Ask an Anarcho-Communist anything

When are you going to grow up?

...

Then riddle me this, if Anarcho-Communism is a political ideology, and the definition of politics is:
"the activities associated with the governance of a country or area, especially the debate between parties having power."

Then, pray-tell, how in the fuck do Anarcho-Communists still call themselves "Anarchists" if by the very definition of their ideologies, they can't be anarchistic?

You're either an anarchist, or a communist, you can't have any system of political ideology that revolves around anarchy, because then it's not a political ideology... it's just anarchy.
And with anarchy comes the total loss of government, as we all know.

Then there's the communist part, communism is the relinquishment of your property and wealth to the state to be shared among the people of that state, which implies a sense of order and organizational structure in order to achieve said equality, meaning you can't be a communist in any sense while also claiming to be an anarchist.

What you are, is a pretty edgy cool guy who probably really likes black clothes... a lot. As in, an unnatural amount of affection for black clothes.

when will the vanguard of the proletariat be ready to rise comrade

As an anarcho-communist, could you elucidate upon your stance thereby of being something that in essence is counter intuitive? Furthermore, how do you reconclie your bullshittery with being a crypto-facist?

Furthermore - could you enlighten us to the possibility of you vacating the premises immediately for the purposes of migrating to that most abundant of places full of likewise faggots - reddit?

Marx wrote that an ideal form of communism eventually abolishes the state. Also, your entire argument seems to be playing a semantic game about how the thing you defined it as doesn't work.

It's not a political ideology, it's a philosophical one that may just happen to involve political upheaval.

...

>abolish the state
>fascist

pick one

I thought the point of Anarchy was that you didn't have to pick anything?

no the point of anarchy is to abolish the state

That's contradictive.

Anarchy is basically the lack of a state, lack of rules.
Communism is nothing but the state, and a whole lot of rules.

It's like saying "I'm a carnivore-vegan". It doesn't work.

You cannot, in any way combine anarchy and communism.

In a capitalist system its the only way modern economies with lots of automatised jobs could keep the necesary consume levels so yes
In a socialist system it's just social justice so I would say yes also

Why is communism such a bad meme?

Right, so it's just anarchy then.

So how does the state continue to produce anything without the leadership required to guide said production?

Or are they planning on sharing the means of production without actually doing anything with it? At the end of the day, someone needs to pull a lever, or till a farm, and that person is going to feel cheated and worked more than someone who doesn't.

>Communism is nothing but the state, and a whole lot of rules.
yet Marx himself said Communism's natural conclusion is the abolition of the state

I'm sure you know more about communism then him tho

>the state continue to produce anything
>the state continue
>the state

jesus nobody understands anarchy on Cred Forums

IDK man, communism's natural conclusion was I think like, 20,000,000 starved people and a Cold War.

There's one thing having a fantasy land, and then there's another accepting reality.

When I refer to the state, I'm talking about the physical fucking land you're sitting on jackass.

Or are you trying to tell me that communists fly now?

How does it feel to be a walking meme?

Its when people who are too lazy or stupid to make money put two things together that by themselves already dont work and somehow expect all problems to go away

You're right, you're so poor and misunderstood. Only your blade collection really gets you, they don't judge you, they just do what they were designed to do, be sharp and useful.

Man, life is hard as a misunderstood college student these days.

That's why they have Cred Forums or were you laughed out of there too?

...

Why are you so gullible ? Why do you believe every single bullshit leftists retard will tell you ?

Also, why didn't you notice yet that you are the "useful idiot" of capitalists, since you help them a lot ?

Are you 14 ?

Judged from every single communist state to date, I'd say, the government makes the rules, owns everything and people are just slaves to the idea "each for their ability, each for their needs". So you're not even allowed to work more and gain more.

I appreciate the level of rage thinly veiled by sarcasm in this thread

Cred Forums is easy to trigger

>state
>anarchy
can't tell if nobody knows what anarchy is, or if I'm just being baited hard here

But he was replying to the communism comment.
lrn2 read.

Come on, everyone knows the only form of communism that works is Chinese communism, which is not really economic Communism. Politically it is with the whole vanguard party thing. I think that works because people are too stupid to elect officials who govern them. They have socialist flavor too with social shit.

the entire thread is about anarcho-communism, no?

I'm 110% positive how much you earn isn't directly tied to how hard you work in capitalism, since the most profitable thing you can do is own a corporation

> Implying that owning a corporation requires zero hard work and effort to maintain and manage

jesus christ this thread is a mess

I've never seen so many people who have no fucking clue what they're talking about

the worst part is they'll all think I'm talking about whoever the fuck they're arguing with and not them

>implying that the owner of a corporation works 204 times harder than the average american

Well donne, preteen, you've been tricked with simplistic rhetoric.

You picture is hilarious : equality / freedom.

What you call "equality" is actually promoting the abolition of all differences between individuals, making them all similar and equally exploitable by capitalists who have the "freedom" to turn them into globalized slaves.

Congrats, kiddo, you just achieved to support the capitalist project. Lenine had a word for you : you're the "useful idiot" of the capitalism.

Anarcho Syndicalist here, anarcho communism is not an oxymoron, it is a philosophy that defines what one may consider forceful action, consider this;

A man walks onto another mans lawn in Ancapistan, and the man is shot by the lawn owner because by the man trespassing onto his land he has initiated force, thus giving the land owner moral permission to act forcefully against the intruder.

In ancomistan however, a man can walk amongst any mans lawns as he so pleases because the land belongs to society, and there is no private property. Thus, if another man shoots a man for trespassing on his lawn, the shooter will have committed an act of force and will probably be dealt with by the rest of society.

Both ancapistan and ancomistan have no ruling classes or any hierarchy whatsoever, yet they have different definitions of what is a forceful act and what is not.

Same syndfag here, It also defines a hell of a lot of other things, but that's what Wikipedia and books are for. Start with Rocker if you want to learn more about syndicalism, Kropotkin for mutualism, Rothbard for libertarianism/liberal anarchism, and Bob black for funny quotes.

Oh shit intra-commie warfare

For real tho the state is an essential part of furthering communism and you can't skip to the stateless communist utopia Marx described without going through all the intermediary steps first

>upvote this

I second this.
OP is idiot that does not understand words he use.

The only real reason I dislike vanguard is within a revolutionary movement is what if a reactionary (cough cough Lenin) comes into power and fucks everything up? Feel free to tell us about vanguardism though I'm listening

Bump for interest

Not the guy you replied to, but honestly the vanguard party has to remain ideologically unified, and I think that's the primary reason communism slips towards totalitarianism so often. Only Mao did it right, and then it all got reversed after his death and now China's a supercapitalist hellhole for the working class.

How does it feel to have the wrong opinion fat faggot.

...

I'm not saying hur dur communism fails every time but it's vanguardism that eventually turns things bad. Ideological unification can be so tough, why take a chance? I say all anarchists work towards their main end (Destruction of the state, and all hierarchy) and then sort things out after the revolution.

WHO BUILD ROADS

ROADS?

ROOOOOOOOOOAAAAAADDDDDDDDDSSSSSSSSSS

> Implying you can quantify the effort it takes to work in numbers and not subjective experience. Also implying that a vast majority of Americans don't slack off at their jobs.

...

There's a difference between saying "I work 5 times harder than you" and "he's sleeping on the job" you know...

This post is just fucking gross. Please leave Cred Forums and never come back.

...

Helps a little. So I guess it's up to society to enforce the rules? More like textbook communism instead of the socialism everyone is thinking about?

...

Postsoviet ukrainian user here.

>owner of a corporation works 204 times harder
No he don't.
But corporations cannot make money from a thin air. That is people who pay all the bills. Therefore people need business even if it does not dedicated to fulfill needs of people but to get more money and power to business owners.
Communists all around the world has failed except for mutated chineese version of communism/confucianism
That failure prooves it main concept of people can run busuiness without business owner that gains profit from it is totally wrong.
No profit to man in charge - no desire to run it effeciently. No effectiveness - no progress.

AHAHAHAAHAH! wp wp wp

woops, wrong meme

>No one should have stuff.
>I would like all your stuff.

Right...

How's middle school working out for you?

Checked

Lol OP here, I thought this thread wouldn't go anywhere and would have died HOURS ago. Let me answer you guys, sorry for the wait.

Anarchist communism (also known as anarcho-communism, free communism, libertarian communism,and communist anarchism) is a theory of anarchism which advocates the abolition of the state, capitalism, wage labour, and private property (while retaining respect for personal property).
^ Textbook definition.

He went power crazy, went nuts.

I'm pretty well grown, got an education, wife, pretty happy.

Nice meme.

lol

No, I just legitimately believe in anarchism and I am a communist. I got this way by ignoring what other people have told me and taking how I feel into my own hands.

I'm out of college with a Master's degree.

Sorry for not answering everyone else, I either skipped you guys over or other people did a better job, or you are b8, and you should stop that.

Fascism? I'm for the abolishment of the state, that's the polar opposite and you're proving how much you have no idea what you're talking about. I feel like you're throwing out a bunch of words that you regurgitate from other people without actually thinking about it yourself.

the people who need them?

And the people who don't want them? The people that would prefer if they were able to build their movie theatre, grow their crops, or otherwise have the land used for anything other than a road as they personally have no desire to utilize roads or the services that those roads would benefit towards?

I don't believe in personal property, they shouldn't hold their own land as it would start capitalism and companies, taking over land of the people.

nice 196x104 image, literally can't read anything that says.

Anarcho communism is the future, stay mad capital and statefags

>Stalin was the greatest communist who ever lived
Disagree.
Mao Zedong is greater that Stalin.
Look at the Russia and China now. Feel the difference.

Right, but I wasn't talking about personal property. You said that roads would continue to be built by the people who need them.

I'm stating: What is to stop the people who don't need them, and therefore would be more on the side of 'no roads we need more food to feed our childrun we have a drought' from simply destroying the road and building over it?

I'm not saying either has personal property, as that generally requires some legal recognition from some force, like a government or a coalition. So, with no coalitions or governments at play to stop, what is to prevent this person from banding with his inbred children and destroying the roads and paving over them with some crops?

Is it some other community/coalition that believes roads are better for the welfare of society? Or is this anarcho-communist society intended to work on a 'we set the jobs for people with a government first, then we get rid of government and everyone keeps their jobs/work to maintain what exists'? Wouldn't that come with a drawback of stagnation?

>I don't believe in personal property
I do not beleive in gravity and some shit is still dragging me down to the planet surface.

FULLY AUTOMATED LUXURY ANARCHO COMMUNISM

How many chromosomes

Communist scum hitler would gas u you faggot

Exactly, let's look to the future and not keep to broken systems that hold us and pull us further into the past.

I am for peaceful protest, and it wouldn't be a luxury, nothing is easy when it comes to politics and government systems.

All of your questions can be answered by simple google searches of what we view. You seem to be going with the assumption that I just want no laws, just because I want to abolish the state doesn't mean I want a completely lawless society. I am a firm believer in "No victim, no crime" which includes interference with the rights of others.

lol

That's not a good analogy, at all. Try to research what I am talking about, that's too everyone who keeps asking these common questions.

I was expecting questions that relate to me as an individual.
Am I some edgy teenager that knows nothing about what I am talking about? No.
Am I a crazy mother fucker who wants to go around and ruin society?
No.

>I want no government, but still want no laws.

How exactly are the laws going to be enforced? Laws are meaningless statements without the force in order to back them up; a government offers this, but so too do people maintaining their ground in a personal property sort of way. The lack of personal property, however, interferes with that.

>No victim, no crime which includes the interference with the rights of others.

What rights, exactly? What crime is being committed by destroying the roads that are built by people who believe they are needed by those who believe they are not needed? As you stated, you do not believe in personal property as that leads to capitalism. From that, what rights are being violated? It is not their land, meaning it is not their decision to make on whether the land is a road or is a farm.

>I was expecting questions that relate to me as an individual.
I do not give a fuck. You introduced yourself not as a person but anarcho communist wich even sounds ridiculous.

And that analogy of me still exists. If some busines or big piece of property do have owner that gets a profit from it it will not be destroyed until it stop being profitable.
If such entity do not have an owner - it doomed to be inefficient.
I told you so here but you prefer to ignore it and live in your fucked up rainbow dream bubble.

Not OP, but strictly speaking, private property is a human concept. If there were no humans, or no society to tell you that "This is my ball", then there would be no personal property.

The concept of personal property is informed by social contract theory, and reaffirmed by our current laws which consider personal property an extension of one's material being. It's not some magical tag that you can place on an object to make it yours forever.

Again, look this up for yourself, there's a whole Wikipedia page on Anarchist Communism with in detail information on what we believe in. These aren't the kinds of questions I was going for making the thread.

The point is that we'd want to lessen the need for money and profit to nothing. That's what I believe, the rest of what you said is pointless in an Anarcho-Communist society.

How do you cope with your mental retardation?

>private property is a human concept
I am ok with this. But still it is unavoidable in most cases.
If you *simply refuse to believe it* that social contract is still a legit thing.

I'm pretty mentally healthy, the only condition I have is Epilepsy and Tritanopia colourblindness.

I'm pretty sure that spiders and many other animals with some form of a nest have their own concept of personal property. If another spider is found on a spider's web, there is likely to be a fight over it. The same can be said for many other animals that make their own dens and then fight over their territory. Or even animals, like wolves, which would fight over food - another form of private property.

As humans, we have created governments which act as agencies in the form of proxy for the initiation of force. Instead of us having to defend ourselves against attacks, we use society and other people to defend it for us, in exchange for goods and services.

However, they are only proxies, and it still boils down to the fundamental understanding of private property being a concept of most intelligent or semi-intelligent species, and not just humans. This much is obvious to see.

OP, how do you feel about libertarian ideologies such as your being skewed to favor cis males? Isn't that inherently unfair?

>we'd want to lessen the need for money and profit to nothing
And what will be a motivation to do anything? Pure altruism or what?
>the rest of what you said is pointless in an Anarcho-Communist society.
It still exists IRL, you dickhead. Deal with it.

FUKIN PINKO COMMIE SCUM
BRAINWASHED BY THE JEWS YOU ARE SO DUMB ITS BEYOND FIXING

Bad jokes aside, do you think anarcho communism has to rise to power through violence, or is there a peaceful way to achieve it?

So you fail to have the answers for this, and instead send me elsewhere.

Obligatory
>not an argument

You know how Reddit has those kids with upper middle class parents who always think their lives would be so much better without government and they think that they would be the sole survivors in a zombie apocalypse? It's pretty much those people

So you wish for a syndicated existence. Have fun.

>I'm pretty sure that spiders and many other animals with some form of a nest have their own concept of personal property. If another spider is found on a spider's web, there is likely to be a fight over it. The same can be said for many other animals that make their own dens and then fight over their territory. Or even animals, like wolves, which would fight over food - another form of private property.

If this is true, why don't we have laws protecting animals from other animals? We only have laws protecting animals from humans, and even then we don't consider animals to have personal property, only "habitat".

To say that animals have "personal property" seems more like a convenient re-labeling for territory and resource control. Spiders can make a web, but we don't know if they can make a well-crafted pleasure-web that serves no purpose except to make other spiders jealous.

Governments start to initiate force that begin to hold freedoms back and that's why I believe in Anarchy. Wolves don't set up governments, they defend themselves for their survival.

Violence would only give us a worse name and make us look like terrorists. Peace is the ultimate goal, for people to live in peace. That's what I will practice to achieve what I feel is right for humanity.

lol

uh... you have no idea what the fuck you're talking about as I believe in complete freedom and equality.

I don't want to spend my time explaining the same thing over and over while you ask the same questions while there are more questions by the second that are relevant to what I was going for.

nah

ok, whenever you want to have an intelligent discussion hmu

You're actually stupid. In your scenario, you're own body doesn't even belong to you and I can use you as a fuck toy or a meal since you don't possess your own body

We believe in absolute freedom and equality and retaining rights for each individual while having no punishment for expressing our right to self defense.

Essentially, this "argument" is just saying that he is stupid which isn't an argument because you fail to explain why he is.

Wolves? You're comparing us to wolves? You're either a furry or you're fucking retarded

No, I was addressing his argument that included animals and specifically wolves, read his argument, read my response with context.

>If there were no humans, then your body wouldn't be yours
>If there were no society, nothing would stop people from using your body like meat

Yeah, I guess you're right? And I agree it is stupid, but I never said it was my idea or that I'm advocating for it, so no need for insults.

Are you in the IWA / member of a group affiliated to the IWA?

>If this is true, why don't we have laws protecting animals from other animals? We only have laws protecting animals from humans, and even then we don't consider animals to have personal property, only "habitat".

Because animals do not hold the capability to defend themselves sufficiently from us in our search to rob them from their 'private property' forcing for certain humans to recognize it for them as a form of agency preventing their death as an avenue of altruism.

Lets say that you find a spider that over a period of a few days set up a nest within your home. It doesn't recognize your 'private property' until you either escort it out or mercilessly end it for treading upon your 'private property'. Much the same could go for an equally human example of people not respecting private property until there is a sufficient application of force. Your neighbor's dog has a nasty habit of shitting on your lawn, so you solicit someone who can institute an act of force, in this case a police officer, who fines the man a number of money that he must pay. If he refuses to pay, there will be applications to -force- him to pay one way or another, eventually.

>To say that animals have 'personal property' sounds like a convenient re-labeling for territory and resource control

I don't see how it isn't in some way related to that. The land you're living in, hopefully, is your territory. The food you're eating, the utensils you use to eat with, the TV you're watching that gives you a dopamine rush - all can be boiled down to a resource that you enjoy. No private property exists without in some way being a resource or territory.

If you're trying to say that 'serves no purpose except to make others jealous' doesn't count as a resource, then you'd be incorrect. That is a resource; making others jealous.

No idea what that is,

It is an argument because I've shown how severely flawed the logic is here. Calling someone stupid is obviously not an argument, nor do I try to present it as such, you stupid fuck. Also, you can't believe in equality while getting rid of the best means we have of upholding it. Anarchy means survival of the fittest which is the opposite of communism. Your beliefs are a contradiction.

>>OP, how do you feel about libertarian ideologies such as your being skewed to favor cis males? Isn't that inherently unfair?
>uh... you have no idea what the fuck you're talking about as I believe in complete freedom and equality.
If it's true that there's nothing to stop others from interfering with your rights except your own self-defense, then that puts physically weaker women at a disadvantage by forcing them to rely on others for physical defense. It also puts people at a disadvantage if they can't raise a family, and if they form some other sort of group through the use of resource-based incentives then isn't that just capitalism?

iwa-ait.org/

Yes via Australian ASF-IWA.

>Governments hinder freedoms and that's why Anarchy. Wolves don't set up governments.
Wolves do set up packs, however. And wolves do hinder the freedoms of their other wolf pack members. Those who do not assimilate to the pack leader will end up dead, or ostracized and left for dead. Their pack is a form of governing body.

Anarchy can work as a form of pure freedom, and potentially a form of moral high ground, but that doesn't mean it's correct or can work. I can believe that cigarettes do not increase my chance of lung cancer, but if I smoke them I'll likely have issues with my lungs.

This is fine as long as there are plenty of resources. If there's not, your anarchi-communism breaks down into a survival of the fittest. In scarce resources, people will eat each other

Yeah, I have no relation.

Fuckin join your local section then.

This is actually a real argument, but it's usually kind of hand-waved away due to family as a non-capitalist construct. You take care of your family, and your family takes care of you, since you share the same blood. Your family understands you on a personal level, but if they don't then you separate from them which makes them weaker as a unit; this usually happens when a family gets too big.

Naw. You've decided already that your political sys won't evolve into something worse. I have no time to google examples of what happens when basics like safety, nfrastructure and regulations are optional

Do you suck dicks?

Just wanted to say OP, I don't totally agree with you but thumbs up on making a non-shitty philosophy thread on Cred Forums.

Or they will learn to very efficiently use those resources and keep their population in tandem with the carrying capacity of their environment like many human tribes do and have done for millennia.

Had oral sex with a guy twice back in high school and dated him for a bit, I'm bisexual.
I have a wife now, in my late 20s.

Yeah man, just expressing my thoughts while trying to educate people that we are an actual group to be taken seriously while maintaining an intelligent discussion, it's hard for people to do that on here now. Thanks for the thumbs up, I appreciate it.

I'm not a Cred Forums tard so I'm surprised when you call this "non shitty" since to me it looks plenty shitty, not because of op though.

Yeah, there are some true dumbasses on here that regurgitate nonsense they hear from other people because they hear the word communism and get triggered.

Shaved or bush?

Shaved, it gets too itchy when I keep a bush.

>Or they will learn to very efficiently use those resources
Lets say you have a population that enjoys eating 100 units of bread. However, the requirements of sustenance while keeping work levels optimal requires that they eat only 70 units of bread. Efficiency has bread at a 75 unit with additional saved for emergencies. A drought hits. Units drop down to 40. They require for optimal survival a 70 - they're nearly halved on the number they need.

They can work together to expand their food and enjoy the surplus that exists, however expansion will take several months, and their food stores only maintain optimal efficiency or even survival alone for less than half of those several months.

Is good-will and efficient resource usage going to keep them from acting out for food?
>Keep population in tandem
Do you believe people are willingly going to let themselves die for the sake of a group instead of fight for continued survival?

Thread's dying again, last bump before I abandon it to get pruned.

in theory it sounds nice OP, In reality we would still want more then others, want what they have, hate them for being happy, have more power and all wimins would still be subject to our relentless desires which probably is the biggest problem of us humans.

removing or adding theoretic freedom does not stop al of this.

There's such thing as birth control dumbass, even primitive tribes practice it.

why are you such a faggot shit ?

Those feelings are things we learn from society, it isn't something we are intrinsically born with, see Buddhism.

Sieg Heil jewfag!

kill yourself

Birth control has absolutely nothing to do with a sudden influx of a major problem.

I'm not talking in the realm of years of constant population issues; I'm saying things were good, until a major string of bad stuff happened and resources became scarce.

Now people are dying in the streets from starvation, and most are not capable of directly surviving. Efficiency of everyone getting a fair share would state that everyone would maintain this limited share of the pie until enough had died that the shares were capable of keeping those alive that had managed to survive.

However, when faced with the option of dying of starvation, or attacking an equally weakened neighbor, taking his food, and increasing your chances of survival what would the common human take? In anarchy there is no application of force to stop him. Would people not turn on eachother?

This has nothing to do with birth control. This is a problem hitting population much quicker than a gradual shift would work for.

I don't get it, that's just anarchism. Where does the communism come in?

Why not just be a syndicalist? Communism is associated with Marxism which is mostly totalitarian horse shit

You are just retarded...

from an actual anarchist

Except that's wrong. -Learning- to not be subject to hate, wanting what others have, hating them for being happy, etc. is not the same as it not being a natural state for humans to be in. We didn't learn them from society, otherwise we'd never have to -learn- not to let them control us.

Buddhism as you refer to it needed more then a thousand years of entire nations working things out slowly until some form of collateral cohesion was forming.
can't force people into anything, removing/adding freedom does not make for enlightened people.

and those feelings are still within Buddhist and/or in Buddhist countries.
just ask Tibetans how the monks treated them for hundreds of years, truly appalling, 3rd grade citizens, rape, power, etc.

Buddhism cannot be forced either, its an individual path where its spiritual leaders can only point in directions and how you see it and learn.

so basicly like afrcans getting guns and exploit the "hard" working people ?

Anarcho communism is an oxy moron you retard

More like Anarcho-Capatalism

There's literally been thousands of famines, many during the capitalist time period and guess what? They passed and the society recovered, if something like that were to happen in my hypothetical community I'd organize a team of people to go and move elsewhere, hunting and foraging along the way, resort to cannibalism if need be.

It comes in that instead of typical corporations and private property the society would (agree to) instead do worker owned cooperatives and share access to resources instead of hoarding them and charging for their use.

>many famines during capitalist time period
I'm unconcerned with capitalism. I'm talking of anarchy + communism. The discussion is on how will people not attack eachother and destroy the foundation of the communist anarcho society.
>organize a team of people
And how would this team of people protect their resources of their own food? The application of force against the others who are trying to stop this? Is this not a government now?

Your way to fix an anarcho-communistic society in which there is a sudden famine is to create a government to tide things over until it's no longer shitty?

ITT morons that don't know the difference between communism and Marxism.

with such self-labeling, do you find it hard to belong in most social situations, user?

#lesbian_lives_matter....

dot con

This.
/thread

Not really, again I have a wife and I am pretty social. My political views are just a perfect matchup with the definition of Anarcho-Communism and after looking into it and studying for myself I confirm that I am an Anarcho-Communist. Just like one would identify as a liberal, or a republican, conservative, socialist, etc.

still would like to know how theory is going to make people want to live peacefully together without too much issues.

jealousy. hate, wanting what they want, taking it, or even not participating. its all in human nature. how does a nice sounding theory remove all that.

feelings on ancap

Do you dook when you nukem?

ehhh, meh....most Cred Forumstards dun even know what in the fuck "Anarchy" is. Those that post on Cred Forums these days have been educated by a system...and it is funny, a system of a down -syndrome.....chemtrails and all that.

ITT: More edges than an annelid crystal shard.

>I thought

LoL,

Big fucking contradiction in my opinion, Anarchy and Capitalism do not mix. The whole point is going against the state.

THANK YOU

Looks like we've got a live one {you) here guise.

>Jesus understands
There's little understanding at all on Cred Forums, it seems.

can i introduce the distinction between personal and private property? Communism is about the abolishing of private property, which lead to capitalism. Personal property is a natural resource, we're not coming for the toothbrush.

So your corporate owned, pay to be free system would have you believe....ha ha

Another libcom here, OP. I'd help you comrade but trying to explain what anarcho-communism is to children on Cred Forums is a wasted effort.

Cred Forumstards barely know capitalist economics, they can't be asked to understand the philosophical tenets of anarchism and communism.

If anyone is really interested go read Marx's Capital vol.1 and Kropotkin's Conquest of Bread and Anarchist Communism: Its Basis and Principles. They're easily readable and very accessible texts. Find them on Marxists.org and theanarchistlibrary.org

Or if you want a more modern 'intro to anarchism' CrimethInc.'s Days of War, Nights of Love is entertaining (but don't listen to it too much cause it's mostly post-left lifestyleism, although I like the rhetoric in it) and Invisible Committee's The Coming Insurrection.

Physical state...liek state of being?or state of Delaware? Or maybe, Minnesota, state-O-mind

Daily reminder that Communism is a dead, failed ideology.

are you an absolute fucking idiot or a troll

...

Daily reminder that you're a retard.

>not all anarchy is equal
>socialists trying to distance themselves from NSDAP socialism by calling it democratic socialism or national socialism
You crazy millenials and your fucktarded ideologies invented by a Jew and forced upon millions by a German-backed saboteur.

what's your job?

Interesting post. As toothbrushes are a natural resource, can you tell me where they are grown or mined?

Also, when does personal property become private property? We've established that my toothbrush is mine, even though I bought it. What about my clothes? My Books? My TV? My Computer? My Car? My House?

Not theory, ideology.

kys

How are things in highschool?

At least I'm not linked to a idiotic ideology created by a hypocritical hack who never worked a day in his life.

I would tell you guys but you'd all fucking hate me even worse.
Hint : techfag who works for a "tech" company which he hates but it makes good money

see, your not all that bad looking of a girl. make sure you vote!

...

Again I am in my late 20's with a Master's degree with a wife.

Go read a book, fag. Proudhon for example.

Fucking 18-yo know-it-alls who think they can bring down a philosophy and negate the work of dozens of philosophers and economists by asking a few dumb questions.
>who's gonna clean the toilets in your utopia bro?

kys

would you say you have a good life with your family?

I take it they botched your lobotomy?

welcum to Cred Forums, newfriend.

same thing mate. unless it actually has been used in real life, it remains a theory.

what if we....

How can society have equality if nature doesnt? By force?

Not a good relationship with my mother, she sexually and physically abused me, stood up to her when I was 14 and managed to break free. I am well attached with my Dad and his side of the family though, as well as my Wife and her parents.

Listen to Onsdag 14 September - Debatt: Marxism vs Libertarianism by radio bubb.la #np on #SoundCloud
soundcloud.com/radiobubbla/onsdag-14-september-debatt-marxism-vs-libertarianism

Just like how it's the Democratic People's Republic of Korea, right? Neck yourself, you lying communist fuck.

Well, they're valid questions that you don't appear to have any answers to; you just seem to like creating strawmen to criticise. Then say "....go read a book".

As for negating the works of philosopher and economists, there are plenty of others of those that do that already.

I live in California, Bay Area m8

>Communism is about the abolishing of private property, which lead to capitalism.
nice one

If they're so easy to answer, you'd be able to quickly answer them. The fact that you Commie faggots always dismiss these types of questions shows that you don't have the answers you claim.

pics, or it just did not happen.

Even if you had pics. It may not have really happened.

...

You are a massive fucking loser.
Sage goes in all fielss.

...

have to agree, OP casually ignores questions.

Fuck, we all knew some cunt who was exactly like that.

kewl.....story...Cred Forumsro!

OP's Final Post

This was mostly a good thread, learned a lot from you guys. Thanks for this! I have to go to work now so I won't be on Cred Forums again until like... 4 PM western pacific time? Traffic is a bitch so, yeah. Again thanks for the educational experience.

Sorry if I missed your questions, the thread has been going way out of control and I am surprised it's still fucking up and not pruned yet.

Seeya fags.

i found OP

The world will never fall to Communism.

Do you realize that private property is the necessity of freedom?

Communists of any name don't care for our Liberty, user.

first the edge
second what will be your money in a anarcho-communist society, as anarchism is the lack of government and communism is the total control of a government and you can't control the production of money under anarchism and, there is total control over the production & distribution of money under communism

Yes, but the method of production of all the items of property we are to own cannot be in private hands, for that is capitalism. So I can't start or own a business to make things, but I can own the products that the method of production manufactures

You could definitely start a business to make things.

The Anarcho Communists claim to but I dont see how someone else owning your property doesnt constitute government, kind of an oxy moron if you ask me.

The reason I don't want to answer them is because they've been answered already, a thousand times over.

I don't know why but I'll indulge you.

Personal property is property that you use. For example, if you have a piece of land and you're planting potatoes on it, i.e. working it, that land is 'yours' for the time being. No one is going to come in and take it from you.

The difference arises in the fact that you cannot sell that land, lease it, pay someone to work on it or leave it to someone in a will after you die. That land is yours as long as you work it, when you stop someone who will work it comes and takes over.

Regarding toothbrushes and other toiletries, there would be people whose 'job' would be to work in a factory making these things, although it wouldn't be a job as we know it today.

Anarcho-communism works on the maxim 'All is for all!' coined by Kropotkin. It relies on a gift economy. Basically, everything is free.

So let's say you're a toothbrush maker, and you enjoy that job because it keeps people's teeth clean and contributes to hygiene. If you want bread, you go over to the bakery and take as much bread as you need, same with potatoes, onions from a farm, etc.

If you need a car for work then you have a personal car that you use. No one is going to take that from you. You use it until you need it. Although at a later stage ancom society there would be a pool of unused cars people could take to go on trips, dates, a drive somewhere, etc.

Your house would be yours as long as you live in it. If you die, your family will continue to live in it. If there's a spare room, and someone needs that spare room, that person would be allowed to live there. You'd allow them to.

Anarchism relies on people being 'up for it'. That's why I believe an ancom society can't come before we've had a socialist/communist society teaching and socialising kids/people into this way of life (same way capitalism has done for its own way of life).

OK, so if I can start a business to make things, that would mean I could sell them to people so, setting aside the question on where the customers would get their money, I could make things, sell things and make a profit? All in an anarcho-communist state?

There is no money in communism or anarcho-communism.

>inb4 hows high school?
Just like OP I'm in my late twenties and hold a master's degree (in physics). No family yet, though.

The stuff you make you'd give away for free because you'd be getting the things you want/need for free too.

Libcom works on a gift economy. Look it up. Maybe there's a Really Really Free Market close to where you love so you can experience it first hand.

then whats the incentive to work

They lie.

and if i want to do absolutely nothing? or have no skills to make anything? or trade with another country?

You're put in the Gulags, comrade.

Well thanks for the answer and, amazingly, this time without the ad hominems.

The biggest issue I see with all of this is that it does not take into account the nature of mankind. As a species, we are both competitive and cooperative and we evolved to live in small groups that will readily reject or compete with other groups.

Philosophies like this cannot be argued with as an ideal, but they are impractical and will never happen. They are the result of navel-gazing by idealists.

In your example, why would I allow someone who needed a room to live in my house? And if I could take what I wanted, it might be more than I needed.

I'm sure you'll now tell me to go read another book, as the answers to all these questions have been writ large by greater brains that mine.

How would you, if you could play god for one day, change our current capitalistic system to a more equal, peacefull and liberal system? Which steps would you take to fulfill your ideological goals? Iam interested in the whole anarcho communist way of thinking, but for me this whole movement will never work besides on paper...

>pic related, it's the slap that you get when you realize that there will never be an utopian society on earth.

So I'd have to give away anything I made? Or, I could do nothing and just get stuff? OK, the latter then. And clearly, I both need and want Jermyn Street shirts and Saville Row suits to dress in, as well as a Rolex to tell me the time.

>Why are the most anarchist stupid?
and this coming from an anarchist. 80% of the anarchist i've met over the years have a really deformed idea of anarchy, they just following others prople thoughts or they're trying to be edgy. Also why do we have to be divided into more and more categories? OP you are anarcho-commie I am anarcho-syndicalist for example, why do we divine in this teams and not be one? Anyway you got pretty good ideas and you know your shit, glad to see this.

>Marx wrote that an ideal form of communism eventually abolishes the state.
>ideal form of communism eventually abolishes the state.
>ideal
nigga nothing in this world is IDEAL
all communist states turned into dictatorships

Why do you think putting two failed societal doctrines together will make them work better.

And seriously anarchy is fucking no government.

Communism is super government.

You can't have both cucklord.

>individual communism
Kek
>used wrong flags
>wrong arguments or maybe a bit confused among the flags
>last flag you want is the black flag

Also the first school of though of anarchism was egoistic as fuck just like the ancaps

That's because Anarchism itself is a foolish concept.

What if I am into Mutualism but with a minimum state?

...

>Also the first school of though of anarchism was egoistic
I'm not sure about that, but I'm aware of the invidualist anarchism. I've it as a part of my individual philosophies. It's very interesting. As an apolitical movement it's really hard to guess what would happen.
So when I don't want to play a game anymore i quit playing. If needed I can explain it further

Sorry to disappoint you, but no. Anarchy is the last and best society it can exist. But people are to stupid and propangated to see it, because muh money, muh country, muh me and stuff. The ultimate society is a society without leaders and solidarity/teamwork, but i'm to bored to explain you over the Internet.

There is no such thing as 'nature of mankind'. And if there is, it's altruistic. Only because we've been socialized into a competitive lifestyle doesn't mean we are competitive. Movies, school, work, it all teaches us to be competitive and think of one another as rivals, not allies.

>we evolved to live in small groups
Exactly. Anarchism wants to do away with national States and States of any kind. An anarcho-communist society would composed of loosely federated communes. Each commune would be slightly different, and one could move freely from one to the other until they found a comfy place to live.

Anarchism and anarcho-communism is all about freedom (real freedom, not McFreedom) and doing what you want with your life and time.

However hard this might be for you to comprehend, the vast majority of humans want to work. Because doing something you enjoy is very fulfilling.

You have skills. You can be taught skills. It's all about finding what you want to do.

Incentive comes from doing a service to your fellow man (and by extension, yourself). You provide a service or a product others need and in turn you are provided everything you need.

It's foolish because it's unrealistic, unfeasible, ignores basic human traits, and impossible to enforce and prevent people from taking power through force.

>The ultimate society is a society without leaders and solidarity/teamwork
Having no leaders in a communist is impossible.
Humans are egoists by default.
If you don't agree then instead of spending your money on superfluous things, use that money to give to the charity.

I get you mate. But anarchism in general comes from nihilism, not through history just who first wrote about anarchism. But in general after you have zeroed everything you can build your own self bariers, ethics, e.c.t and then comes the collective anarchism.

>Americans are really this simple
>Americans really do see everything as black and white

I hope Trump wins. He's the president you deserve.

What do you actually do to tend to your goal?

Not anyone you replied to, but I find it interesting how you couldn't answer a good chunk of those questions.

Pretty sure I answered all of them.

Well i'm not gonna explain it to you, i'm just another random voice of the Internet. Google it and your "disbeliefs" or questions will be anwserd

Why do you think the two are compatible with each other? if you're a Communist then you're not an Anarchist.. Anarchy is the lack of a governing body, and Anarchist values include personal freedom and a free market. Communism relies on a system of government to regulate the free market and personal income.

There is no such think as an "Anarcho-Communist"
By definition it simply cannot exist.

And calling yourself an "Anarcho-Capitalist" really isn't much better since Capitalism and a free market are simple byproducts of a free society, they evolve naturally when people are allowed to interact with each other without a government placing obstetrical in their way. Which is exactly what Anarchism strives for.

In short. If you're an actual Anarchist then you don't believe in governmental authority or the initiation of force against innocent people.

If you're a communist then you desire a government to regulate the market and control what people can earn.

The two actually couldn't be more dissimilar.

This doesn't take human nature into consideration.

Not in the slightest.

>humans are egoists
No man, society taught you that, even in our primal form we were co-operatimg, and even if we didn't we are civilized now and we can throw this away from us. But yeah since the educational system is theirs and not ours..

>There is no such thing as 'nature of mankind'. And if there is, it's altruistic.
That has to be the most naive thing I've ever read. And your idealism and denial about the true nature of some, if not all men is why you have been taken in by this stuff.

Education will not change the nature of mankind; the savage lies just beneath the surface and above it in some cases. You can't just blame current movies/school/work.

Not an argument.
No you didn't, you conveniently ignored them. Specifically, the second and third. You don't actually address the base concern, you just say "no, it's fine though.".

Citation needed.

> Movies, school, work, it all teaches us to be competitive and think of one another as rivals, not allies.
Because the "best" prevail. If there was no competition people wouldnt do anyhting. They would be like the black slaves in brazil after slavery was banished. They (men and women) grouped in dozens in a house and fucked all day and all night.
>Each commune would be slightly different, and one could move freely from one to the other until they found a comfy place to live.
So a commune has more natural resources then another commune. What impedes the commune more poor in resources from conquering the other commune?
In the current system the law impedes.
>Anarchism and anarcho-communism is all about freedom (real freedom, not McFreedom) and doing what you want with your life and time.
>doing what you want with your life and time.
You can do that in a capitalist society
>However hard this might be for you to comprehend, the vast majority of humans want to work.
Want to work but complain about the work.

You mean the incentive and no skills ones?

Money is only an incentive in a money economy and even in capitalism it isnt the strongest incentive. People Want to enjoy what they do and job satisfaction is more important than money.

He said he doesnt have skills. He doesnt have any right now. He can be taught a thousand different things.

If a commune has less resources how can it conquer the one with more?

What the hell does the state have to do with the free market? Do you actually know what capitalism is?

If I grow tomato in my back garden and then sell them at a farmers market every two week, that's capitalism.

If I take raw materials and put them together to make something useful, then proceed to sell it to those who want to buy it, that's capitalism.

if I learn a skill and then use that newfound knowledge to provide a service to people who desire that service, that's capitalism.

I'm making money through my own ingenuity and integrity and it has jack shirt to do with anyone else.

>Money is only an incentive in a money economy and even in capitalism it isnt the strongest incentive.
Money is a necessary tool to live in our modern society, what the fuck are you talking about? And what you're ignoring is the base concern raised by them: How will your "free, open communist paradise" deal with people who REFUSE to work?

chi le ha tutte le carichi.
Queste foto sono un patrimonio da condividere

It can try to attack and kill everyone in another commune.

I was talking about natural resources like water, iron, coal, etc...
But the poorer commune could conquer the other by employing more of its resources to production of weapons.
In the case the richer commune notices that the poorer commune is planning an attack, then how will it defend itself? By using their resources to produce weapons.
And the cycle goes on.
In the end whos more bellic wins.

>Because doing something you enjoy is very fulfilling.
But what if I want to do something that doesn't support the collective, like paint or take photos?

A commune can have less "useful" ressources but can have a lot of weapons and/or "soldiers".

Social Libertarian here OP

Art is necessary for a healthy society. Even the Soviet Union had paid artists.

Whats the incentive for these soldiers to fight (and die)?

Why would the commune go to war? Whats the incentive?
>inb4 to have more resources
why would they need to fight when the other commune is more than happy to share (or trade) its surplus.

Why?

People who refuse to work will be shamed. Other people wouldnt want to associate with them. People who dont work will be given things they need to survive, but it will be looked down upon.

Simple, tell others about it and once a significant percentage of people know about it and want it we can coalesce together to put pressure on the powers that be in order to force them into at least compromise measures (such as universal income) which will eventually ready us to take the final step after a few decades.

Sounds like something written on triestine cards.

Do your parents know you're fucking retarded?

how much wood could a woodchuck chuck if a woodchuck could chuck wood?

>why would they need to fight when the other commune is more than happy to share (or trade) its surplus.
How can you know if the richer commune would like to share?
Supppose it shares and the poorer commune gets greedy and wants more? What now? The richer commune will still be more than happy to share even more resources?

So, you personally would go through months or years of war (hell), risk your life and possibly die so your commune could have more resources?

Dont be silly.

Has it been a struggle for you?
What with the mental disorder and whatnot.

There's no human nature, only human behavior which is shaped both by genetics and the environment/memes.
Humans are incredibly adaptive and can learn to live in thousands of different ways.

>Whats the incentive for these soldiers to fight (and die)?
And [maybe] die. Fixed for you.
The first incentive that comes to my mind is riches.

These are wild hypotheticals.

If people have banded together into an anarcho-communist commune i think its safe to assume they are not greedy.

>Anarchist
>Communist
Choose one

>moneyless society without capital
>riches

wew

I would only do it to defend my commune from an external attack, I wouldn't attack another commune.

What if the rich commune is not greedy but can't share ressources because it is a very hard time (like a rude winter) and the poor commune has nothing to trade too?

Do you ever cut your self on your own edges?

I prefer to risk my life at war instead of starving to death.

>Art is necessary for a healthy society. Even the Soviet Union had paid artists.
But what if everyone wanted to do this sort of activity? No one wanted to dig ditches and fix drains, or build houses, or farm? Wouldn't the ideal society collapse?

>If people have banded together into an anarcho-communist commune i think its safe to assume they are not greedy.
But the world around them is and would be. They will all die

If your proposal relies on all of mankind simultaneously deciding to join anarcho-communist communes; well, I don't need to point out how unlikely that is.

So it all remains a textbook exercise with no real-world value

but if people that reflect a topic or philosophy as much as you will still exist. And if these people think for example, something more facist into the whole idea then what? There will always people that manipulate facts and ideas to their favor. And there will always people that don't think much for themselves and like fast and easy answers to complicated things. Look at trump followers. Sure, more people would buy your idea and start to follow it immedeatly and also people who would follow anything else. And there surely, after some time, would be something else to follow.

>riches only consist of capital
what about:
food
clothes
land
slaves

Why are you such a politically retarded edge lord?

After enough people want it there would be pockets (cities or small town/regions) in which 80% or so people would want it, and pockets where the opposite would be true, 80% or so don't want it and the rest do/don't care, what could be done in that case is that an agreement is achieved in which the minorities of each pocket trades their possessions and moves into the pockets in which the majority shares their ideology, after that the non Anarcho communists can govern themselves as they will, as long as they don't bother the AnComs, and vice versa, if conflicts arise, such as for pollution, trafficking and immigration issues they can use diplomacy like countries do today.

Did OP flee after we pointed out that he's not a communist anarchist and instead he follows the Naïve Anarchism?

How do you keep someone from starting a business? If someone is making something and trading things of value for the items that they made is that allowed?

So... apple?

How hard was is telling your parents that you're a faggot?

 

  ▼
▼ ▼

who builds the roads?
who stops me from going on a killing spree in the middle of the night?

>You're either an anarchist or a communist

You are either a retard or a troll but hey since this is Cred Forums then what's the difference?

...

People.
People with guns.

...

GIANT METEOR 2016!!

You into Proudhon?

How do you feel about deleting system 32?

Have you ever been to a riot and experienced anarchy? The idea is good but it will never work. You would be surprised how animalistic people can get under the power of peer pressure and circumstance.