Coercive Capitalism vs. Voluntary Socialism

It always baffles me to hear resident capitalists of the non-anarchist/primitivist/libertarian strain talk about capitalism and socialism as if it's a choice between voluntary, non-coercive freedom (capitalism) and coercive, forcible authoritarianism (socialism). It's equal parts absurd, ignorant, and absolutely laughable.

Observe. I am a libertarian/anarcho-socialist. I believe that socialism is 100% voluntary, that the only people participating in the socialist system should be doing so by their own free will. Under this voluntary system, workers of all stripes will be valued rather than spit upon. They will be rewarded for their labor fairly without having to worry about not being able to care for their family. All workers will own businesses and factories cooperatively, having equal voice in how their business is run. How anyone could say this is not freedom and is coercive authoritarian force is beyond me.

Now, what of their own strain of capitalism? They claim it is free and non-coercive, but that is a lie. You have no choice, you either participate in their capitalist system or you die. Even other types of capitalists are not allowed to choose their preferred brand, they must participate in the one chosen for them. Workers are expected to work for whatever low wage and meager benefits they are given, no matter how hard or long they work. They have no say in how the businesses they labor for are run, and if they don't like it, they are told to either live with it or risk the well-being of their families to search for another. They are demeaned and put down while their slave masters are praised and showered with the benefits of the labor of the workers.

In one, you choose to be a part of the system and are given an equal voice in all matters. Nobody is the master of another. In the other, you have no choice to be a part of the system and unless you become one of the privileged few, you have no voice in most matters.

How is the former coercive authoritarianism, and the latter non-coercive freedom?

 

Can't get there from here using human beings as the basic material. Human beings don't work that way. That which is everyone's responisblity is simultaneously no one's responsibility and consequently dies. Human beings aren't ants or bees.

 

What do you mean by that?

We are social species like ants or bees. We can organize ourselves in different kind of organizations, but we are social. We depend in things like mutual aid, cooperation, solidarity... That is what move us. Our actions are done in the net of a society, and our actions affect to that net in one way or other. And also, in this society we can be free or slaves. As the O.P. says now we are living under a covert slavery, but we can emancipate ourselves, break the chains and be free, and that, is what defends the anarchism.

You can agree or not, you can think that human need chains for A or B, but the fact, in my opinion is that we can be free, and the best way is self-managing, deciding by ourselves and being independent to any kind of authority, from mythological, statist or economic.

 

How is it that someone who doesnt participate in Capitalism dies? Wouldnt someone who doesnt participate in socialism, die in the same way. How is it that one has no choice but to paricipate in capitalism when in fact they are free to create their own socialist enterprise now if they so chose. And why havent they done so? Whats holding you back?

 

310 million idiosyncratic human beings...or a thousand...
will NEVER "voluntarily" subject themselves to a direct democracy, and risk having fruits borne of their expensive educations, individual creativity, work ethic or natural talents stripped away in the name of "fairness and equality"


hence the required application of force....
rendering the term...and deluded, utopian ideology... "libertarian socialist" an oxymoron.

Start, or live in a collectivist commune if you want "fairness and equality"...they're all over the place....here's a link to the one I lived in during the 70s/80s: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miccosukee_Land_Co-op

DO NOT, however, COWARDLY EMPLOY ARMED GOVERNMENT AUTHORITARIANS TO FORCE YOUR LIFESTYLE CHOICES ON ME.

 

Libertarian socialist is thousand times less oxymoron than Libertarian capitalist.

All Libertarian have been always socialist, until the 50s that some Liberals started to call themselves Libertarian, and only in USA. In the rest of the world Libertarians are Liberals, and Libertarians are the traditional Libertarians, the anarchists and usually Communist.

 

Didn't you just say that people will never voluntarily subject themselves to a direct democracy? Isn't this is a direct contradiction?

 

An economy based upon laizze faire capitalism allows enterprise based upon voluntary socialism but an economy based upon socialism does not allow voluntary laizze faire capitalism. I believe that's where the real difference is between the two.

Of course true socialism is pragmatically impossible because there are always differences even if wages, rents and costs are defined by an authority. For example having waterfront property is preferrable for most but there isn't enough waterfront property for everyone so someone is treated better than someone else. All things are not equal which is what socialism tries to establish as an economic system.

 

I choose to live without capitalism or socialism in my life, and look forward to a move to the mountains to find solace from human beings as well. Real freedom.

 

RIF. '310 million or a thousand' (my old commune never attracted or sustained more than around 100 households)

 

Capitalism is the freedom of exchange. Socialism is a restriction upon that freedom. I dont ree how restrictions on freedom are considered liberty.

 

Capitalism = There are LOSERS and WINNERS
Socialism = Everyone deserves the TROPHY
Crony-capitalism = Privatizing Profits, Socializing Losses. Head I WIN, Tail You LOSE.
Obamaism = Spread The Wealth Around, It's Good for Everybody. If you've got a business, you DIDN'T build that.

 

The Kibbutzim in Israel prove you claim wrong.

 

That's because you don't know what you are talking about.

 

No cooperative utopia there either....

 

Conservative =/= Capitalist.

You claimed that large numbers of people won't voluntarily subject themselves to direct democracy. The Kibbutzim prove you wrong. Own it.

 

A commune can sustain thousands of people. In Free Territory of Ucraine and Revolutionary Spain was done.

 

When and for how long? Kilgram. That's the krux of the problem. We are social and political animals. Bees, and ants are communal animals. There is a difference and that's why long term success generally eludes attempts at human communal societies.

 

I would willingly live in a commune with people I like...which is my biggest problem. I'm a (*)(*)(*)(*)(*) and don't like a lot of people.

I make a much better hermit/world renouncer.

 

We're apex predators. People forget that.

 

Freakin brilliant repartee

 

The freedom you claim would exist is a fantasy. The moment that I decide that my value to society is greater than your value, your contribution to the "collective" would be viewed as inequatable when compared to mine, and I would no longer wish to be a part of your commune.

And so it would fail, just as it did when the Pilgrims attempted it.


Hell: parents only tolerate supporting their own kids for only a set length of time: why would you think people in general will tolerate supporting others who aren't even family in similar fashion for perpetuity?

Your ideology is against human nature. You compare ants and bees to humans, but you clearly do not understand the difference.

 

How does socialism reward them for their labor fairly? How does it lead to them not worrying about not being able to provide for their family. I can imagine new socialist businesses not even able to make their payroll with current cash, just like capitalist businesses. Socialist businesses in down economic times forced to lay off workers, just like capitalist companies. In a capitalist company, they are required by law to pay their wage employees, they are not required to pay the owners. How exactly do you see the magic of this socialism alleviating all these problems?

 

You are approaching this thread from a point of view that all socialism is the same.

You don't know what you are talking about.

 

Which is why capitalism doesn't work.