stores or do incompetent stoned work at their job and expect to keep it. But what meaningful thing can the left wing anarchist say about drugs if he does not accept property or bosses as a valid concept? How does he draw the line?

It just seems unworkable to me. If property is theft who decides how land and possessions are used? Some sort of committee? How is this committee different from a government? And anarchists seem to want to abolish prison too. Yet they are too soft to support the death penalty? So what happens to people who rape and steal (sorry, "take goods not officially distributed to them by the committee" or whatever)? It all just sounds poorly thought out, impractical, and inconsistent with human nature. I think it would just be an authoritarian state that didn't call itself a state. I'm willing to learn if someone has evidence I'm wrong though.


 No.72686

>>72663

Socialism is when property is owned together. It is the paradox which is important, not a particular interpretation.


 No.72687

>>72686

nowadays some property is owned together


 No.72708

Yes, anarchists do not obey capitalism


 No.72721

>>72687

It is only possible when ending the arrangement is, which is done by each person getting a specific amount.


 No.72738

>>72708

this is why you are poor loosers


 No.72874

>>72738

Anarchy is not a game


 No.72878

File: 96286f22ab2b882⋯.jpg (112.05 KB, 800x973, 800:973, 84531-anarchy-amiga-front-….jpg)

File: 4c3a123b9c385d6⋯.jpg (130.21 KB, 800x981, 800:981, 84532-anarchy-amiga-back-c….jpg)

File: 7ce31d6796868ed⋯.jpg (127.7 KB, 800x835, 160:167, 290340-anarchy-amiga-media.jpg)

>>72874

>Anarchy is not a game

As per usual, you are incorrect.


 No.72887

>>72878

A game has rules, anarchy has no rules, we will cheat


 No.72893

>>72887

If an IRL console existed we'd have accessed it by now.


 No.73151

>>72708

anarchists may or may not obey capitalism as they see fit


 No.73159

>>73151

Anarchists never obey anything


 No.73199

>>73159

That sounds an awful lot like a rule. You're not fit to use that flag.


 No.73201

>>73199

It's a law of nature


 No.73205


 No.73223

>>73199

This is not a rule, it is a fact: anarchists do not obey anything

>>73205

Than you're not an anarchist


 No.78418

>>73223

Not even the laws of nature?


 No.78420

>>73205

You are not an anarchist


 No.78421

>>73223

Neither are you


 No.78473

>>73205

>>78420

>>73159

Anything but indifference to capitalism is spooked.


 No.78505

File: 1e0d016223472f0⋯.mp4 (Spoiler Image, 8.48 MB, 1280x720, 16:9, leftypol BO taking it deep….mp4)

(you) cucks know who that cat "girl" is, left?


 No.78507

>>60003

But you guys are a small minority of the left, the rest of which if they're even aware you exist, deride you as 'brocialists'. The left, at least, in the West, is 99.9+% overtaken by idpol.


 No.83734

good thread


 No.83758

>>72666

You seem like your questions are honest.

>antifa, which I think is mostly leftist anarchists,

Mostly bashies, with a fuckton of honest-to-god alt-right.

There are anarchist and trot antifa, but honestly, it's a fucking shitstorm. Meanwhile, the thing as a greater whole has… some complexity.

>want to physically attack people for having marches or speaking at universities.

San Fransisco, for instance, is a key figure in the heroin trade, with the philipenes, and duterte, at the other end of it. How the hell are you going to fight a massive geopolitical war against a VERY unfriendly drug cartel, and say "fuck it, do what you want" at the same time, exactly? Antifa is USUALLY bashie shits such that one hopes both sides kill each other leaving everyone else, but in that case, was a very effective example of self-defense without governments. Said government, BTW, has been VERY tolerant of foreign manipulation and outright bombing, I might add.

>If property is theft who decides how land and possessions are used? Some sort of committee? How is this committee different from a government?

…because it includes literally everyone in the area, or everyone involved plus whatever noninvolved stakeholders were called up to mediate the thing, usually just by being around, depending on the scale of the matter. We are all Shanti Sena now…

Of course, you'll have a fucking anyeurism when we tell you that the rules aren't even binding, but…

>And anarchists seem to want to abolish prison too. So what happens to people who rape and steal

Restorative justice works. You may not like that, but it doesn't change it.

>sorry, "take goods not officially distributed to them by the committee" or whatever

There are two ways to get property on the left; make it, or be given it, which can include picking it up at the free box/free store/etc. "The committee" is not, in fact, on the list at ALL, unless they're the actual group of people that just made something. No bosses.

…and then you force dystopian succdem down the throat of an unwilling populace and whine about how people won't call it open-access MoP for your benefit. Ever consider that maybe you're just a fucking retard?

As for the rest of your questions, districting is usually done just to ensure that one literally can do anything.. and again, disputes are mediated, but none of the rules are binding.

>I never see any practical information on how it would deal with any issues.

Anarchist socialism currently owns a massive chunk of your economy, with names like State Farm and Vanguard, both of which at least nominally follow the construction of Proudhon. There's a good chance that a solid chunk of food in your pantry was cooperatively produced.

…so, being one of the larger chunks of your economy and owning fucking everything pretty much absolutely debunks…

> It all just sounds poorly thought out, impractical, and inconsistent with human nature.

>that. About 10% of the world's 50 largest banks are run on mutualist socialism, and thanks to vanguard ALSO being a mutual fund, if it's not ansoc, it's ansoc-owned.

A bunch of shitty helicopter posters can't and won't do shit in the real world. We, on the other hand, have already outcompeted you. How can something "not be possible" and still be happening?

>>60202

>Okay, if you don't think we're anarchists, call us rothbarianists or voluntaryists or free-market-libertarians. no one will dispute it because no one will care.

Most ancaps are WAAAY to the authoritarian right of Rothbard, though.

<Rothbard : "I have the minimum technological unit required for my previously-established use."

<Ancaps : I have borders, taxes, a police state, and murder political dissidents.

…so no, we can't call you Rothbardists honestly, and it would be a damn step up if we could.


 No.83761

>>83758

Not the persons you've replied to.

>…because it includes literally everyone in the area, or everyone involved plus whatever noninvolved stakeholders were called up to mediate the thing, usually just by being around, depending on the scale of the matter. We are all Shanti Sena now…

I'd like to hear more about this. How does land come under use given that there was no previous owner? If someone homesteads a previously unoccupied plot of land and brings it under use does this person need to appeal to a not-government in order so that he can use the land he has transformed? If he wants to give a piece of land to his heir, or to a friend, or to a stranger in exchange for remuneration does he have to also confirm this transaction with an uninvolved third-party? Could at anytime this cabal of third-party people decide to appropriate this person's land that he transformed with his sweat and blood? Or prohibit him to transfer or sell it to another? It seems grossly unjust that people by just existing in close proximity to one person should have any say about what is to be done with the product of their labor.

>There are two ways to get property on the left; make it, or be given it, which can include picking it up at the free box/free store/etc. "The committee" is not, in fact, on the list at ALL, unless they're the actual group of people that just made something. No bosses.

Really? I always hear about committees when I hear people talking about how a socialist society would be organized. You have a democratically elected group of people who decide how resources will be allocated for the best of society. If you wanted to use capital in production you'd have to petition to the board or committee to be allowed to use capital in production. I mean, how else would you be 'given' property if not by some democratically elected committee, because if private property is thought to be a creation of the state then the idea that one person could transfer their capital would be precluded.

>Anarchist socialism currently owns a massive chunk of your economy, with names like State Farm and Vanguard, both of which at least nominally follow the construction of Proudhon. There's a good chance that a solid chunk of food in your pantry was cooperatively produced.

If it truly was the most efficient way to organize production I would think everything would be organized like a cooperative, but if it was the most efficient way to organize production I wouldn't be opposed to it at all. Even if it's not I have nothing against communes if that's how someone wishes to live their life. Regardless, State Farm and other cooperatives still exist within a market system with price indicators to allow for calculation which I believe is the aim of socialism, ultimately.

>Most ancaps are WAAAY to the authoritarian right of Rothbard, though.

To be fair, this is the internet where there is kind of a desire to make your personal ideology seem as cool and edgy as possible. There is a reason that anarchists like to praise the mask-wearing molotov-cocktail-throwing type over communal farmer, or Gommunists with their tanks and guillotines. I think it's really unfair to claim that ancaps are more authoritarian when a lot of them are just doing what literally every other political poster does. That being said, I think it's really stupid and not super helpful in presenting anarcho-capitalism/Rothbardianism/anrcho-libertarian as a serious ideology.


 No.83762

>>83761

>State Farm and other cooperatives still exist within a market system with price indicators to allow for calculation which I believe is the aim of socialism, ultimately.

State Farm and other cooperatives still exist within a market system with price indicators to allow for calculation, which I believe the aim of socialism is to abolish, ultimately.

I really should proof read long posts lol


 No.83766

>>83761

>Not the persons you've replied to.

But… but it says 'Anonymous' in the user field! I KNOW IT'S YOU, ANON!!

;)

>How does land come under use given that there was no previous owner?

By getting up and doing. Continuing use is the right of use, with no particular formal property, though it passes pretty well for personal property.

>If someone homesteads a previously unoccupied plot of land and brings it under use does this person need to appeal to a not-government in order so that he can use the land he has transformed?

Nope.

If a something is disputed, they may well turn to random people around them (the not-government) to try to mediate the disagreement. Without disputes, you just get down and do.

>If he wants to give a piece of land to his heir, or to a friend, or to a stranger in exchange for remuneration does he have to also confirm this transaction with an uninvolved third-party?

It's more or less meaningless in the system. The easiest way to give a history of use is to invite someone to do the work with you; at this point, if you kick the bucket, they are the sole surviving worker, and thus "own" the thing.

>Could at anytime this cabal of third-party people decide to appropriate this person's land that he transformed with his sweat and blood?

Yes, but this is system-independent. It's called random military seizure, and is very much outside the system.

Similarly, your current legal system has not abolished what it names as crimes. Such a seizure would be very unusual and generally outside left norms, unless you've been demanding other people use your property for you (at which time THEY are the owners), or someone wants to stage an environmental protest (in which case the environmental concerns are the owners).

>Or prohibit him to transfer or sell it to another?

Not so much "prohibit," just that there would likely not be the basis necessary for this to be sensical or meaningful. It would be like selling someone air in the current system, only possibly without a form of currency, either.

>It seems grossly unjust that people by just existing in close proximity to one person should have any say about what is to be done with the product of their labor.

…let me accidentally release exhaust from my Sarin factory, and we'll see if you're sure about that.

>Really? I always hear about committees when I hear people talking about how a socialist society would be organized.

This is a sign of too many Marxist-Leninists, who aren't Left.

>You have a democratically elected group of people who decide how resources will be allocated for the best of society.

It's more like "the people doing the thing have to come too agreement if they want to work together." The committee and its subject are the same folk.


 No.83767

>>83761 (cont)

Mind you, leftists like to talk for fucking forever…

>If you wanted to use capital in production you'd have to petition to the board or committee to be allowed to use capital in production.

We call those "capitalist bosses," and point to current Board of Directors/Employee relations.

It's no coincidence the Left told Marx to fuck off.

>I mean, how else would you be 'given' property if not by some democratically elected committee,

Just by using it. If you found an abandoned building and set up an elaborate squat in one of the rooms, that room and a route to walk to it are yours.

>because if private property is thought to be a creation of the state then the idea that one person could transfer their capital would be precluded.

Private property is generally differentiated from personal property by making other people use it. In the theory, those people own it because you abandoned the damn thing, and they use it all day.

A good example of the property system of use-value is a kindergarten or daycare with a bin full of toys. In theory, it's a BAD analogy, because the toys are owned on paper by the daycare/school/whatever, but it works pretty well in practice.

Anyone can get a toy from the bin. This would be communism if the bin actually manufactured the toys, or the toys themselves manufactured other goods, but since it doesn't, it is just a mutual pool. It is rude at best to take a toy from someone while they're playing with it; the system acknowledges use as personal property. If the child sets the toy down, wanders away, and does something else, it's perfectly okay to take the toy; there is no permanent property from this, only use. Someone who stuffs a toy in their backpack and takes it home has unjustly depreciated the mutual pool; property is theft. The kid standing by the toy bin and saying no one can have any toys is absolute bullshit; there is no private property nor the class relations thereby. What actually happens is a pretty good model…

…of a system which is damn-near ultraleft in its views of property. In your credit union, otoh, your account is yours (it's your labor), and one member, one vote. The "day care" example does pretty much establish both that ultraleft property theory is pretty well human nature, demonstrates wealth from a mutual pool (across time, 100% of children have 100% of the toys), and the poverty of privatization - if one kid steals all the toys and takes them home, the class is fucked out of a toy bin, if one kid extorts sexual favors to access the toy bin, we get into classical economics as to how much value is lost based on reluctance and other factors.

So, it illustrates pretty well, despite being way towards the there-is-no-property-left of MOST socialist systems.


 No.83768

>>83761 (cont)

>State Farm and other cooperatives still exist within a market system with price indicators to allow for calculation, which I believe the aim of socialism is to abolish, ultimately.

You're talking to too many MLs again. MOST schools of socialism are free-market theories. The "no price, no money, everything's free" school, which is its own thing, is ENTIRELY based on a free market (if I undercut you, I have the low price, for instance), though most schools are not explicitly the utopian/gift strain.

The mathematics of anti-work and gift economies are FASCINATING. Anti-work, for instance, notes that if you lock someone in a completely barren jail cell, they will get bored, and derives that there is a unit greater than zero such that any amount of activity above OR below this is "work" to the consumer, and uses that quantity as the base labor input in self-directed activity… positively wonderful, and using laziness as the driver of the economy ensures that one will have an unlimited supply.

Suffice to say, left theory is all enlightenment-based (Locke posited a theory of communism involving a recycling chute and a replicator button), and entirely free-market-driven, especially the utopian gift-economy stuff. Attempting to get away from this (Marxism, which is not left) tends to give the employer(or council or 'great leader')-employee relations and alienation from the property of one's daily use that makes it… capitalism. (Private property of great leader, great leader tells the workers what to do).

It's kinda fun.

Meanwhile, the only not-government you'll face is the people you're trying to do something with, or literally-random people around you which you have asked to help mediate a dispute… and even then, you don't actually have to listen to them; you can fork the project or fail to agree on a solution, respectively.


 No.83779

>>83768

>Marxism, which is not left

You repeated it multiple times, yet to back it up with at least the definition of "left" was none of your concern. You know, when leninists are kinda "non-left" the distinction really blurs.


 No.83780

>>83767

using the toy bin analogy

if I see the toy bin and recognize that those toys, however it came to be, belong to everyone and tampering with that would be theft…

but then I went off to make my own toys because I wanted something of my own, would your particular brand of leftist ideology allow me to keep it and do with it as I wished?


 No.83844

>>83780

>f I see the toy bin and recognize that those toys, however it came to be, belong to everyone and tampering with that would be theft…

>but then I went off to make my own toys because I wanted something of my own, would your particular brand of leftist ideology allow me to keep it and do with it as I wished?

Sure. Most of 'em do. This ain't capitalism, we don't need to create some bizzare regulatory scheme to extract your labor, the worker gets to keep the full fruits of their labor.

You might lose your toy if you set it down and walk away. You might lose your toy if you make someone else work with it on a semipermanent basis - a landscaping gig is market socialism, but the slaves own the plantation. You obviously lose your toy if you put it in the free box and leave, or if you give it to a specific person. But unlike capitalism, the fruits of your labor are yours entire.

>>83779

>You know, when leninists are kinda "non-left" the distinction really blurs.

When a person spends their free time purging non-leftists until they're completely booted out of the club, while advocating for the same sorts of third-party control of others the movement was literally founded to abolish (Marx), and someone calls them the movement they were kicked out of which exists to abolish the thing they advocate, it blurs lines.

When someone spends their time attacking socialists and anarchists to, in their own words, implement capitalism, and sets themselves up as the CEO of the resultant company (Lenin), and folks call them left, it obscures lines most heavily.

When someone points out that these have never been left and shows the preceeding 2,000 years, it clarifies lines. No, people attacking leftists to stage a definitively capitalist takeover, usually of capitalist entities, and calling themselves capitalist, are not leftist.

Mutualism is the most successful school of socialism that advocates enough structure to form a recognizeable entity (not all of them do), and owns a good chunk of your economy. The Rochdale cooperatives are a bit broader, but still qualify. Marxism… doesn't. Dude was booted from the First International for attacking leftists, and criticized for, well, having bosses over the workers/people.

What if the owner and management died and the workers kept showing up?


 No.83866

>>83844

> we don't need to create some bizzare regulatory scheme to extract your labor, the worker gets to keep the full fruits of their labor.

Being that stupid.


 No.83867

>>83866

Yeah, it's totally stupid not to use brute force to coerce slavery in a capital- and trade-monopolist enviro-

Oh, wait. No its not. And your "voluntary" employment seems to involve a lot of government workers with guns…


 No.87722

File: 341f147d6d890d6⋯.jpg (34.52 KB, 600x315, 40:21, 1493306812249.jpg)

If rightists had high IQ, they would not be right wing


 No.87723

>>87722

Wow, if the Democrats can make a coherent voting bloc out of so many right-wing niggers they must be really good at outreach.


 No.87732

>>87722

Astute observation there, waifufag. Really bumped up some quality posting with an even better post.


 No.87756

>>87723

>>87732

Stop giving him attention you idiots.


 No.87777

File: 5886cc56f18201c⋯.png (Spoiler Image, 460.57 KB, 604x543, 604:543, ClipboardImage.png)

File: 15175f6958a33c6⋯.png (Spoiler Image, 479.77 KB, 604x543, 604:543, ClipboardImage.png)

File: d8bbb909d9d2f66⋯.png (Spoiler Image, 441.59 KB, 604x543, 604:543, ClipboardImage.png)

File: 62e508a3f595762⋯.png (Spoiler Image, 415.59 KB, 604x543, 604:543, ClipboardImage.png)

>>87722

>>87756

Fuck you, he is the best poster since the Commie Flaseflagger and his soy got banned and left.


 No.87846

>>87732

Democrats are right-wing you politically illiterate imbecile


 No.87860

>>87846

arent anarchocomunists democrats too?




[Return][Go to top][Catalog][Nerve Center][Cancer][Post a Reply]
Delete Post [ ]
[]
[ / / / / / / / / / / / / / ] [ dir / agatha2 / animu / arepa / ausneets / tacos / vg / vichan / zoo ]