Libertarian Communism

[dude]

I would like to know more about libertarian communism.
about what it is and what it stands for

[Delirium]

www.libcom.org is a good site.

Anarchism is largely comparable with libertarian communism / socialism also.

[Stranger Than Paradise]

Libertarian Communism, in most cases refers to Anarchist Communism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarchist_communism).

[Catbus]

I know The Levellers' Stand has a good definition of what libertarian communism is, I just don't know it off the top of my head.

[Vincent P.]

Libertarian communism's definition is pretty much in the name. It is communism, for there is common ownership of the means of production and all the stuff, and it is libertarian because there is no state or any institution.

At the end there is little difference with marxist communism, which is at the end a stateless, classless, ect society (not to be confounded with USSR-like state capitalism). The difference is how we reach communism: marxists want a revolution and dictatorship of the proletariat, which is still a state, while anarchist communists want to get rid of government and authority as soon as they can and not necessarily with a global revolution.

Libertarian communism can be achieved either with a violent revolution or, as I advocate, by undermining capitalism and the state with communes, or the two of them. I like the last option better because we can build a commune and achieve communism tomorow morning, efficiently and without violence.

[Pogue]

Libertarian communism's definition is pretty much in the name. It is communism, for there is common ownership of the means of production and all the stuff, and it is libertarian because there is no state or any institution.

At the end there is little difference with marxist communism, which is at the end a stateless, classless, ect society. The difference is how we reach communism: marxists want a revolution and dictatorship of the proletariat, which is still a state, while anarchist communists want to get rid of government and authority as soon as they can and not necessarily with a global revolution.

Libertarian communism can be achieved either with a violent revolution or, in my case, by undermining capitalism and the state with communes, or the two of them. I like the last option better because we can build a commune and achieve communism tomorow morning, efficiently and without violence.


Emphasis mine. Thats the most ridiculous claim I've ever heard. All anarcho-communists are revolutionaries. Setting up communes is lifestylism, not revolutionary class politics.

Why one earth would anyone join a 'commune' in capitalism? What would stop capitalism just destroying it? What about those who didn't join?

Its not a real anarcho-communist position and its politically and tactically ridiculous.

All anarcho-communists want a global revolution, too.

[Vincent P.]

All anarcho-communists are revolutionaries. Setting up communes is lifestylism, not revolutionary class politics.

Why one earth would anyone join a 'commune' in capitalism? What would stop capitalism just destroying it? What about those who didn't join?

Its not a real anarcho-communist position and its politically and tactically ridiculous.

All anarcho-communists want a global revolution, too.

Why should I endure living under capitalism while waiting for a revolution? Why couldn't I participate to a global revolution if I live in a commune? Also communes aren't innocent: you're free from taxes and capitalists can't spoil you, so if it's a mass movement it could be quite damaging. Don't get me wrong, I'm for a revolution, but I'm also for offering the possibility of an immediate emancipation from capitalism for those who are interested.

So fuck yeah, I'm anarcho-communist. You don't have no copyright on the concept.


I don't pretend to speak for all anarcho-communist with my commune thing though. It's more personal stuff.

[teenagebricks]

Lifestylism or not, establishing a commune is extremely progressive, even if it only progressive for the small number of people involved. There are some people on this planet of ours who don't want to wait five hundred years for the left to get off their backsides and start making a difference. If it constitutes lifestylism then so be it, not everyone wants to be the next Che Guevara, some people just want to start living better lives as soon as possible.

[Vincent P.]

Absolutly. Moreover, living in a commune doesn't deny you the right to be part of the revolution like any "normal" anarchist. You can print book and pamphlets in communes, you can build bombs in communes, you can do what you want as well if not better than in the very middle of a capitalist society.

[welshboy]

Why should I endure living under capitalism while waiting for a revolution?
Why are you waiting for the revolution? Anarcho-Communists work towards the revolution.

Why couldn't I participate to a global revolution if I live in a commune?Because you have disconnected yourself from the rest of the class by dropping out and living in some hippy place in the sticks.

Also communes aren't innocent: you're free from taxes and capitalists can't spoil you,Not at all, communes still have to pay rent/mortgages and taxes. People who live in communes still have to pay the bills. And besides capitalism is a social relationship. You can't just drop out of it.

so if it's a mass movement it could be quite damaging. Don't get me wrong, I'm for a revolution, but I'm also for offering the possibility of an immediate emancipation from capitalism for those who are interested.Like I said capitalism is a social relationship that pervades all human interactions, whether you live in a commune, a tower block or a shop doorway.


So fuck yeah, I'm anarcho-communist. You don't have no copyright on the concept.Well actually we kinda do. You can't go around redefining words to suit yourself, as fun as that may be. I could just as easily say that I'm a fascist as Fascism stands for the self emancipation of the working class and the establishment of a decentralised system of workplace and community councils interacting on a federative basis. Wouldn't make it true.
I don't doubt that you wish for an anarchist communist world but our actions as much as our theory define our politics. I mean almost all on the left desire an anarcho-communist society as the highest order of human society. However different political groups envision different ways of getting there.
For the authoritarian left it is by building the vanguard party and siezing control of the state
For Anarcho-Communists it's by engaging in the class struggle in order to build a revolutionary class, not by living on a commune.
It's up to you if you want to do that but it's engagement with the class struggle and the manner in which one does so that makes an Anarcho-Communist.

[Vincent P.]

Because you have disconnected yourself from the rest of the class by dropping out and living in some hippy place in the sticks. WTF? :laugh: If I'm living with like-minded anarchist in a place where anarcho-communism is applied, I'm disconnecting myself from the rest of the class? Do you know the internet? i'm living in a lost redneck town right now, with no anarchist inside a 200 km radius, and I'm a devote revolutionary. How could it be harder in a commune full or anarchist?


I can still write pamphlet and build bombs and whatever an anarchist want to do from a commune, working at McDonald's 8h a day for crapitalists while wearing a Che Guevara shirt doesn't help the working class.


Not at all, communes still have to pay rent/mortgages and taxes. People who live in communes still have to pay the bills. And besides capitalism is a social relationship. You can't just drop out of it.
Wow XD. I personally knew people living disconnected from government (and not from the people, on the contrary), who did live and didn't pay taxes exept when they were buying goods produced outside the commune.


Like I said capitalism is a social relationship that pervades all human interactions, whether you live in a commune, a tower block or a shop doorway.
Bwawawa. Educate yourself: capitalism is private ownership of the means of production and wage slavery. Where is capitalism in a commune where gift economy and common ownership of production is applied?


For Anarcho-Communists it's by engaging in the class struggle in order to build a revolutionary class, not by living on a commune.

An anarcho-communist is someone advocating a-communism. Now if I apply a-communism I'm no more an anarcho-communist? That's dead retarded.

[Stranger Than Paradise]

WTF? :laugh: If I'm living with like-minded anarchist in a place where anarcho-communism is applied, I'm disconnecting myself from the rest of the class? Do you know the internet? i'm living in a lost redneck town right now, with no anarchist inside a 200 km radius, and I'm a devote revolutionary. How could it be harder in a commune full or anarchist?


I can still write pamphlet and build bombs and whatever an anarchist want to do from a commune, working at McDonald's 8h a day for crapitalists while wearing a Che Guevara shirt doesn't help the working class.

The person working in McDonalds is more help in all honesty. That person is engaging in class struggle: agitating and organising the workplace. Libing in a commune whilst capitalism continues WITH OTHER ANARCHISTS means you will be detached from the real struggle.

[teenagebricks]

Regardless, I think it's a bit unfair, not to mention entirely untrue, to state that a true anarchist can not live in a commune. I would suggest taking a closer look by actually visiting a commune, I'm sure you will find a whole bunch of anarchists. Not only that but I think living in a commune would be a fantastic learning experience for any would be revolutionary, anarchist or otherwise.

[robbo203]

Libertarian communism's definition is pretty much in the name. It is communism, for there is common ownership of the means of production and all the stuff, and it is libertarian because there is no state or any institution.

At the end there is little difference with marxist communism, which is at the end a stateless, classless, ect society (not to be confounded with USSR-like state capitalism). The difference is how we reach communism: marxists want a revolution and dictatorship of the proletariat, which is still a state, while anarchist communists want to get rid of government and authority as soon as they can and not necessarily with a global revolution.

Libertarian communism can be achieved either with a violent revolution or, as I advocate, by undermining capitalism and the state with communes, or the two of them. I like the last option better because we can build a commune and achieve communism tomorow morning, efficiently and without violence.

I think it is largely true what you say about Marxists although there are some notable exceptions like the WSM who question the need for a dictatorship of the proletariat under the altered circumstances we face today. I agree with the WSM. The transition is now, not after the capture of political power

I too support the idea of lifestyle change but not as a substitute for revolutionary politics but to complement this. The one can reinforce the other and mutually benefit each other in synergistic fashion- A good example of this is the Escanda commune in northern Spain which espouses core libertarian communist values. Here is the link http://www.escanda.org/english/indexen.php

[Pogue]

Regardless, I think it's a bit unfair, not to mention entirely untrue, to state that a true anarchist can not live in a commune. I would suggest taking a closer look by actually visiting a commune, I'm sure you will find a whole bunch of anarchists. Not only that but I think living in a commune would be a fantastic learning experience for any would be revolutionary, anarchist or otherwise.

Anarchists can live in communes but its useless to the point fo being counter-productive. And communes don't make a revolution, which is what the person I originally quoted was saying.

[welshboy]

WTF? :laugh: If I'm living with like-minded anarchist in a place where anarcho-communism is applied, I'm disconnecting myself from the rest of the class? Do you know the internet? i'm living in a lost redneck town right now, with no anarchist inside a 200 km radius, and I'm a devote revolutionary. How could it be harder in a commune full or anarchist?
How does living with people who have the same political opinions as you help to spread anarchist ideas? How does it contribute to the class struggle? How does it build confidence, competence and consciousness within the rest of our class?
Perhaps by organising with your neighbours and workmates you could help contribute towards the revolution.



I can still write pamphlet and build bombs and whatever an anarchist want to do from a commune, working at McDonald's 8h a day for crapitalists while wearing a Che Guevara shirt doesn't help the working class.Working at McDonalds would at least offer you the opportunity to organise with your fellow workers and therefore contribuite towards the class struggle.



Wow XD. I personally knew people living disconnected from government (and not from the people, on the contrary), who did live and didn't pay taxes exept when they were buying goods produced outside the commune.So they do buy goods produced by capitalism. They are therefore still participating in maintaining capitalist society.



Bwawawa. Educate yourself: capitalism is private ownership of the means of production and wage slavery. Where is capitalism in a commune where gift economy and common ownership of production is applied? You have already admitted that the communards you speak of rely upon the capitalist mode of production.



An anarcho-communist is someone advocating a-communism. Now if I apply a-communism I'm no more an anarcho-communist? That's dead retarded.So by living in some commune you have instigated a global system whereby Communism is the dominant mode of production and workplace and community councils network federatively on a worldwide scale? Well done, I figured you were just a drop out.

[Vincent P.]

That person is engaging in class struggle: agitating and organising the workplace.
Writing pamphlets and using a positive form of the propaganda of the deed by creating a sucessful anarcho-communist experience isn't?

With all those average joes and janes who think socialism is an unfeasable utopia, giving them a concrete exemple(s) would be kinda clever.

[Vincent P.]

Anarchists can live in communes but its useless to the point fo being counter-productive. And communes don't make a revolution, which is what the person I originally quoted was saying.


Is it about making a revolution for fun, or to achieve anarchism?

[Vincent P.]

How does living with people who have the same political opinions as you help to spread anarchist ideas?
How does it contribute to the class struggle? How does it build confidence, competence and consciousness within the rest of our class?
Perhaps by organising with your neighbours and workmates you could help contribute towards the revolution.


Writing pamphlets and using a positive form of the propaganda of the deed by creating a sucessful anarcho-communist experience isn't?

With all those average joes and janes who think socialism is an unfeasable utopia, giving them a concrete exemple(s) would be kinda clever.


Working at McDonalds would at least offer you the opportunity to organise with your fellow workers and therefore contribuite towards the class struggle.
Do I have to offer sweat and blood to capitalists like they do to be convincing? The best pro-cappie answer they could get is "then why you're working here if you're not happy?". Why indeed? The only difference they see between us and me is that I speak evil of the evil doer, yet I work for them, and screw me: those guys are just ever-teenager trouble makers who want to convert me and what then?


So they do buy goods produced by capitalism. They are therefore still participating in maintaining capitalist society.
Refusing to sell your labour power is already a big achievement, isn't it? Now let's get real and start somewhere: I want communes to be a mean to help achieving revolution, not as an ultimate goal. We'll have to rely on non-socialist goods for a while, until our sphere of influence grow. You'll have to buy sugar and flour until you can produce it.
This will be so no matter how you manage a revolution.


So by living in some commune you have instigated a global system whereby Communism is the dominant mode of production and workplace and community councils network federatively on a worldwide scale? Well done, I figured you were just a drop out.
A forest don't pop out of the blue, it grows around a tree.

[Pogue]

Is it about making a revolution for fun, or to achieve anarchism?

I don't get it?

I'm saying communes don't acheive anything and ignore the structure of capitalism, i.e. as a class system.

[Vincent P.]

I don't get it?

I'm saying communes don't acheive anything and ignore the structure of capitalism, i.e. as a class system.

Sorry about that. It's just that sometime I feels as if some people want the fall of capitalism more than the raise of socialism. I mean come on... you guys are condemning anarchists when they try to build an anarchist experience because it isn't an action meant to give a direct blow to capitalism. :mellow:

But I stick to my point: creating sucessful anarchist experiences would convert more people than *****ing and doing nothing positive. I'm not saying we should stop *****ing, but that we should ***** while standing on something concrete.
Most people are just opportunists. It's quite sad, but true. All they understand is "what can you do better than capitalists?", because for the last few 150 years or so, the best we reached is being anarchists living in capitalism, suffering stigmatization and repression. When people hear anarchism, they think mad bombman instead of social innovator. Why do you think most anarchist don't reach 30 years old?

[Pogue]

Sorry about that. It's just that sometime I feels as if some people want the fall of capitalism more than the raise of socialism. I mean come on... you guys are condemning anarchists when they try to build an anarchist experience because it isn't an action meant to give a direct blow to capitalism. :mellow:

But I stick to my point: creating sucessful anarchist experiences would convert more people than *****ing and doing nothing positive. I'm not saying we should stop *****ing, but that we should ***** while standing on something concrete.
Most people are just let it be. It's quite sad, but true. All they understand is "what can you do better than capitalists?", because for the last few 150 years or so, the best we reached is being anarchists living in capitalism, suffering stigmatization and repression. When people hear anarchism, they think mad bombman instead of social innovator. Why do you think most anarchist don't reach 30 years old?

I know laods of anarchists over 30. What on earth are you talking about? And what the hell is a mad bombman?

In fact what is this whole post about. Anarchists have plenty of ideas on what to replace capitalism with. Its called anarchy.

We focus on aoblishing capitalism because thats the task in the here and now. We recognise this is done through a proletarian revolution, worldwide, which replaces capitalism with communism, which is better.

Stop making vague ramblings. You can't destroy a social relationship and agressive class society by encouraging everyone to live in a commune. I don't want to live in a commune and no one should have to need too. We want to destory capitalism not escape from it/try to exist independently of it but within it as a world system (oxymoron yes, but thats just the point)

[Vincent P.]

I know laods of anarchists over 30.
Sure you do. But I also know a load of people who left their ideas and took capitalism as a fatality when it's been time to create a family.


And what the hell is a mad bombman?

In fact what is this whole post about. Anarchists have plenty of ideas on what to replace capitalism with. Its called anarchy.
Of course we do. All I'm doing here is thinking propaganda. Here is an anarchy in most people's mind:
http://colorado.indymedia.org/files/black%20bloc.jpg

Now try to explain the average worker that it's what him and his family need.

What I'm saying here is that before starting to riot, we must get support from the population, and this can only be done if we make positive achievements, such as communes. At 40 with 2 kids, most people don't feel like fighting capitalism, they feel like building stability and live better. I know you'll need to do the first step first, but class struggle must not over-shadow what will come after. You've got your answer for the bomberman thing.


We focus on aoblishing capitalism because thats the task in the here and now. We recognise this is done through a proletarian revolution, worldwide, which replaces capitalism with communism, which is better.
Yup I know what we want, but what I'm saying is that theory never impressed anyone looking for stability, as I tried to explain above. That's why I think our troops are outnumbered: we don't have no concrete to convince people. There will be a time when you will have to accept that most people don't have the gut to die for some abstract notions of class struggle, yet we need them on our side.




You can't destroy a social relationship and agressive class society by encouraging everyone to live in a commune. I don't want to live in a commune and no one should have to need too. We want to destory capitalism not escape from it/try to exist independently of it but within it as a world system (oxymoron yes, but thats just the point)
Lol I don't want everybody to live in a commune, I want people to say "hey look those people in communes, they look real happy without [intern] capitalism, NYC should be like that!". Then the riots may start.



All this is to say that communes aren't useless shelters for drop out anarchists, but useful for revolution, and that we should not be ashamed of emancipating ourself from capitalism. People will follow if they're jealous of anarchy, not if anarchism means being low-class proletarian clothed in black.

[Pogue]

Sure you do. But I also know a load of people who left their ideas and took capitalism as a fatality when it's been time to create a family.


Of course we do. All I'm doing here is thinking propaganda. Here is an anarchy in most people's mind:
http://colorado.indymedia.org/files/black%20bloc.jpg

Now try to explain the average worker that it's what him and his family need.

What I'm saying here is that before starting to riot, we must get support from the population, and this can only be done if we make positive achievements, such as communes. At 40 with 2 kids, most people don't feel like fighting capitalism, they feel like building stability and live better. I know you'll need to do the first step first, but class struggle must not over-shadow what will come after. You've got your answer for the bomberman thing.


Yup I know what we want, but what I'm saying is that theory never impressed anyone looking for stability, as I tried to explain above. That's why I think our troops are outnumbered: we don't have no concrete to convince people. There will be a time when you will have to accept that most people don't have the gut to die for some abstract notions of class struggle, yet we need them on our side.




Lol I don't want everybody to live in a commune, I want people to say "hey look those people in communes, they look real happy without [intern] capitalism, NYC should be like that!". Then the riots may start.



All this is to say that communes aren't useless shelters for drop out anarchists, but useful for revolution, and that we should not be ashamed of emancipating ourself from capitalism. People will follow if they're jealous of anarchy, not if anarchism means being low-class proletarian clothed in black.

You misunderstand how anarchism would come about if you think if we get enough people to see a commune, they'll become anarchists. Education and moving to one ideology comes through struggle and anarchism becoming relevant to people's everyday lives. By removing yourself from ordinary society and living in a commune you wont get any coverage and will be irrelevant to most people who wont ever even know your commune exists. By participating in their bread and butter struggles, like occupations, and putting a political bend on these, you become relevant. Its not about people looking at us acting on our own and deciding 'i want some of that', its about us showing our ideas to be relevant and correct by applying them to the real world.

[Sprocket Hole]

Im sorry Vincent P. , but just as your average apolitical bystander viewing a Food Not Bombs chapter or Critical Mass in action will not have a life changing anarchist epiphany that will revolutionize them, neither will a person looking at a commune. I mean communes are great, but there's not much about it helping the working class become conscious, or effect much change anywhere.

What about gentrification? Foreclosure? Class struggle?
While you sit cozy in your commune, the working class will still be evicted, exploitated, oppresed, and so on.

I mean certian FNB style and CM-like actions could be benificial for our struggle, if the intintions are that way, but I can't really think of any way a commune could be revolutionary.

I mean you could live in a commune and still engage with the working class, have a job, etc, wouldnt you? To say if the commune wasnt out in the middle of nowhere?

[Stranger Than Paradise]

But Vincent P. A commune is not the way to change peoples minds about Anarchism. Class struggle is. As me and others have previously mentioned you would be doing better to educate people of the idea by working at McDonalds. If you are in a commune living with other Anarchists then you will have minimal effect on the working population. If anything it would further sway people from the idea by seeing the stereotypical 'lifestylist' Anarchists.

[Schrödinger's Cat]

I'll sign up for a commune, provided it has (or will have) internet access, separate housing, personal possessions, telephones, automobiles, and a commitment to technological advancement.

Yellow pages are coming up with nothing...

[Delirium]

I don't get it?

I'm saying communes don't acheive anything and ignore the structure of capitalism, i.e. as a class system.

I agree that communes don't directly challenge capitalism, but no one action or project will overthrow capitalism. The revolution will be a patchwork quilt of movements, projects, views, and revolutionaries.

Communes can change social relations between the people in them and people interacting with them. Communes can be a liberated space for use by various revolutionary projects that may not exist elsewhere. Communes can also show that alternatives exist and mono culture does not have to be reproduced.