Originally posted by John_Rodger_Cornman
None coercive taxes (is theft if not fairly agreed to, or negotiated between the community and the owner. Then they enforce the theft by violence and
threats if you don't pay what you didn't agree to or negotiate to. That is fake ownership.).
But that is (libertarian) socialist.
is libertarian socialist? I'm confused?
It's ridiculous to argue capitalism is not economic private ownership because of taxes. When you start a business you voluntarily accept paying
taxes. How do you expect the state to run without taxes? The capitalist economy requires the state, as I explained in another reply. Capitalism is
what coerces you to pay taxes, not government. Government is not outside of capitalism, it is required to pay and pay, just like the rest of us.
If you don't want government, and taxes, then you need to also realise that the economy has to change first.
Must be evil.
What must be evil?
Community owned operated(not government) and controlled? That is (anarcho)communist!
Why is that evil? ALL forms of anarchism support workers common ownership. It's not really community ownership, as the means to produce belong to
those using them, the workers. Workers are a major part of any community, and worker owned provide for their community.
Workers dominating the yields of their own work. That is (anarcho)syndicalist and (libertarian)socialist!
Again all forms of anarchism supports worker ownership, anarchists are either socialists or communists and the two terms mean the same thing.
Syndicalism is worker ownership through worker controlled unions. Libertarian socialism is just another word for anarchism in general. It was used
by anarchists because of the negative connotations of the term Anarchy.
I can't tell if you're being sarcastic with the evil stuff?
By the way if workers owned their own workplace collectively (like stock shares) would they get paid twice every 3 months?
Worker ownership is not really stock shares. Workers simply have free access to the means to produce, to provide for their needs, it's not based on
stock and shares, or profit making. Workers can collectivize/cooperate, to run a large company, or they can work by themselves. Workers are free to
decide for themselves, not coerced to work because they have no other choice.
I don't understand your question, why would they be paid every three months? Please be more specific, because I can't read your mind to be able to
Libertarian Socialism is a term essentially synonymous with the word "Anarchism". Anarchy, strictly meaning "without rulers", leads one to wonder
what sort of system would exist in place of one without state or capitalist masters... the answer being a radically democratic society while
preserving the maximal amount of individual liberty and freedom possible.
Libertarian Socialism recognizes that the concept of "property" (specifically, the means of production, factories, land used for profit, rented space)
is theft and that in a truly libertarian society, the individual would be free of exploitation caused by the concentration of all means of
wealth-making into the hands of an elite minority of capitalists....
Syndicalism - an introduction
Syndicalism refers to the practice of organising workers into unions to fight for their interests. Originally, the term comes from the French work
for Trade Unionism (Syndiclisme), but in English the term specifically refers to rank-and-file unionism....
Socialists Do Stand for Equality
Marx and Engels used the terms Communism and Socialism to mean precisely the same thing. They used “Communism” in the early years up to about
1875, and after that date mainly used the term “Socialism.” There was a reason for this. In the early days, about 1847-1850, Marx and Engels chose
the name “Communism” in order to distinguish their ideas from Utopian, reactionary or disreputable movements then in existence, which called
themselves “Socialist.” Later on, when these movements disappeared or went into obscurity, and when, from 1870 onwards, parties were being formed
in many countries under the name Social-Democratic Party or Socialist Party, Marx and Engels reverted to the words Socialist and Socialism. Thus when
Marx in 1875 (as mentioned by Lenin) wanted to make the distinction referred to by the Daily Worker, he spoke of the “first phase of Communist
society” and “a higher phase of Communist society.” Engels, writing in the same year, used the term Socialism, not Communism, and habitually did
so afterwards. Marx also fell, more or less closely, into line with this change of names and terms, using sometimes the one, sometimes the other,
without any distinction of meaning.
edit on 2/11/2013 by ANOK because: (no reason given)