If a man's home is his castle, you approve of mortgage companies and rent regimes being practically the only ones who own men's castles? Rather than having the freedom to build your castle yourself, you approve of having to serve the wealthy so they will allow you to build it or should you have the freedom to just go build it? Would you rather build it yourself or do you need to restrict access to the means of survival so that the Mexican construction workers will have to serve you by building your house so they can aquire temporary access to the means of survival by getting paid?
Property is theft.
Yeah, regression from your status of enforced privilege. That is what it is indeed, and I'm looking forward to the dethroning all capitalists.
You think equality (anti-heirchical) society means that only the strongest will rule? Uh well, who rules now? The greediest, heartless and most manipulative group on the face of the planet is who rules now. You like that though, I already see. No need to announce that you approve of it.
That is short sighted to jump to the conclusion that the strongest will rule in an anarchy. What in the world are they going to rule? How is the strongest person or group going to manage to take over a community's entire communist-oriented production of all of the essentials in order to force people to obey them? If they succeed, they would either be conquered shortly afterwards by the self-defending masses or the masses would just leave the community and go empower some other anarcho-communism. It is too fluid for any small group to conquer and maintain the conquest once anarchy is established.
Yeah, well let's keep government in place so they can defend your furniture from cigarette burns, even though they already failed because the furniture is already burned.
What makes you think people need to be forced (by capitalism) to provide utilities, medical, food and construction? People want all of that, and they are willing to do what it takes to get it. Once capitalism is dead, people will continue to operate and produce, and it has nothing to do with bartering. Bartering is more like in the market socialism areas of trade, external yet coexisting with anarcho-communism. No one in an anarcho-communism is going to keep tight trading tabs on anyone. It is from each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs. Actually, I think the 2 hour work day is a high estimate. A town near me has 18,000 people. If I do some complicated economic math, I might find that each person would have to do maybe an hour every two weeks for the entire community to have full, unrestricted access to all the means of survival for that community. I will do the math later.
The ruling class is anyone who is free from living under mortgage & rent plus collecting taxes (government), collecting rent, collecting mortgage payments, or sitting at the top tier of a corporation making 400 to 1000 times more than the workers of that business. To clarify who the ruling class is in one lump: they are the people who are living off of other people's need to survive while not producing anything. Not producing anything does include those executives mentioned earlier, because the workers produce, not the executives. Those are the people who are sitting on their asses all day every day.
I think your entire premise is full of shit. Your premise offers nothing more than the sorry world we live in right now, and it's a premise that does not improve. It is doomed.
[ This Message was edited by: JDavid on 2003-05-16 16:41 ]
