Libertarianism permits the existence of both free markets and communal ownership

[New_Zealand_bro]

Here me out guys.

Under libertarianism, your tax paying dollars go towards are protecting rights. You can do whatever you want with the rest of your labor, lives and possessions, no one gives a shit.

If the Communists want to make their own workers co-operative in their own little corner of land (providing they obtain it through mutual agreement and trade, not theft), a libertarian society would let them, they can collectively own shit if they really want, as long as they don't force others to do so. They would be free to practice Communism in peace, and although I personally don't like the idea of communal ownership, others can do it.

In a libertarian society you would be able to have the best of both worlds. Us free marketeers can individually own our property in one corner, and you communists can go in the other corner. Everybody wins.

I think you libertarian Communists and us Right Libertarians would get along together, the individual will get to choose, does he want to work for a commune with a wide safety net, or a cut throat private firm where you climb the ladder and make lots of money. Individual choice

I think the only thing stopping us coming together and being friends is fear. Some people, on both the right and the left. Are afraid that the other side might be right. If free enterprise works best then the libertarian society would only have a few communal firms, if communal ownership works best then their would be little private ownership.

So, how about it? I say both the right and the left join together to repel statism and make our own choices about how we want to work and live:).

[Johnny Kerosene]

How long till the commies rich neighbors decide they want that land and take it by force, and then don't suffer any consequences, because well, they're rich, and the rich seldom take shit with Capitalism. Plus, it's not just about living in a communist society ourselves, that would be selfish, it's about everyone living in one, so that everyone everywhere is equal, and not just the lucky few who had enough cash and weren't already stuck in some shitty job contract with their slave ow.... sorry, boss, preventing them from leaving their employ without risking pseudo-legal consequences.

[New_Zealand_bro]

How long till the commies rich neighbors decide they want that land and take it by force, and then don't suffer any consequences, because well, they're rich, and the rich seldom take shit with Capitalism. Plus, it's not just about living in a communist society ourselves, that would be selfish, it's about everyone living in one, so that everyone everywhere is equal, and not just the lucky few who had enough cash and weren't already stuck in some shitty job contract with their slave ow.... sorry, boss, preventing them from leaving their employ without risking pseudo-legal consequences.

>Plus, it's not just about living in a communist society ourselves, that would be selfish, it's about everyone living in one, so that everyone everywhere is equal,

Ok, now I know why. You guys aren't really libertarians, you want to force others to collectivize.

[Che a chara]

Blackwater inc.

[Che a chara]

You guys aren't really libertarians

who the fuck says we were ?

[#FF0000]

Capitalism's a global system. Communism can't live outside of it as long as it exists.

So no. Capitalism doesn't permit the existence of both.


Ok, now I know why. You guys aren't really libertarians, you want to force others to collectivize.

yes

[New_Zealand_bro]

who the fuck says we were ?

I was told by a commie IRL at the Statist Command economies that currently exist aren't communist. And that Libertarian communism is the "true" communism.

Have I been mislead?

[Che a chara]

This geezer's confused. He/she talks about freedom, individualism, libertarianism and tolerance of other's views and opinions, yet on his/her profile it says:


Anti-immigration, anti socialist
:lol:

[Che a chara]

Liberty and freedom for all except for blacks and reds !! :lol:

[#FF0000]

Have I been mislead?

Different people think different things.

[RGacky3]

How about propety is a democratic issue?

Also your talking utopianism, i.e. if me and you get to remake the world, we can't, we have to fight the powers that be, right now the powers that be are Wallstreet and the Corporate Elite.

[RGacky3]

I was told by a commie IRL at the Statist Command economies that currently exist aren't communist. And that Libertarian communism is the "true" communism.

Have I been mislead?

BTW, we are actally more libertarian than you, we are so libertarian that we want stop telling me and others that we can't go on certain land simply because its "private property," even though we did'nt agree to that. THATS real freedom.

[Property Is Robbery]

Here me out guys.

Under libertarianism, your tax paying dollars go towards are protecting rights. You can do whatever you want with the rest of your labor, lives and possessions, no one gives a shit.

If the Communists want to make their own workers co-operative in their own little corner of land (providing they obtain it through mutual agreement and trade, not theft), a libertarian society would let them, they can collectively own shit if they really want, as long as they don't force others to do so. They would be free to practice Communism in peace, and although I personally don't like the idea of communal ownership, others can do it.

In a libertarian society you would be able to have the best of both worlds. Us free marketeers can individually own our property in one corner, and you communists can go in the other corner. Everybody wins.

I think you libertarian Communists and us Right Libertarians would get along together, the individual will get to choose, does he want to work for a commune with a wide safety net, or a cut throat private firm where you climb the ladder and make lots of money. Individual choice

I think the only thing stopping us coming together and being friends is fear. Some people, on both the right and the left. Are afraid that the other side might be right. If free enterprise works best then the libertarian society would only have a few communal firms, if communal ownership works best then their would be little private ownership.

So, how about it? I say both the right and the left join together to repel statism and make our own choices about how we want to work and live:).
But you believe in private property. That is against any form of libertarian socialism, which yes, is true libertarianism

Edit: Gacky already said it

[Revolution starts with U]

Unfortunately, history tells me our commune could not last alongside your society. Those with always want more.
They asked Laertes (the guy from 300) "how best can we forestall invasion (by the Persians, the largest and richest empire in the known world)."
His response was "remain poor."

Some trumped up pretense would be brought up declaring how it is imperative, in order to protect "liberty" (by that they would mean property), that the commune be invaded and its land, goods, and resource appropriated by the powers that be.

[RGacky3]

Exactly, every time a collective style modern society started, it worked (economically speaking), and every time they were destroyed it was by Capitalist interests detroying it violently, meainig with armies.

[agnixie]

I was told by a commie IRL at the Statist Command economies that currently exist aren't communist. And that Libertarian communism is the "true" communism.

Have I been mislead?

You're against freedom of movement, so you're no libertarian either.

Also, private property is establishing a monopoly on a common good (i.e. land), which is neither produced nor created by humans. The "no initiation of violence" dogma of the libertarian right is its most pernicious lie, as the very fact of claiming land as belonging to you beyond your use of it already initiates violence.

[red cat]

@ the OP :

No form of capitalism can co-exist with communism, because by definition communism is reached only when every form of capitalism along with all of their oppressive social remnants, have been wiped out from the face of the earth. And yes, communists will and must use force to achieve this.

[Baseball]

BTW, we are actally more libertarian than you, we are so libertarian that we want stop telling me and others that we can't go on certain land simply because its "private property," even though we did'nt agree to that. THATS real freedom.

And if the majority decides that you cannot go on certain land even though though you voted "no" in the election making that decision, the result is the same.

[RGacky3]

Its much less likely for a majority to do something like that than for plutocrats, because there is simply more people deciding.

[StoneFrog]

IMO the capitalist sector will undoubtedly effect the communist one, the capitalist outlook fails to see the damage it does on people who don't participate in it. how will resource from the different areas be handled? how will the overwhelming effect of capitalism on environment effect the communes? How i see communism is that it will cut the fat of over production and stop these useless jobs which are there just to hold up capitalism.

The whole system of capitalism libertarian or not, effects on a global scale due to it only working on using the world resources to make profit. No lasting form of socialism can last while there are capitalists grabbing at their heels for their resources. If the capitalist mode of production cannot keep up with their demand, due to creating throw away products it will be the socialist who will pay.

You say "providing they obtain it through mutual agreement and trade, not theft" we say private property is theft.

[progressive_lefty]

Under libertarianism, your tax paying dollars go towards are protecting rights.

I was told by a commie IRL at the Statist Command economies that currently exist aren't communist.

If you going to tell capitalist fairytales, at least get your grammar right.

[Spawn of Stalin]

Here me out guys.

Under libertarianism, your tax paying dollars go towards are protecting rights. You can do whatever you want with the rest of your labor, lives and possessions, no one gives a shit.

If the Communists want to make their own workers co-operative in their own little corner of land (providing they obtain it through mutual agreement and trade, not theft), a libertarian society would let them, they can collectively own shit if they really want, as long as they don't force others to do so. They would be free to practice Communism in peace, and although I personally don't like the idea of communal ownership, others can do it.

In a libertarian society you would be able to have the best of both worlds. Us free marketeers can individually own our property in one corner, and you communists can go in the other corner. Everybody wins.

I think you libertarian Communists and us Right Libertarians would get along together, the individual will get to choose, does he want to work for a commune with a wide safety net, or a cut throat private firm where you climb the ladder and make lots of money. Individual choice

I think the only thing stopping us coming together and being friends is fear. Some people, on both the right and the left. Are afraid that the other side might be right. If free enterprise works best then the libertarian society would only have a few communal firms, if communal ownership works best then their would be little private ownership.

So, how about it? I say both the right and the left join together to repel statism and make our own choices about how we want to work and live:).
It's a nice enough idea. But ultimately I think it would simply lead to full scale Communism. Basically in a libertarian society there would be no way to cover up the achievements of Communism like the United States did the Soviet Union and China, especially when it is right on your doorstep. Workers would see what happened on the Communist side and begin to understand that it is not such a bad thing after all, when faced with the choice of either having a boss pay them little, or being part of a collective "boss" and still receiving material reward for the labour, they will choose the latter. From there on out there would be no stopping Communist expansion, the population would grow and so would their slice of the land, eventually you would be left with a full scale Communist society, with a few minor exceptions of struggling businesses unable to hire anyone, and they would fail soon enough anyway.

The competition which capitalism loves so much would ultimately be the death of it. When debating people who I know are intelligent I always suggest hypothetically that we split the country in two, one half would be capitalist and one half would be socialist, and let them compete for supremacy....this is where they almost always back down and come up with lame excuses about how they don't want to discuss it anymore, because as intelligent people, they know that out of the two, only one is truly productive.

[Struggle]

It's a nice enough idea. But ultimately I think it would simply lead to full scale Communism. Basically in a libertarian society there would be no way to cover up the achievements of Communism like the United States did the Soviet Union and China, especially when it is right on your doorstep. Workers would see what happened on the Communist side and begin to understand that it is not such a bad thing after all, when faced with the choice of either having a boss pay them little, or being part of a collective "boss" and still receiving material reward for the labour, they will choose the latter. From there on out there would be no stopping Communist expansion, the population would grow and so would their slice of the land, eventually you would be left with a full scale Communist society, with a few minor exceptions of struggling businesses unable to hire anyone, and they would fail soon enough anyway.

The competition which capitalism loves so much would ultimately be the death of it. When debating people who I know are intelligent I always suggest hypothetically that we split the country in two, one half would be capitalist and one half would be socialist, and let them compete for supremacy....this is where they almost always back down and come up with lame excuses about how they don't want to discuss it anymore, because as intelligent people, they know that out of the two, only one is truly productive.

That is a complete whitewash of history.

If you think a world revolution did not occur merely because the United States and the Capitalist forces at be wrongly portrayed the Soviet Union as if it was not a liberated workers’ paradise; then you sir, are falling on the brink of insanity.

Its comments like that which make people more hostile towards Marxism and Socialism, because anybody with any brain cells can realise by studying, dare I say it, objective history, that the Soviet Union had significant problems built in even from the very start. The same goes for China. It is precisely because the Soviet Union was not a workers paradise that world revolution did not occur in the first place.

If you want to spread revolution merely by showing the world that Socialism is better; You do not build walls preventing people from leaving the said Socialist country; You do not purge the Socialist society of millions; You do not ban emigration – And why would you need to, if in fact that said Socialist country was a workers paradise?

The most effective method of spreading revolution from country to country is by using the ‘Socialist’ country as an example for other workers throughout the world. But to say that the Soviet Union and China could have been that example is laughable, to say the least.

[Tim Finnegan]

Here me out guys.

Under libertarianism, your tax paying dollars go towards are protecting rights. You can do whatever you want with the rest of your labor, lives and possessions, no one gives a shit.

If the Communists want to make their own workers co-operative in their own little corner of land (providing they obtain it through mutual agreement and trade, not theft), a libertarian society would let them, they can collectively own shit if they really want, as long as they don't force others to do so. They would be free to practice Communism in peace, and although I personally don't like the idea of communal ownership, others can do it.

In a libertarian society you would be able to have the best of both worlds. Us free marketeers can individually own our property in one corner, and you communists can go in the other corner. Everybody wins.

I think you libertarian Communists and us Right Libertarians would get along together, the individual will get to choose, does he want to work for a commune with a wide safety net, or a cut throat private firm where you climb the ladder and make lots of money. Individual choice

I think the only thing stopping us coming together and being friends is fear. Some people, on both the right and the left. Are afraid that the other side might be right. If free enterprise works best then the libertarian society would only have a few communal firms, if communal ownership works best then their would be little private ownership.

So, how about it? I say both the right and the left join together to repel statism and make our own choices about how we want to work and live:).
They key here is the concept of the "mode of production", which is Marx's characterisation of society-wide material orders. While it is certainly possible to entertain collective ownership models within capitalism, they do not actually represent a break from the fundamental logic of capitalism, merely a fine-tuning of it towards collective rather than individual ownership of private property. Only be superseding capitalism entirely, that is to say, by transforming society from one of Generalised Commodity Production to one of Communist Production, can humanity actually achieve social and spiritual emancipation, rather than a mere increase in political freedom (which is not to say that "Libertarianism" actually offers such an opportunity, of course). This demands the universal abolition of private property by the worker class as a class-movement, and not simply the reshuffling of political structures, which is all your "Libertarianism" would allow us.

Besides, you'd all just end up doing something stupid like dumping toxic waste in the waters, so it'd end in a fight one way or the other. Better to sort things out in the first place.

[Klaatu]

I think you are forgetting one important thing (which all "free-marketers" seem to ignore) and that is the criminal element. Sans governmental controls, free markets always evolve into criminal enterprises, more or less. For example, just take a good look at the American system: it's chock full of organized crime, from top to bottom.

[REVLEFT'S BIEGGST MATSER TROL]

Here me out guys.

Under libertarianism, your tax paying dollars go towards are protecting rights. You can do whatever you want with the rest of your labor, lives and possessions, no one gives a shit.

If the Communists want to make their own workers co-operative in their own little corner of land (providing they obtain it through mutual agreement and trade, not theft), a libertarian society would let them, they can collectively own shit if they really want, as long as they don't force others to do so. They would be free to practice Communism in peace, and although I personally don't like the idea of communal ownership, others can do it.

In a libertarian society you would be able to have the best of both worlds. Us free marketeers can individually own our property in one corner, and you communists can go in the other corner. Everybody wins.

I think you libertarian Communists and us Right Libertarians would get along together, the individual will get to choose, does he want to work for a commune with a wide safety net, or a cut throat private firm where you climb the ladder and make lots of money. Individual choice

I think the only thing stopping us coming together and being friends is fear. Some people, on both the right and the left. Are afraid that the other side might be right. If free enterprise works best then the libertarian society would only have a few communal firms, if communal ownership works best then their would be little private ownership.

So, how about it? I say both the right and the left join together to repel statism and make our own choices about how we want to work and live:).

You haven't offered communists a choice to have communism in a capitaist society, you've offered communists the ability to attempt to live in a more eglatarian form of capitalism, which has nothing at all to do with communism.

Your idea only works if you feel communists can be communists while accepting that they are happy to obey a framework of capitalist laws forced apon them. Since I don't feel capitalist property rights are moral, and they certaintly aren't voluntarily chosen for me, I don't feel there can be a commmunist society where people abide by them. You've just foisted your concept of what is a moral society onto us, and claimed we are "free" within it even if we totally oppose such a thing. Despite your claims to be voluntary, accepting, and wanting peopel to be free, your obtuse ideology has blinded you to the fact that you are acting in a totally contary way.

[gorillafuck]

You guys aren't really libertariansTo be honest that's totally true, but the same goes to the reality of your desired socio-economic system. The only people who are actual libertarians are people that try to live in a libertarian way. Because the anarchists on this site clearly believe in a crypto-state but in practice right-libertarianism also does.

[Demogorgon]

This sort of claim is ridiculous because it is akin to arguing that slavery was justified as it allowed for both slave owners to have slaves and those opposed to slavery to not have slaves. And indeed the claim that those of us opposed to private property can buy up land to have communes (totally leaving aside the inequality of resources) is like saying that a slave based system allowed opponents of slavery to buy slaves and grant them manumission.

The problem is private property itself.

[Rafiq]

Ok, now I know why. You guys aren't really libertarians, you want to force others to collectivize.

No, you hear me out.

We as communists are not idealists, like you are.

We want the workers to dictate the world that they created.

We want to fight against Capital.

We think that Society will just adjust itself to communism, in whichever way it pleases. We think the workers aren't idiots, and they will be capable of forming and creating, running a society based on historical experience and common sense.

It's a waste of time talking about the possibilities of a future society now. Why spend time dreaming about solutions when you haven't fully exposed the problem.


True Marxists don't envision what future societies will be like.

"We as communists do not see communism as a general state of affairs that must be achieved, we see communism simply as a process, a process in which the abolishment of certain things take place. Society will just have to adjust itself to communism (or something like that)"

- K. Marx



Our purpose is to take your capitalism, libertarian, or authoritarian, whatever, and simply rip it to pieces scientifically.

[Rafiq]

And if the majority decides that you cannot go on certain land even though though you voted "no" in the election making that decision, the result is the same.

No it's not.

Besides, moralist criticism of capitalism is weak.

[Capitulo]

One issue with Communism in a Libertarian society I've seen is that the Communists aren't giving themselves enough credit. Suppose Dr. Capitalist, the evil rich neighbor, tries to kick the small Communist community off their land to take it for his own. The Communists outnumber him, and are in a much tighter community. A physical fight is the basis of any conflict, and should never be underestimated or overlooked. I agree with the original post, but that's because Libertarianism is close enough to total anarchy to suit my beliefs.