Loading...
Welcome to Anarcho-Punk.net community ! Please register or login to participate in the forums.   Ⓐ//Ⓔ

Anarchy vs Communism

Discussion in 'General political debates' started by Probe, Jul 20, 2010.

  1. nike

    nike Experienced Member Experienced member Forum Member


    439

    0

    6

    Jun 19, 2011
     
    first point would be the neutralization of the division between productive and non-productive work up to the point of abolishing the usual job- and family-stereotypes - in short words, noone would be only a shoemaker, a garbage wo/man or what else necessary to keep the collective running, but a teacher, a nurse or doctor and homemaker too, noone able to work would be without an "income" as a reward for her/his individual working capacity - each hour spend working no matter in which profession would have the same value, so there wouldn't be any better-off-professions and no special status for specialists, no nursing mother would be depending on a working partner/father.
    people who aren't able to work for whatever reason are part of the collectives care going for the highest living-standards possible, including medical care and therapy. some bolshevic commissar called the role of the "non-productive" members in the society "inspiring pro-social behaviour":
    "productive-only" work is alienating in the long run - the care for the non-workers would bring the collectivists back into real life and thus reinforces the social bonds between the individuals in the collective.
    the same goes for children and youngsters and their education - teachers who work in a factory or on the farmfields are better teachers than some crackademic-onlys, schools and colleges would get more practical orientated and much more interesting, preparing the future collectivist much better for her/his multitasking living - this is not limited to working skills only, arts and philosophy should play a greater part in general education too.
    to fund this little utopia the collective empowers/assigns a non-permanent executive group of bargaining agents who organize the trading with other collectives selling or trading the collective production for goods needed in the collective. the members of this executive group follow general directions given by the collectives' general assembly and are exchanged from time to time using kinda rotation system, so everybody is involved and a realistic view on needs and wishes of the collective is secured.
    the collective remains autonomous in the decision what/how much and how something is produced and "private" production is possible to gain an individual rewards besides the collectives production, allowing to bargain for luxuries or something "special" not recognized as really necessary by the collective. this "private" market allows direct trading with the collective too, so noone is forced to be a direct member of the collective, working on a reasonable area of land for an individual living or a private workshop should be possible - even if it's not synonymous with private ownership of the land or the shop.

    i think this decisionmaking is the main point - even if i accept direct democracy i still have my one and only individualist view of things here&there and i don't want to be forced to acknowledge a majority-decision just because i'm a minority.
    i think it's important to keep open the door for kinda individualist experience if necessary without loosing the protection of the collective - and as long as capitalist regrowth is prevented via a general anti-capitalist economy - the private production could only round up the general collectivist production.
    critiques please...
     
  2. vAsSiLy77

    vAsSiLy77 Experienced Member Uploader Experienced member Forum Member


    1,816

    1

    15

    Jun 21, 2010
     
    I would like to read it, but I doubt that it's "shaw" at all, because he died 1950 and never saw much of the post stalinist era - Iossif Wissarionowitsch did us a favour on march 5th 1953 - so....???
    After the authoritarians did everything necessary to drive out even the weakest notion of revolutionary elan the workers and farmers had, filling up brains and hearts with apathy and hopelessness, persecuting the knockers, the idealists and the constructive kritics too, giving George Orwell practically the textbook for "1984", come on Nike Mikhailowna, the breakdown of the eastern bloc wasn't economical, it was social and ideological - recommended reading: Gorbatchevs writing about perestroika and glasnost...
    The russian war effords 1941 - 1946 or the vietnamese from 1954 - 1975 (??) show clearly what motivated people working and fighting for a cause are able to do - despite professional functionaries and authoritarian parasites and brakemen.
    And the "private" black markets of china, vietnam and cuba aren't really my ideal of a mutual exchange of goods, especially if it's used by government officials to make "private" deals with consume goods they stole from the community.
    agreed, but a economy organized by producers and consumers will! :lmao: And personally, I couldn't get enough of gifts...
    Well, still regarding myself as an @-communist I have my personal problems with majorities defeating minorities, but there's nothing in an anarchist community preventing those nice endless discussions to find an agreeable compromise representing the point of view of everyone involved - and somehow I don't see what's your individualist problem with that - kinda egalitarinaism??!
    anarchism is a bastion against uniformity - and @-communism is the finest way to keep the bastion rolling... :ecouteurs:
     
  3. nike

    nike Experienced Member Experienced member Forum Member


    439

    0

    6

    Jun 19, 2011
     
    i will look for it again, somehow i'm still sure it was "a shaw" - but i might be wrong after realising that Iossif Wissarionowitsch did us all a favor 1953 - and not one day too soon - but anyhow:
    the malfunction of total de-privatisized production is a fact - just see the socialist experiments and the economic improvement after the return of a independent market - you can't deny that - and in an anarchist society there would be no corrupt functionaries stealing - at least i hope so.
    gorbatchevs writings alone proves nothing - are there any sources above a personal point of view avaliable? why are cuba, north-korea, china and vietnam still socialist? i don't want to defend them at all, but if state-capitalism/authorian communism is eating itself - why are these regimes still working? could it be that the private side market is stabilizing the system and wouldn't the same effect start working for an anarchist society too?
    agreed, the point isn't "why" - it is "how"...
    well, tawarishch commissar - collectivism is still waiting for you, you just have to renounce the black prince and your marxist heresies and you get individual self-determination, autonomy and free choice about whatever is to decide - and i'll throw in an extra gift for you!
    [​IMG]
     
  4. skulldrix

    skulldrix Experienced Member Experienced member Forum Member


    105

    0

    0

    Jul 9, 2011
     
    Communism was completely ruined by the soviets, but I still today lookforward to seeing actual socialism come into existence.

    Even though if not, I don't see anything wrong with returning back to small democratic communities, like tribal societies. Even though many people wouldn't be able to adjust to not being able to watch tv or go on the computer and shit.

    I hate economics though, I feel as though it's all about production, and material views o f life. And money is always power and control.
     
  5. vAsSiLy77

    vAsSiLy77 Experienced Member Uploader Experienced member Forum Member


    1,816

    1

    15

    Jun 21, 2010
     
    the problem is not only the political system, because the state is just the stalking horse/the straw man for the haute bourgeoisie abusing political and legislative system in their egoistic interest - so the puppetteers/string pullers have to go on the garbage heap of history.

    People have to eat, dress, get information, education and entertainment too - where possible with an adequate roof above their heads - philosophy and idealistic attitude means nothing if you're hungry and freezing without a job - at least until we all learn to live off love and air... money might be a lesser problem, the problem is control over power.
     
  6. vAsSiLy77

    vAsSiLy77 Experienced Member Uploader Experienced member Forum Member


    1,816

    1

    15

    Jun 21, 2010
     
    It isn't comparable with a liberated economy taking care of the actual situation, real needs and demands if you have to deal with technocrats and ideologised planners trying rather to prove the glory of the socialist paradise than taking notice of what actually happens around them. the lack of realism reached unbelievable scopes in the eastern bloc, the production successes/victories celebrated by the party propaganda were no more than pretty speeches, a classic example of windowdressing alá potemkins villages...
    The first point about the still running statecapitalistic systems is the old "you cannot compare apples with pears - russia isn't china, china not vietnam, the same applies to cuba and north-korea which might be a chinese project, but I don't actually know enough to have something like an opinion.
    Read something like Victor Serges books, he gives some fine accounts of the highflying elites of party and administration and I guess even Voline reports the early drama of constructive critiques about the completely illusionary "realism" of the war-economy - the revolt in Kronstadt was a result of the continuing economy of scarcity too - and the Kronstadt rebels were well aware of the the inevitable restrains due to the real counter-revolutionary war against tsarists and white generals.
    Stealing functionaries are the least factor to deal with, lacking realism and the blindness/carelessness of elites not longer connected with real life are the problem. Theft will loose it's mean-ing when everything is free and we learned to satisfy the actual demand, inclusive yours beloved luxuries.
    Sorry, Nike Mikhailowna, I rather go for the complete thing and not for some half-individualistic mic-mac including a monetary system keeping the backdoors open for the old weakness creeping back in and why should we waste paper on credit notes when we can have direct exchange of trading goods and get everything for free just because we are here and have the fucking right to get everything necessary and possible without any regard what we are actually doing and "how much we deserve" to have our need satisfied and I will never renounce neither the sweet prince and the noble artillerist and firestarter Bakunin and marxist heresy doesn't hurt if yours looking close enough to find out about the pitfalls m-brother karl was diggin' and in general it doesn't really matters because at the end you'll see that it all works out like it should just because it has to do so.
     
  7. butcher

    butcher Experienced Member Uploader Experienced member Forum Member


    2,118

    2

    18

    Sep 8, 2009
     
    exactly...
    Everyone has the right to everything they need in life...and an obligation to contribute appropriately to the creation of the things needed to satisfy these needs (and i do mean everything, not just food and housing, but ipods, central heating, caviar, fuck off big tvs, whatever, etc). Besides, the resources a person needs don't correlate with (and is often inversely proportional to) how much stuff they can produce ( think some people with disabilities, kids, the elderly, the injured, etc, etc).
     
  8. skulldrix

    skulldrix Experienced Member Experienced member Forum Member


    105

    0

    0

    Jul 9, 2011
     
    What does that have anything to do with anything I just said? We can collectively cooperate and create sustainable ways to receive information, feed eachother, cloth eachother, and provide basic needs.

    We do not NEED all the excessive material bullshit. Money puts worth on material items, making material worship essential.

    For example, I'm not a primitists or something, but if you look at post European Imperialist America, the primitives peoples were abundant in resources and material items like fur, gold, jewels, pearls, food, medicines, etc. But they did not worship or value these things over eachother, so their purpose of their lives was not to serve an economy. Therefore, they did not have extreme technology, and they could see that protecting the earth and life is more important than having petty disposable shit.

    You'll probably say something rude like, we are not all buddhists or nihilists, but I'll say this, we aren't capitalists by nature. The sentimental value and worship of material items and production is saying nothing but, we are impuny or inferior to to it. This creates hatred, wars,low self esteem, depression, and probably mor mental illnesses that I am mentioning.

    This mindset, I know, is very hard to rid of, because it is the central mentality and control of this society.

    As for entertainment etc, people can create and provide these things to eachother, I don't see how we can't. Money is control over power. No it is said to be a tool, but really it puts value over things that don't really matter, and enslaves people.

    I'm all for gift economy, mutual aid, and trade and giving away. That's the only way to avoid waste and over consumption.

    We should have an insatiable desire to be with eachother and nature, and insatiable desire to enjoy life, not the insatiable desire for more shit.
     
  9. butcher

    butcher Experienced Member Uploader Experienced member Forum Member


    2,118

    2

    18

    Sep 8, 2009
     
    How you can decided that this statement:
    is saying we are Capitalists by nature is beyond me...
    Its simply saying we need things like food and housing to live. In fact, it is the enforced state of hunger and homelessness of great numbers of people by Capitalism that is precisely one of the main problems with it.

    yes and no. The point of an economy is to serve the needs of people, which of course doesn't currently happen. However, when you lump food and medicine with gold and pearls as 'petty disposable shit', you end up sounding a bit daft.

    There is excessive material production yeah, but that's hardly got to do with money. The problem is that production is geared towards the realisation of profit through the production of commodities, things that are made to be sold on the market, rather than on producing things we need (although some things we need are commodified). Where any real need for a given commodity is absent, need is created, this is excessive material production. Moreover, money acts to mediate social relationships, but the problem is the social relationships themselves; having more money than someone else symbolises yr respective wealth, however, the real basis of this inequity lies in the better food, housing, clothes, etc, you possess or are able to possess. The problem is Capitalist social relationships, its relations of production, not what it uses as a means of exchanging things (money).
     
  10. nike

    nike Experienced Member Experienced member Forum Member


    439

    0

    6

    Jun 19, 2011
     
    well, tawarishch commissar vassilij pjotrevich sir, punctuation is kinda easy gift to present to your curious audience, ya know, t'would make it a quite a bit easier to respond.
    (and btw: you sound like Aishe getting furious about her mom - no full stop, no comma... :ecouteurs: :ecouteurs: )
    maybe we can agree about everything said before that and victor serge is already on the future-reading list inspired by Père Gobblez - but it says nothing about the quest for turning wage-slavery/labour into creative and satisfactory/self-realizational work?
    if everything is for free in praxis - why should anybody bother and do something to sustain her/himself and maybe the community too?
    why should we renounce the little inspiring fame and the benefits given to creative people promoting the information society's development in natural sciences/technologies and to those who critically analyse this development again?
    i guess i know what yours and butchers after, but to somebody less convinced of the greatness of humankind it sounds like a sci-fi-utopy - everything for free - but who's actually doing the necessary work? people actually want to see the fruits of their labours, sad but true.
    i think it wasn't the bolshevist/stalinist apparatus alone that strangled the revolutionary elan - in my eyes it was the general limitation of the average individual to abstract (and never reached) social limits - zeal, enthusiasm and talent can be worthwile and benefitting too - for everybody involved.
    agreed too, but the obligation to contribute is... hard to mediate, especially in our beloved postmodern times where some people denounce "workers" as "whores" in their privileged view on the actual necessity of alienated wage-slavery - so i guess the performance-pays-system might be a bit more realistic - maybe even if limited to a transitional period before we finally reach utopia and die of boredom. and what will we do with those who finally renounce any obligation and demand their right to do nothing because everything is free? ( :o )
    i think we already agreed on the matters of the non-productive fellow humans, their security of supply depends on the work of the productive working class heroes and it's out of question that their rights should be limited due to their inability to contribute physically - but i really like the idea that they fullfill a role promoting social social cohesion.
    @skulldrix
    oh yes we do need the results of technological progress and there is nothing wrong about it except for it's undesirable (ab)use for commercial profits and the carelessness about it's consequences on our beloved enviroment. both aspects are easy to deal with if we gain control economy by abolishing capitalism - and how stupid would we be renouncing all those fine ways to communicate and exchange information, spread education and entertainment too? listen to butcher:
    &
    you sound more and more like one of these well-fed zealots hating themselves because of the white-mans-burden, congrats
    for falling for well-earning popwriters exploiting the anti-tech-anti-civ-anti-anti niches... you are fed up with your privileged being making you completely ignorant for the positive opportunities to use technology and material stuff - and the rude part: your unreflected demonisation of technology and civilisatoric progress gets a bit boring with the time...
    says the person who has everything at his proposal...
     
  11. skulldrix

    skulldrix Experienced Member Experienced member Forum Member


    105

    0

    0

    Jul 9, 2011
     
    You know what, fuck you Nike on here judging people. This is why I don't do forums.

    " says the person who has everything at his proposal" what the fuck are talking about?

    We rely on the system that basically is destroying us, the earth, and leading to our early extinction.

    You know what I'm done on here. This is no better than coffeeshop anarchists, we sit on here and argue with eachother yet add nothing productive or try to change anything in the actual material world.

    I'm going to the anarcho-community center, fuck this shit.
     
  12. nike

    nike Experienced Member Experienced member Forum Member


    439

    0

    6

    Jun 19, 2011
     
    [​IMG]
    and because it's funny too:
    [​IMG]
     
  13. vAsSiLy77

    vAsSiLy77 Experienced Member Uploader Experienced member Forum Member


    1,816

    1

    15

    Jun 21, 2010
     
    Time to relax a bit and doing the dishes I guess...
    [​IMG]
     
  14. Eggs_Isle

    Eggs_Isle Member Forum Member


    22

    0

    0

    Jan 24, 2011
     
    What's the point of a discussion like this? Its completely irrelevant to everything that's going on, and all it serves is for a platform to grandstand and make people feel not welcome. I get that its a forum and the point is to kill time but maybe things would run a little bit smoother if people stood away from politics and focused more on the music aspect. Really, its a waste of time trying to have a respectful and civil discussion with punks.
     
  15. punkmar77

    punkmar77 Experienced Member Uploader Experienced member


    5,737

    203

    718

    Nov 13, 2009
     United States
    The point is this is an Anarchist forum with anarcho-punk music as a focus, not punk, not thrash, not metal, not rock, and not rap....anarchism plain and simple. It's not a waste of time like you said, if this isn't the place for you or others no one is holding a gun to your heads saying participate in discussions or split...how long have you been here? Not long enough to judge the validity of political debate by any means....
     
  16. vAsSiLy77

    vAsSiLy77 Experienced Member Uploader Experienced member Forum Member


    1,816

    1

    15

    Jun 21, 2010
     
    What the point of this discussion is?
    There are actually people who live their attitudes and discuss important aspects, so it's far from being irrelevant to everything that's going on - except for those who just look for a grandstand to display their barely founded opinions, but always get a hard time taking critiques.
    I get that you obviously don't get it at all - and if politics isn't your thing, but musics is - why are you wasting your time here?
    There are hundreds of music-topics just waiting for you, why bother with politics or everything else what's going on?
    And personally and as a punk, I really love to be told that a respectful and civil discussion isn't for punks at all... o_O
     
  17. vAsSiLy77

    vAsSiLy77 Experienced Member Uploader Experienced member Forum Member


    1,816

    1

    15

    Jun 21, 2010
     
    Yours an EXTREMIST! I always told ya...
     
  18. butcher

    butcher Experienced Member Uploader Experienced member Forum Member


    2,118

    2

    18

    Sep 8, 2009
     
    You've sold out man, you used to be about the music! :ecouteurs:
     
  19. butcher

    butcher Experienced Member Uploader Experienced member Forum Member


    2,118

    2

    18

    Sep 8, 2009
     
    you've seen right thru us.

    [​IMG]
     
  20. nike

    nike Experienced Member Experienced member Forum Member


    439

    0

    6

    Jun 19, 2011
     
    music on this topic is completely off-topic and i' not blonde! :'( (and in general: it's all the boshevists fault!)
     
Loading...