- 22 Sep 2013 21:37
#14302729
A society without toil. A society of robotic property.
Excuse the sketchiness of this, but let's start simplistically:
Basically, as you go further to the right (should be the other way around really hehehe ), each philosophy rejects the private property conditions of the one before it. All anarchy rejects intellectual property (there are some forms of right-libertarianism that accept it), others just reject further forms of private ownership. The difference between anarcho-collectivism and anarcho-communism's conceptions of property seems to be that in ancol each worker co-operative owns its final products, which it sells in the market based on a labor theory of value wage system, whereas in ancom the whole of society owns the final products (I'm not sure about the means of production though. Can a worker from another co-op just walk straight into the co-op of another set of workers and transition seamlessly into work? I doubt it's that flippant) which are put into a common market for people to get the products based on need without money.
How can this be expanded? Is there anything I'm missing? Is there anything that's misinterpreted about the philosophies here? I understand there are more differences between the different philosophies than just this. Different kinds of 19th Century individualist anarchy had different ideas for ordering things, but I think they more or less all had in common the idea of use-ownership/value of private means of production, so we're just talking about property here.
Basically, as you go further to the right (should be the other way around really hehehe ), each philosophy rejects the private property conditions of the one before it. All anarchy rejects intellectual property (there are some forms of right-libertarianism that accept it), others just reject further forms of private ownership. The difference between anarcho-collectivism and anarcho-communism's conceptions of property seems to be that in ancol each worker co-operative owns its final products, which it sells in the market based on a labor theory of value wage system, whereas in ancom the whole of society owns the final products (I'm not sure about the means of production though. Can a worker from another co-op just walk straight into the co-op of another set of workers and transition seamlessly into work? I doubt it's that flippant) which are put into a common market for people to get the products based on need without money.
How can this be expanded? Is there anything I'm missing? Is there anything that's misinterpreted about the philosophies here? I understand there are more differences between the different philosophies than just this. Different kinds of 19th Century individualist anarchy had different ideas for ordering things, but I think they more or less all had in common the idea of use-ownership/value of private means of production, so we're just talking about property here.
A society without toil. A society of robotic property.