Is all Private Property bad ?

I still think mass-transit (buses, cable cars, rails, etc.) are the real solution. If everyone used mass-transit most routes would run every couple of minutes most of the day so you would never need a schedule. You would need no parking garages, visitors would not have to find a place to park, etc. The streets would need no parking spaces. And since mass transit vehicles would be the majority of vehicles on the street, road repair would be much less frequent. And without personal cars in urban areas we could say "F*ck-You" to the Middle Eastern oil and the USA would produce enough for other needed uses such as heating homes and workplaces.

I can understand the need for personal vehicles or shared vehicles in rural areas but I firmly believe that personal automobiles should be banned in urban areas. We would be healthier and live longer breathing less polluted air and walking to the nearest bus stop, etc. :)

Well, if we're now getting to the finer points of the transportation aspect of urban planning in a hypothetical future communist society, I'll up the ante and even more radically suggest, that instead of creating megacities with behemoth transportation systems (be they public or private) it is much more advisable to aim for compact cities where most of the important stuff is within walking distance. Think Arcology. I think in a postrevolutionary society the entire purpose of and the dynamics of activity within the entity known as a city will have to be reworked completely.
Suffice it to say that while the cities of today are in essence capital generating machines (mostly but, not only, financial districts at the center + factories if any exist) with living and entertainment space attached to them almost as an afterthought, in order to facilitate the efficent ordering about of labour, "the city" within a post-revolutionary society will instead be a creative space for the local residents to collaboratively express themselves (this ties in nicely with the whole getting rid of alienating labour thingy).

I don't give a fuck what the USA produces, and why would you want to say 'fuck you' to our brothers and sisters in Arabia who work in the oil industry? Are you some kind of nationalist/racist?

Draw the line between what? Sorry I don't understand what you mean.

It's just about pointless to own a car in any high density place like that. Or a boat. Or an aeroplane. There are "houses" in Tokyo where you can't even own a bike. But if you WANTED to, you could have a housing cooperative that shared a few cars or something. I think I've seen some highrise coops like this. Not sharing cars, but they shared bathrooms and kitchens and stuff. One was an ex nurses barracks that got sold off to private enterprise. It was like 7 stories and it had a communal kitchen and bathroom on every floor. I think people bought their own food but overall it was very communal. Something like that could easily add car sharing to its MO. If they wanted to. But wanting to is the key.

That's nice. :rolleyes:

I have not done such a thing, what I said was "And without personal cars in urban areas we could say "F*ck-You" to the Middle Eastern oil and the USA would produce enough for other needed uses such as heating homes and workplaces."

You must have not meet many Americans but many of us are sick to death of our sons and daughters being killed in the Middle East for decades in wars for oil!! If we didn't drive so many cars perhaps we would not be fighting in war after war after war in the Middle East. On the contrary I believe all life is sacred, I'm for saving all the American and Arab lives I can by eliminating the main REAL cause for Middle Eastern wars, control of the oil fields.

Eliminating the cause of war is a benefit to Americans as well as Arabs.

I don't understand why you are even asking this question. No I am NOT a racist, I am English, Irish, French, Black Dutch, Jewish and Cherokee Indian.

Your signature says If you believe that then you also would want America completely out of the Middle East.

It's not all about the USA, you are only 5% of the world's population after all.

I know what you said, I read it. So rather than 'Middle Eastern oil' refering to the oil industry in the Middle East as I originally assumed, you want to say 'fuck you' to some minerals that happen to come from the Middle East? Do you think they'll notice? If they do, presumably (as there's no reason oil from the Middle East would understand English) you'd have to tell it 'fuck you ' Arabic or Farsi?

Are you seriously claiming that imperialism is the result of Americans not having a better public transport network?

The cause of war in the modern world is capitalism, not cars.


I don't know what 'America completely out of the Middle East' means. If you can read my signature, you'll see it also says 'Destroy All Nations'. I don't want 'America out of the Middle East', I want the USA to be destroyed. I'm not sure that more buses is the way to do that.

You didn't comprehend a single word I wrote. I'm not sure how I could more clearer but I will try my very best.

I am well aware of that and that is why I said "That's nice." :rolleyes: as it's fine with me if people don't like the products of American workers, especially if they live in another country. Even someone like yourself who does not believe any countries should exist. But I would never use a curse word to describe another countries workers products.:(

Boy talk about misunderstanding, your take on my statements is bizarre indeed. First off I believe that the lives of all Arabs would be better without the grubby hands of the American Oil Companies and the American military bases all over the Middle East not only getting involved with the internal politics of every Arab nation but appropriating most of their national resources (oil) as well. I said "F*ck you" to the American Oil companies and the American Government exploitation of the Middle East, as they wouldn't need to go out of the USA to get MORE oil if USA citizens didn't use so much oil. And it would also the save the lives of hundreds of thousands of American soldiers and and hundreds of thousands of Arabs both military and civilian citizens lives. If you can't see how absolutely evil America's OIL WARS in the Middle East has been for decades I'm not sure what I can say to help you understand. Maybe someone can help me explain to you why America getting out of all the Middle Eastern nations is better for Americans and better for Arabs. :crying:

No, the reason there is not a better public transport network is because too many Americans are too bourgeois with their continued use of personal automobiles as I clearly stated in my post. If more Americans rode public transportation then the service would run more often and to more areas.

I agree but these are NOT mutually exclusive. If you are not aware, the big Oil companies are some of Americas most profitable capitalist enterprises. If we as Americans cut down drastically on our use of personal automobiles then the big Oil companies wouldn't need the power and sacrificed lives of the American military to help secure the Middle East oil for them. Eliminate the demand and America can no long f*ck-over the Middle East, especially killing as many innocent Arab citizens as they do military targets.

First things, first. It is to the advantage of both American and Arabian lives if America gets the hell out of the Middle East completely.

I would not want an elimination of countries until government is no longer necessary. Until we have communism with NO MONEY, from everyone according to their abilities to everyone according to their needs and wants. If we get one world government BEFORE that happens we could end up with a cruel Fascist dictatorship that might repress mankind for Millennia.

The feeling's mutual, believe me.


Good, me too, and perhaps we can make some headway.



Which means it's pretty unclear at exactly which aspect of 'Middle Eastern oil' you're saying 'fuck you' to. You later explain that you mean 'fuck you' not to Middle Eastern oil (not the workers, not the industry, not the actual mineral stuff) but to American involvement in Middle Eastern oil. In other words, rather than saying 'fuck you' to Middle Eastern oil, you're saying 'fuck you' to American capitalism. 'American capitalism' is not the same as 'Middle Eastern oil' so claiming you want to say 'fuck you' to one of them when in fact you want to say 'fuck you' to the other is, to my mind, confusing at best.


Well, I think the lives of all Arabs would be better if the proletariat overthrew capitalism. Fuck American capitalism, and fuck Arab capitalism too.

And if we overthrew capitalism, it wouldn't matter if comrades in the former-USA needed to use oil.

And if there was no America and no military and no wars, that would be even better.

If you can't see that wars are endemic to capitalism I'm not sure what I can say to help you understand.

Maybe someone can explain to you why overthrowing capitalism is better for Americans, Arabs and Belgians.

Hmm, I'm tempted to say 'fuck you' here. 'Oh, the world would be so much better if the workers were just better people, they're too bourgeois because they drive cars, they just don't care about the world like I do'. That's sickening liberal moralistic shite, in my opinion. Fuck blaming the working class for the destruction capitalism causes.

Reforming capitalism and making it slightly nicer is not the game here, if you think it is, I'd suggest going and working for the Democratic Party (or maybe the Greens). Capitalism is the problem, not this or that company. Capitalism needs to be overthrown, not this or that aspect of behaviour changed.


It's to the advantage of Chinese and French and Argentinian and Congolese and Indonesian and Icelandic and Mexican and Zimbabwean and Mongolian and Romanian and Equadorean and Algerian and Pakistani etc etc lives if capitalism is overthrown. Why concentrate on one particualr aspect, a symptom, instead of the whole problem?

Way to go misundertanding the point. I'm not advocating the destruction of states by setting up a state, how is that the destruction of the state? Under capitalism 'one world government' is impossible, in communism it's unnecessary.

Proudhon was using the word; 'property', in the sense of; 'capital.' Anarchism is completely opposed to capital, which necessitates exploitation, but not personal possessions, which do not.

From the AnarchistFAQ;
http://www.infoshop.org/page/AnarchistFAQSectionB3

In what sense is the purpose of motor vehicles illegitimate?

There's every reason to suspect a great number of individuals would still have to commute, even under Socialism, etc.

It isn't clear what you are referring to. I was referring to the need of individuals to travel significant distances to get places, and do things, a purpose for which motor vehicles are quite well suited.

Again; Proudhon was referring to capital. You are either misunderstanding this quote, or deliberately misrepresenting it.

I suspect you'd care if I decided to appropriate them. I would certainly care if you decided to take mine.

Granted.

You would have the right to give it to someone else, either as a gift, or in exchange. You could abuse the car, by, for example; not changing the oil, by grinding the gears, etc., you could even take a baseball bat to it, although that hardly seems rational. You should not be allowed to set the vehicle on fire, as this represents a public safety hazard.

Yes; exactly. Without extracting surplus value, without exploitation, there is no philosophical issue.

As I've said, there's simply no philosophical, or practical reason for an Anarchist to object to the ownership of motor vehicles, or possessions; in general. Motor vehicles serve a practical purpose, and it's likely to assume that in a Socialist society they would still be widely used.

You are getting closer to the meaning of the one sentence you couldn't comprehend: "And without personal cars in urban areas we could say "F*ck-You" to the Middle Eastern oil and the USA would produce enough for other needed uses such as heating homes and workplaces." I didn't think I would have to give you a history of the USA/Arab Oil wars for you to try to understand why I don't believe that Middle Eastern Oil is worth the HIGH cost in American and Arabian lives. I hate killing for no reason and killing for oil is one of the stupidest reasons man has ever came up with, I guess you were unaware of all the USA/Arab Wars and that the CIA put Shah of Iran in power in 1953 and has been involved in the internal affairs of oil rich Middle Eastern countries up to this very day when we are in three Arabian Wars all at once. It makes me sick to my stomach and very ashamed of my government for being of pawn of the capitalist Big American Oil companies. I expected the USA's despicable history in the Middle East was also known by the rest of the world.

I can't pretend the whole world will be communist tomorrow or even in my lifetime. But I can be pissed at both the Oil companies and the bourgeois who are too high and mighty to use public transportation. In fact I feel those who own cars that are not needed indirectly contribute to the hundreds of thousands of deaths of both American and Arabian citizens. It is HELL. And I am insulted you don't care more about all the people who NEEDLESSLY died for the greedy Oil companies.

So I am sorry that you didn't understand the reprehensible USA history in the Middle East to comprehend that one simple sentence that explained it all.

I agree, however first things first. Saving the lives of young Americans and innocent Arabs has to come first, because we can do that now. When is REAL communism coming? I've been waiting my whole life.

True, however Oil is not a renewable resource, when it is gone, it's gone. So it is not fair to future generations of human beings to squander it now. I see REAL communism making the maximum use of public transportation, and that personal automobiles be seen as the bourgeois artifacts they are.

I agree, however we are not there yet as a planet.

I do and there is nothing more capitalist than Big Oil and personal automobiles. That is what you don't understand.

I have known this for over 40 years, give me a gun I am ready to fight the evil capitalists in my country, but I can't do it alone!!

If you did then it would reveal you as a member of the bourgeois class. NO!!!! The proletariat should live by example until the liberating revolution comes ushering in REAL communism. It is pure simple logic to understand the reason there is not a better public transport network is because too many people are too bourgeois with their continued use of personal automobiles as I clearly stated twice before. If more people rode public transportation then the service would run more often and to more areas. What about this do you not understand? It would be the same under capitalism as under communism. The more buses the proletariat fill up the more often they can run.

I never blame the proletariat working class for anything at anytime! It's the bourgeois capitalists, and those proletariat who pretend to be or wish to be bourgeois by putting on airs with their personal automobiles usually with just a single occupant, spewing pollutants into the air I breath, clogging the streets of the city I live in. Public transportation is proletariat and wasteful personal automobiles are bourgeois and nobody will convince me otherwise.

I never said such a thing, but keeping capitalism from destroying innocent proletariat lives before the communist revolution comes is MANDATORY!!! Hiding your head in the sand until that happens is chicken shit in my humble opinion. I agree capitalism needs to be overthrown, help me build an army and we will.

Agreed but as I clearly said "First things, first." We need to live day to day until capitalism can be abolished.

I know you are not, but you can't vouch for other revolutionaries. As I stated I would not want an elimination of countries until government is no longer necessary. Until we have communism with NO MONEY, from everyone according to their abilities to everyone according to their needs and wants. If we get one world government BEFORE that happens we could end up with a cruel Fascist dictatorship that might repress mankind for Millennia.

In other words if not done correctly the revolution could be subverted like it was in the USSR and with a terrible one world government instead of the desired end: No government at all.

I'm insulted that you don't bother to read or think about other people's posts before you spew moralistic drivel about them.

Really. Take your liberalism elsewhere, I'm not interested.

I read this whole thread and every single post including your idea of car-sharing, did you?

One is either proletariat or bourgeois, I am proud to be a member of the proletariat and a friend of the Earth. No one will change my opinions of the evilness of the Oil industry or owning personal automobiles.

How can YOU justify the needless deaths of Americans and Arabs in the name of OIL PROFITS?

I'm not interested in liberalism, in fact I abhor both liberals and conservatives with every fiber of my being! I am a progressive communist and believe in the working class completely.

No you don't. You describe the working class as 'bourgeois' because it drives cars, and you look down on it for not living up to your hippy ideals - that seems pretty obvious to me anyway.

You have a ridiculous notion that driving less would mean the US wouldn't throw its military weight around. Do you also believe that the American working class is to blame for death-squads in Central America because of its 'bourgeois' consumption of pinapples and bananas? Do you also believe that the 'bourgeois' use of batteries by American workers is to blame for the collusion of Rio Tinto Zinc with the Pinochet regime?

Your solutions are ridiculous utopianism. There is no class analysis at all, all you're proposing is changes of behaviour inside capitalism.

Why on earth do you think I'd want to justify people being killed for oil profits? Do you even read other people's posts, or just splurge half-cocked nonsense if someone disagrees with you? I'm attacking you for being a liberal, for wanting to keep capitalism intact and just putting a happier face on it. How is that in any way justifying capitalism's wars? I want to destroy capitalism. You just want to make it shinier.