What is Anarcho-socialism?

[untermensche]

It is difficult to start a top-down company that is trying to steal the fruits of labor from most workers.

Yes, it is difficult to scheme like this and carry it out.

But it doesn't take much courage. Mostly it takes a lot of greed and a disregard for workers.

Soooo, why note start an owner controlled company? I know a couple attorney's who could help you. They help a couple startups a week.

This is the last resort when one has no more rational criticism.

It is not any comment on Anarchism at all.

 

[Harry Bosch]

Soooo, why note start an owner controlled company? I know a couple attorney's who could help you. They help a couple startups a week.

This is the last resort when one has no more rational criticism.

It is not any comment on Anarchism at all.

?? My simple point is that I think you have dramatically underestimated how difficult it is to start a company. If you formed your own worker controlled company (say a professional partnership) you would understood what I mean. It wouldn't be difficult. I think that you work in a trade? Maybe I'm wrong, but start your own entity with a like minded partner.

 

[coloradoatheist]

Soooo, why note start an owner controlled company? I know a couple attorney's who could help you. They help a couple startups a week.

This is the last resort when one has no more rational criticism.

It is not any comment on Anarchism at all.

It actually says a lot. Find other people who want to start a worker controlled company and just start one. Should be easy.

 

[untermensche]

This is the last resort when one has no more rational criticism.

It is not any comment on Anarchism at all.

It actually says a lot. Find other people who want to start a worker controlled company and just start one. Should be easy.

It is happening everyday all over the world.

But again, this shows any rational criticism has ended.

 

[coloradoatheist]

It actually says a lot. Find other people who want to start a worker controlled company and just start one. Should be easy.

It is happening everyday all over the world.

But again, this shows any rational criticism has ended.

No, because the criticism of that model is that it's not very efficient. It's slow to start, slow growth, slow to change and slow to divest.

 

[untermensche]

It is happening everyday all over the world.

But again, this shows any rational criticism has ended.

No, because the criticism of that model is that it's not very efficient. It's slow to start, slow growth, slow to change and slow to divest.

It was more efficient than the capitalist counterpart in Spain when it was allowed to exist.

Your comments are based on absolutely nothing beyond your prejudices.

 

[coloradoatheist]

No, because the criticism of that model is that it's not very efficient. It's slow to start, slow growth, slow to change and slow to divest.

It was more efficient than the capitalist counterpart in Spain when it was allowed to exist.

Your comments are based on absolutely nothing beyond your prejudices.

And yet you refuse to start a worker owned company. The predictions of that short time of Spain is like predicting the weather 6 months in advance because of the weather of the last 5 minutes. It took 60 years for the USSR to fail.

 

[untermensche]

It was more efficient than the capitalist counterpart in Spain when it was allowed to exist.

Your comments are based on absolutely nothing beyond your prejudices.

And yet you refuse to start a worker owned company. The predictions of that short time of Spain is like predicting the weather 6 months in advance because of the weather of the last 5 minutes. It took 60 years for the USSR to fail.

The Spanish Anarchists were crushed. They didn't fail. They were getting better and better.

Again your criticism comes from nowhere.

It is pulled from thin air.

If capitalists could actually predict what will fail and what will not why is the system constantly failing and in need of one massive government rescue after another?

 

[dismal]

The Spanish Anarchists were crushed. They didn't fail.

This counts as a fail.

One of the central objectives of a government is not to be crushed.

 

[untermensche]

The Spanish Anarchists were crushed. They didn't fail.

This counts as a fail.

One of the central objectives of a government is not to be crushed.

The fact they they were crushed speaks as much to Anarchism as the crushing of the French by the Nazi's speaks to capitalism.

 

[dismal]

This counts as a fail.

One of the central objectives of a government is not to be crushed.

The fact they they were crushed speaks as much to Anarchism as the crushing of the French by the Nazi's speaks to capitalism.

Crushed is crushed. Failed is failed.

 

[Nice Squirrel]

Something that people who smoke a lot of pot and read Foucault think is a good idea.

This.

 

[Nice Squirrel]

And yet you refuse to start a worker owned company. The predictions of that short time of Spain is like predicting the weather 6 months in advance because of the weather of the last 5 minutes. It took 60 years for the USSR to fail.

The Spanish Anarchists were crushed. They didn't fail. They were getting better and better.

No, they failed. They refused to lead when put in charge. And this is why they were crushed.

 

[untermensche]

The Spanish Anarchists were crushed. They didn't fail. They were getting better and better.

No, they failed. They refused to lead when put in charge. And this is why they were crushed.

You don't know the history?

Why do you even speak?

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Yep, this is the primary issue! I've never met an anarchist who has ever had the courage to start their own company. It's extremely difficult to start and control a company. You have to be willing to work long hours and put everything on the line.

It's easy to start a company if you're connected to the social power structure. Certain people are connected and their efforts succeed, while other people's equal efforts do not, even when they do comparable work.

You're not "putting it on the line" if you're connected to the social power structure.

Not everyone knows about what goes on behind the scenes- a poor person could be raised up (succeed at starting a business on "your own") because they are being used to demoralize workers into keeping their low paying jobs.

The thing is, those on top only need a few plants among the workers to stay on top of any possible insurrection or action against them. Can't plan on killing every rich fucker without them finding out... there is always a poor fool who talks. Or is there?

Maybe that's true in a place like Russia. It's not true in the US. Only once have I worked for a business whose owner wasn't simply from the middle class--and that was a short term dismal failure (web startup where the numbers didn't work. I warned them from the start that I didn't think the monetization was going to work, it didn't. I wouldn't have taken it at all except I was unemployed at the time.) Being connected didn't save a bad business plan.

- - - Updated - - -

This is the last resort when one has no more rational criticism.

It is not any comment on Anarchism at all.

It actually says a lot. Find other people who want to start a worker controlled company and just start one. Should be easy.

Except they want a bunch of free capital with no requirement to pay for it.

 

[coloradoatheist]

So we are supposed to take the 3 year sample of the anarchists working and say, "Hey that would happen forever" but we can't take the example of them falling apart as what the system does? Got it.

 

[Kharakov]

It's easy to start a company if you're connected to the social power structure. Certain people are connected and their efforts succeed, while other people's equal efforts do not, even when they do comparable work.

You're not "putting it on the line" if you're connected to the social power structure.

Maybe that's true in a place like Russia. It's not true in the US. Only once have I worked for a business whose owner wasn't simply from the middle class--and that was a short term dismal failure.... Being connected didn't save a bad business plan.

Yeah. It's not pragmatic to prop up a bad business, unless one gains something by doing so.

If propping up the business served the purposes of the connected, it would have been propped up despite being costly.

 

[untermensche]

So we are supposed to take the 3 year sample of the anarchists working and say, "Hey that would happen forever" but we can't take the example of them falling apart as what the system does? Got it.

What are we comparing it to?

Modern capitalism that constantly breaks down and is in constant need of massive government support? Leaving millions of victims every time it happens.

This is the great stable system we have to live up to? A system held together by the force of government.

 

[coloradoatheist]

So we are supposed to take the 3 year sample of the anarchists working and say, "Hey that would happen forever" but we can't take the example of them falling apart as what the system does? Got it.

What are we comparing it to?

Modern capitalism that constantly breaks down and is in constant need of massive government support? Leaving millions of victims every time it happens.

This is the great stable system we have to live up to? A system held together by the force of government.

It doesn't constantly break down, we just have the measures now to make day to day and hour to hour comparisons. How often did the Roman empire calculate it's unemployment rate? They are trying to always tweak it and government trying to engineer the economy instead of allowing it to recover.

 

[skepticalbip]

So we are supposed to take the 3 year sample of the anarchists working and say, "Hey that would happen forever" but we can't take the example of them falling apart as what the system does? Got it.

What are we comparing it to?

Modern capitalism that constantly breaks down and is in constant need of massive government support? Leaving millions of victims every time it happens.

This is the great stable system we have to live up to? A system held together by the force of government.

What utter bullshit. There has never been a time in US history when groups of like minded people were denied the opportunity to start a worker owned business. And you have to go fairly far back in British history to find any such limitation. Many worker owned business have been started during this time, most have failed. Many privately owned businesses have also been started during this time, most have failed. What this tells us is that starting a business is risky no matter who starts it and what its business model is.

What you seem to be advocating is an all powerful government that outlaws privately owned business and supports worker owned business - a government with the power to and which squashes anyone attempting to offer someone else employment. Your personal opinion seems to be that privately owned business is somehow evil (one hell of a religion you have there). You apparently really believe that a worker owned business model can not fail in spite of several hundred years of history that contradict this belief.