Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

6

TheLegendaryBirdMonster wrote

Left wing market anarchism

  • anarchism has 2 main economies basis: gift economy and markets; gift economy being pure communism; markets being everything where you exchange goods for stuff, be it money or bartering.

  • left wing market anarchism includes mutualism, but also syndicalism (afaik) and probably a whole lot other flavours of anarchism that I dont know about.

Mutualism

  • they believe in property, but not in absentee owmership: people can only own what they use or what they make: if someone is farming a plot of land, they own it. but if they start emplying people to farm it for them, those people become co-owners of the land. Also if if they ever stop farming that piece of land, they arent the owners anymore. The stuff people make wit their property is theirs and can be sold thought.

  • They believe that the value of stuff is linked to the amount of work pur into it, some mutualists use hours of labours instead of money to value stuff.

  • It's the OG anarchism, made by pierre joseph proudhon

  • you can think of it as being "ancapism without property" without being too wrong

  • a common mutualist joke is that if you leave your house to go and buy bread, you'll loose your house if someone goes into it (thought if you abandon your house, it isnt your house anymore).

agorism usually has 2 meanings depending who you are talking to:

  • agorism is a technique used by mutualists (but also right wing "libertarians") which consists of having black markets and other non-state-enforced ways of exchanging goods.

  • agorists are right wing libertarians who try to separate themselves from ancaps, they dont believe in "nap" and other ancap absurdities, believing only in the sacred free markets. probably less spooked overall.

    • mostly they oppose patents and copyright, believe ideas cant be someone's propriety, which ancaps do not necessarily so (lol idk how ancaps justify this to themselves while still claimg ancapism as "free market" ts so dumb).
    • agorists are pratically allies, IMO they are leftists in denial that dont know about mutualism and georgism.

Another cool one that you havent asked about but that's pretty close to all of these is georgism:

  • you can probably rename it as free market left wing "capitalism" wealth-distribution minarchism

  • there is a free market like ancaps for practically everyting, but there still a state that redistributes the wealth of the richest to the rest of the population, via taxes

    • the tax is based on the amount of land the person owns and on their environmental impact, ideally people would not be able to amass capital since it gets redistributed.
    • afaik there is no inheritance, everybody starts the same.
  • the inventor of georgism was the dude that made the monopoly game, as a critique of capitalism (monopoly is meant to be unfair and unfun because of monopolies)

TLDR? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JUUEHv8GHcE

4

retiredaccount wrote

I just wanna say calling Proudhon the 'first anarchist' is pretty Eurocentric; Zhuangzi would fit some definitions, Christ himself to Christian Anarchists, etcetera. Proudhon is only 'first' because he was the first to codify it whilst also speaking a European language that would make sense to have the word 'Anarchism' in.

3

selver wrote

Many would call it Eurocentric to frame Zhuangzi in European political terms.

3

retiredaccount wrote

It would depend on the individual. I wouldn't call him an Anarchist myself, but his writings do oft line up with Anarchist ideals. Hell, even the EZLN doesn't call itself anarchist because that's a Eurocentric term, but I'm willing to bet more people label it as such than don't.

3

selver wrote

I think some people's mutualism is different than that, in that it doesn't really advocate any sort of specific system, but is more of a philosophy of reciprocity.

At least I think that's what I've seen Shawn Wilbur advocating.

-1

OKC wrote

##Also if if they ever stop farming that piece of land, they arent the owners anymore. ##

What if they get sick? Or need to go on a business trip? They just lose all their property and others can take it?

5

selver wrote

It's more of a spirit of the law thing. Small owners of land under mutualism would enforce property norms much more loosely than that (it's in their interest as owners themselves), no one's going to steal your land cause you left for a week.

-1

OKC wrote

Okay so what if I die and my son is a child, shouldn't he get my land once he comes of age?

6

selver wrote

If they grew up with you then it'd probably already be their land since they are working it.

2

retiredaccount wrote

what kind of mutualist farmer goes on a business trip

that's not a business

-1

OKC wrote

To trade their crops with others overseas...

2

retiredaccount wrote

Why would they need to do this? That's for amassment of wealth, which wouldn't be a thing. It'd be entirely local markets.

-1

OKC wrote

What if the local market doesn't have the goods you need? Are you really going to claim everything you'll ever need can be locally sourced?