Aha but that’s where we have different views - I believe that a society built on cooperation would be way better than a society built on competition.
My problem with anarcho-capitalism is, that if well let’s say we have an anarcho-capitalist society. You could still work together, cooperation etc, built a society or a small town relying on cooperation - so not seeking for profit, just for a good life and stuff. Now, if the next town would be an anarcho-capitalist one, where one guy thinks it’s awesome to earn as much money as possible - it will go wrong I think. Greed and money are what causes so many shit that’s going on in the world today - if that capitalist in that town would want more money he would built more stuff etc, farm more land etc. But, when he’s at his ‘max’, that is to say all the land in his town is being farmed by him already, what to do hu? He still wants to make more money! So how to prevent him from paying guys to be his bodyguards (or simply his bullies), going to the next town, violently take their land and farm that as well? He has all the money which means he has power, since money equals power now and it will be like that in every society where greed is still a big thing. Nobody can touch him cause he pays bodyguards to protect him. If you’re living in cooperation you can defend yourself, but he has money so he’ll find a way to get you probably - and anyway that would be a society where I don’t want to strive to. I believe in cooperation and solidarity, and I can’t see those in a capitalist society.
Because we all know greed stops existing once you get rid of capitalism. Is this just a mentality thing that an-coms can’t understand, or what?
I can’t say I’ve ever had a discussion with an Anarcho-communist. This whole forum thing is kind of new to me. Where do you go to confront these folk anyhow?
The word “greed” actually has a very simple meaning. Not “wanting too much”. Not “excessive desire for everything”.
It just means “wanting more”. Or pleonaxia in older archaic terms. Is that a bad thing? Since time immemorial, it has been considered so. Can it be eliminated? Nope. Should it be relaxed? If only for health reasons.
It’s sort of like farting. Farting is a natural body function that can not go away. But you will lose good company by farting all the time in people’s presence.
Buddha once tried to starve himself in order to remove all materialistic, worldly desires. When that got critical, he started eating again and started enjoying life again. That lost him his most dedicated followers at the time, who thought he betrayed himself and his principles. Except he got it just right, and influenced the larger sect of Buddhism today. Buddhism is not about deprivation, but about not wanting more. Buddha found another kind of greed in spiritual greed - you fall into such deep meditation that you destroy your mind and body from hunger. That’s where he stopped. Academics and intellectuals also condemn greed, but they have another kind of greed. It’s intellectual greed. It’s a kind of greed that causes your belly to come out from excess of sedentary living, a kind of greed that causes you to demand debates with other intellectuals, a kind of greed that causes you to live in a world of ideas and be divorced from action and living, and a kind of greed in which proving to students and colleagues that you are right is the prime purpose of your life.
All those kinds of greed will not be eliminated, but are quite healthy to minimize.
I followed him on Tumblr for a bit. Then tonight I debated two kids about the drug war, and they couldn’t understand the difference between why someone should get to choose that alcohol/marijuana is fine but cocaine isn’t. I have a headache.
That’s a very interesting way of putting it in regards to spiritual greed, intellectual greed, etc.
Clearly this person has never tried to run/launch a business. I find many business illiterate people that heavily critisize capitalism. It’s scary how much they have convinced themselves they know about it.
Because we all know greed stops existing once you get rid of capitalism. – brian anderson
Wrong,
capitalism is ‘greed’ managed by efficient and productive economic profit-driven private individuals and enterprises to promote their own interests to the benefit of overall societal health and well being.
When capitalism is removed,
greed is managed by inefficient, wasteful, and corrupt political power-driven public individuals and enterprises to promote their own interests to the detriment of overall societal health and well being.
It is easy to debunk your entire premise by examining nominal capitalist societies in South Korea, West Germany, Puerto Rico, Hong Kong, et al – and compare them with demographically twin statist nations in North Korea, East Germany, Cuba, communist China, et al.
My problem with anarcho-capitalism is, that if well let’s say we have an anarcho-capitalist society. You could still work together, cooperation etc, built a society or a small town relying on cooperation - so not seeking for profit, just for a good life and stuff. Now, if the next town would be an anarcho-capitalist one, where one guy thinks it’s awesome to earn as much money as possible - it will go wrong I think. – brian anderson
If you’re living in cooperation you can defend yourself, but he has money so he’ll find a way to get you probably - and anyway that would be a society where I don’t want to strive to. I believe in cooperation and solidarity, and I can’t see those in a capitalist society. – brian anderson
I got news for you brian. You are always going to be at risk of predation irrespective of the system you live under. With capitalism you can choose the individual or enterprise to protect you. If you exercise due diligence, you will be rewarded.
In contrast, you don’t get a choice under statism, it is forced on you. Unless you think your single vote out of millions carries any weight. Moreover, since statism is by defintion less productive and efficient – your cost/unit of protection is considerably more than a profit driven capitalist protection industry.
Hence, you are paying more for inferior service that you have no direct control over !
Of course, if you want to enjoy the illusion of a ‘benevolent’ government security blanket that you have no control or power over to a private security regime that you choose, fund, and is directly accountable to you – that is your perogative.
Somebody whould write an expose on how the left argues. All leftists argue with a similar, I dunno, flavor. I can’t quite put my finger on it. This guy worldview is pretty clouded anyway.
[quoteuser=“Dustin Jussila”]
Somebody whould write an expose on how the left argues. All leftists argue with a similar, I dunno, flavor. I can’t quite put my finger on it. This guy worldview is pretty clouded anyway.
[/quote]
That’s interesting. Could this flavor simply be collectivism?
I find these quasi-anarchism systems have bastardised true anarchism. In my opinion communist-anachism is an oxymoron. They are incompatible, a lot of the so called schools of anarchism are fallacies and they latch on to anarchism but they are not anarchism.
You can not have communism or other forms of collectivism without authortarianism so therefore they can not be considered to be anarchism. ie if there is no state who is going to tell people to share?
People will naturally be unhappy with their share and want a different colour or a different flavour, that is human nature and when they try to trade with another man who is going to stop them?
In capitalism, people can voluntarily choose anything they want, including communism, animalism, and door-knob fetishism, as long as they leave voluntary non-participants alone.
Nope. In capitalism, who/what would stop you from voluntarily choosing communism, animalism, and/or door-knob fetishism provided that you leave all voluntary non-participants alone?
You’ve done it again.You’ve begged the question.You assume capitalism is free market/anarchy so to say it’s involuntary to you makes no sense which logically follows given your definition.I’m questioning your definition.You have conflated capitalism with a free market/anarchy by assuming you would be left alone.