: It doesnt have to advocated. If a man produces x crops by his effort and those crops divided up by a popular vote, the result of which the farmer disagrees with, then it is the consequence. he is onver the barrel of populism. If he produces its taken, if he doesnt - they all suffer. (it does show who depends on whom though)
But thats not what's being advocated, what is being advocated is that said man takes part in a social production fo crops, in as much the way that peopel depend upon him for teh crops, he depends upon others for his housing, electricity, clothes, machinery, fertilizers, etc. If a person wanted a plot of land to produce for themselves exclusively on, then tats fine, sounds like excessively hard work to me, but..there ya go. If someone is going to work on the common land, producing for others, they take part in the social system of production.
Am I not a collective of individual fragments of time, random biological impulses and data packages? Is not my self-hood itself an illusion? Back to viral contact again. My boundaries are not definable, I am not I.
: 'Us' against those who would coercively enslave 'us' part-time or full time for purposes 'we' may not agree with.
Is that a collective us? WOuld you agree with this statement:
'Slavery exists in America- its called jury service.'