🇵🇸 single use plastique 🏴‍☠️ on Nostr: Sylwia 🏳️‍⚧️ :nyarch: i did not know that c4ss is so ideologically ...

Sylwia 🏳️‍⚧️ :nyarch: (nprofile…twud) i did not know that c4ss is so ideologically confused, i think carson is at this point moved more into like ancom/syndicalist like Rudolf Rocker, but idk i'm afraid to tag him lol I know that Studies in Mutualist Political Economy was a long time ago and the thing about Proudhon or any series body of work that is based in his scattered or let's say historically transitional, as he's kindof still on the edge of enlightenment, he certainly made valuable economic contributions which marx and others owe to him, or his critique of representation democracy in "the solution to the social problem" Ian Mkays anthology of Proudhoun is good because it's reading him thru more of an ancom lense, i'm not one that scuffs at navel gazing philosophical speculation there's a place for that, but trying to set up mutualism as a body of "theory" on it's own, idk, i think there will be a necessary period of transition between capitalism and higher form communism and market economies are an unavoidable evil and so syndicalates and cooperatives engaged in market activity, either using money ( which requires Peoples Banks as Proudhon advocated at one point) but that does require the expropriation of the means of production, any socialist project with or without markets or a dictatorship of the proletariate, the expropriation of the capitalist class and what Proudhon called "social liquidation" the complex abolishment of all institutions of property and governance and regeneration of society, if you're not down with that you're not a socialist, your just a reformist liberal, i don't know what Rothbardian Socialism even is and i'm just gonna pretend that doesn't exist for my own mental health. I do konw if Agorism which tbh is interesting, it's like a revolutionary theory but representing the interests of the petty bourgeoisie... There are some things i will agree with market libertarians i.e. classical liberals when it comes to questions of individual liberty from states, or how bad regulations can be since it usually hurts small firms in the interests of large one's, if you are talking about a literally free market yes, an indivdiual has the right to enage in any kind fo business or trade that doesn't harm anyone, this includes the right to sell drugs, or sex works, this includes the informal economy, or shit like Cuban Cigars ( what right does one country have to embargo another? ) and if you sincerely believe in individual freedom, the freedom of travel is fundamental, so any consistant individualist and opponent of state tyranny should oppose borders and immigration restrictions of any kind.

I different between anarchists or people who share an anarchic outlook is anarchists reject all systems of authority and dominantion, whereas authoritarians, state socialists or right leaning libertarians denegrate one system of authority, the state or private property, over the other. So while if you want to talk about a "natural right" to property, sure, a human has the natural right to claim ownership over all they possess, this includes physical objects or living quarters, or land they occupy, and people collectively have a natural right to claim what they occupy collective, namely the means of production, their housing, all economic institutions rightfull belong to the people whose labour animate them. Private Property as a legal abstract institution requires the state and is inherently a tool of class domination, it's founded on the alienation of possessions and reification into an abstract system of property that restricts individual liberty. If you don't get that we ain't allies.