Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

12

ziq wrote

Money is theft.

3

[deleted] wrote (edited )

2

ziq wrote (edited )

I've actually never heard of them, but I don't frequent their spaces so I wouldn't know any of them.

1

go1dfish wrote

Is voluntaryism a forbidden ideology here?

1

Lenny wrote (edited )

Not on this sub, but you'll get flamed to bits if you try to spread capitalist propaganda on f/anarchism.

0

go1dfish wrote

Voluntaryism isn't necessarily pro-capitalist though it is necessarily tolerant of the practice to the extent it is non-coercive.

It is accurate to describe me as an AnCap, but I do not think of myself as specifically pro capitalism.

The only strong favorable argument specifically for capitalism that I have found is the "information theory of capitalism" and even that to me is more of a strong argument for freedom and individualism in the generic sense over centralized control than a specific argument for capitalism as an economic model.

1

BlackFlagged wrote

No, the only people the terms of service excludes from using the site are fascists. But each particular subforum can make its own rules.

-1

go1dfish wrote

Even if that money is communally developed?

5

ziq wrote

Any system of trade that enables a few entrepreneurs to stockpile resources and use this wealth to control others in order to accumulate yet more wealth and more control is theft.

1

Lenny wrote (edited )

Wouldn't that just be barter with debit notes? If the note represents actual goods on a shelf, then it's not money so much as direct trade.

3

ziq wrote

You're talking about a society where everyone contributes goods and services to a market, whereupon their contributions to the market are valued, and then they are allowed to receive other goods and services for equal value?

2

sudo wrote

What you described is very similar to the period of "Lower Communism" that Lenin describes in State and Revolution.

The means of production are no longer the private property of individuals. The means of production belong to the whole of society. Every member of society, performing a certain part of the socially-necessary work, receives a certificate from society to the effect that he has done a certain amount of work. And with this certificate he receives from the public store of consumer goods a corresponding quantity of products. After a deduction is made of the amount of labor which goes to the public fund, every worker, therefore, receives from society as much as he has given to it.

3

mofongo wrote

He's just sort of quoting Marx's labor voucher ideas, he proppsed in Critique of the Gotha Program as a method of rationing. This could be used in case the production forces took a big hit during the revolution; of course this is not necessary for the inmediate communist society to function.

3

sudo wrote

Yeah, I figured it sounded a lot like labour vouchers.

1

ziq wrote (edited )

It would appear to be a good stop gap measure, but I'm sure corruption would ruin it, as with anything the USSR touched, and your value as a worker would end up being determined by your social status in relation to the party, rather than the quality of your work.

2

sudo wrote

Lenin wasn't referring specifically to the USSR, he was referring to any society that advanced past capitalism, and the early phases of socialism. Measures could be taken to prevent corruption, but preventing corruption in the government is another topic entirely.

-1

go1dfish wrote

The note doesn't have to necessarily be a direct representation of any specific good or service.

I was thinking along the lines of cryptocurrencies specifically.

4

Lenny wrote

cryptocurrencies don't create hierarchy and power imbalances? Isn't the whole point of them to expand your wealth?

0

go1dfish wrote

That depends on who you ask.

For many that is the entire point, for others the bigger point is to deny the state the power of money creation and the control that facilitates