The prekariat pseudo-bourgeois

Sort of like a landlord who

Sort of like a landlord who fancies himself a revolutionary?

Lawyers and judges dont really belong to the working class. They are paid by the state or capitalists and will be one of the last sections of the people who will revolt against the state.
Remember the tools they work with (the law) is donated to them by the state.

One does not bite the hands that feeds you

I dont know about clerics. Maybe they can be working class

Your short description of

Your short description of your current circumstances reminds me of The Trial, by Franz Kafka: Prague, Court Clerks and never reaching the goals set for one. I don't recommend reading it – if you haven't already – but I would recommend a Czech website that also publishes it's text in English:
http://www.autistici.org/tridnivalka/

-

timthelion wrote: . If the

timthelion

. If the working class only involves pea pickers and fob turners, than you're fucked because both of those tasks have been automated

I would say those jobs has not vanished but outsourced. So if you were a pea picker what you would have to do would be to move to China or Indonesia or something and start the revolution there.

Imagine a revolution in the UK without involving the college educated?

Easy, in a highly specialised economy, if one sector strikes, then the whole economy is gonna collapse. No one to attend customers at the gas station? BOOM CRASH - bye bye capitalists.

Gulai Polye wrote: Easy, in

Gulai Polye

Easy, in a highly specialized economy, if one sector strikes, then the whole economy is gonna collapse. No one to attend customers at the gas station? BOOM CRASH - bye bye capitalists.

I presume that you mean sabotage and not strike, as that would be trivial to scab on. What would the result of such a revolution be? Simply the failure of capitalism is not communism. Don't you NEED a wide base of individuals who will actively work to become socialized into the new system?

I can imagine what would happen in that situation is that there would be a real and severe crisis. The price of everything would skyrocket. Certain goods, notably cars, would cease to be transported via rail, in order to free up more capacity for transporting vital goods. People would rediscover their ability to carry things on their own backs. And within a month there would be a Koch brothers drone on TV telling everyone how marvelous it was that the market had so ingeniously found solutions to the dire problem.

You cannot create a revolution without convincing the majority. Unless your goal is to have some silly despot that is worse than what we have now.

I'd say the precariat is not

I'd say the precariat is not a very useful concept. The conditions of the proletariat have always been precarious. The only exceptions to this are periods of high economic growth.

If the capitalist economy was going through a massive growth period, like if Czech was still industrializing and had a demand for administrative workers with higher education, then those workers with Masters degrees would eventually get nice 'middle class' jobs. But as we are having a crisis of profitability i.e. long term stagnation, that is not going to happen. I'd assume that for the most parts of Europe having a degree is still better than not having one, but it doesn't mean getting higher income-class wages automatically anymore.

PS. Lawyers and judges are mostly OK.

I can't see the relevance of

I can't see the relevance of your comment there chilli. Tim the group you are referring to has been theorised around quite a bit. "Graduate without a future" etc. The disappointment is likely to have consequences imho. Whether it swings left or right is the question.

timthelion wrote: I presume

timthelion

I presume that you mean sabotage and not strike, as that would be trivial to scab on. What would the result of such a revolution be? Simply the failure of capitalism is not communism. Don't you NEED a wide base of individuals who will actively work to become socialized into the new system?

Well it depends. If everyone is striking then there is no one to scab. It depends how disciplined the working class is.

The bankruptcy of the state due to popular actions means that once again it is the people who will have the freedom to do with society as they please. If they wanna have socialism they can have it. If they wanna have a one man rule they can have it.

People would rediscover their ability to carry things on their own backs. And within a month there would be .. found solutions to the dire problem.

The new solutions would be low practical solutions which means the entry point you need of cash to acquire the means of production would be low. So people could join together and form transportation collectives (a big wooden wagon pulled by 20 workers anyone?). Thus direct democracy would be introduced in the work place. Unemployment would be gone. Wages would rise. Capitalism would come under pressure. This could then spread to more sectors of the economy and then we could have a revolution. Remember the market is not the problem, capitalism is.

So I know this guy named

So I know this guy named "UnsureDude". Here's the story of his life.

UnsureDude - College student(22) : Hm, I don't know what I want to do with my life. Certainly don't want to spend the rest of my days in some crouded office doing some job that doesn't even make sense. I guess I'll stay in school.

UnsureDude - Graduated with masters degree(26) : My my, still not sure what I want to do with my life. Gota eat though, and this internship sure will give me good experience. Sure, along with all the unpaid time its bellow minimum wage, but since I live in this appartment that my parents bought as an ivestment, I'll survive.

UnsureDude - Still in the same internship possition (35) : Hm, don't seem to be moving up. Still working for minimum wage. Parents are thinking of retiring and they need to earn some money by renting out that appartment. This sucks.

Marxist : Hey! Join our revolution. Workers unite!

UnsureDude - Still in the same internship possition (35) : I'm not working class am I? I'm not sure what I am...

Do you think that UnsureDude will ever revolt? Will he ever feel "working class" and want to join the revolution? That's my question to the communists here. Aren't you missing a huge revolutionary force by focusing on the selfe identified "working class"?

Gulai Polye

The new solutions would be low practical solutions which means the entry point you need of cash to acquire the means of production would be low. So people could join together and form transportation collectives (a big wooden wagon pulled by 20 workers anyone?). Thus direct democracy would be introduced in the work place. Unemployment would be gone. Wages would rise. Capitalism would come under pressure. This could then spread to more sectors of the economy and then we could have a revolution. Remember the market is not the problem, capitalism is.

Do you know about the movement to "democratise the means of production"? Do you realise that the current 3D printing craze was actually a political movement using decades old technology? I think that you'd find those folks interesting, though now the movement has been taken over by a bunch of god damned entreprenurial types promoted by a bunch of god forsaken netmags that never write their own content, prefering instead, to publish unedited copy written by the PR arm of the first category. The homesteading movement is also a hotbead of people trying to invent technologies where "the entry point you need of cash to acquire the means of production would be low". Though the entreprenurian book selling snake oil bulshit is also flowing quite healthily there as well.

Chilli Sauce wrote: Sort of

Chilli Sauce

Sort of like a landlord who fancies himself a revolutionary?

Watch it you!!!

Gulai Polye #10 ‘Remember the

Gulai Polye #10

‘Remember the market is not the problem, capitalism is.’

The market/trade was/is essential in the development of capitalism. That is how profit is generated. To transcend capitalism is to transcend the market and the wages system (the wages system is of course part of the market – the buying and selling of labour – also known as ‘wage slavery’).
It is replaced by mutual aid and free access.

Auld-bod wrote: The

Auld-bod

The market/trade was/is essential in the development of capitalism

No violence was essential in development of capitalism. First you had the slavetrade which is violence and not free trade. Then capitalism also had imperialist/colonialist capitalism which is warmongering and not free trade at all.

So this brought tremendous wealth to the rulling class (kings queens the nobility etc). The capitalists were not amused. So they thought what was needed was a revolution. So Napoleon came to power - again through violence and not through the free market. Of course Napoleon failed in conquering everything (which the Rothschild capitalised tremendously on) but the ideas got carried with it and they stuck. The ideas boiled in the minds of the people and some ~50 years later only then did the capitalist succeeded in breaking free from the state. Again with the use of violence and not with the use of the free market. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revolutions_of_1848
They got their parliament and such which means that everyone can get access to legislation (Read: Not a privilege retained for the nobility and the working class will never gain enough power either cause they are too poor)

So i dont know why you proclaim that The market/trade was/is essential in the development of capitalism....

Capitalism is just using the market as a tool thus giving it a bad name. Remove the market from capitalism and you will see.

the wages system is of course part of the market

No the wagesystem is a part of capitalism. It is from the wages that capitalism exploit the workers.
It follows: Remove capitalism = remove exploitation = remove wages
In the market - the real market, you trade products made from labour, not labour itself.

One only has to read in the anarchist FAQ to get enlightened:
FAQ

This perspective can best be found in the work of Proudhon’s (who inspired both Tucker and Bakunin) where he argues that anarchism would see “[c]apitalistic and proprietary exploitation stopped everywhere [and] the wage system abolished” for “either the workman... will be simply the employee of the proprietor-capitalist-promoter; or he will participate ... In the first case the workman is subordinated, exploited: his permanent condition is one of obedience... In the second case he resumes his dignity as a man and citizen... he forms part of the producing organisation, of which he was before but the slave ... we need not hesitate, for we have no choice... it is necessary to form an ASSOCIATION among workers ... because without that, they would remain related as subordinates and superiors, and there would ensue two... castes of masters and wage-workers, which is repugnant to a free and democratic society.”

Therefore all anarchists are anti-capitalist (“If labour owned the wealth it produced, there would be no capitalism” [Alexander Berkman, What is Anarchism?, p. 44]). Benjamin Tucker, for example — the anarchist most influenced by liberalism (as we will discuss later) — called his ideas “Anarchistic-Socialism” and denounced capitalism as a system based upon “the usurer, the receiver of interest, rent and profit.” Tucker held that in an anarchist, non-capitalist, free-market society, capitalists will become redundant and exploitation of labour by capital would cease, since “labour... will... secure its natural wage, its entire product.” [The Individualist Anarchists, p. 82 and p. 85] Such an economy will be based on mutual banking and the free exchange of products between co-operatives, artisans and peasants. For Tucker, and other Individualist anarchists, capitalism is not a true free market, being marked by various laws and monopolies which ensure that capitalists have the advantage over working people, so ensuring the latter’s exploitation via profit, interest and rent (see section G for a fuller discussion). Even Max Stirner, the arch-egoist, had nothing but scorn for capitalist society and its various “spooks,” which for him meant ideas that are treated as sacred or religious, such as private property, competition, division of labour, and so forth.

So anarchists consider themselves as socialists, but socialists of a specific kind — libertarian socialists.

https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/the-anarchist-faq-editorial-collective-an-anarchist-faq-02-17

It appears you think a post

It appears you think a post capitalist society returns to barter? Or does your imagined society use money?

Proudhon's ideas (also Tucker & Stirner), are part of a historical development of anarchist ideas. If you think you must believe everything an anarchist has ever written, more fool you.

EDIT
I should add, that, completely missing from your ‘historical’ analysis is the role of class struggle. For anarchist-communists, this rather suggests you do not understand the basic functioning of capitalism.

So you want a market but not

So you want a market but not private property? If I see an apple lying on the ground (the common ground, no private property involved) and I pick up that apple. And it is the only apple around. Can I then sell that apple in your "market"?

I wrote a short story which I believe shows, to a degree, why violence is not needed to create capitalism. The only thing that is needed, is the blind and implicit faith in property rights.

A mild wind, from the south, blew outsized waves which crashed upon the
shores of the small town where three brothers, Henry, John, and Rand had
always lived. Now, they stood on that gravel beach, and Henry, toes
wiggling in the water, spotted a fish darting between the waves. He
longed to grasp it with his fingers, and, once cooked, savor its soft
and mild flesh. Yet law forbade him catch more than 2000 fish a year,
and with taxes paid, and homes repaired, and heat, that left hardly a
fish a day to eat.

It was a small fish, perhaps no one would even notice, but that was the
thing about small fish, why catch a small fish, when a large one could
just as easily fill the quota? Henry squatted down to get a better look,
and Rand, after a disinterested glance at Henry and the fish, stared out
to sea.

"There!" he pointed. "There lies an island out at sea. Small and
uninhabited, but enough for us meager three.
We will go there, and live lives of liberty.
We'll never pay a dime in taxes, and eat all the fish we please."

"Eh?" John looked up at the horizon, "I suppose I do see a black line
out there on the horizon."

Henry search the now black water, having lost sight of the silver
streak. A few moments of silence passed between them and Henry said
"let's be getting home now. I'm hungry, and this breeze is growing cold."

They walked together, up the beach, among the stones, to a small path,
and then, to a row of cozy houses where they parted ways.

------

Henry looked into his smallest pot,
only rice, and not a lot,
and as he swallowed it, he thought
Perhaps Rand is right, and flee we ought.

-------

They reached the island in a rickety boat, which one man oared and two
men bailed.
They earthed upon a bar of gravel, ten meters from the shore. Henry and
Rand hauled as John held the craft steady. Finally, staggeringly, they
stood upon the Isle of Liberty.

Heavy breathing slowed.

"Here, we shall be as free as the birds." Declared a solemn Rand.

"Amen" came the echo from Henry and John.

Having hauled the boat to dry ground, the three began to walk up the
hillside. The ground was hard and rocky, jagged stones mixed with
equally sharp golden grass. Further up, the ground softened, and there
were fir trees, moss, and finally, bare grey rock.

At the summit, spread out before them, was a three faced ridge. The face
which they had scaled consisted mostly of grassy plateau which spread
down to the gravel beach where their boat was shored. The second face
had many more trees, and but one small and steep triangle of grass
adjoining the plateau. The third face was an equal mix of tree, brush
and grass. "If we divide the island evenly, than each man shall do with
his allotment as he pleases." John proposed.
The other two nodded, already summing up which face they should choose.
It was not long, before it was clear to Henry that he wished the second
face. He knew that below the cliffs would be rocks, rich with oysters,
muscles and crabs. Rand, on the other hand, foresaw himself transforming
the plateau into an ample field of wheat. John saw value in balance. So
it was decided without need for speech. And they parted.

Henry walked down to a group of fallen trees which he lifted into a
slanted roof against a stone. John cut a passage into tall brush, in
which he could lie and sleep. Rand was left to lay in the overturned
boat on the hard and rocky beach.

The next day, the three men got to work. Each began to break the soil
with the blunt edges of knives they caried, and sometimes, with broken
rocks. It was hard work, and not two meters had been plowed before Henry
felt his back begin to strain. Rand continued, not like man, but like
machine, and John plowed at a steady rate, slow but steady wins the race.
Henry walked down to the cliffs, then, lowered himself through the
crevices to the rocks below. There he found many types of muscle and
oyster, the largest he had ever seen. He pried an oyster from the rocks,
and smashed it with a stone. Then he let the fat belly slide into his
mouth. He looked about him at his fortune. He had never felt so free in
his life, and soon he began to shout and sing. He stripped down to bare
skin and strode out into the water. There he saw the red of crabs, and
many sleek and silver fish. He sat, letting himself absorb the
realization of liberty.

The cold water, having eased the pain in his back, and the spirit of
freedom having filled his heart with join and energy, he pulled on his
pants and bounded up the hill to return to work.

That evening, the three men met on the ridge to sup together. John had
with him fish and berries, Henry brought a large orange crab, while Rand
had but a thin morsel of fish which he had caught among the surf. There
was not a little envy in Rand's eyes as Henry sucked soft crab meat from
its shell. They did not speak much that evening. They were tired, and
each went to bed before the sun had set.

It took three weeks for Henry to get that meager triangle of grass
tilled, but by the time the sun was growing long in the sky, little
heads of wheat were poking themselves out of the ground. Henry the sat
on the ridge-side as Rand tilled on, or walked among the rocks bellow
his cliffs in happy solitude. In fall, he gathered grain and when winter
storms set in, he boiled porridge by his shack. Even the winter snows
did not seem too cold, for he had all the wood he'd ever need.

Years passed this way, and there was happiness and peace on the Isle of
Liberty. The following years, the tilling went easier, and Rand built a
round house away from the wind. John too expanded his dwellings into a
dug out, with a door looking out to sea. Now the men ate many fish, and
joked, and cursed the government of their forsaken village.

But come the fourth winter, and trouble came. The storms were long and
fierce, and for many weeks, Henry could not make his way down to the
rocks bellow the cliffs to fish, for the rocks were battered by great
waves. He grew tired of porridge, and then there was none and he was
hungry. For one day, he was too proud to ask for help, but come night
and neither pride nor strength endured. Cursing bitter winds, he trod
his way to John's side of the mountain. But John, with sad eyes, sent
him away, "there is not enough for one, let alone two". So Henry found
his way to Rand's place, with such large fields, Rand must have wheat to
spare.

Rand nodded his head and let Henry inside, "so you're hungry," Rand
said. "I'll see what I can do. But, ehem, you'll have to pay. I worked
mighty hard for this wheat you know."
"Come the end of this storm, you shall have all the crab and oyster you
can eat!" Henry replied.
"Ah, but it is my wheat, you see, and I shall name the price. I'd like
that triangle of field you own."
"But you have plenty of fields here, my Rand, and more wheat than you
can eat."
"I have made my wishes to you. And surely, on the Isle of Liberty, I can
dispose of my things as I please."

Henry thought a little while. He was surprised, shocked even, and felt
himself growing angry. He would not give up his land willingly! The very
concept of losing any part of his dominion, of his self, of his ration
of liberty, was absurd! He trod heavily, home across the cold windswept
hillside.

That night, Henry lay awake, his mind buzzing with energy, anger, and
contemplation, he lay there for hours, the ache in his stomach, and the
seeping cold, robbing him of clarity of thought.

When the sun rose, he did too, his shoulder and back, upon which he had
lay, ached so as to fill his very chest with tremor and weakness. And
thus, in his stupor, he trod his way back, along the barren hillside, to
the house of Rand, where he ate his fill and took rations to last him
the storm.

The loss of that small triangle of field greatly bothered Henry. He felt
violated, and the sense of freedom he had once felt, no longer came to
him as a burst of lightness and joy, but rather, as a burdensome worry.
How would he prepare for winter when he had no fields in which to grow
wheat? He tried felling some trees in a lower part of the forest, and he
did manage to clear a small patch, but the going was too slow to yield
any sizable farmland, and the ground bellow the trees was no good. He
hung fish above the fire to dry, but in the night, the sea birds ravaged
them. He thought of packing oysters on high ground, but he knew they
would spoil within days. So with no other option, he gathered an arm
load of the sweetest crabs he could catch and he headed off to Rand's to
purchase some wheat.

Rand met Henry with a broad smile and grasping Henry's arm, he cried
"What have we here? Those are some mighty fine crabs you've got! Would
you like to buy some bread? Fresh from the stove!"
"I've come to trade for wheat" Henry replied. "To store for the winter."
Rand looked down at his toes and said, "haven't got any of that for you."
"How come?" Henry shot back, "with fields like yours I'm sure you've got
plenty to spare!"
"That may be true," Rand replied gravely "but it's my wheat, and here on
the Isle of Liberty, I'll dispose of my things as I please. You are
welcome to buy my bread time you want, but my wheat is not for sale."

Henry left, carrying his crabs with him, and went to see if John would
be more willing.

John spotted him as he came over the ridge, and stopped his labors. When
Henry got down low enough on the hill that he could see John clearly,
John was standing with a nervous expression on his face, hands clasped,
looking up at him. When they were standing at arms length, Henry
offered, "I'd like to buy some wheat." And held up the crabs. Johns
eyebrows pressed together with a sense of pain, and his left hand fell
to his side, his right still clasped before him. "I wish I could. It's
sure been a good year for it. But... Seeing what's come of you, I dare
not risk running low on wheat myself." Henry's shoulders dropped, he
looked down at John sadly, and felt a wave of emotion, what was it? He
felt the need to protect John from the fate that had befallen him, and
felt, glad, that his offer had been denied. "Want some crab? Can't eat
them all myself, t'would be a pity to see them spoil."

They ate in silence, looking out at the grey horizon. Then, Henry went home.

That winter was a mild one, and though gusts of wind did blow causing
sharp waves to lash out at the foot of the cliffs, none of the ominous
dreariness of the previous year prevailed. Henry sat atop the cliffs,
and a sense of beauty and belonging washed over him. Great billowing
clouds covered the horizon, but above him the sky was clear. Seabirds
circled and swooped to the surf. Henry commanded himself, be strong
against the hunger! He sat, back straight, legs crossed before him. And
the sea birds circled, and his gaze rested on the rolling of the sea.
Days passed, and the gusts of wind did not let up. And the sea birds
circled, and Henry, hypnotized, felt the feathers of their wings
brushing against the insides of his stomach. And his spirit withered,
and his shoulders sank, and he slouched his way off to Rand.

Henry carried with him an arm load of wood that he had chopped in his
forest.

Rand greeted him with a smile, raising his arm in welcome. "So, you've
come to buy some bread?" He asked congenially. "Yes, I have chopped some
wood to trade." Rand waved his hand and frowned quickly. "I have no use
for your wood." Rand paused, "but I wouldn't mind trading for your forests."
"How could you! Take my forests for a loaf of bead?"
"I'll dispose of my things as I please, on the Isle of Liberty." came
the well oiled reply.

Henry threw down his wood and began to leave. But a wave of hunger
struck him and he lurched against the door. Rand stepped around him
alike a dancer, holding the loaf before Henry's nose. "Are you sure
you're not hungry?" He asked. Henry lifted his hand to shove the loaf
away, but his fingers grasped the fresh crust, and he tore away a chunk.
Then, the act begun, he began to devour the bread. Henry was without
soul or purpose, he ate because he was hungry, and when he was full, he
sat, dull eyes, downtrodden, defeated.

Two more days had passed, Henry sat upon the cliff, looking wearily down
at the furious waves. His spirit was beaten and he had no will to fight
the hunger. Rand had won, and each day, Henry had gone to Rand to get
his bread. Each day, he received orders in return, like a servant or a
slave. "Chop this wood", "stoke that fire".

Today, despite his hunger, Henry did not feel like eating, and he held
his bread limply in one hand.

-----

He saw a seabird, on the wind, floating with such ease
He stared down at the rocks below, where once he'd felt so free
He tossed the seabird chunks of bread, which it caught with glee
And he wondered how he'd come to be, a slave to liberty
Then, without a word, he cast himself into the sea

Quote: I wrote a short story

I wrote a short story which I believe shows, to a degree, why violence is not needed to create capitalism.

We don't really know how and under what circumstances capitalism originated but there sure has been alot of violence by the ruling classes to perpetuate it ever since.

There are no women or children in your story.

Cooked wrote: I can't see the

Cooked

I can't see the relevance of your comment there chilli.

To be honest, I just don't really care what some aggy landlord with politics verging on the an-cap has to say about much in the world.

Ah yes I've seen the other

Ah yes I've seen the other threads now... clear the relevance is

Chilli Sauce wrote: Cooked

Chilli Sauce

Cooked

I can't see the relevance of your comment there chilli.

To be honest, I just don't really care what some aggy landlord with politics verging on the an-cap has to say about much in the world.

Aw come on, cut the guy a little bit of slack even if it's just for a little while. You seemed to forgive my landlordery pretty easily when I first blighted the forums. Not that I've read what he has said but you can't expect a rich guy to really know shit about the working class and at least he's showing an interest.

Noah Fence wrote: Chilli

Noah Fence

Chilli Sauce

Cooked

I can't see the relevance of your comment there chilli.

To be honest, I just don't really care what some aggy landlord with politics verging on the an-cap has to say about much in the world.

Aw come on, cut the guy a little bit of slack even if it's just for a little while. You seemed to forgive my landlordery pretty easily when I first blighted the forums. Not that I've read what he has said but you can't expect a rich guy to really know shit about the working class and at least he's showing an interest.

In principle I'm a cutter of slack and people aren't their class but the way class is leaking all over the posts of our new friend is quite something. Enormous patience will be required.

Would love to see libcom at their best, nicest and most educational though. Let's see if we can avoid our typical trainwreck...

The thing is though, you

The thing is though, you didn't come on in your first post spouting the worst sort of patronizing, judgmental consumption politics (that came later ;-)).

Quote: that came

that came later

Hahaha! Fuck, I wish that was one of mine. I salute you comrade!

Glad you enjoyed it On a

Glad you enjoyed it ;-)

On a more serious note, I have friends that have sort of fallen into landlording - they inherented a place or moved in with their partner and rented out their old place. Shit, even my own grandma has taken in boarders over the years. And, ya know, whatever, I'd probably do the same thing in their position.

But what I wouldn't do is then go around judging others based on what they consume and taking about how the Western working class is complicit in imperialism because of their consumption. For someone who actively makes a profit out of the social arrangements of capitalism to be such a judgemental prick, nah, I've got no time for that nonsense.

Quote: Not that I've read

Not that I've read what he has said but you can't expect a rich guy to really know shit about the working class and at least he's showing an interest.

Marx and Bakunin didn't know shit about the working class? Interesting

timthelion wrote: So you want

timthelion

So you want a market but not private property? If I see an apple lying on the ground (the common ground, no private property involved) and I pick up that apple. And it is the only apple around. Can I then sell that apple in your "market"?

I dont want private property on the means of production and other things that can be used as speculation like housings.

You cant sell something if you just pick it up. You need to have a production going. Well you can sell it on the black market, but this is true also for communism because no system can avoid the black market.
So in order to facilitate that, there could be a regulated market inside an enclosed area with fixed pricing and the products had to meet a qualitative criteria. And if you sell something outside this area to a buyer it would be ok, but then it would be on the black market.

Also i didnt read your story too long and i am afraid i wouldnt learn much from it :)

Auld-bod wrote: It appears

Auld-bod

It appears you think a post capitalist society returns to barter? Or does your imagined society use money?

Anything can be used as money. Go pick up a seashell and use it as money. Maybe you meant legal tender?

Also barter always exist. The real question one could ask is would a communist society make barter illegal? And if so how?

I think people will use the system they think suits them best and there are lots of different ways it can be handled. Money is a complex issue. So i think there should be a debate after the revolution and then we should take it from there.

Delete. Sorry.

timthelion wrote: Chilli

timthelion

Chilli Sauce It be better if your granny DIDN'T take the boarders and just kept the room empty! That way she wouldn't be exploiting anyone!

You're a god damn poser. You only care about a few self interested unionist reforms. The only kind of socialism you know is twisting your bosses arm for more money. If you didn't have a boss, you wouldn't even know what to do! You aren't even interested in building a comprehensive system to replace the one we have. YOU WANT TO BE EXPLOITED because by being exploited you turn responsibility away from yourself! You're not a Native American or Indonesian or even a woman. You're a god damn white male brit! You belong to the privilaged class and your privilage oozes out of every word you write. You don't want to take responsibility for anything. You want to be seen as a poor helpless working class guy. You are a counter-revolutionary dick. Good thing you don't know that I'm trying to grow my own vegitables, afterall, only a capitalist (who owns a garden) does that kind of thing!

It didn't take long for you to turn asshole did it? I know Chilli IRL and you have a whole load of stuff wrong. As for privilege being in every word he writes, LMFAO, have you tried reading back you own posts? BTW, he's not a Brit so you even got that wrong.
Fucking hell, I've been sticking up for you and asking for people to cut you some slack - I must be an even bigger idiot than you! Honestly man, you're post is one of the most arrogant, ignorant, ill-informed, assumptive and downright stupid things I've ever read on here. I think it would be best for everyone if you fuck off right now.

P.S. Good luck with the vegetables.

Can't I just put this Chilli

Can't I just put this Chilli Sauce guy on iggy?

Iggy Pop or Iggy Azalea?

Iggy Pop or Iggy Azalea? Serious question because Iggy Azalea is dead dodgy.

Iggy is ignore, so I won't

Iggy is ignore, so I won't see his posts.

Chilli, apart from not being

Chilli, apart from not being British, or privileged (although he listens to NPR, which is a little suspect) is an anarchist with extremely sound politics. So cut it out with the assumptions.

fwiw, I grow my own vegetables too. It's a signifier of nothing.

He seems to be an anarchist

He seems to be an anarchist with a deep seated hatred of all vegans who promote the boycot of palm oil.

Quote: He seems to be an

He seems to be an anarchist with a deep seated hatred of all vegans who promote the boycot of palm oil.

And you got that from here? That's some massive extrapolation from a few forum posts.

I got that from his constant

I got that from his constant attacks on me for my "consumer politics". He seems to be following me around the forums and attacking me for living off of rent money and "consumer politics".

timthelion wrote: an

timthelion

an anarchist with a deep seated hatred of all vegans who promote the boycot of palm oil.

If I was chilli and this site allowed sigs THAT would be my signature ! :)

But Quote: deep seated hatred

But

deep seated hatred of all vegans who promote the boycot of palm oil.

? What the fuck are you talking about?

Anyway, no-one's "following you around the forums," you doofus. It's an open forum in which anyone can comment.

I got that sentiment

I got that sentiment from:

Chilli Sauce

But what I wouldn't do is then go around judging others based on what they consume and taking about how the Western working class is complicit in imperialism because of their consumption. For someone who actively makes a profit out of the social arrangements of capitalism to be such a judgemental prick, nah, I've got no time for that nonsense.

And every other thread that I have posted in, in which I have either been attacked for rentierism or consumer politics.

Context is here where I admited that I actually do think that the majority of Americans and Europeans actually do benefit from Imerialism.

Fleur wrote: Anyway,

Fleur

Anyway, no-one's "following you around the forums," you doofus. It's an open forum in which anyone can comment.

He IS following me around, in that he is attacking me for consumption politics in this thread, which has NOTHING to do with consumption politics what-so-ever. It was just a random personal attack.

Oh, it's you. The guy who

Oh, it's you. The guy who thinks we should all be poorer because, Idk, some shitty reason. Oh well, no wonder he's a bit annoyed at you. And he has a point, consumer politics are really shit. There's been a 40+year boycott of Nestlé. Not seeing them go away any time soon.

this is an communist forum,

this is an communist forum, you are literally a capitalist, you come on here and attack working class people for what they buy, and your surprised its not well received?

Fleur wrote: Oh, it's you.

Fleur

Oh, it's you. The guy who thinks we should all be poorer because, Idk, some shitty reason.

I am not Tagore2. He's the one that suggested that. I only wrote that we all benefit from imperialism, and therefor we are all ill-inclined to fight against it.

We all know that we all

We all know that we all benefit from imperialism. That's basic 101. Still don't know what that has to do with vegans and palm oil. Or is not buying palm oils fighting imperialism?

radicalgraffiti wrote: this

radicalgraffiti

this is an communist forum, you are literally a capitalist, you come on here and attack working class people for what they buy, and your surprised its not well received?

Even if it wasn't well received that doesn't mean that all other, non-related threads should be hijacked because of it.

Oh well, this is hopeless. This reminds me of a situation when my great aunt was dying. She was a catholic, and she dearly wished that I'd join a catholic youth group. I'm an athiest, but I finally decided to go. She was really excited. I went there, and we played some bible trivia games. I didn't do very well, aka, I sat out. Then we went down to this special chamber beneath the church, where we prayed. Then there was some talk of organising some kind of trip. I got stuck, in being invited on the trip and having to weasle my way out of it. I explained to the priest that I wasn't a catholic and only came because my aunt was dying.

The priest gave me a woried glance: "You mean, you're not even baptised." "No, I'm not"

Priest turns around to talk to some girl in a loud wisper. I overhear that they are discussing whether it is a big problem to clean out the chamber after an unbaptised person prays there.

"OK. You can go now."

Not exactly a good way to invite someone to your religion, to shun them as a heathen the day the enter your church.

Anyway, I just went back and

Anyway, I just went back and read that thread. You clearly have no conception of what communism is and I can think of better things to do on a Friday evening, so I can't really be bothered.
Still, Chilli didn't actually say that he hated vegans who boycott palm oil, or even hint at that.

Fleur wrote: is not buying

Fleur

is not buying palm oils fighting imperialism?

Yes.

Like I said, no concept of

Like I said, no concept of communism. However, boycotting things can make a person feel really self-righteous, so whatever cranks your handle sweetie.

DP

Fleur wrote: You clearly have

Fleur

You clearly have no conception of what communism is.

No I don't.

How do you expect to build a revolutionary movement, when you hate everyone who doesn't yet understand your movement? That makes no sense. Are you going to build this movement merely on wishing really hard or hoping that people read all three volumes of Das Kapital? A movement that is not newbie friendly has no hope of gaining traction at all.

Yeah but you're completely

Yeah but you're completely unreceptive to to discussion, so I can't really see the point. Plus, all the homilies are a bit annoying.

fwiw, it's extremely newbie-friendly here, as long as said noob doesn't go off on a temper tantrum if someone disagrees with them.

Not to dignify poverty but is

Not to dignify poverty but is that all there is? Is it not a little disheartening that most people seem to only have one dream these days: in all this shit, if only we could just have more money? And after all the theorists have offered their explanations for the behaviour of the over-educated poor, nothing changes, everything just goes on, why is that? Is that all there is, the 'market' and working class culture in ruins? Hundreds of thousands of years of evolution and human society and this is all we've been able to do with it? I don't know about the rest of you but for me that's devastating and heartbreaking on a daily basis. This stupid machine in front of me, this stupid capitalist space and nothing outside. When my students tell me they don't want to live past eighteen, I have to admit to feeling less horrified than when they tell me their plans for putting themselves on the market. The whole thing's a fucking nightmare.

factvalue wrote: This stupid

factvalue

This stupid machine in front of me, this stupid capitalist space and nothing outside.

What do u mean with nothing outside?

timthelion wrote: Fleur

timthelion

Fleur

Anyway, no-one's "following you around the forums," you doofus. It's an open forum in which anyone can comment.

He IS following me around, in that he is attacking me for consumption politics in this thread, which has NOTHING to do with consumption politics what-so-ever. It was just a random personal attack.

Sorry but this thread is about consumption politics, your OP is about a problem which is low paying jobs, and unfulfilled monetary ambitions, and one of the alternatives to your hypothetical situation you lay out is that they will either rebel because of their low purchasing power or they will get more gainful employment (more purchasing power) and stop being angry.

Your entire outlook judging from your comments that I've seen is steeped in consumerism and consumption. You're also not very open at all to this "new gospel"* you make frequent ignorant and frankly abusive statements, and I'm not convinced you've understood any of what's been said to you.

* As soon as I saw you comparing us to the Catholic Church I knew you were never a Catholic, I was and your not even close on either group.

timthelion

radicalgraffiti

this is an communist forum, you are literally a capitalist, you come on here and attack working class people for what they buy, and your surprised its not well received?

Even if it wasn't well received that doesn't mean that all other, non-related threads should be hijacked because of it.

Oh well, this is hopeless. This reminds me of a situation when my great aunt was dying. She was a catholic, and she dearly wished that I'd join a catholic youth group. I'm an athiest, but I finally decided to go. She was really excited. I went there, and we played some bible trivia games. I didn't do very well, aka, I sat out. Then we went down to this special chamber beneath the church, where we prayed. Then there was some talk of organising some kind of trip. I got stuck, in being invited on the trip and having to weasle my way out of it. I explained to the priest that I wasn't a catholic and only came because my aunt was dying.

The priest gave me a woried glance: "You mean, you're not even baptised." "No, I'm not"

Priest turns around to talk to some girl in a loud wisper. I overhear that they are discussing whether it is a big problem to clean out the chamber after an unbaptised person prays there.

"OK. You can go now."

Not exactly a good way to invite someone to your religion, to shun them as a heathen the day the enter your church.

Good analogy.

Anyway, to be fair to Tim, I

Anyway, to be fair to Tim, I have been trolling him a bit.

But, Tim, I'll make you a deal:

You respond to this comment:

http://libcom.org/forums/theory/should-salaries-be-lowered-western-world-02042016?page=3#comment-577738

and I'll drop the stuff about palm oil.

You being a landlord - ehhem, rentier - well, probably not.

Gulai Polye #26 ‘You can’t

Gulai Polye #26

‘You can’t sell something if you just pick it up. You need to have a production going. Well you can sell it on the black market, but this is true also for communism because no system can avoid the black market.
So in order to facilitate that, there could be a regulated market inside an enclosed area with fixed pricing and the products had to meet a qualitative criteria. And if you sell something outside this area to a buyer it would be ok, but then it would be on the black market.’

From the above please explain:
Who will stop you from selling something you just picked up? The anarchist policeman?
Do you have any examples of a communist system which had a black market?
Or a communist model which proposes any kind of market selling goods or services?
Will this means of exchange you propose (coinage, seashells, tokens, or whatever) necessitate a banking system? If not, how will this ‘wealth/purchasing power’ be kept safe?
How long would it be before people just admitted it was capitalism rebranded?

Auld-bod wrote: From the

Auld-bod

From the above please explain:
Who will stop you from selling something you just picked up?
If people only goes to the regulated market then there is no buyers.
The anarchist policeman?
try be more serious..
Do you have any examplecs of a communist system whih had a black market?
There havent been any communist society in existence yet. But if we look what has been a try or came as close as possible, we can look at USSR as an example. In USSR people wanted to trade food but then was killed. If they werent punished there would had been a black market
Or a communist model which proposes any kind of market selling goods or services?
Its not about proposing, its about a fact you cant deny
Will this means of exchange you propose (coinage, seashells, tokens, or whatever) necessitate a banking system?
There can be a non profit bank
How long would it be before people just admitted it was capitalism rebranded?
So everything that is not communism is suddenly capitalism. Ok i got it. Just throw 200 years of socialist research out the window, reduce yourself to a guy with 70 IQ and behave like a mad child. Try grow up.

'Try grow up.' Nice.

'Try grow up.'

Nice.

Auld-bod wrote: 'Try grow

Auld-bod

'Try grow up.'

Nice.

nice
http://pasteboard.co/1fPfrAuy.jpg

Gulai Polye wrote: There

Gulai Polye

There havent been any communist society in existence yet. But if we look what has been a try or came as close as possible, we can look at USSR as an example. In USSR people wanted to trade food but then was killed. If they werent punished there would had been a black market

Being, Czech with many Russian friends, I can assure you hands down that the soviet black market was a very large part of the soviet economy. Everyone, including party members, bought things through the black market. It traded in everything from home grown vegetables to designer German and American goods. People stole from the factories where they worked, and this helped fuel the black market. In Czech, for example, we have the saying "Kdo neokrádá stát, okrádá rodinu." He who does not steal from the state steals from his own family. The most popular item for purchase here in Prague, as I understand, was recordings of American rock and roll. Indeed, there is a group of people around the age of 60-70 now adays, which refers to the Velvet revolution as the rock and roll revolution.

timthelion wrote: Gulai

timthelion

Gulai Polye

There havent been any communist society in existence yet. But if we look what has been a try or came as close as possible, we can look at USSR as an example. In USSR people wanted to trade food but then was killed. If they werent punished there would had been a black market

Being, Czech with many Russian friends, I can assure you hands down that the soviet black market was a very large part of the soviet economy. Everyone, including party members, bought things through the black market. It traded in everything from home grown vegetables to designer German and American goods. People stole from the factories where they worked, and this helped fuel the black market. In Czech, for example, we have the saying "Kdo neokrádá stát, okrádá rodinu." He who does not steal from the state steals from his own family. The most popular item for purchase here in Prague, as I understand, was recordings of American rock and roll. Indeed, there is a group of people around the age of 60-70 now adays, which refers to the Velvet revolution as the rock and roll revolution.

You are right. In my carelessness i confused the black market with an official market. What i was talking about was people trading directly with the communist party or the state. If you didnt hand food over to them you would get killed

timthelion #61 I do not doubt

timthelion #61

I do not doubt your description of the ‘state capitalism’ you had to endure. That someone thinks Stalinism is close to communism (as a libertarian communist understands the word), only shows how little that person knows of anarchist-communist ideas.

If something walks like a duck and quacks like a duck you may call it a kangaroo, though it does not make it so.