In fact, the "compassionate anarchist" usually claims the authority to govern others, redistribute wealth according to their own concept of equality and fairness, and threatens violence against any who dispute their dictates.
Anyone that calls themselves an anarchist and condones forcing other to do anything is contradicting themselves.
https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/the-anarchist-faq-editorial-collective-an-anarchist-faq
You can check them against the consensus of what anarchism is, if you like.
This so-called consensus of what anarchism is is also completely against private property, correct?
You would have to read the book for yourself: What is Propety by PJ Proudhon, if you want to find where that idea comes from.
No anarchist is looking to take away your shoes, or winter jackets.
The way I see it happening is we keep what we have and move forward.
The wealthy won't be able to care for their mansions and plantations so they will probably be taken up by the homeless when they are abandoned by the servants that no longer have to slave for the rich to get supper.
So, when the waltons have nobody to work their stores, I would imagine that the workers would just pick up what is laying around rather than wait for new to be made, but if we need to, we can.
PJ lived in an era and place where homesteading was not the primary basis for property claims. When property rights are derived from government grants, property is indeed theft. However, under homesteading, land ownership is under the same principle as shoe ownership. And in the US, government has always sought to convert homesteading into a government grant. This usurpation does not negate the principle.
property is indeed NOT theft.
If I build something...it's mine.
And if you build something in order to trade it for something else, it's yours until you trade, and then the thing you traded it for is yours instead. No one else has a higher claim.
exactly right.
HOWEVER...it seems that we're all getting richer and richer.
although I didn't build the steel mill, or mine the ore, or work the metal, I bought the saw.
I can use it to cut wood (which I didn't fell the tree, mill the wood...etc)
There's a bunchaton of added wealth from legacy technology pretty much free for anyone to use...THAT's not theft.
That's the beauty of the decentralized free market with its division of labor.
yup..and the exponential advance of technology is making us ALL much richer.
That's an interesting point.
When profit is removed from the equation nobody needs to steal to get ahead and property will be secured by a general agreement to ask for things rather than to employ hooks and crooks, imo.
Currently the body politics accepts that some will be sheep and some would be wolves, the 'education' system has reinforced this since time immemorial, since the first two men decided it was easier to hit people with sticks than to farm.
PJ's philosophy failed to win the world, some of that is attributable to the masses being largely illiterate, or too poor to have books.
In the defense of the anarchists from the last two centuries Walmart was not available to serve as the backbone of regime change.
Today, and on any given Tuesday, the workers can simply keep working, but stop paying, and all this globalist crap comes to an end, but they won't, mostly because they have been dumbed down to the point that they recognize slavery as freedom, imo.
https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/personal-incredulity
Profit cannot be removed from any equation. Value is subjective, and voluntary exchange is mutually beneficial. Even original appropriation of natural resources for immediate use is profitable to the individual as proven by his value of the result of such labor. Reducing profit to a monetary accounting term clouds rational thinking rather than revealing any real truth. I covered the matter of value, prices, and trade in more depth in a previous post.
And no, that previous comment was not an example of the personal incredulity informal fallacy.
So, tell me, Jacob, can the world exist without crapitalism?
I do believe it is time to return the favor:
https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/strawman
https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/loaded-question
Define your terms. The post makes a clear distinction between different opposing concepts people like to conflate under the term "capitalism," and you completely ignored the distinction between property claims through homesteading/exchange and government grant.
Society functions best through recognizing and respecting the universal and reciprocal spheres of individual authority. Property, trade, and profit all have a valid and beneficial place within this framework. The State corrupts everything good, and seeks to twist it. You appear to recognize only the corruption and refuse to acknowledge the core principle beneath it.
I thought I had conceded to you that with crypto displacing fiat the distinctions may become academic.
That being said, even in a crypto environment, the havenots clean the toilets and the haves eat caviar.
If you can explain to me how hereditary wealth is mitigated against, voluntarily, so that people that have enough money to never work are not at an advantage to those born poor I might give your 'version' of crapitalism a chance, but as it is now, wage slavery continues in your utopia, as far as I can tell.
I'm new to this logical fallacy thing, I get the strawman, but not the loaded question, if you could elucidate your position a little, perhaps I can understand what you are driving at?
It's not the first time you've told me to go away and read 🙄 I've read but I regard this as a conversation.
You make a good point. I had a similar thought when I thought of the supposed wealth of say Apple. What does it truly own if the banks shut down and the governments disband?
But, and I think you know this, property mainly refers to land, your home, your business. That things you have will not be "redistributed" or taken if you cannot rest your hand upon all what you consider your own at one time.
I can't help you if you don't want to do the research.
I can't force the knowledge into your head, if you want to operate from a position of supposition, how do you want me to help you?
More supposition?
How much do you need?
Do you really need gold toilets and 470 pairs of shoes?
I mean, if you do, and your neighbors agree that you have it coming, feel free to order it from the webz, but you got to know that what you consume comes from the work of others, unless you did ALL the work yourself.
Conspicuous consumption will go away, for the most part.
I mean, really, once your house is paid for, and supper comes in every night, how much more do you need?
If you think that we all just need to know a certain passage from a certain book and we'll "get it" then you may as well live as a hermit but that's not how discussions go, or not how they go well anyway. It's not super wonderful to begin a conversation with required reading, as if for some course you are teaching.
You imply that doing the research leads you to the same conclusions as you. You presume much about me but don't engage with me honestly here. That's to both our loss.
sorry, i got interrupted and have to run.