Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr
OccupyForum

Forum Post: Please help spread the ideas of Anarchism / Libertarian Socialism

Posted 2 years ago on Sept. 24, 2012, 4:04 p.m. EST by struggleforfreedom80 (6584)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

In the long term, organizing society based on the principles of Libertarian Socialism is the only logical and reasonable thing to do, and I believe a vast majority of people would embrace the ideas if properly introduced to them. Unfortunately not enough people are aware of Libertarian Socialism or have been fed lies and propaganda about it. Spreading the ideas of Libertarian Socialism, and convincing more people is therefore of course very important in order to help move our communities in the direction of a more just, democratic and sustainable society.

I ask everyone here who knows about good websites/videos/channels/articles etc. etc. on Anarchism and Libertarian Socialism to please share them here, and spread the shared info that’s posted here further.

Here, I’ll start:

http://libcom.org/

http://www.anarchosyndicalism.net/index.php

http://workersolidarity.org/

http://www.wsm.ie/

“Anarcho-Syndicalism - Theory and Practice” (by Rudolf Rocker):

http://libcom.org/library/anarcho-syndicalism-rudolf-rocker

“The Conquest of Bread” (by Peter Kropotkin):

http://libcom.org/library/the-conquest-of-bread-peter-kropotkin

“The Relevance Of Anarcho-Syndicalism” (Noam Chomsky interview):

Audio: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h_x0Y3FqkEI

Text: http://www.chomsky.info/interviews/19760725.htm


Some things I put together:

Anarchism, Libertarian Socialism and Anarcho-Syndicalism:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rxYth0ktPsY

( Watch all the videos on my channel here: http://www.youtube.com/user/Andy80o/videos?view=0 )

Why Libertarian Socialism is the best way to organize society

(Trolls will probably post some garbage here, but please just ignore them and vote them down)

84 Comments

84 Comments


Read the Rules
[-] 3 points by shadz66 (19985) 2 years ago

Back to basics with some words from Albert Einstein from over 60 years ago :

Good post 'sff80''. Thanx.

fiat lux ...

[-] 1 points by struggleforfreedom80 (6584) 2 years ago

Yes, "Why Socialism" is a good article. I read this many years ago and I seem to remember Einstein advocating more of a democratic state socialist organization, than Libertarian Socialism, but over all the article is very good.

Thanks for contributing here, Shadz :)

[-] 4 points by shadz66 (19985) 2 years ago

We have mind meld in this funda'mental' matter bro' & 'takk for det'. Please also consider that a 'rapidly evolutionary process' of a dynamic between "d.s.s.o." and 'LS' ~}~ To get it right, inwardly - we look 'left' to true democracy - maybe even 'one person ; one vote - Democracy' rather than the 'One Dollar ; One Vote' demoCRAZY deMOCKERYcy we have now.

Like many millions of people throughout The World - I subscribe to Socialist Precepts and Principles because I realise and accept that Socialism has an Ethical Basis and Dimension, above and beyond "The Dog Eat Dog" and "The Devil Take the Hindmost" attitudes of crude laissez-fair crapitalism.

Indeed Modern High-Finance Capitalism (cf Corporate Banksterism / 'Hoover-Up Kaputalism' ) is a Busted Flush and any honest person in possession of the most rudimentary ethical compass can clearly see that.

Brothers and sisters, please do NOT context, confuse or conflate Socialism with 'State Capitalism' or 'Totalitarian Stalinism' (as is the wont of avowed and abject 'anti-socialists' {ahem!}) and please do try to understand why very many 'Economists' and 'Social & Political Commentators' with anything pertinent to say about our Global 'Debtocracy' ( http://topdocumentaryfilms.com/debtocracy/ ) are increasingly referring to Karl Marx ( http://www.marxists.org/ ) for analysis if not solutions.

Socialism is a Philosophy, World View, School of Thought and Morality and is a very 'broad church', from Social Democrats, Fabians, Christian Socialists (inspired by that Proto-Socialist, 'Jesus Christ'!) through Dialectical Materialists, Internationalists, Libertarian Socialists, Anarcho-Syndicalists & others - through to Revolutionary Maoists advocating armed resistance and armed proletarian agrarian revolution.

Ignorant and prejudiced opinions are no place for anyone to objectively assess Socialism, so step back from The Corporate US MSM (ABCNNBCBS / FUX SNEWzzz etc.) induced apoplexy and prejudices and look to make your own mind up. Thus, further to the links above, I also append the following :

'L<3VE' is the base vibration of Socialism. "Socialism" is just a word - but L0VE is its real Vibration, Spirit and Light & I believe that to the core of who and what I am. Shine 0n 'sff80' and much thanx for all you do here brother ~{:-)

pax, amor et lux ...

[-] 3 points by beautifulworld (21336) 2 years ago

Awesome comment, Shadz. You articulate what I would want to say but can't get out. LOL.

[-] 2 points by shadz66 (19985) 2 years ago

I think that you do a very good job indeed of 'articulating' what needs to said and heard here 'bw' and I thank you for it in general and for your gracious comment above in particular & append for you & others :

"Every man must decide whether he will walk in the light of creative altruism or in the darkness of destructive selfishness." (Martin Luther King).

veritas vos liberabit ...

[-] 1 points by beautifulworld (21336) 2 years ago

Love that quote, thanks. And, Rand, yuck.

[-] 2 points by shadz66 (19985) 2 years ago

Yep re. 'Psycho Rand' but Balles' came to his senses when he grew up ie - "Over the next decade of subscribing to Rand's "objectivism", I realised that I had been infected with the worst kind of selfishness. Objectivism was the term that Rand used to describe selfishness." Also, Balles goes on to end with : "Economist, teacher and diplomat John Kenneth Galbraith complained that : 'The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy ; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness'." - which really speaks volumes, I think.

Take care ; stay well ; stay aware & best wishes to you and yours.

minima maxima sunt ...

[-] 2 points by struggleforfreedom80 (6584) 2 years ago

Real socialism, that is: a system based on workers' self management, solidarity, and real participatory democracy is what we must work to create.

Check this one out:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K4Tq4VE8eHQ

Solidarity!

[-] 4 points by shadz66 (19985) 2 years ago

"The War Against the Poor : Occupy Wall Street and the Politics of Financial Morality" :

Consider that maybe 'words' are an approximation of our thoughts which in turn are analogues for our feelings & 'feelings' define us. Let Love, Light & Logic - Lule, lol {:-p)

Good link & thanx again. SOLIDARITY !!

ad iudicium ...

[-] 2 points by struggleforfreedom80 (6584) 2 years ago

Thanks for the link. Bookmarked!

Again, thanks for sharing your thoughts here:)

[-] -1 points by TheRazor (-329) 2 years ago

Socialism would have to be alcohol and drug free.

[-] 3 points by shadz66 (19985) 2 years ago

LOL !!! Why's that 'TR' ?!! Please do share ! &

From "The Disposable Heroes of Hiphoprisy" :

ne quid nimis ...

[-] 3 points by Builder (4202) 2 years ago

He's thinking mormonism...

[-] 3 points by shadz66 (19985) 2 years ago

'Socialist Mormons' ?! Do they exist 'B' ?!! I hope so, mate !!!

Hope 'pork bone puppy' is well :-)

pax et lux ...

[-] 2 points by Builder (4202) 2 years ago

No idea, Shadz. Just butting in.

Pork bone puppy just dropped in for some roughing up and a lump of old cheese.

All good.

[-] 3 points by shadz66 (19985) 2 years ago

LOL !!! Onyer mate !! Puppy will be 'Big Dog' by the end of the summer you have coming up, lol !

I'm for the 'fart sack' now mate - learnt that fom you, back in the day ;-)

vale ...

[-] 2 points by Builder (4202) 2 years ago

Sleep well, and don't fart the flannel off your sheets, ol' mate.

[-] 3 points by shadz66 (19985) 2 years ago

LOL ! Now there's one that I may not share with the girlfriend !! Ever, lol !!!

More on point re OWS & this thread, I append for you and others :

Stay well 'B' & re. 'Pork Bone Puppy' - cheese ? lol !

pax ...

[-] 1 points by TommyNYC (730) 2 years ago

Boo!! That's what's great about libertarians! They let you take bong hits!

[-] 1 points by struggleforfreedom80 (6584) 2 years ago

That one I've never heard before. Care to elaborate?

[-] -2 points by TheRazor (-329) 2 years ago

All citizens would need to live an exemplary life.

[-] 1 points by struggleforfreedom80 (6584) 2 years ago

You can't be serious..

Why do you think that?

[-] 0 points by TheRazor (-329) 2 years ago

I am very serious. Socialism is in reality everyone looking out for everyone else. As a conservative, I still understand that if everyone were reliable and responsible, a communal effort has great appeal over the more severe aspects of capitalism, and its reliance on winners, not recognizing that there will also be losers.

[-] 1 points by struggleforfreedom80 (6584) 2 years ago

In a socialist society it would be pretty reasonable that we took care of the ones who need it. Things like establishing good social safty nets and decent welfare are very popular ideas in socialist circles.

The core idea of socialism however is collective ownership of the means of production.

How a society with workers' self-management and decent welfare has to be alcohol and drug-free in order to work is beyond me. If you're being serious I must ask you to please elaborate more.

[-] -1 points by TheRazor (-329) 2 years ago

If thats the true definition of socialism, arent then publicly traded companies truly socialistic?

Most of the very largext mutual funds are run by unions. http://www.calpers.ca.gov/index.jsp?bc=/investments/assets/assetallocation.xml

[-] 1 points by struggleforfreedom80 (6584) 2 years ago

The word "Socialism" has come to mean different things.

The type of socialism I want is Libertarian Socialism; a society based on a participatory democracy built from below - democratic workplaces, communities and so on.

You didn't explain why a society with workers' self-management and decent welfare has to be alcohol and drug-free in order to work.

[-] -1 points by TheRazor (-329) 2 years ago

Your definition isnt in line with mine. A socialistic society built on a socialistic economy demands all must work for the common good. It demands ecological accountabilty. It demands corporations that have strict ethics and accountabilty. and it demands strict personal ethics and responsibilty and recreational drug/alcohol use would be contrary to high individual responsibility.

[-] 1 points by struggleforfreedom80 (6584) 2 years ago

"Your definition isnt in line with mine. A socialistic society built on a socialistic economy demands all must work for the common good"

You can interpret socialism to be whatever you want. Again, I don't understand how a participatory democracy with decent welfare can't exist for the absurd reasons you mentioned.

"It demands ecological accountabilty. It demands corporations that have strict ethics and accountabilty."

We should work to create a sustainable and solidaric society, yes.

"and it demands strict personal ethics and responsibilty and recreational drug/alcohol use would be contrary to high individual responsibility."

In a libertarian socialist society there'd be more people than today participating in the democratic society. It would be a society with more cooperation and solidarity among the general population, but why is this inconsistent with people enjoying a bottle of wine a friday night?

I don't mean to be rude, but what you propose here is pretty absurd. I'm not sure if I want to continue this debate.

[-] 0 points by TheRazor (-329) 2 years ago

An example would be HOA's. Having been on an HOA, the thing that just destroys HOA's are homeowners who refuse to see themselves as part of a whole. Hoa's have rules and if everyone follwed the rules, there is neighborhood peace. As you stated, an occasional glass if wine is no big deal as long as EVERYONE confined themselves to that occasional glass. I would actually extend this to tobacco and obesity.

[-] 1 points by struggleforfreedom80 (6584) 2 years ago

I think we should wrap this up, Razor. You've refuted your original claim, and I'm not going to start a new debate with you about the amount of wine individuals drink. This has been weird enough as it is.

if you want to discuss other topics I might answer, but I'm done with this one.

[-] -1 points by TheRazor (-329) 2 years ago

The reasons societies break down is because personal responsibilty breaks down. Mormons created a strong social society based on high personal conduct. Quakers built strong societies based on high personal conduct. The Pilgrims built a strong society based on high social conduct. All of these were quite socialistic communities. The Amish did the same.

Hippie communes (I am not using hippie perjoratively, the base ideas of hippie communes were in fact commendable) broke down because of low personal conduct. Germans who tend to be very disciplined people probably have the best social structure right now and it isnt an accident that Greece and Italy do not.

Of course an occasional glass of wine wouldnt cause trouble, but would you not agree that the higher a society's level of personal conduct is set, the more likely all will feel united in a common cause?

[-] 1 points by struggleforfreedom80 (6584) 2 years ago

So you refute your original claim? Good. Then we can finally end this weird debate, right?

[-] 3 points by struggleforfreedom80 (6584) 2 years ago

Ayn Rand's admiration of Hickman is one of many examples of her twisted world view. Her philosophy is so grotesque, I don't even know where to begin. Unfortunately many have bought into this garbage, especially in the US. By debunking her ideas with the use of reasonable logical arguments and science, some might decide to abandon this philosophy.

But back to Anarchism. Can you recommend any good sites ?

[-] 1 points by Anomilus (41) from Naples, FL 2 years ago

Ummm no to anarchism.

[-] 2 points by struggleforfreedom80 (6584) 2 years ago

But why?

Anarchism is about people having the freedom to control their own lives. That's not an unreasonable suggestion.

[-] 1 points by Anomilus (41) from Naples, FL 2 years ago

If you want to center an idea around the 'freedom of people to control their own lives", try using the term 'freedom'. It conveys the idea much more clearly.

Masking the idea behind the term anarchism, is misleading and totally counter-productive. Not to mention how you leave yourself and you idea vulnerable to true anarchists who believe that anarchism means to go burn and destroy stuff.

I guess a better word choice is what I am trying to say. Because I won't subscribe to any idea with that word behind it. Using that term is probably doing your message more harm than good. Just a suggestion.

When you think of anarchism, freedom is the last thing that comes to mind. Wouldn't you agree?

[-] 2 points by struggleforfreedom80 (6584) 2 years ago

Anarchism is about creating real freedom. Those who believe anything else have been fed lies and propaganda about it.

Libertarian Socialism and Anarchism has nothing to do with lawlessness and people who only want to destroy stuff. Anarchism is about creating a real participatory democracy in which people control their own life, work and community - freedom.

[-] 1 points by Mooks (1985) 2 years ago

So would a system like this advocate for something like a single payer health care system? Being forced to participate in a specific health plan (whether is a good idea or not) sounds like anything but real freedom, and yet is an idea that is pretty popular on here.

[-] 1 points by struggleforfreedom80 (6584) 2 years ago

There should be totally free health care for everyone. The society is more wealthy than ever, it wouldn't be a problem whatsoever. The whole society would be better off with free health care for all. Don't you wish that you had access to free health care when you needed it?

There's force in any kind of society: you're forced to follow the laws decided by society. The point is that people should be able to control their own life, work and community. I want force and domination down to the minimum, and that would have to be in a classless, egalitarian society.

[-] 1 points by Mooks (1985) 2 years ago

Well health care can never truly be free. Someone has to pay for it. Essentially people would be forced to pay into and use a single payer system. As you said though, any kind of society has some force in it. Where does the limit on this force come in though?

I feel as if I have pretty good control over my life, work, and immediate community. The one thing I wish I had more control over are regulations on my business put in place by the government, but those are regulations that I am sure most would support.

So essentially my question is do we really need a whole new system or do we simply need to remove the corrupting influence of money in our current political system? Obviously the system you propose only offers a limited amount of freedom and I think most Americans would agree that is exactly what we already have now.

[-] 1 points by struggleforfreedom80 (6584) 2 years ago

“Well health care can never truly be free. Someone has to pay for it.”

I’m talking about it being free of charge when you need it.

“Essentially people would be forced to pay into and use a single payer system.”

If a community wanted to fund health care thru taxes, then the ones disagreeing with this would be forced, yes - just as Americans who are against capitalist/state-capitalist organization are forced to live under those conditions.

Free health care for all should be established everywhere; it benefits the entire society. The society is wealthier than ever, it can easily be established.

“As you said though, any kind of society has some force in it. Where does the limit on this force come in though?”

I told you. Force and domination must be down to the minimum, and that would have to be in a classless, egalitarian society (where all undemocratic hierarchies and concentration of wealth and power were dismantled).

“I feel as if I have pretty good control over my life, work, and immediate community.”

The point is that everyone should have the right to be in control of their own life, work and community. That means that the private ownership of the means of production and economic institutions must be abolished, in favor of democratic organization of workplaces and communities etc.

“The one thing I wish I had more control over are regulations on my business put in place by the government, but those are regulations that I am sure most would support.”

You shouldn’t have the right to privatly own this regulated business to begin with. The economic institutions in society must be run democratically by the participants.

“So essentially my question is do we really need a whole new system or do we simply need to remove the corrupting influence of money in our current political system?”

We need money out of politics and a new system. State-capitalism must be replaced by a real participatory democracy.

“Obviously the system you propose only offers a limited amount of freedom and I think most Americans would agree that is exactly what we already have now.”

The system I want is the one that offers most freedoms for individuals. Only in an egalitarian, classless, participatory democracy are individuals truly free.

[-] 1 points by Mooks (1985) 2 years ago

I am not going to lie, I am glad I live in the real world and not your world. I like owning my business, regardless of the silly regulations.

And I don't see the difference between being forced into participating in capitalism or being forced to participate in a single payer system. They are both a loss of true freedom.

[-] 1 points by struggleforfreedom80 (6584) 2 years ago

The ones who have power and control over others are often very comfortable in that position, so I'm not surprised you like owning a business. It's still wrong, though. Institutions should be run democratically by the participants.

[-] 0 points by AlwaysIntoSomething (42) 9 months ago

Local, local, local...

http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2013/12/27/3104771/occupy-madison-homeless/

Small group of people working together to improve things. Very cool.

[-] 0 points by Karlin (350) from Nelson, BC 2 years ago

Allow me to explain further why I think this thread's idea defeats itself - first, the quote: "It’s about dismantling the hierarchical structures which allow some individuals to control and dominate others, and replacing them with an egalitarian, solidaric society where all individuals are in control of their own lives."

An example of a "heirarchical structure" on paper is the US Constitution, or a church doctrine, or political organisational banner under which voters group together to say "THIS explains how we want things done" - such as Libertarian Socialism" {so, dismantle it!!}

[please see my other post in this thread for the positive suggestions]

[-] 1 points by struggleforfreedom80 (6584) 2 years ago

People should control their own workplace and community themselves. When representation is necessary the representatives should be elected by the group to which they belong. Society must be controlled from below.

[-] 0 points by Karlin (350) from Nelson, BC 2 years ago

The link says "Libertarian Socialism" is about "dismantling the hierarchical structures which allow some individuals to control and dominate others, and replacing them with an egalitarian, solidaric society where all individuals are in control of their own lives" - I love that.

I have been saying that GOVERNment should represent the citizens, not GOVERN them. No wonder the word government gets a bad reputation!!

I would just like to add that we can try to define what we want by asking for this type or that type of society and government, but we have been arguing about "over-arching doctrines" {communism, socialism, capitalism, fascism, etc.etc] but that has not and does not get us anywhere - the meat is in the detals... And even if we chose and instituted the best system for us and our times, they are all prone to corruption.

So forget the type of system and focus on the details such as "how we stop corruption" - political parties are prone to that - they control who gets to run in elections. We need average people representing us, not elites, not retired corporate bigwigs, and changing the government members, a clean sweep, at least every 8 years.

[-] 2 points by struggleforfreedom80 (6584) 2 years ago

Ideally the government shouldn't exist at all, but as long as private enterprise exists and dominates our lives we need government for self defense. Concentrated power, including capitalist institutions, must be dismantled

We need a society in which people get to run their own workplaces and communities themselves - direct democracy.

[-] -1 points by dreamingforward (394) from Tacoma, WA 2 years ago

We have it already: it's called the Internet. Now if you want to (re-)build a society where you can secure means of sustenance, strike the existing paradigm where it's weakest: the "right to property" where the land was occupied by American Indians. You won't get there purely by ideological means. Get arrested for a simple act of sleeping and then find me: I can help you make your case. The court system is the last vestige of the ideals of the American Founders, and there are no documents that suggest they ever anticipated the End of Growth.

Otherwise, see pangaia.sourceforge.net and help build such a system.

[-] 1 points by struggleforfreedom80 (6584) 2 years ago

Could you elaborate on what exactly your point was with this?

[-] 1 points by dreamingforward (394) from Tacoma, WA 2 years ago

At what point did you get confused?

[-] -1 points by Neuwurldodr (744) 2 years ago

Not sure I agree with this type of theory and practice....

There still must be a quorum which can identify the desires of the people, and there are also those whose desires will not be on a non-egotistical level wanting to maintain dominance over others. That is human nature.... So, established doctrines will and still must be adhered to, regardless of what name it goes by.. For example.....OWS rules and regulations for posting on this forum. People are followers, leaders are few.

[-] 1 points by struggleforfreedom80 (6584) 2 years ago

No one should be able to dominate and control others. People should be free to control their own lives. When people do things together, decition must be based on consensus or democratic process.

Libertarian Socialism is very much in accordance with human nature. Solidarity, mutual aid, and cooperation are at the core of human nature. Alos, huge hierarchies and the concentration of power in the hands of the few are pretty new phenomena when looking at human history and evolution.

[-] 1 points by Neuwurldodr (744) 2 years ago

So, where has this ever been implemented? Is this not the same as the form of Communism that this country so intolerably hates?

I mean, lets be realistic...it all looks good in print, but who is gonna let that take place? Seriously.....

[-] 1 points by struggleforfreedom80 (6584) 2 years ago

The greatest achivement was anarchist Spain (Spanish Revolution). There have been, and are lots of examples of anarchist/anarchist-like organization, workers' self-management etc. working very well

Libertarian Socialism is perfectly feasible, but more people must be introduced to, and convinced of joining the struggle.

All this hatred of communism is mostly due to propaganda and lies. Communism means a stateless, classless, egalitarian society. The ideas of communism are actually pretty reasonable.

[-] 1 points by Neuwurldodr (744) 2 years ago

Yet, Spain is now at its lowest level of civilization and has been since its first inhabitants were run out of it and the religion changed.

Nope, can't see where any particular idealism can be re-instituted when it has created nothing but turmoil, confusion and unrest in most countries. Man's views and opinions on how social equality should be implemented is usually, to me, very egotistical in nature...sorry to say,..

[-] 1 points by struggleforfreedom80 (6584) 2 years ago

Why do you start talking about today's Spain now? How relevant is that to the experiments during the Spanish Revolution?

"Turmoil, confusion and unrest" Could you elaborate?

Communism offers perfectly reasonable suggestions to how society should be organized. A real communist organization of society has yet to be implemented, though.

The core of human nature is based on cooperation, altruism and solidarity, but today's society encourages us to be greedy.

[-] 1 points by Neuwurldodr (744) 2 years ago

Well hell....are you living yesterday or today? Get real. it worked for a short time then and it will only work for a short time in the future as well. You cannot put new wine in old bottles, skins, whatever. Get things in order for the children, the new generation coming up... Let them benefit from the changes you all are trying to implement and put them in place in way that they will work for them. But please, please, whatever you do, come to the realization that ..... You all had your chance and blew it!!

[-] 2 points by struggleforfreedom80 (6584) 2 years ago

Anarchist Spain was very succuessful, but it was crushed by powerful opponents.

I just want a society where the decitionmaking is in the hands of the people, not corporations and the financial elite.

Is it really so unreasonable to suggest that we should work to create a society in which people control their own workplace and community?

[-] 1 points by Neuwurldodr (744) 2 years ago

I have never spoken against that since, as I have always stated, it was done on these very shores long before the marauders arrived here....but you all ignore that fact due to past indoctrinating brainwashing. Most are comfortable with that indoctrination and will continue to be as such.

Most of you would try to make us all believe that it couldn't have existed unless someone from a European or Ancient Euro/Asian background introduced it to the world. So, where did they get that notion from in the first damn place?

Remember...nothing new under the sun...just the way people wish to perceive it.

Sad state of affairs for the people on this continent, I must admit... The mental slavery has been strongly imbedded here.

So, again...we are looking at the results of all that dumb ass brainwashing, Or perhaps I should say....the white-washing of the mind?

[-] 1 points by struggleforfreedom80 (6584) 2 years ago

I'm sorry, that didn't make much sense.

[-] 1 points by Neuwurldodr (744) 2 years ago

I know, most of what OWS is fighting against doesn't either. No problem...it will all work it self out in the end.

After all...nothing lasts forever...

In other words, Socialism is just a remake of Ancient world order civilizations before the invasions from Europe came...nothing more and nothing less.

[-] 1 points by struggleforfreedom80 (6584) 2 years ago

All I'm suggesting is that we should work to establish a free society where people get to participate in and have a democratic say in the things that affect their lives. I don't think that's an unreasonable suggestion.

[-] 0 points by Neuwurldodr (744) 2 years ago

I never said it was unreasonable.

All I ever want you all to do is.....RECOGNIZE!

You all are not the first on this earth to implement this ideology or this system as it was done in the Ancient worlds, yet destroyed, and must and will return... Yet, I doubt seriously it will be named...SOCIALISM OR COMMUNISM.. Ya know?

[-] 1 points by struggleforfreedom80 (6584) 2 years ago

"You all are not the first on this earth to implement this ideology or this system as it was done in the Ancient worlds, yet destroyed, and must and will return."

What do you have in mind specifically?

[-] 1 points by Neuwurldodr (744) 2 years ago

Hmm? Good question....

Yet, as a humble servant of life, my only response can be.... 1) Keep an eye on Mother Earth 2) Keep an eye on the Nations of the Earth and if that doesn't convince you that change is inevitable and out of our control, regardless of what society calls "Socialism, Communism, or even a New World Order"..then 3) Keep an eye on the Universal Order of the solar stars that man truly has no control over...

We are all just putty in the scheme of existence....since there is a plan greater than any of us can comprehend here.

[Deleted]

[-] 2 points by struggleforfreedom80 (6584) 2 years ago

First, the concept of some individuals being able to buy their own towns is pretty awful, to say the least.

Organizing anarchist towns is great, but it must go further. The economy is as you know all-encompassing, and the wealth is very highly concentrated. An anarchist commune or town here and there is a good start, but the whole economy must be dealt with as well.

The financial elite must be stripped from their ability to control and dominate our lives. Private enterprise is private tyranny.

[Deleted]

[-] 3 points by struggleforfreedom80 (6584) 2 years ago

Chomsky was talking about authority and domination. The burden of proof is on the ones who want to have power and control over other people, or who advocate a society with such structures. The burden of proof is on the ones advocating concentrated private power.

There have been, and are lots of examples of anarchist, or anarchist-like organization, workers' self-management etc working very well. A really large scale anarchist society in the US can only be proven when the people and the communities want it, and this type of organization will in most cases probably come gradually. But it's hard to operate within a capitalist framework, and it can't stop with a few communes or co-ops, because, like I said, the economy is all-encompassing. A few anarchist communes here and there is a good start, but must eventually go further.

[Deleted]

[-] 1 points by struggleforfreedom80 (6584) 2 years ago

No. Anarchism is about establishing a society in which all individuals are in control of their lives. Everyone would have a say in the things they're a part of and affect their lives. If undemocratic hierarchies and concentrated power were dismantled and replaced by a real participatory democracy no individuals would have authority over others. Everyone would have a say in their affairs. You wouldn't always get your will of course; sometimes the majority in your community or at your workplace would agree with you, sometimes not, but that's a logical consequence of living in a society with other people.

[Deleted]

[-] 1 points by struggleforfreedom80 (6584) 2 years ago

No one should be forced to work. The communities and the workplaces should come up with the solutions as to how undesirable work could be carried out. Preferably it should be shared among the people capable and willing to do it.

[-] -2 points by JackTG (-194) 2 years ago

Perfect. I'm not willing to work. You can send a paycheck directly to my bank account so that I can eat. Thanks. Chop chop. You anarcho-communists start working now. I need money to buy food and stuff. Chop chop.

[-] 3 points by struggleforfreedom80 (6584) 2 years ago

I'm all for a society which allows even people like you to have a decent life. If you don't wnat to work in a society that offers decent welfare for all citizens, then that would be sad - for you. While most people would be living out their creative life and participating in society, you'd be having a pretty sad and boring life. You'd also be very unpopular in the community you lived.

Individuals like you would make up a very small percentage. We have a wealthier society than ever, we can afford to make sure people like you don't starve.

[-] -3 points by JackTG (-194) 2 years ago

I agree. All my life I wanted money from others so that I could concentrate my energies on making art without worrying about whether it would sell or not. My hope is that you will hurry and build this society so that you all can provide a paycheck for me. Now, chop chop, go go go!

[-] 3 points by struggleforfreedom80 (6584) 2 years ago

instead of ridicule, why don't you present some counter arguments? If you disagree with me, then tell me why.

[-] -3 points by JackTG (-194) 2 years ago

I agree with you. I was not being sarcastic. I like to spend my days doing art, and the type of art I do doesn't have much potential to be sold because of its ephemeral nature. Having a political system in place where I would not have to work would be truly excellent.

[-] 2 points by struggleforfreedom80 (6584) 2 years ago

You're of course well aware that I don't believe you at all about not being sarcastic. If you continue with the ridicule and lies I will not respond anymore.

btw, what artists do is also work.

[-] -2 points by JackTG (-194) 2 years ago

Dude, I'm being totally serious. I do not ridicule you. I think a society in which I would not have to work would be amazing. I do consider my art work, but I can't get money for it.

[Deleted]

[-] 2 points by struggleforfreedom80 (6584) 2 years ago

I don't think you got stinkled because you wanted to help, but because you're a reactionary ultra right-winger with solutions that are poorly conceived.

[Deleted]

[-] 1 points by struggleforfreedom80 (6584) 2 years ago

You want to hand most of the power over to the corporations so that they'll be able to dominate and control our lives and communities - much like it was back in the 19th century. Your ideology is in fact advocating tyranny - private tyranny.

[Deleted]

[-] 2 points by struggleforfreedom80 (6584) 2 years ago

Oh, I know that the US is a business-run society to a large extent. But you want to give even more wealth and power to corporations.

[-] -2 points by HeatherL (-30) 2 years ago

Hey bud, I will roll up my sleeves and help you spread it. I will spread it in the fields with the rest of the manure