Sadly voluntary hierarchies do exist, most of the people believe in
decision making delegation (what they call democracy). Also without buying
into the overoptimistic ancap scenario, I think there are always choices we
don't see until somehow we discover them, any system will be hacked given
enough time, creativity and purpose.
On Tue, Jul 12, 2016 at 7:25 PM, Penny Gaff <pennygaffgallery@???>
wrote:
> The fact is "voluntary hierarchies" dont exist for the majority of the
> labour force stuggling for subsistence. Your suggestions to "opt out" are
> unrealistic. There is no choice but to participate in the system.
> I never understand the distinction between "private property" and
> "personal property". Take away the lunch or wallet of any die-hard
> communist, they will fight against it as much as a capitalist.
>
> Anything that can be used as personal property, can also be used for
> profit. Your home coffee machine is a consumer good. Open up a coffee shop
> and it is now a "means of production". In real life, there is no valid line
> between personal property and private property, or a consumer good or a
> means of production. If I'm using my computer to watch movies online, then
> it is a consumer good. If I use it to build web sites and get paid, it is
> my "means of production". If I hire a freelancer on upwork for graphic
> design, now am I a "capitalist exploiting worker"?
>
> Capitalists oppressing workers is based on long debunked theory of "labor
> theory of value".
>
> Labor has no inherent value. You can dig a hole in the ground half a day,
> then fill it back the rest of the day, and will have worked hard, but will
> have achieved nothing of value.
>
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Ttbj6LAu0A
>
> I have no problem with voluntary hierarchies. Some employee joining a
> company in a voluntary way. I have a problem with top-to-bottom enforced
> violent hierarchies.
>
> On Tue, Jul 12, 2016 at 11:02 AM, Penny Gaff <pennygaffgallery@???>
> wrote:
>
>> hmm im afraid Capitalism isnt voluntary except in the myopic sense
>> suggested above. Either you participate in capitalism or starve, this is
>> not a choice. Profit, the foundation of capitalism, is inherently
>> exploitative. Extracting surplus value from labour is exploitation. Where
>> ever there is exploitation there is by definition hierarchy.
>>
>> The problem here I think is the definition of anarchy. It seems venture
>> capitalists have hijacked the term as a synonym for "free" as in "free
>> market" which unless you are a business tycoon has nothing to do with
>> freedom
>>
>> _____"Penny and Pablo, does your view of Anarchy have some sort of
>> property rights? If you and your entire family travel to visit family for
>> a month do you still have a claim to your home when you return? " _____
>>
>> tough question about property ownership. I think it is worth examining
>> whether someone would want to occupy a property that is clearly someone
>> elses "home" just beacuse it lies empty for a month. Its not really my
>> perception of ownership that validates the ownership rather others who
>> respect the fact me andmy family have lovingly tended,maintained and
>> improved a place with heart and soul, so the place becomes sacred and the
>> family become indigenous to it, signifying "ownership".
>>
>> Esentially private property is problematic and needs rethinking, private
>> property isnot to be confused with personal property as in pocessions which
>> is a different matter and perfectly acceptable in my view.
>> I think the definition of capitalism here is the problem. One side
>> seems to think the capitalism in the term means it's a top down systemic
>> economic system that is about hierarchies where socialism is about flat
>> structures.
>>
>> While the other side is referring to capitalism as if it refers to a
>> bottom up system based on 1 to 1, voluntary free market interactions where
>> each side will only trade if they perceive it to be in their best interest.
>> The "anarchy" refers to a lack of monopolistic hierarchies who could force
>> one-sided trades to happen. Lacking force a trade cannot happen when one
>> party perceives themselves to be worse off from trading than if they had
>> not traded)
>>
>> I think most self identifying anarcho-capitalists are using the term in
>> the latter sense while the people saying they don't make sense are thinking
>> in terms of the former. Perhaps this is the disconnect?
>>
>>
>> Penny and Pablo, does your view of Anarchy have some sort of property
>> rights? If you and your entire family travel to visit family for a month
>> do you still have a claim to your home when you return?
>>
>> Adam B. Levine
>> Editor-in-Chief
>> The Let's Talk Bitcoin! <http://www.letstalkbitcoin.com/> Show
>>
>> On Tue, Jul 12, 2016 at 12:34 AM, Penny Gaff <pennygaffgallery@???>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Anarcho-capitalism is surely an oxymoron. Anarchy operates without
>>> hierarchy, capitalism is fundamentally based on hierarchy. So how can the
>>> two possibly be conflated?
>>> On Jul 11, 2016 7:44 PM, "psy" <epsylon@???> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Amir:
>>>> > Pablo, you made a good outline for a general anarchist theory which
>>>> > still needs some development because it leaves out a path for creating
>>>> > this society from our current context. Bookchin has very strong
>>>> > arguments for a sort of federal democracy by creating civil society
>>>> > movements that take political power through local municipalities. In
>>>> > Catalonia for instance, there's an anarchist cooperative we work with
>>>> > called the CIC (http://cooperativa.cat) organizing small local
>>>> > businesses and cooperatives to evade the economic system through
>>>> > economic disobedience, such as using the law to avoid paying tax (like
>>>> > the big corporations do). The Kurdish movements in Turkey switched
>>>> from
>>>> > a struggle for de jure independence to a struggle for de facto
>>>> > independence heavily influenced by Bookchin's ideas of libertarian
>>>> > municipalism.
>>>> >
>>>> > Bookchin's ideas are refreshing because they point to a real path to
>>>> > political power that is actually very contemporary and being employed
>>>> by
>>>> > anarchist groups in multiple places. Combined with free market
>>>> mutualist
>>>> > or syndicalist ideas which give a path to economic power, and we have
>>>> a
>>>> > solution for strong thriving anarchist societies. The key is civil
>>>> > society development and this is where the postmodernists like
>>>> Nietzsche
>>>> > or Foucault have a massive contribution that point to big flaws in the
>>>> > fabric of our moral systems that are life-denying and the propensity
>>>> for
>>>> > lying through rationalist positivism (which makes Objectivism look
>>>> > ridiculous). Philosophy influences scientific development and rational
>>>> > truth- words like central planning, command and control economy, and
>>>> ...
>>>> > are old fashioned today. Instead we're more likely to use words like
>>>> > tipping point, butterfly effect, ...
>>>> >
>>>> > Ours is an age of movement, uncertainty and transition. By necessity
>>>> > anarchism has to change with the times. It feels that this age of
>>>> > materialist Marxism has tainted anarchist thought since Proudhon,
>>>> making
>>>> > anarchism anachronistic and dogmatic at times. That's not to say that
>>>> > anarcho-communism has nothing valuable to offer. The liberating thing
>>>> > about anarchism is that every strain of anarchism (even
>>>> > anarcho-communism and anarcho-capitalism) tells us new interesting
>>>> > things, and offers up new strategies and tactics for fighting
>>>> > authoritarianism.
>>>> >
>>>> > By saying you are a proponent of anarcho-communism or
>>>> anarcho-capitalism
>>>> > means you believe that questions of class and economy are the most
>>>> > important issues- not our ethics, how we administrate and govern, the
>>>> > relations between people and culture. However one philosophy gives us
>>>> a
>>>> > history of experience for organizing economically. The original
>>>> > criticism of capitalism emerged from Proudhon, the anarcho-syndicalist
>>>> > and first person to call themselves an anarchist.
>>>> >
>>>> > The other philosophy gives us practical tools like Bitcoin, smart
>>>> > contracts and agorism. It also teaches us about economics and the
>>>> > destructive role played by central banks and corrupt government
>>>> > intervention in the economy. These are all useful, valuable ideas and
>>>> we
>>>> > should not reject ideas completely without studying them all first,
>>>> and
>>>> > then you deciding what to take, and what to leave.
>>>>
>>>> +1.
>>>>
>>>> Really nice explained mentioning Bookchin as a point to start.
>>>>
>>>> We can also talk about some opposite views: Freud.
>>>>
>>>> His theories are directly related with individualism ("I", "super-I",
>>>> etc..) which are intrinsically related, from a humanistic point of view,
>>>> with capitalism methods.
>>>>
>>>> Nietzsche... +1
>>>>
>>>> What about capitalistic dogma: "More Benefit for Less Cost"?
>>>>
>>>> Can an "anarcho-capitalist" tell me that follows that doctrine by using
>>>> contemporary market to engage anarchism?.
>>>>
>>>> Aren't they hidden "neoliberalism"?. For that to read
>>>> "anarcho-capitalism" for me sounds confusing.
>>>>
>>>> To be pragmatic doesn't means to be individualistic. Collaborative
>>>> pragmatism is a powerful tool. And capitalism, almost as I am realizing
>>>> it, trying to be as most objetivist as possible, is fundamentally based
>>>> on forgive problems derived by manufacture, such as plastics, CO2
>>>> emissions, etc, but also slavery processes on "third development"
>>>> countries like de-localization, tax evasions, etc...
>>>>
>>>> I think it is really easy to talk about "anarcho-capitalism" from a
>>>> social classes point of view. Mostly if you are on the Occident part
>>>> because capitalism has indeed "bourgeoisie".
>>>>
>>>> What about "anarcho-bourgeoisie"?.
>>>>
>>>> Maybe "anarcho-capitalists" are confused with "anarcho-bourgeoisie"
>>>> which is more related with Marx's anarchists doctrines...
>>>>
>>>> > psy:
>>>> >> You will cannot practice never anarchism by using capitalism.
>>>> >> You always will be subjugated to market rules which are really
>>>> >> anti-socials.
>>>> >
>>>> > That's a very dogmatic thing to say. How do you feel about projects
>>>> > organized by the Catalan cooperative which are using the free market
>>>> to
>>>> > support socialist projects. Are they not practicing anarchism because
>>>> > they are using capitalism?
>>>>
>>>> Well. I am agree with an interventionist market in which products and
>>>> services are directly related with the ecological/human problems they
>>>> cause to be made. Before and after consume them.
>>>>
>>>> I am not agree with "free" market rules. Almost, with actual neo-market
>>>> doctrine based at offer/demand. I am agree with engage nature/humanity
>>>> more up than "tagged projects", etc. So social/cooperative individuals
>>>> greater than social technocracies.
>>>>
>>>> For that I on the way of that Catalan cooperative ideas. I just only
>>>> remarking that needs more next steps to be done. And that is not
>>>> "anarcho-capitalism" what they are trying.
>>>>
>>>> > If you like cooperatives, then you are supporting non-authoritarian
>>>> > socialism.
>>>>
>>>> Even mutualism. +1.
>>>>
>>>> > Nietzsche teaches us that we can create our own moral systems. There
>>>> is
>>>> > nothing authoritative or intrinsically right. Just societies and
>>>> values.
>>>> > And this is where it gets exciting- the Kurds are postmodernists. When
>>>> > you say this or that isn't anarchism remember Wikipedia:
>>>> >
>>>> > "Anarchism draws on many currents of thought and strategy. Anarchism
>>>> > does not offer a fixed body of doctrine from a single particular world
>>>> > view, instead fluxing and flowing as a philosophy."
>>>> >
>>>> > "Many types and traditions of anarchism exist, not all of which are
>>>> > mutually exclusive."
>>>> >
>>>> > Different strategies and tactics from different schools of anarchism
>>>> can
>>>> > be used side by side, and mixed together in different ways to create
>>>> new
>>>> > societies with different values. Anarchism is far too rich to reduce
>>>> it
>>>> > down to a single school or even reject recognized schools in their
>>>> entirety.
>>>>
>>>> Totally agree.
>>>>
>>>> I just putting in context what "anarcho-capitalism" is giving to that
>>>> theories/practices.
>>>>
>>>> By the moment, I cannot see any good one to follow it at the point to
>>>> self-tag me as: "an anarcho-capitalist".
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> unSYSTEM mailing list: http://unsystem.net
>>>> https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/unsystem
>>>>
>>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> unSYSTEM mailing list: http://unsystem.net
>>> https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/unsystem
>>>
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> unSYSTEM mailing list: http://unsystem.net
>> https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/unsystem
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> unSYSTEM mailing list: http://unsystem.net
>> https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/unsystem
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> unSYSTEM mailing list: http://unsystem.net
> https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/unsystem
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> unSYSTEM mailing list: http://unsystem.net
> https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/unsystem
>
>
::
Re: [unSYSTEM] Anonymous - Official…
