Topic: Anarchy =~ Communism - page 6. (Read 9682 times)
May I confirm how you negate my scenerio.
In the island scenario there are 5 people who hold the entitlements to all essential resources. They harvest the resources themselves, they are shrewd traders therefore they give nothing for free. They trade in between themselves for essential resources each needs.
A stranger comes to the island. He has nothing to offer, in the form of labor and essential resources. Now five collude as I have previously said, agreeing not to bid below the reserve for the strangers labor. However driven by greed one does and secures the employment of the stranger, because they all obey the non-aggression principle therefore the 5th does not have to fear retribution from the other 4. Due to increased capacity the 5th and the stranger are able to collect their essential resources at a higher rate, therefore they can drop the price of their essential resource and trade with the other 4 for the essential resources they have, helping to break the trading ban outlined earlier.
So what exactly obligates the four to obey the non-aggression principle? Or do we just assume that all citizens are perfect non-socialist anarchists ?
This scenario will never occur? The people with essential resources would never use their power to create a new age of slavery in non-socialist anarchy? And this is a cornerstone of non-socialist anarchy?
We rely on basic human greed to ensure that at least one will always undercut the others, and the NAP to ensure that the others don't beat him up for it. That's a distinct oversimplification, but, there it is.
This scenario will never occur? The people with essential resources would never use their power to create a new age of slavery in non-socialist anarchy? And this presumption is a cornerstone of non-socialist anarchy?
Okay, so your saying that if the 5 people were anarchists(not the socialist flavor), and they collude according to above then there is nothing stopping the 5 from exploiting the stranger ?
No, You're saying they're colluding. I'm saying they won't.
The 5 collude according to the rules below:
Quote from: smellyBobby
What if they collude and all agree not to bid below a certain price. Lets say someone is "compassionate" and they bid below this threshold. Then the remaining four stop trading their essential resources with the "compassionate one". The four will then resort to using force over the fifth, to gain the fifth's essential resources. Then what?
Okay, so your saying that if the 5 people were anarchists(not the socialist flavor), and they collude according to above then there is nothing stopping the 5 from exploiting the stranger ?
I fail to understand how this is relevant. As you say Lord of the Flies is about how a group of school boys on an island. Everything falls apart, right? How does that support your perspective? If anything it shows that these "children" needed a state to govern them.
Are you assuming everyone knows this in the island scenario therefore they will not take the path of the school boys?
No, Oppenheimer, You asked 'then what?'. That was my answer.
I fail to understand how this is relevant. As you say Lord of the Flies is about how a group of school boys on an island. Everything falls apart, right? How does that support your perspective? If anything it shows that these "children" needed a state to govern them.
Are you assuming everyone knows this in the island scenario therefore they will not take the path of the school boys?
Quote from: myrkul
Ever read lord of the flies?
I respectfully decline.No, seriously. Not only will that help you see how your island scenario is flawed, when you get assigned the book in 8th grade, you'll have already read it!
Since you seem unable to even google the book, It illustrates what happens on an island when society breaks down. Which it would rapidly do as soon as one group of people attacked another.
Quote from: myrkul
Ever read lord of the flies?
I respectfully decline.No, seriously. Not only will that help you see how your island scenario is flawed, when you get assigned the book in 8th grade, you'll have already read it!
Oh but I am steadfast in my disapproval at such a request.
I find that it would be an unfair waste of my time to read a fiction book to understand the cornerstone of the society you advocate for. Especially given that I have presented a very simple island scenario with only 5 people and a stranger, yet somehow you are unable to communicate the essence of this fiction book to highlight the flaws in my scenario.
I must reiterate my request; is there anyone who can convey the essence of this fiction book and help express myrkul's point?
Quote from: myrkul
Ever read lord of the flies?
I respectfully decline.No, seriously. Not only will that help you see how your island scenario is flawed, when you get assigned the book in 8th grade, you'll have already read it!
In my mind, there is no difference between Anarchy and Communism, both are based on lawlessness, mutual benefit and a non-existent human hierarchy.
This is despite on all scales and across all times of the universe there is hierarchy. From the structure of the atom, to the evolution of life, the way networks process traffic, the existence of solar systems, the fractal structure of weather systems and galaxy super-clusters there is a hierarchy where something is apart of the whole. Your telling me that somehow we humans, us mere little people are so special that we are above this rule.
That there is something so magnificent, so amazing about us that the system you propose will somehow just completely disregard this fundamental law of the universe. Your telling me that despite the recent human hierarchies, the hierarchies of our primate cousins and all other lifeforms that we are so so so special, that we are god-like and do not belong in this category.
We are gods and that we are above the rest of the universe and we are capable of creating a system that does not obey the universe. So when you say that this new Society is great, because we will be all “fundamentally equal, there will not be a hierarchy”, remember to wipe your mouth with toilet paper once you’ve finished speaking. Because what you just said is the abstract logical equivalent of what I hear at church. That your system is above the mechanics of the universe and that's why it will work.
This why I don't bother reading about such fantasies.
Justice Dragons will always exist, get use to it and learn how to ride them.
(Socialist) anarchists do not oppose hierarchical structure, but rather coercive power relationships.This is despite on all scales and across all times of the universe there is hierarchy. From the structure of the atom, to the evolution of life, the way networks process traffic, the existence of solar systems, the fractal structure of weather systems and galaxy super-clusters there is a hierarchy where something is apart of the whole. Your telling me that somehow we humans, us mere little people are so special that we are above this rule.
That there is something so magnificent, so amazing about us that the system you propose will somehow just completely disregard this fundamental law of the universe. Your telling me that despite the recent human hierarchies, the hierarchies of our primate cousins and all other lifeforms that we are so so so special, that we are god-like and do not belong in this category.
We are gods and that we are above the rest of the universe and we are capable of creating a system that does not obey the universe. So when you say that this new Society is great, because we will be all “fundamentally equal, there will not be a hierarchy”, remember to wipe your mouth with toilet paper once you’ve finished speaking. Because what you just said is the abstract logical equivalent of what I hear at church. That your system is above the mechanics of the universe and that's why it will work.
This why I don't bother reading about such fantasies.
Justice Dragons will always exist, get use to it and learn how to ride them.
One piece of advice regarding the above: Take the use of "capitalism" in the above with a grain of salt (in particular, section F). Self-described anacaps can/usually do mean something different by "capitalism" than most socialist-anarchists do. Mutualism (free-market anti-capitalism) is a form of socialist-anarchism, and describes an economic system that is largely compatible with what anacaps usually envision.
In my mind, there is no difference between Anarchy and Communism, both are based on lawlessness, mutual benefit and a non-existent human hierarchy.
This is despite on all scales and across all times of the universe there is hierarchy. From the structure of the atom, to the evolution of life, the way networks process traffic, the existence of solar systems, the fractal structure of weather systems and galaxy super-clusters there is a hierarchy where something is apart of the whole. Your telling me that somehow we humans, us mere little people are so special that we are above this rule.
That there is something so magnificent, so amazing about us that the system you propose will somehow just completely disregard this fundamental law of the universe. Your telling me that despite the recent human hierarchies, the hierarchies of our primate cousins and all other lifeforms that we are so so so special, that we are god-like and do not belong in this category.
We are gods and that we are above the rest of the universe and we are capable of creating a system that does not obey the universe. So when you say that this new Society is great, because we will be all “fundamentally equal, there will not be a hierarchy”, remember to wipe your mouth with toilet paper once you’ve finished speaking. Because what you just said is the abstract logical equivalent of what I hear at church. That your system is above the mechanics of the universe and that's why it will work.
This why I don't bother reading about such fantasies.
Justice Dragons will always exist, get use to it and learn how to ride them.
(Socialist) anarchists do not oppose hierarchical structure, but rather coercive power relationships.This is despite on all scales and across all times of the universe there is hierarchy. From the structure of the atom, to the evolution of life, the way networks process traffic, the existence of solar systems, the fractal structure of weather systems and galaxy super-clusters there is a hierarchy where something is apart of the whole. Your telling me that somehow we humans, us mere little people are so special that we are above this rule.
That there is something so magnificent, so amazing about us that the system you propose will somehow just completely disregard this fundamental law of the universe. Your telling me that despite the recent human hierarchies, the hierarchies of our primate cousins and all other lifeforms that we are so so so special, that we are god-like and do not belong in this category.
We are gods and that we are above the rest of the universe and we are capable of creating a system that does not obey the universe. So when you say that this new Society is great, because we will be all “fundamentally equal, there will not be a hierarchy”, remember to wipe your mouth with toilet paper once you’ve finished speaking. Because what you just said is the abstract logical equivalent of what I hear at church. That your system is above the mechanics of the universe and that's why it will work.
This why I don't bother reading about such fantasies.
Justice Dragons will always exist, get use to it and learn how to ride them.
This sounds interesting, this flavor in my mind may actually work! So who decides what is a coercive power relationship? My initial impression is that this is something like decentralized socialism.
Quote from: myrkul
Ever read lord of the flies?
I respectfully decline.
Maybe there is someone else who can articulate why this fiction novel will solve this scenario?
In my mind, there is no difference between Anarchy and Communism, both are based on lawlessness, mutual benefit and a non-existent human hierarchy.
This is despite on all scales and across all times of the universe there is hierarchy. From the structure of the atom, to the evolution of life, the way networks process traffic, the existence of solar systems, the fractal structure of weather systems and galaxy super-clusters there is a hierarchy where something is apart of the whole. Your telling me that somehow we humans, us mere little people are so special that we are above this rule.
That there is something so magnificent, so amazing about us that the system you propose will somehow just completely disregard this fundamental law of the universe. Your telling me that despite the recent human hierarchies, the hierarchies of our primate cousins and all other lifeforms that we are so so so special, that we are god-like and do not belong in this category.
We are gods and that we are above the rest of the universe and we are capable of creating a system that does not obey the universe. So when you say that this new Society is great, because we will be all “fundamentally equal, there will not be a hierarchy”, remember to wipe your mouth with toilet paper once you’ve finished speaking. Because what you just said is the abstract logical equivalent of what I hear at church. That your system is above the mechanics of the universe and that's why it will work.
This why I don't bother reading about such fantasies.
Justice Dragons will always exist, get use to it and learn how to ride them.
(Socialist) anarchists do not oppose hierarchical structure, but rather coercive power relationships. This is despite on all scales and across all times of the universe there is hierarchy. From the structure of the atom, to the evolution of life, the way networks process traffic, the existence of solar systems, the fractal structure of weather systems and galaxy super-clusters there is a hierarchy where something is apart of the whole. Your telling me that somehow we humans, us mere little people are so special that we are above this rule.
That there is something so magnificent, so amazing about us that the system you propose will somehow just completely disregard this fundamental law of the universe. Your telling me that despite the recent human hierarchies, the hierarchies of our primate cousins and all other lifeforms that we are so so so special, that we are god-like and do not belong in this category.
We are gods and that we are above the rest of the universe and we are capable of creating a system that does not obey the universe. So when you say that this new Society is great, because we will be all “fundamentally equal, there will not be a hierarchy”, remember to wipe your mouth with toilet paper once you’ve finished speaking. Because what you just said is the abstract logical equivalent of what I hear at church. That your system is above the mechanics of the universe and that's why it will work.
This why I don't bother reading about such fantasies.
Justice Dragons will always exist, get use to it and learn how to ride them.
Read it, and you'll know why it's relevant.
Nope, but please show how it is relevant.
What if they collude and all agree not to bid below a certain price. Lets say someone is "compassionate" and they bid below this threshold. Then the remaining four stop trading their essential resources with the "compassionate one". The four will then resort to using force over the fifth, to gain the fifth's essential resources. Then what?
Ever read lord of the flies?
What if they collude and all agree not to bid below a certain price. Lets say someone is "compassionate" and they bid below this threshold. Then the remaining four stop trading their essential resources with the "compassionate one". The four will then resort to using force over the fifth, to gain the fifth's essential resources. Then what?
Pure and simple greed. each one wants his labor, and the desire for it will drive the price down until it's accepted.
If the person truly has nothing to offer, then he will need charity. I don't think it's reasonable to assume he has nothing to offer, but what the hell-it's your hypothetical scenario.
So let's assume nothing to offer. You apparently want the charity to be provided by those who want to give it and those who don't rather than just those who are willing. For this to work, you would have to also assume that the energy required to force wealth redistribution from the uncharitable is less than the energy extracted.
Yea exactly, my question is to anarchists, is this possible?
Flatly, No. It is not possible that someone has nothing to offer, unless that person is a quadriplegic simpleton. Labor is always in demand, and one can always trade a little sweat of the brow for a chunk of the pie.
So what is stopping the five in control of essential resources from dictating the terms of employment? It seems little different from America's current situation.
Jump to: