Let's break the anti-communist taboo

[Jimmy Higgins]

The trouble is you are loosely tossing around meaningless terms, not actually describing the system you think should be adopted, and are not pleased with people handwaving the ideas you aren't actually describing.

Examples of non-exclusionary anarcho-communism include open source software and Wikimedia. They have worked beautifully, and nobody involved in those projects wants to make a law against also profiting from their labors as long as you respect THEIR freedom.

Okay, so open-source code is a reason to do what now?

If you like it, you can take part in it if you want to. You could also try using a similar approach to do other kinds of things...if you wanted to and if you could figure out a strategy for application. It's entirely up to you. It's anarchy!

So you aren't actually going to participate in your own thread then.

 

[SigmatheZeta]

The trouble is you are loosely tossing around meaningless terms, not actually describing the system you think should be adopted, and are not pleased with people handwaving the ideas you aren't actually describing.

Examples of non-exclusionary anarcho-communism include open source software and Wikimedia. They have worked beautifully, and nobody involved in those projects wants to make a law against also profiting from their labors as long as you respect THEIR freedom.

Okay, so open-source code is a reason to do what now?

If you like it, you can take part in it if you want to. You could also try using a similar approach to do other kinds of things...if you wanted to and if you could figure out a strategy for application. It's entirely up to you. It's anarchy!

So you aren't actually going to participate in your own thread then.

And this is what always happens to me, @Bomb#20. If I don't espouse orthodox Marxism, which I disagree with, then people deny that I could be serious, even though the style of anarcho-communism that I am talking about is a real form of communism that is rooted in Proudhon's mutualist theory. I get accused of trolling, and I am shut down.

And then someone has the nerve to claim I am not being censored.

That is why this discussion is necessary.

Anarcho-communism refers to a means of organizing production. While politics might affect regulation and patents and copyprotection, it is not a form of government. It is more closely related to economics.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

And this is what always happens to me, @Bomb#20. If I don't espouse orthodox Marxism, which I disagree with, then people deny that I could be serious, even though the style of anarcho-communism that I am talking about is a real form of communism that is rooted in Proudhon's mutualist theory.

You aren't talking about anything. You wrote a rambling OP. And haven't said anything specific since then.

 

[Trausti]

Instead, it a creative commons sort of community where people might create stuff for many different reasons, including just because they are bored or because they found a solution that worked for them and wanted to share and share alike. It is a highly libertarian concept.

Why can’t you do that now? Doesn’t this happen already?

 

[SigmatheZeta]

Instead, it a creative commons sort of community where people might create stuff for many different reasons, including just because they are bored or because they found a solution that worked for them and wanted to share and share alike. It is a highly libertarian concept.

Why can’t you do that now? Doesn’t this happen already?

I could start citing Corey Doctorow's rants on DRM squeezing out everybody, but that was not the point of this particular thread. I might talk about that when I have gotten something meta to the subject out of my system. After that, I would be glad to give you a Corey Doctorow rant.

I am tired of the offensive stereotype of communists as authoritarian Marxists, and I am tired of told I am talking nonsense and trolling people when it turns out I am not an authoritarian Marxist in spite of identifying as a communist. We are not all authoritarian, and whether most people know it or not, it is possible for communism and capitalism to exist as part of the same economy. Just like Richard Stallman, I like both! I am not going to choose because both of them are excellent ideas for different reasons.

If somebody is going to demonize communists, then I am going to speak up and say something.

Communism is not something that it's legitimate to demonize people over. You probably have communism on your phone. That's what Android is. It's based on open source, and the very idea of open source exists because of a man named Richard Stallman. Your phone's software exists partly because of a man that supported communism but who also supported capitalism, which is why somebody was able to put a comfortable interface on the software and put it on a device that you were willing to give them money for. You are carrying communism in your pocket.

Not all communism is exclusionary. In spite of being a communist, my positions on most policy issues are actually normal for a Democrat. I mean I have a nephew that has cystic fibrosis, so I am no foe of the welfare state that currently helps keep him alive. Even so, I really have non-extreme, non-scary views. Most of my views are really mainstream.

Communism is valid as a part of a balanced, complex, moderate, intellectually inclusive political philosophy. It really should not be used as a political punching-bag. It is wrong to take people on bad faith over it.

Nearly the only people that treated gay and transgender people like human beings, in the 1980's and 1990's, were people in the open source community. The reason they did so was that they were damn decent people. Communal labor brings out something noble in people. You cannot measure it in dollar signs. You measure it in the number of people that otherwise would have killed themselves out of loneliness and had nowhere else to turn. Even if communal labor is not always as lucrative as profit-motivated labor, it is a beautiful thing to be a part of. It is intrinsically good.

 

[SigmatheZeta]

@Jimmy Higgins I would prefer if you did not address me about this again. It is an abstruse topic.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Well, you've yet to actually address the topic with me to start with.

 

[SigmatheZeta]

Well, you've yet to actually address the topic with me to start with.

Pyotr Kropotkin. I you don't like the way that I talk about it, then get it from his books. They are free.

 

[Bronzeage]

Instead, it a creative commons sort of community where people might create stuff for many different reasons, including just because they are bored or because they found a solution that worked for them and wanted to share and share alike. It is a highly libertarian concept.

Why can’t you do that now? Doesn’t this happen already?

I could start citing Corey Doctorow's rants on DRM squeezing out everybody, but that was not the point of this particular thread. I might talk about that when I have gotten something meta to the subject out of my system. After that, I would be glad to give you a Corey Doctorow rant.

I am tired of the offensive stereotype of communists as authoritarian Marxists, and I am tired of told I am talking nonsense and trolling people when it turns out I am not an authoritarian Marxist in spite of identifying as a communist. We are not all authoritarian, and whether most people know it or not, it is possible for communism and capitalism to exist as part of the same economy. Just like Richard Stallman, I like both! I am not going to choose because both of them are excellent ideas for different reasons.

If somebody is going to demonize communists, then I am going to speak up and say something.

Communism is not something that it's legitimate to demonize people over. You probably have communism on your phone. That's what Android is. It's based on open source, and the very idea of open source exists because of a man named Richard Stallman. Your phone's software exists partly because of a man that supported communism but who also supported capitalism, which is why somebody was able to put a comfortable interface on the software and put it on a device that you were willing to give them money for. You are carrying communism in your pocket.

Not all communism is exclusionary. In spite of being a communist, my positions on most policy issues are actually normal for a Democrat. I mean I have a nephew that has cystic fibrosis, so I am no foe of the welfare state that currently helps keep him alive. Even so, I really have non-extreme, non-scary views. Most of my views are really mainstream.

Communism is valid as a part of a balanced, complex, moderate, intellectually inclusive political philosophy. It really should not be used as a political punching-bag. It is wrong to take people on bad faith over it.

Nearly the only people that treated gay and transgender people like human beings, in the 1980's and 1990's, were people in the open source community. The reason they did so was that they were damn decent people. Communal labor brings out something noble in people. You cannot measure it in dollar signs. You measure it in the number of people that otherwise would have killed themselves out of loneliness and had nowhere else to turn. Even if communal labor is not always as lucrative as profit-motivated labor, it is a beautiful thing to be a part of. It is intrinsically good.

In the 80's and 90's, the antique selling community also treated gay and transgender people treated people like human beings, but to say they are damn decent people is probably stretching it a bit.

Saying something can and does work is a fairly weak assertion. I don't know of any country which claims a communist system of government which allows free and open dissent, and I'm pretty sure they are all quite exclusionary.

If you are going to espouse an idea that has always resulted in undesirable consequences, you'll need to explain what changes or improvements will be made to avoid the bad stuff. Depending on the intrinsic good in people may not be sufficient.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Well, you've yet to actually address the topic with me to start with.

Pyotr Kropotkin. I you don't like the way that I talk about it, then get it from his books. They are free.

You aren't talking about it. For the most part you are saying you are a communist that only believes in the good parts of communism.

 

[SigmatheZeta]

Instead, it a creative commons sort of community where people might create stuff for many different reasons, including just because they are bored or because they found a solution that worked for them and wanted to share and share alike. It is a highly libertarian concept.

Why can’t you do that now? Doesn’t this happen already?

I could start citing Corey Doctorow's rants on DRM squeezing out everybody, but that was not the point of this particular thread. I might talk about that when I have gotten something meta to the subject out of my system. After that, I would be glad to give you a Corey Doctorow rant.

I am tired of the offensive stereotype of communists as authoritarian Marxists, and I am tired of told I am talking nonsense and trolling people when it turns out I am not an authoritarian Marxist in spite of identifying as a communist. We are not all authoritarian, and whether most people know it or not, it is possible for communism and capitalism to exist as part of the same economy. Just like Richard Stallman, I like both! I am not going to choose because both of them are excellent ideas for different reasons.

If somebody is going to demonize communists, then I am going to speak up and say something.

Communism is not something that it's legitimate to demonize people over. You probably have communism on your phone. That's what Android is. It's based on open source, and the very idea of open source exists because of a man named Richard Stallman. Your phone's software exists partly because of a man that supported communism but who also supported capitalism, which is why somebody was able to put a comfortable interface on the software and put it on a device that you were willing to give them money for. You are carrying communism in your pocket.

Not all communism is exclusionary. In spite of being a communist, my positions on most policy issues are actually normal for a Democrat. I mean I have a nephew that has cystic fibrosis, so I am no foe of the welfare state that currently helps keep him alive. Even so, I really have non-extreme, non-scary views. Most of my views are really mainstream.

Communism is valid as a part of a balanced, complex, moderate, intellectually inclusive political philosophy. It really should not be used as a political punching-bag. It is wrong to take people on bad faith over it.

Nearly the only people that treated gay and transgender people like human beings, in the 1980's and 1990's, were people in the open source community. The reason they did so was that they were damn decent people. Communal labor brings out something noble in people. You cannot measure it in dollar signs. You measure it in the number of people that otherwise would have killed themselves out of loneliness and had nowhere else to turn. Even if communal labor is not always as lucrative as profit-motivated labor, it is a beautiful thing to be a part of. It is intrinsically good.

In the 80's and 90's, the antique selling community also treated gay and transgender people treated people like human beings, but to say they are damn decent people is probably stretching it a bit.

Saying something can and does work is a fairly weak assertion. I don't know of any country which claims a communist system of government which allows free and open dissent, and I'm pretty sure they are all quite exclusionary.

If you are going to espouse an idea that has always resulted in undesirable consequences, you'll need to explain what changes or improvements will be made to avoid the bad stuff. Depending on the intrinsic good in people may not be sufficient.

Anarcho-communism is not proposed as a system of government, but it is proposed as a system for organizing production. You can engage in it with or without the permission of the government, and you can do it without the government's knowledge if you want to. You might even do other things, too! You might work at a regular accounting job as your day job, but you might put in an hour or so a day on a communal project that benefits everybody that is engaged in it. You might organize temporary teams, have occasional discussions about direction and vision, or even split off into separate projects, merge with others, or completely rethink what outcomes you are looking for.

You don't have to if you don't want to, but it gives me pleasure. I like the camaraderie and the warmth.

As far as government, I am really a run-of-the mill, garden variety Democrat.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

So you like to call open-source software development "anarcho-communism".

 

[funinspace]

So you like to call open-source software development "anarcho-communism".

GNAC?

 

[SigmatheZeta]

So you like to call open-source software development "anarcho-communi".

The way it is organized and general culture does indeed parallel the ideas that have been suggested bphilosop like Pyotr Kropotkin and Pierre-Joseph Proudhon, yes. I do not propose that we start doing that exclusively and cease all other economic activity. I am not entirely sure that could even be workable, and if it were, I am not sure the total cost-benefit analysis, accounting for both extrinsic and intrinsic variables, would surpass the conventional strategy of just working for a wage.

I do prefer working on those types of projects and being in that type of culture, though. It is quite fun, and it would be wonderful if I could get involved in more of them. They always get me feeling chipper and skippy.

Not all views on economics are about who is or is not in the government. If you want to know how government can influence the matter, see Corey Doctorow's material. Even that is not all about the government.

Stop assuming that everyone that espouses a left-leaning set of ideas wants to take over your life or force you to do something. It is a truly offensive stereotype. Some of us are just as protective of our independence as anybody.

As far as what I want the government to do about most things, shit, I don't know: ask the archetypal educated democrat. Buttigieg is close to me on some things, not all. I think Biden is amusingly old-fashioned but not anything to get hysterical over.

Like the majority of self-avowed anarcho-communists, my views on most things are really moderate and reasonable. I disagree with it being socially permissible to use "communist" as a scare word.

 

[SigmatheZeta]

Where my phone typing produced "bphilop" I meant to type "by philosophers" but am past the editing window.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

So you like to call open-source software development "anarcho-communi".

The way it is organized and general culture does indeed parallel the ideas that have been suggested bphilosop like Pyotr Kropotkin and Pierre-Joseph Proudhon, yes. I do not propose that we start doing that exclusively and cease all other economic activity. I am not entirely sure that could even be workable, and if it were, I am not sure the total cost-benefit analysis, accounting for both extrinsic and intrinsic variables, would surpass the conventional strategy of just working for a wage.

I do prefer working on those types of projects and being in that type of culture, though. It is quite fun, and it would be wonderful if I could get involved in more of them. They always get me feeling chipper and skippy.

Not all views on economics are about who is or is not in the government. If you want to know how government can influence the matter, see Corey Doctorow's material. Even that is not all about the government.

Stop assuming that everyone that espouses a left-leaning set of ideas wants to take over your life or force you to do something. It is a truly offensive stereotype. Some of us are just as protective of our independence as anybody.

As far as what I want the government to do about most things, shit, I don't know: ask the archetypal educated democrat. Buttigieg is close to me on some things, not all. I think Biden is amusingly old-fashioned but not anything to get hysterical over.

Like the majority of self-avowed anarcho-communists, my views on most things are really moderate and reasonable. I disagree with it being socially permissible to use "communist" as a scare word.

That is a long-winded "yes".

 

[Bronzeage]

Instead, it a creative commons sort of community where people might create stuff for many different reasons, including just because they are bored or because they found a solution that worked for them and wanted to share and share alike. It is a highly libertarian concept.

Why can’t you do that now? Doesn’t this happen already?

I could start citing Corey Doctorow's rants on DRM squeezing out everybody, but that was not the point of this particular thread. I might talk about that when I have gotten something meta to the subject out of my system. After that, I would be glad to give you a Corey Doctorow rant.

I am tired of the offensive stereotype of communists as authoritarian Marxists, and I am tired of told I am talking nonsense and trolling people when it turns out I am not an authoritarian Marxist in spite of identifying as a communist. We are not all authoritarian, and whether most people know it or not, it is possible for communism and capitalism to exist as part of the same economy. Just like Richard Stallman, I like both! I am not going to choose because both of them are excellent ideas for different reasons.

If somebody is going to demonize communists, then I am going to speak up and say something.

Communism is not something that it's legitimate to demonize people over. You probably have communism on your phone. That's what Android is. It's based on open source, and the very idea of open source exists because of a man named Richard Stallman. Your phone's software exists partly because of a man that supported communism but who also supported capitalism, which is why somebody was able to put a comfortable interface on the software and put it on a device that you were willing to give them money for. You are carrying communism in your pocket.

Not all communism is exclusionary. In spite of being a communist, my positions on most policy issues are actually normal for a Democrat. I mean I have a nephew that has cystic fibrosis, so I am no foe of the welfare state that currently helps keep him alive. Even so, I really have non-extreme, non-scary views. Most of my views are really mainstream.

Communism is valid as a part of a balanced, complex, moderate, intellectually inclusive political philosophy. It really should not be used as a political punching-bag. It is wrong to take people on bad faith over it.

Nearly the only people that treated gay and transgender people like human beings, in the 1980's and 1990's, were people in the open source community. The reason they did so was that they were damn decent people. Communal labor brings out something noble in people. You cannot measure it in dollar signs. You measure it in the number of people that otherwise would have killed themselves out of loneliness and had nowhere else to turn. Even if communal labor is not always as lucrative as profit-motivated labor, it is a beautiful thing to be a part of. It is intrinsically good.

In the 80's and 90's, the antique selling community also treated gay and transgender people treated people like human beings, but to say they are damn decent people is probably stretching it a bit.

Saying something can and does work is a fairly weak assertion. I don't know of any country which claims a communist system of government which allows free and open dissent, and I'm pretty sure they are all quite exclusionary.

If you are going to espouse an idea that has always resulted in undesirable consequences, you'll need to explain what changes or improvements will be made to avoid the bad stuff. Depending on the intrinsic good in people may not be sufficient.

Anarcho-communism is not proposed as a system of government, but it is proposed as a system for organizing production. You can engage in it with or without the permission of the government, and you can do it without the government's knowledge if you want to. You might even do other things, too! You might work at a regular accounting job as your day job, but you might put in an hour or so a day on a communal project that benefits everybody that is engaged in it. You might organize temporary teams, have occasional discussions about direction and vision, or even split off into separate projects, merge with others, or completely rethink what outcomes you are looking for.

You don't have to if you don't want to, but it gives me pleasure. I like the camaraderie and the warmth.

As far as government, I am really a run-of-the mill, garden variety Democrat.

I speak as a working class person who has always lived off the proceeds of his labor.

What you have described is an after school club for adults who don't have to worry about making their rent.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Examples of non-exclusionary anarcho-communism include open source software and Wikimedia. They have worked beautifully, and nobody involved in those projects wants to make a law against also profiting from their labors as long as you respect THEIR freedom.

It works well for voluntary associations. It's a complete failure at the level of a society because it's no longer a voluntary association.

 

[SigmatheZeta]

Instead, it a creative commons sort of community where people might create stuff for many different reasons, including just because they are bored or because they found a solution that worked for them and wanted to share and share alike. It is a highly libertarian concept.

Why can’t you do that now? Doesn’t this happen already?

I could start citing Corey Doctorow's rants on DRM squeezing out everybody, but that was not the point of this particular thread. I might talk about that when I have gotten something meta to the subject out of my system. After that, I would be glad to give you a Corey Doctorow rant.

I am tired of the offensive stereotype of communists as authoritarian Marxists, and I am tired of told I am talking nonsense and trolling people when it turns out I am not an authoritarian Marxist in spite of identifying as a communist. We are not all authoritarian, and whether most people know it or not, it is possible for communism and capitalism to exist as part of the same economy. Just like Richard Stallman, I like both! I am not going to choose because both of them are excellent ideas for different reasons.

If somebody is going to demonize communists, then I am going to speak up and say something.

Communism is not something that it's legitimate to demonize people over. You probably have communism on your phone. That's what Android is. It's based on open source, and the very idea of open source exists because of a man named Richard Stallman. Your phone's software exists partly because of a man that supported communism but who also supported capitalism, which is why somebody was able to put a comfortable interface on the software and put it on a device that you were willing to give them money for. You are carrying communism in your pocket.

Not all communism is exclusionary. In spite of being a communist, my positions on most policy issues are actually normal for a Democrat. I mean I have a nephew that has cystic fibrosis, so I am no foe of the welfare state that currently helps keep him alive. Even so, I really have non-extreme, non-scary views. Most of my views are really mainstream.

Communism is valid as a part of a balanced, complex, moderate, intellectually inclusive political philosophy. It really should not be used as a political punching-bag. It is wrong to take people on bad faith over it.

Nearly the only people that treated gay and transgender people like human beings, in the 1980's and 1990's, were people in the open source community. The reason they did so was that they were damn decent people. Communal labor brings out something noble in people. You cannot measure it in dollar signs. You measure it in the number of people that otherwise would have killed themselves out of loneliness and had nowhere else to turn. Even if communal labor is not always as lucrative as profit-motivated labor, it is a beautiful thing to be a part of. It is intrinsically good.

In the 80's and 90's, the antique selling community also treated gay and transgender people treated people like human beings, but to say they are damn decent people is probably stretching it a bit.

Saying something can and does work is a fairly weak assertion. I don't know of any country which claims a communist system of government which allows free and open dissent, and I'm pretty sure they are all quite exclusionary.

If you are going to espouse an idea that has always resulted in undesirable consequences, you'll need to explain what changes or improvements will be made to avoid the bad stuff. Depending on the intrinsic good in people may not be sufficient.

Anarcho-communism is not proposed as a system of government, but it is proposed as a system for organizing production. You can engage in it with or without the permission of the government, and you can do it without the government's knowledge if you want to. You might even do other things, too! You might work at a regular accounting job as your day job, but you might put in an hour or so a day on a communal project that benefits everybody that is engaged in it. You might organize temporary teams, have occasional discussions about direction and vision, or even split off into separate projects, merge with others, or completely rethink what outcomes you are looking for.

You don't have to if you don't want to, but it gives me pleasure. I like the camaraderie and the warmth.

As far as government, I am really a run-of-the mill, garden variety Democrat.

I speak as a working class person who has always lived off the proceeds of his labor.

What you have described is an after school club for adults who don't have to worry about making their rent.

From between 8 o'clock until 4 o'clock, I work a steady job. I enjoy my job, being a very physical and energetic kind of person.

However, let us do some math:

1) I sleep about 6 hours a night, sometimes less.
2) I have literally never owned a television.
3) I have literally never owned a gaming system, and I have not even played on somebody else's gaming system in 16 years.
4) While I love books, I mostly listen to audiobooks at work. Most of my coworkers listen to music.
5) I am non-religious.
6) I do not have any offspring.
7) No sports, and I would not even know where to buy a football racket.
8) No partying.
9) Nope, don't go out to nightclubs.
10) My cooking amounts to boiling some cheap spaghetti and pouring in some cheap spaghetti sauce.

That's a lot of free time. I like to use it to try to make my life better. Sure, if I wanted to, I could work a second part-time job and make more money, but I expect more measurable improvement in my quality of life based on how I am spending my time, now.

*swishes her tail playfully*

You are not going to find fault with it. The way I choose to live is profoundly reasonable.

 

[SigmatheZeta]

Examples of non-exclusionary anarcho-communism include open source software and Wikimedia. They have worked beautifully, and nobody involved in those projects wants to make a law against also profiting from their labors as long as you respect THEIR freedom.

It works well for voluntary associations.

It works great for voluntary associations! That's the point. Anarcho-communism is inherently voluntary. It would not be anarchist if somebody were forcing you to do it.