B.
i prefer B., but am not opposed to federations of communes in certain regions instituting an internal gift economy and/or non-monetary trades between communes.
what does "aboliton of the wage system" mean to you?(poll)
Communard wrote:
guydebordisdead wrote:
Communard wrote:
C. as a consequence
ehm.... what? :)
Quote:
Alice does not like the Caterpillar when they first meet, because he does not immediately talk to her and when he does, it is usually in short, rather rude sentences, or difficult questions.
Quote:
i am the only socialist (not pure communist) libertarian on this board?
Definitely. Though you’re all the Left-of-Capital from the perspective of the working class themselves. Ha ha. Exchange as degenerate? A sentiment as bourgeois as its Benthamite negation.
Quote:
i am the only socialist (not pure communist) libertarian on this board?
No...but they tend to ignore us...serious discussions about exchange value tend to break down into circle-jerks surrounding the views of obscure Dutch communist sects.
Quote:
Ha ha. Exchange as degenerate? A sentiment as bourgeois as its Benthamite negation.
I agree, actually. That's ok, the vast majority of working people...having learned from hundreds of years of economic development...are much warmer toward exchange than their agrarian forebears.
There can be no middle ground. And Proudhon was a douchebag.
Such irrationality, and such a treacherous stance against the interests of the working class, should come as little surprise, however, from someone who both advocates the extinction of the human race- and who supports the IWW as well.
Fuck you and your 'capital investments'.
Proudhon, Marx and the middle ground? No thanks. There are plenty of intellectuals amongst the contemporary working class, ignored by politico-cliques as they focus on exhuming failed ghost-philosophies. The task of the revolutionary is not to interpret the Pantheon’s ramblings, but to turn working class thought into working class action, into real events. The punters’ perspectives are nether informed by the values of these “great” thinkers or through corruption by the elite, but by their ongoing secret experience of life.
Quote:
Fuck you and your 'capital investments'.
fw severin, don't you think heated talk of whether to abolish money (with force?) should be one for when the class struggle is over and the workers have seized the offices and factories?
as for vhemt, v is for voluntary- a core principle of anarchy. i question whether we can ever live in harmony w/ the earth again, so i applaud all the 1st world hedonists who spend their disposable income on WoW, drugs, pets, especially electronic ones instead of reproducing. they are doing their part to end capitalism, money, patriarchy, racism and civilization.
also i applaud the syndicalists who are "race traitors" because they know starting a family would just shorten the chain around their necks that the bosses have on them.
have a nice day,
wh
woundedhobo wrote:
Quote:
Fuck you and your 'capital investments'.fw severin, don't you think heated talk of whether to abolish money (with force?) should be one for when the class struggle is over and the workers have seized the offices and factories?
as for vhemt, v is for voluntary- a core principle of anarchy. i question whether we can ever live in harmony w/ the earth again, so i applaud all the 1st world hedonists who spend their disposable income on WoW, drugs, pets, especially electronic ones instead of reproducing. they are doing their part to end capitalism, money, patriarchy, racism and civilization.
also i applaud the syndicalists who are "race traitors" because they know starting a family would just shorten the chain around their necks that the bosses have on them.
have a nice day,
wh
I said nothing about force.
You question our capacity to live in harmony with the earth..I have no doubt of it.
As for the rest...absurdity I cannot begin to address.
And I am not your 'FW', dont insult me.
sam sanchez wrote:
I always thought it had more to do with worker self-management. Most importantly removing the division between managers and managed, order givers and order takers.
Yes, that is what Proudhon hoped for. Kropotkin wanted total Communism. There are as many forms of anarchist economics as there are anarchists.
In the actual practice of Anarcho-syndicalism and Revolutionary Unionism, at least in the USA (think IWW in particular) but also to a significant extent the rest of the world, abolition of the 'wage system' or of capitalism is taken to mean that the workers in a particular factory, enterprise, or industry collectively administer and distribute the product and revenue that is produced...both in terms of internal distribution of income and the exchange of goods.
Or to put it simply (and I've seen this quote numerous times coming directly from the mouths of workers involved in these struggles): 'the workers own the factory they work in'. Everything else seems to work itself out through people being generally well-meaning and considerate of the needs of others. The abolition of 'exchange' doesn't really have a place in this understanding and the abolition of money would be in terms of abolishing state-mandated forms of currency.
A. salaries for all workers!
B. workers shop committees determine how much revenue will go towards their pay, and how much will go back into capital investments
C. abolition of money
(what happened to the poll option?)