- Capitalism and Alternatives -

Youre much clearer

Posted by: Gee ( si ) on August 25, 1999 at 19:32:36:

In Reply to: W.S.M. posted by Red Deathy on August 25, 1999 at 18:25:32:

: Well, its an anrachist model that would say the state could end tommorrow, the difference between Anarchists and socialists is that we say you'd have to build the right conditions in which hoarding would end- eitehr through temporary rationing, or a production spike to cover for the inital glut. People, having pratical consciousness, and having deliberately aimed at socialiation of property, would learn the values from there. to demand an abstract change of mind-set a priori is idealist.

Fatal aswell. I would suggest rationing would be resisted and attempts as spiking would require a mass of productive free trade. Any changes would occur after a great majority had changed their minds, not be stimulated by changes to the current set up.

: Indeed, all we do is abolish the money, and stop people aquiring from the labour of others over night. Some are necessarilly gonna be redistributed, for instance my house, the one rent, will cease to be my landlords, etc.

this would only be possible after (or during) the great majority deciding to pursue this.

: Further, the end of money would effectively mean even Bill Gates only has the same aquiring power as the rest of us- as much as he can carry.

Weightlifters, being quite strong, would do well.

: inded, but once people see shop shelves stacked up week in week out, then they just won't bother to hoarde, mean, i don't go down to my mam's kitchen and hoarde some of the food there up to my room...

All hoping the abundance is realised.

: How can a small group hope to use force against the majority of society?

Which small group? Relative to their neighbours it could be big, and 'ourt brothers in Indonesia' may not have the resource to respond, or even the will.

: Why would anyone want to use force, when they have no economic interest to pursue. the only possible use of force would be counter revolution...

Thats one possibility. The other is that there is economic interest in acquiring via force people and objects and that a sufficiently powerful group may do this unpoliced meeting only the resistence of the immediate victims rather than everyone. Not in my backyard, and the US isnt in Indonesias backyard, it cant happen here, were sop much nicer etc etc.

Follow Ups:

The Debating Room Post a Followup