Question to socialists

[Strange Worker]

I'm not an antagonist opponent of socialism, but I do have some questions that I hope can be resolved from our resident community. My interest in socialism has been peaked for the past few months. I picked up a few works by Karl Marx and Peter Kropotkin, but I couldn't agree with everything that was said about communism. I hope you can answer my questions. Would I be allowed to start my own non-corporate business after capitalism if I didn't want to join a communist association? I've always stived for my own bookstore, and my wife would like to become rich enough one day to start a vertical farm cooperative. Supposing I could get enough people interested in working at my bookstore, or her farm? How will individualistic projects like large-production movies be handled? Will the writer have to concede parts of his plot via democratic vote? Will I be able to possess a getaway house for when I want to go out and fish? I already own some land by a lake where I visit frequently, and I'm in the proccess of building a lodge. Thanks for your time.

[#FF0000]

Would you be able to open a business? Well, not in Anarchist Communism and Socialism. You could work in a worker-run library, or something, but owning businesses is not possible, since there is no private property (land, factories, farms, stores...etc).

As for the movies, that's depends. I don't see why a writer would have to concede plot points as you said (but the thought of it is pretty funny :lol:). What would likely happen is a guy with a script puts out a notice that he is looking for actors and a crew to put on a show, and all who are interested would contact the writer/director. They'd just work it out from there.

I'm not so sure about owning that getaway house, either. I imagine some sort of time-share system would work in that situation.

In any case, I think you should look into Mutualism, the socioeconomic system proposed by Jean-Pierre Proudhon. I think you'll agree more with that than non-market Socialism or Anarchist Communism.

EDIT: Fixed just for you, GeneCosta.

[Schrödinger's Cat]

Realize that there are large disagreements over how post-capitalism will be approached, Worker.


I think you'll agree more with that than Socialism or Anarchist Communism. A slight agitation: mutualism is a form of socialism.


Would I be allowed to start my own non-corporate business after capitalism if I didn't want to join a communist association?Sure. Technically if you want to stretch the definition of a corporation to be any business model that "pools" resources together with a promise of something in return, you could start a corporation, but no contracts are going to be forced onto a different party, so you're going to rely on trust and not law. Corporate personhood and limited liability would also be virtually non-existent.

Typing that second sentence nearly made me ruin the carpet.


Supposing I could get enough people interested in working at my bookstore, or her farm?Of course. You would have to take into account that no state is going to protect your property, though, and that most people aren't going to be interested in such a system when they could join a communist association or even form their own cooperative. After a certain point holding property is going to become very expensive when others call into question your claims. Social anarchists are not going to protect your commercial property - many will probably strike against it or even violate the land; if you rely on "defense" agencies they're going to be very limited and the cost burden will probably restrict your commercial interests to a few bookstores. You would have to be quite an excellent community organizer and weaken your expense margins to ~0 to keep building up.

Over a short period of time private defense agencies will smarten up to the fact that social anarchism is a prevalent model of human thought. PDAs will ask big sums for defense of commercial property that is far away from your location. Anarcho-capitalists make the mistake of believing their system will just quell all opposition in a post-state society. People don't sit idle and obey absolutist notions. Pacifists will sometimes attack a violent criminal, and free speech proponents will lash out against racialists. Even large amounts of anarcho-individualists will call for the overthrow of abusive private conditions.

But the opposite won't be true. Individualists (well, real ones, not anarcho-capitalists) champion free association, so they have no legitimate concern with communist and collectivist organizations. Not to mention these collectivist models will be united - increasing their power - whereas private defense agencies are competing.


How will individualistic projects like large-production movies be handled? Will the writer have to concede parts of his plot via democratic vote?
Rorschach's statement is reasonable. You would approach a workers' council with your proposition, and they would decide to run with it. Before the project starts the writer would probably arbitrate with the council over what is going to be changed.

Or if you can manage it go the individual route and set up a studio at home, or build one.


Will I be able to possess a getaway house for when I want to go out and fish? Most likely. Since it's not commercial few social anarchists are going to dispute your claim, as long as you didn't possess it through force.

[JimmyJazz]

How will individualistic projects like large-production movies be handled? Will the writer have to concede parts of his plot via democratic vote?

"Individualistic"? Hollywood movies are funded by corporate studios, who are accountable to their shareholders.

Anyway, addressing what I think is the larger question behind this, I too have wondered about the status of art in a socialist society. Basically I think the state shouldn't touch it. If someone is able to make millions of dollars by entertaining people, I have no problem with that. Talented musicians can form bands and talented athletes can form teams, and more power to them if they can get rich by attracting a tremendous number of people to pay for the creative work they do.

The same doesn't go for people making millions of dollars merely by financing the entertainment of some people (audience) by another person (writer/director/basketball player/whatever). Thus I wouldn't hesitate to socialize giant, corporate movie studios if other businesses of the same size were being socialized. If anyone worries about only state-friendly art getting financed, well, they simply need to pay more attention to the content of current blockbuster films; they are choc full of deliberately pro-corporate, pro-capitalist, and pro-nationalist propaganda. There is no such thing as value-free art, nor the value-free financing of art. Not under socialism, but not under capitalism either.

Some socialists might believe there is a need for public art, but I'm not sure. In a genuinely socialist society all people would have a meaningful job providing them with a reasonable income, and could afford to pay for access to entertainment of their choosing. Certainly there is no need to have all art be public art, and I would strongly resist any effort to do this.

I've actually been wanting to check out this book (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/B000NOYT1E/ref=ord_cart_shr?%5Fencoding=UTF8&v=glance) and this book (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0520011813/ref=ord_cart_shr?%5Fencoding=UTF8&v=glance) to see how this worked in the Soviet Union. Trotsky also wrote a lot (http://www.marxists.org/archive/trotsky/works/art/index.htm) about socialism and art but I haven't read any of it.


Would I be allowed to start my own non-corporate business after capitalism if I didn't want to join a communist association? I've always stived for my own bookstore

check out this thread. (http://www.revleft.com/vb/done-small-businesses-t90402/index.html?t=90402)

[Schrödinger's Cat]

Most wealthy artisans and athletes rely on the state (corporations, patents, copyrights, trademarks) to make that much wealth. I could see JK Rowling squeezing out a few million, but her billion-dollar value comes from force. On my nice days I believe - if anarchism does not come into fruition (yet) - copyrights should only be utilized against firms, not people. That way you don't have some snot-nosed entrepreneur printing the same book and distributing on en masse to the disadvantage of the writer, but the state doesn't chase me down for not citing a page.

[synthesis]

I've always thought of a good post-capitalist paradigm in the sense that if you have free time, and you can put a computer or a car together yourself, you should be able to trade those for others' luxury items. I don't see trading of commodities as an "evil" on par with wage slavery.

[Schrödinger's Cat]

Few here would.

[Nusocialist]

I'm not an antagonist opponent of socialism, but I do have some questions that I hope can be resolved from our resident community. My interest in socialism has been peaked for the past few months. I picked up a few works by Karl Marx and Peter Kropotkin,
Pretty diverse thinkers there, personally I prefer Kropotkin. Marx is interesting but he has nothing on Kropotkin in my view.



I hope you can answer my questions. Would I be allowed to start my own non-corporate business after capitalism if I didn't want to join a communist association?
Depends on the kind of busienss. In most forms of anarchism and libertarian socialism you would as long as it was just based on direct occupancy and use. In anarcho-communism there would be no money though.




and my wife would like to become rich enough one day to start a vertical farm cooperative.
Why wait? Start or join a land trust or start a homestead and encourage others to join you and start a co-op or something like that.

[mikelepore]

Would I be allowed to start my own non-corporate business

These common "would" questions, questions about specific form, assume that there is a unique and official answer, and the inquirer wants to be informed about what that answer is. There are an infinite number of possible futures. You can ask a thousand people and get a thousand mutually exclusive answers. Each individual must decide: What form do you believe a classless society should take, in order to make it most democratic, most just, most efficient? Join the movement, advocate the form that you prefer, and explain to others why. Hopefully, when the time comes to choose a new system, every individual will get one vote. Even after the people choose, the system's form can be amended again and again.