Submitted by anarchist_network in Anarchism (edited )
ziq wrote
If you can't be completely self sufficient I think it'll result in failure. Once the people depend on exports and external forces, everything falls apart.
anarchist_network OP wrote
But as I said in the comment above you what about regions that don't have iron or stuff like that. They would get stuck and could not produce anything what might be important
captaindread1 wrote (edited )
What is important? Big TVs? Or perhaps fast electric cars? No doubt that the concept of "important" must be deeply reevaluated.
anarchist_network OP wrote
Roads, houses, factories or workplaces. These are important and without certain resources you can't build nor operate them
ziq wrote
https://i.imgur.com/9XwOuhRr.jpg
This is my idea of social anarchism. Notice there are no paved roads.
Paved roads are incredibly bad for the environment because they heat the planet. They're also so expensive to maintain that governments worldwide are pulling them up and replacing them with gravel.
They're an outmoded concept and should be abandoned.
captaindread1 wrote (edited )
Factories and workplaces perhaps are expired concepts. With respect to roads and house, for sure that the global intellect will be able to solve quite a lot of those problems.
zorblax wrote
This is pretty much a non-answer.
ziq wrote (edited )
This is what destroyed the environment. We can make do without iron just fine, like plenty of cultures did for centuries. We don't have to compete with other cultures to be the most technologically advanced, it only leads to disaster. Our local resources are all we need to prosper.
kestrel77 wrote
are you kidding me? so, no coffee, tea, or chocolate under communism in much of the world?
no cultural exchange of books, records, art/sculpture, etc? can't buy a t-shirt from yr favorite band on another continent?
how are we supposed to even communicate with people on the other side of the planet if we don't send at least phones around the globe sometimes?
OP said "in a social anarchist society" not "in an anprim society"
ziq wrote (edited )
I don't consume any of those things so I can safely say humans don't need them.
Besides, there are thousands of different 'teas' for each climate. If you can't grow a particular plant locally, big whoop. Anarchism isn't "Exploit Asia/Africa, ship everything to white people, everything stays the same but we call it anarchism now".
People will have to make sacrifices to live in a world without heirarchy. There's simply no way that maintaining our exploitative habits will ever lead to anarchism. People on the other side of the world don't want to labor all day growing chocolate for you. If you get chocolate in a society of equals, everyone gets chocolate, so billions of people - and slavery is the only way to achieve that. Often child slavery.
The fact that you think living within our means is 'primitivism' makes me sad for our future.
Think beyond your capitalistic imperialist impulses. If you think cocoa is so important (it isn't), figure out how to engineer it to grow in your climate. I can already think of several ways to do it in my climate.
And please don't reply to this saying something like "No... Africans will love continuing to grow/mine our luxury items for us because it'll be communism..." Capitalism has spoiled you. Make do with carob instead of chocolate like I do.
EDIT: There's no reason we can't continue to trade culture. That's what the Internet is for. There are now trillions of internet devices in the world, so even if the slave factories in Asia are shuttered, there's more than enough devices already made for everyone. We don't need a new phone / tablet / laptop / pc every year. We need to overcome deliberately wasteful capitalistic tendencies like that and reuse and retrofit our shit.
Freely sharing art between cultures isn't exploitative in any way so long as we can do it without tearing down the forests to make paper or pumping out carbon to distribute the art to 7 billion people.
Blackbeard wrote
I feel like this is just right. A new way of living requires a new mindset- we don't get to indulge in all the same luxuries we had under capitalism in our anarchist utopia. Or, if we do, it's because we found some way to make it work in our locality. Otherwise, if you don't have steel for buildings, use earth, or rocks, or wood. Can't manufacture iPhones and computers with materials where you live? The world is probably better off for having fewer of those dumped into landfills, leaching toxins into our water. I love chocolate and coffee as much as anybody, but I can live without them just fine if it meant a more egalitarian world for us all.
kestrel77 wrote
okay so. there is no way we are going to continue a functioning internet without having some kind of physical global trade system, i.e. ships going from one place to another. not everywhere produces the minerals needed for computers. every one of us doesn't need a new device every year but we can't just keep using capitalist devices built under planned obsolescence. all that shit is going to fall apart within ten years. so, if we're going to have to figure out some kind of non-exploitative global resource exchange system anyway why not have a cup of coffee every now and then?
i am well aware of the issues with the industries i mentioned, chocolate, coffee, etc. there are issues with almost every industry being racist and exploitative, especially those which take advantage of the fictions of borders and racism against the global south, because like we live under capitalism? i am very clearly an anarchist on an anarchist forum not talking about continuing capitalist policies in any way, so i'm not sure why you're implying that i'm racist for asking fucking questions. i'm going to be honest it feels like you're trying to passive-aggressively shut me down for asking questions that disagree with you slightly. this is not how i think that comrades should talk to each other.
in reality, you don't know anything about me, and i imagine we would agree on quite a bit of things and have a lot to discuss about (like, while we're on the subject, i barely consume chocolate, i don't drink coffee, and i have been known to grow my own tea in my own climate in the past, so i definitely get where you're coming from there!). i'm not going to tell you what to do. but perhaps consider being less thorny to people who disagree with you in the future.
anarchist_network OP wrote
This! I thought about it the same way and it bothered me. Social anarchism and communism are such great ideas but this is a big problem in my opinion
[deleted] wrote (edited )
anarchist_network OP wrote
Social anarchism is in my book the forms ancom, ancol, ansyn and mutualism which relie on solidarity and work in a socialist way
[deleted] wrote (edited )
anarchist_network OP wrote
Sorry again the language barrier
[deleted] wrote (edited )
kestrel77 wrote (edited )
many of the goods discussed are cultural items, not luxury items
i'm talking about fucking. signals here. like physical infrastructure to communicate in case there's a hurricane or wildfire or other natural disaster.
do you think that long distance communication and trade are inherently racist?
i'm not interested in forcing anyone to do anything. there are things made in some regions that can only be made in that region and are desired in other regions. resolving that issue is the purpose of this thread. you can divorce that from historically imperialist products if you wish, which was only a small part of what i mentioned. i am obviously not interested in continuing racist, capitalist policies or i would not be on this forum.
anarchist_network OP wrote
How is it rascist? If these countries would also go anarcho communist for example it would be great to import and export in exchange of other workers or programs who would help them get better developing other technology, methods for agriculture, education and so on.
[deleted] wrote (edited )
anarchist_network OP wrote
May I ask what ideology you are?
Why wouldn't they work. Of course it would not be the same slavery in this capitalist system.
If you would get support for your region and could develop I think it would be a great opertunity.
Also for clean energy you would need special metals to build solar or wind power plants. In 80% of the world you wouldn't get these and the idea falls apart
[deleted] wrote (edited )
anarchist_network OP wrote
In the sense of worker solidarity it would make sense to work and get help and develope your region. I don't see a problem here. It would not be the working conditions like under capitalism.
Saying that this problem should be solved is a kind of lazy answer in my opinion. It's fact that for solar energy or wind energy or stuff with rubber you would need to import.
[deleted] wrote (edited )
anarchist_network OP wrote
Why would people work less in a ancol or ansyn society? That's a thing that capitalists say as a argument against libertarian socialism or social anarchism
ziq wrote
anarchist_network OP wrote
I am not saying that these people there should work for the regions but for solidarity and mutual help between these countries and regions. Of course it would be there decision and of course we would not make them export it just so we can have it like "polpotisevil" said
anarchist_network OP wrote
Yes that's of course great but you can't deny that even for your perfect social anarchist society (on your picture) we would need special metals which don't exist on much of the world!
ziq wrote (edited )
If you can't do it without exploiting others, don't do it. There are no utopias.
RedOctopus wrote
This is what anarchist does. It deprives you of the fruits of your labour. Communism is international but anarchism is small minded.
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments