What is wrong with wage labour?

I despise wage labour, but I'm unable to give too great arguments about it outside the labour theory of value.

What do you think is wrong with it(apart from arguments derived from the LTV.)?

And does anyone have any good links on this?

It is simply crazy. With an integrated system, as a supra-national economy, mixed with automated labor, we could produce everything we would like to very cheaply. Then, it is crazy to regulate the economy to keep the price system going. Nowadays, wage labor is utilised so that workers should afford to consume what they are producing, supporting a middle class which is encouraged to consume.

Look at my sig.

okay.

I'm an anarchist, I was more looking for arguments to use against anarcho-capitalists.

But thanks anyway, I'll take alook at that.

Anarcho-capitalists are a waste of time basically. Their proposed society would result in a mafia system with "private security firms" offering "protection". The state is the great cataclyst of modern capitalism, not it's enemy.

The problem is not that there proposals would end in these, I doubt they would. It is that most anarcho-capitalists support this stuff.

As you said take the state away and you can't have capitalism.

There are a lot more people who are members of Opus Dei. It exists all kinds. We should not tal with anarcho-cappies, but about them, though. They are good debaters, I agree, but their ideology would result in Somalization. And they have nothing against it.

I don't think it would end up like Somalia much more than Mutualismor Geoanarchism would. But I think it is strange they seem to want it to.

Technically, an ideological proponent of capitalism is not called a "capitalist". A capitalist is a person who owns capital which she are investing in means of production. Engels for example, was a capitalist, yet politically a socialist/communist.

Here in Europe, such people who are supporting capitalism are calling themselves liberals, alternatively "classical liberals". Anarcho-capitalists calls themselves "anarcho-liberals".

On my experience from reading history, I could say that most systems where exchange of labor is involved would inevitably cause economic exploitment of laborers. For example, in southern France during the 5th century, there existed village cooperatives which handled their own defense. Their inherent scarcity though, caused feudalism to emerge.

I think it takes the state and large scale intervention to create capitalism. I'm very influenced by Mutualist/Geoanarchism like that of Proudhon, Tucker, Carson, Oppenhiemer, Nock etc.

If they still have money...

I'm supportive of libertarian communism if the local community wants it, but I certainly don't think it is necessary to end wage labour.

I'm a very inclusive anarchist and radical decentralist and I'd hate to rule out the influence of so many strains that way.

Wage labor sucks for me and everyone else (the majority of people on earth) who are wage laborers.

It is in my best interest and also the best interest for humanity to abolish wage-slavery and the oppression that comes along with it.

One class works the machines and doesn't own them, the other owns them and does not work them. The owners also go out of their way to take the majority of the profits and give only a small remnant to the workers. They justify this by waving documents proclaiming "ownership" around.

What is wrong with wage labour? The fact that those who buy labour force do so because they own all the other factors of production, while those who sell labour force only own their own labour force. In other words, wage labour is just an expression of the classist monopoly of means of production.

But I can't understand why you would like to discard Labour Theory of Value in discussing this. Is it something like riding a bike without using your hands? The more difficult, the best?

Luís Henrique

Ah but the say that if this comes about naturally through, voluntary exchange, it is fine.

Because I'm discussing with anarcho-capitalists mainly of the Rothbardian/Austrian economics strain. They consider the Labour theory of value the height of crankery and it doesn't convince them at all.

I'm an anarchsit btw so it also isn't the most important thing to me. I'm more worried about wage labour as an example of domination and authority.

Well what happens under capitalism if you do not work for capitalist masters? You live a hideous life, barely surviving. That's not really voluntary because there's no realistic alternative to wage servitude under this system.

Cool, I can dig that.

Tell them that it's a scenario where individuals can exert economic authority over others with the backing of an armed institution (be it the state today or the private armies of anarcho-capitalism.)

Not to stray off topic, but nusocialist, are you known as tuckerite on infoshop's forums? I'm "solidex."