What will @s replace the welfare state with?

21 posts / 0 new
Last post
_/-\_
Offline
Joined: 23-08-04
Aug 24 2004 13:10
What will @s replace the welfare state with?

How will the sick and the poor cope when the 'wealthier'* refuse to help.

Will there be a group of @ bailifs that will come and 'tax' the 'wealthier' goods?

*those with greater resources and are unwilling to give them up.

Ghost_of_the_re...
Offline
Joined: 16-06-04
Aug 24 2004 14:09

I believe that sharing resources is both logical and natural, and the only reason people are greedy is that they are indoctrinated to believe that having more stuff than other people is important. IMO we cannot achieve a better society if this attitude still exists amongst the majority. Essentially, proliferation of the idea of common property would have to precede a change in society, and so would not need to be enforced later on. If the reality of the welfare state ideal is clarified in people's minds, I don't think there are many people in this world who would deny some of what they have to someone genuinely in need.

The only real problem at the moment is that the minority who are prepared to gain at the expense of others are the ones in charge of everything.

_/-\_
Offline
Joined: 23-08-04
Aug 24 2004 14:43
Ghost_of_the_revolution wrote:
I believe that sharing resources is both logical and natural, and the only reason people are greedy is that they are indoctrinated to believe that having more stuff than other people is important.

So you believe we are 'nutured' into selfish behaviour and it is not our 'natural' genetic inclination to compete?

_/-\_
Offline
Joined: 23-08-04
Aug 24 2004 14:50

What will happen when people refuse to help?

It is well documented that the more wealth you have the less money(resources) you will donate to charity.

Ghost_of_the_re...
Offline
Joined: 16-06-04
Aug 25 2004 00:28
_/-\_ wrote:
Ghost_of_the_revolution wrote:
I believe that sharing resources is both logical and natural, and the only reason people are greedy is that they are indoctrinated to believe that having more stuff than other people is important.

So you believe we are 'nutured' into selfish behaviour and it is not our 'natural' genetic inclination to compete?

I'm a geneticist by trade, since you ask. Humans kill themselves every day, that doesn't fit with a purely evolutionary model of behaviour. All higher mammals cooperate to survive, there is no reason evolution should make things any different for us, the only real difference is that we can cooperate based on logic rather than just instinct.

Ghost_of_the_re...
Offline
Joined: 16-06-04
Aug 25 2004 00:34
revol68 wrote:
by refusing to help u mean the rich refusing to give up their shit? well surely thats the point of social revolution to make them! it isn't their shit its our shit and those shits only got it from our wage labour which we gonna take back thru the seizure of the means of production and that will be some good shit! embarrassed

But if we're living in an anarchist society, who'll do the siezing? Who, indeed, will suppose they have the right to do so?

AlexA
Offline
Joined: 16-09-03
Aug 25 2004 15:37
Ghost_of_the_revolution wrote:
revol68 wrote:
by refusing to help u mean the rich refusing to give up their shit? well surely thats the point of social revolution to make them! it isn't their shit its our shit and those shits only got it from our wage labour which we gonna take back thru the seizure of the means of production and that will be some good shit! embarrassed

But if we're living in an anarchist society, who'll do the siezing? Who, indeed, will suppose they have the right to do so?

I don't see what you mean here confused

If we're in an anarchist society, there won't be private ownership of the means of life (land, homes, factories, infrastructure etc.). It could only come after the redistribution of wealth, by the majority of people taking back what's theirs.

Ghost_of_the_re...
Offline
Joined: 16-06-04
Aug 26 2004 16:40

If we're anti-authoriarian, we can't tell people they're not allowed to have more stuff than other people, because to be allowed to do something you have to have someone who is allowing you to do it. If humanity doesn't share things without being told to then humanity will die and good riddance.

Ghost_of_the_re...
Offline
Joined: 16-06-04
Aug 27 2004 00:24

Mexico, Russia, Cuba; all countries where revolutions replaced authority with authority and so failed to achieve any lasting difference for the people at the bottom of the ladder. If there is a ladder, someone is always at the bottom.

Ghost_of_the_re...
Offline
Joined: 16-06-04
Aug 27 2004 11:36

An anarchist, but not necessarily a revolutionary. Your example of bolsheviks not yielding control of production to the workers is an illustration of how, if any system of control exists, the original tyrannical system will reassert itself.

As you said, the means of production must be siezed fully; using the same logic the mechanisms of control and command must be dismantled with equal prejudice. This means no police, no laws and a universal right to fight inequality by any means available. I think my idea may have got a little cloudy earlier on, but essentially i think trust in human nature is the most effective way to fight inequality, beacuse a) most people will be happy to share resources, and b) the majority will naturally deal with anyone trying to exploit others. Granted b) has not always been the case, due to religious coersion, threat of violence etc, but once people understand how they have been exploited in the past, they won't let it happen again so easily. black bloc

caretaker
Offline
Joined: 28-07-04
Aug 28 2004 12:29


Quote:
I believe that sharing resources is both logical and natural, and the only reason people are greedy is that they are indoctrinated to believe that having more stuff than other people is important.

Further we are led to believe that the world does not have enough resources – we are put in competition with other groups for our survival – this is a lie the world can easily provide what we each NEED. It is natural I believe for people to share and co-operate we would never have survived as a race if we did not co-operate in tribal times. Families do not with hold food from some of the members – we need to begin looking at all people as worthy of love and resources no matter how far removed from our ‘family’ they seem.

Quote:
If humanity doesn't share things without being told to then humanity will die and good riddance.

I agree we need to learn to stop thinking that those who are not us are less worthy. It is the only way humanity can move on. Anarchists are not exempt from thinking others less worthy – look at the things they say about each other and groups like the swp – hatred and condemnation – the swp I have meet want a better world and are working within their present understanding towards a better world – so they deserve or love and respect – their ideas are different from ours so we need to talk and discuss – perhaps on some issues they have a better interpretation of the world than we do – perhaps we can learn from them - perhaps on some issues their ideas are weaker than ours – perhaps we can educate them – but it needs to start from love and respect of them as individuals – not condemnation of their actions or general attacks on what we think they might do or say or believe. If we then expand that principle outwards and love and respect every human being we can deal with the exploitation at its root in our heads – people need to want to be better we cannot force them without talking some of our own humanity from us.

As for the bosses – they are content in the world they have created and will never see the need for change – but to kill them or jail them will reduce our humanity. Let us just occupy our factories, run our communities, create a better world, without the bosses – but let us show them forgiveness and include them in our human love in an effort to make them see the power of humanity in co-operation.

Quote:
due to religious coersion, threat of violence etc, but once people understand how they have been exploited in the past, they won't let it happen again so easily

we also need to recognise that we are exploiters – we have our comfortable lives here on the backs of the third world poverty and enslavement.

linda

Wayne
Offline
Joined: 28-12-03
Aug 30 2004 14:54

Enrager.net wrote:

Quote:
NO FLAMING PLEASE in this forum, it's a newbie-friendly space and will be kept clean of inappropriate stuff.

Is that a rigid rule or can we have some exceptions? If we're anti-authoritarian we can't tell people they're not allowed to tell other people to 'go fuck yourself you liberal fuck', for example...

Ghost_of_the_re...
Offline
Joined: 16-06-04
Aug 30 2004 21:04

He's right there, this young gentleman should indeed have the right to say what he wishes. My only request is that he steps a little closer next time he does so.

Wayne
Offline
Joined: 28-12-03
Sep 1 2004 15:21
Quote:
He's right there, this young gentleman should indeed have the right to say what he wishes. My only request is that he steps a little closer next time he does so.

Do you want your goes like? Step closer? To Nottingham? I'm not going to fucking scabville wink

Steven.'s picture
Steven.
Offline
Joined: 27-06-06
Sep 1 2004 17:19
Wayne wrote:
Enrager.net wrote:
Quote:
NO FLAMING PLEASE in this forum, it's a newbie-friendly space and will be kept clean of inappropriate stuff.

Is that a rigid rule or can we have some exceptions? If we're anti-authoritarian we can't tell people they're not allowed to tell other people to 'go fuck yourself you liberal fuck', for example...

Well this anti-authoritarian will kick your scrawny mohawked ass if you're rude to newbies on here twisted

er ghost_of_rev - you've contradicted yourself posting. You told revol that it'd be "authoritarian" to stop someone exploiting others again in an anarchist society, then you say that people will "naturally" deal with people who wish to start exploiting

Ghost_of_the_re...
Offline
Joined: 16-06-04
Sep 2 2004 12:42
Wayne wrote:
Quote:
He's right there, this young gentleman should indeed have the right to say what he wishes. My only request is that he steps a little closer next time he does so.

Do you want your goes like? Step closer? To Nottingham? I'm not going to fucking scabville :wink:

Miner yourself are you? where were you in the strike?