The fallacies of "class warfare" and "redistribution of wealth"

Started Jul 29, 2012 | Discussions thread
Senior MemberPosts: 1,342Gear list
Re: Anarchism
In reply to Chato, Jul 29, 2012

Chato wrote:

The problem with Anarchism is the inability to acomplish all the trivial and yet absolutely necessary organising for the functioning of any society.

How would society be organised? Food has to be grown and distributed. Manufactured goods require raw material, the ability to organise the turning of raw material into goods, and then the distribution of goods. Highways, roads, rails, airports all require an ortganising impulse, or they will either not be created, or if created not be able to function...

Saying all of the above, I do believe that an Anarchist Society is possible AND desirable. Eliminating the State and private ownership of industry is a supreme benefit for all of humanity.

The Anarchist theory behind the organising of society without a State is based by industry. Those who actually produce food, will be one organised aspect of society, who will, within that industry, democratically decide how to produce food. Those who distribute goods will organise and democratically decide how to run their industry. And so on. In other words, eliminating the State, and those who "own" the industries, and giving the power to those who actually participate in these industries, would make greed obsolete - Not because human nature would change, but because the ability to accumulate power and money would not be possible. Presitige, sucess and financial rewards would be the awards of those who best participate in Society.

The Internet with it's ability for instant large scale communication between millions of people simultaniously will be the means by which the above society will stay and function.

Such a transfrmation to an Anarchist Society would be a long process; difficult, but not impossible As long as the means to to the above are done Democratically: as long as that democratic process allows the reversal of it's own agenda, then it can succeed. If any of the above it implemented by the use of naked force and power, then such a process is doomed. The very use of force will turn the perception of an injustice, into resistance, and that in turn will lead to more force - In a cycle with no end. An essentially voluntary system needs a huge majority to succeed -

"Everyone who has ever lived, has lived in Modern Times"

Thank you for that interesting post, Dave. I agree with most or maybe even all of what you said. I think the main problem with the democratic process in a state is that it is involuntary; you're forced to participate in it and so if your interests aren't served, it becomes coercion. And you can't just move to a different state, because the whole world is a cartel of states no matter where you go.

One thing I'm wondering is, could a single country dissolve itself into anarchism? Or would it have to be a large block of countries or even the entire world? Are some of the small countries that are primarily inhabited by rich people, already quasi-anarchist societies?

 IcyVeins's gear list:IcyVeins's gear list
Sony Cyber-shot DSC-W290
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow