RE: A 150 Person Anarchist Town?
OK. I guess I will take my system that is kinda of based on Anarchism.
First off I think no matter how you manage a community there will always be those who want to do it another way. Therefore people need to have the right to leave the community in a proper way and additionally every man and woman should have the right to claim land to found a new community. Of course the seize and place need to be reasonable.
So OK. We got 150 people. First off we need water and since we are human settlers I would guess that we are near to a water source (lake or river). Water and food providing would be a necessity that needs to be provided on a stable basis before we can do anything else. I will take 50 people for that. The people are free to provide their own food and water services. The state will keep lowering the production accordingly, but will at bare minimum keep a water and food storage for 3 months.
In general I would set a state work force for things like a sewer system, healthcare, roads and housing, (I am running out of people, help!) but everybody is free to build alternatives and not join the state force. You are also free to take (and pay) any service offered by the state. If you don't need the sewer system because you are fine shitting in your vegetable garden, that's cool with me.
The State work force is ofc run be an old school (not Stalinist) communist system where the workers manage their production.
Currency is set in an distributed, open-transparent ledger like blockchain. Some people might not like to have their finances disclosed to the public, but this is a condition to live in my community.
The Leader is selected per vote. The leader decides and plans new project. Being the leader is not a job and not paid by the state. It also shouldn't take too much time since most things should self manage via communism.
Thanks for your thoughtful response! I'll reply in point form:
-it sounds like an argument for open borders? Man would I love to able to leave the prison that is my nation-state!
-in a way, you are agreeing with me that basic needs are primary and a necessity. It leaves me to wonder why soooo many in the anarchist community deny and dismiss this incredibly important foundation.
-yes, I agree, as soon as more than 3-people agree to do something in this community they are in fact forming a government.
-I'm not understanding the 4th paragraph.
-agreed and fiat currency is the crime of the century.
-leadership is unavoidable and would best be served in by councils kind of like in The Matrix movies.
The council system is the communist system. Communism classically meant that you would have councils for every work cooperation and factory. Comparably to an open, self organizing democratic guild with a lot of voting involved. It is often considered by many lefties as the real form of democracy. However the Sowjet Union just claimed to have a bottom-to-top organized Council Sytem, while it was much more reminiscent of a top-down Dictaturship.
Communism is rooted in Anarchistic Communes (ie French Communes during the Revolution). I think Barcelona also used a communist system when they had an Anarcho-Communist Government pre WW2. It is considered the only successful implementation of Anarchism in Europe.
The LSD probably made me less prone to reactionary attitudes when it comes to the capitalist/communist control grid. What I've done in this post and community is to try and unite what I think are the best ideas of both systems.
Yes, libertarians in Europe were in reaction against dominator hierarchies and the socialist part was simply workers attempting to own their means of production. It's interesting how the American capitalist twisted these two congruent ideas into extreme antithesis.. Well, they are cunning.
the libertery movement backstabbed the socialist movement and the socialists backstabbed the anarchists. I think we are quit.
Liberty and Sociality have never been mutually exclusive even though many try to advocate for one side bigger than the other. I also tried to combine them by leaving them the opportunity to create a private service or take the state service, If nobody takes a state service we would have anarcho-capitalism. If everybody is happy with how the state is managing things and there is no need for private alternatives then we have anracho-communism.
I should mention that by dividing the people into small communities you already full-filled my main goal which is localism or loci for short. As long as the most important decisions are made locally I think it is a fair system since you can actually just go to the next community/city/piece of land if you dont like it.