ACers: What do you think of mainstream (socialist) anarchism?

[GoodCallYouWin]

"That was the real point of the question is where is the line drawn on what is property and what is a possession."

In this hypothetical commune? That depends entirely on the rules of the commune... doesn't matter though, when you agree to enter the commune you agree with all the things the commune does.

[SNOWBALL]

[ QUOTE ]
For example...I have a tractor or combine, and my job is to grow corn for the commune. The guy growing wheat has his equipment break down and the "panel" tells me I should give him my equipment to use in his tasks.... I tell the panel, I dont want to loan out my equipment, it will take me longer to do my job, it will require more maint. on my part, and it will add wear and tear to my machines.

Is my equipment property (mine) or a possession (everyones if I am not using it)?

[/ QUOTE ]

are you a member of the commune? If so, then I don't see how you can argue that the tractor is *yours*
Did you save up and then pay for it? If so, did you join the commune with the understanding that the tractor would be part of a package through which you became vested in the commune and earned a share of the the output of the commune?

Your question is too nonspecific.

[Brainwalter]

What if he saved up and bought it after becoming a vested member of the commune (with his "share of the output")?

[SNOWBALL]

[ QUOTE ]

What if he saved up and bought it after becoming a vested member of the commune (with his "share of the output")?



[/ QUOTE ]

It sounds like the commune might evict him if he continues to act like a tool. On the other hand, if the commune is the one acting unfairly, then they probably wouldn't have too many members. Maybe he should have joined a commune that was more open to *his* style of economic behavior.

I find this situation a bit far-fetched though. Did he buy the tractor to make his work easier? That's a very big investment. He couldn't have possibly bought it to increase his output, because he wouldn't benefit 100% from increased output. As a member of the commune, output is divided up according to your job desciption. "OMG THAT'S NOT FAIR" you might think, but if the land he is tractoring on is the property of the commune, then how could it possibly be otherwise?

So what did he buy the tractor for? What land was he supposed to use it on? Did he buy it because he thought it would be fun to drive around town in?

[Brainwalter]

[ QUOTE ]

It sounds like the commune might evict him if he continues to act like a tool.

[/ QUOTE ]

Wait a minute, saving and investing are considered vices under socialism? I mean I knew they were economically disincentivized, but I had no idea they were also actively socially discouraged.

[ QUOTE ]
So what did he buy the tractor for? What land was he supposed to use it on? Did he buy it because he thought it would be fun to drive around town in?

[/ QUOTE ]

Maybe he did just buy it to get his work done quicker. Maybe with the time he saves he wants to take an active role in his daughter's education, hoping to help her get a spot on the planning committee. Maybe instead he'll use the extra time (and the tractor) to landscape yards for extra money. Or is diligence a vice too? Or maybe he'll tell his neighbors he'll do all their work for them if they give him half their "salary".

If it's not clear, my philosophical problem with AS is that adherents have told me possessions, voluntary exchanges, income and consumption disparities are all allowed, but they apparently don't realize that's all that's required for capital formation: Someone saves up their income to invest in something to increase their productivity, increasing their resources (time or income, doesn't matter) thereby allowing them to look for ways to increase their productivity further. It's not only inevitable, it's also beneficial. Not allowing land ownership is something of a barrier to advanced (esp. industrial) capital formation but hardly a deal-breaker.

[pokerbobo]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
For example...I have a tractor or combine, and my job is to grow corn for the commune. The guy growing wheat has his equipment break down and the "panel" tells me I should give him my equipment to use in his tasks.... I tell the panel, I dont want to loan out my equipment, it will take me longer to do my job, it will require more maint. on my part, and it will add wear and tear to my machines.

Is my equipment property (mine) or a possession (everyones if I am not using it)?

[/ QUOTE ]

are you a member of the commune? If so, then I don't see how you can argue that the tractor is *yours*
Did you save up and then pay for it? If so, did you join the commune with the understanding that the tractor would be part of a package through which you became vested in the commune and earned a share of the the output of the commune?

Your question is too nonspecific.

[/ QUOTE ]

So you are saying the tractor is a possession and therefore to be used by the commune.

Lets assume I happen to buy this tractor prior to joining the commune and "move in" with it. According to the rules posted before..."when not in use, possessions can be used by others"....so if wheat farmer man wakes up at 5 AM and comes and takes my tractor for the day, and I wake at 6 AM..I have to tend my corn by hand for the day?

I have to wake earlier than others to use the machines I brought to the commune?

It seems if tractors are considered possessions as opposed to property, I have no claim at all to the things I would bring with me to the commune, and if this tractor is defined as possession, does that not overide anything else (ie panel decisions) if that is one of the principles of AS?

[Dan.]

Where did you guys get the idea of the ominous "planning committee?" Anarchist do not have a hierarchy of power. In all likelihood things would be settled through non-binding direct democracy. Completely voluntary. No big brother.

Edit: I don't envision a "possession" immediately becoming fair game the moment you cease using it. If I'm writing a manuscript and I set down my pencil to rub my eye, why would you think some guy would dive across the room for it? If it's your job to harvest corn and you have a tractor to do so, it is your "possession" so long as your job needs doing. Private property would suggest that you could rent out the tractor once your job is done to someone and exploit money from his or her labor (ie, usury.) The ability to exploit another is what distinguishes property from possession.

[pokerbobo]

[ QUOTE ]
Where did you guys get the idea of the ominous "planning committee?" Anarchist do not have a hierarchy of power. In all likelihood things would be settled through non-binding direct democracy. Completely voluntary. No big brother.

[/ QUOTE ]

previous poster "latefordinner" who was a hardcore AS enthusiast said there would be a planning or decision type commitee.

[JuntMonkey]

I have an AS friend who does not believe in any form of currency. I asked him what would happen if one guy decided he wanted to work 80 hour weeks, and he said the community would decide to reward him accordingly.

Just use a damn market.

[tomdemaine]

If two people want to use the tractor at the same time how is that resolved?