Another question to anarchists

[Havet]

How do anarchists here see the state and capitalism right now? I have come to two different conclusions and I was wondering what do you think about them

-Will capitalism, as a socio-economic system, tend to increase its repression and capitalists will use the state even more to increase their power, until we approach a sort of dystopian 1984 world?

-Or will capitalism sort of self-regulate itself into this sort of system we currently have, where we are constantly switching between 2 major centrist parties and there aren't major oppressions inside THE country (outside there will be), this system where people are happy just by having the liberty to decide what clothes to wear, but are restricted of other liberties?

Also, there is the possibility that the current system will implode (which my happen if the current economic policies that are being followed continue) or that the current repression will be enough for the tension to grow and for a revolution to follow.

But i'd like you guys to mainly focus on the two I proposed above: capitalism increases infinitely until we are all slaves (like 18th century slaves, thought police, mind control) or will we stay in this continuous state of centrism, that still continues to be very harmful?

[h0m0revolutionary]

I don't believe there is anarchist consensus on this matter, any more than say, there is Marxist consensus on this matter.

Persoanlly however I believe it's the latter. I think capitalism grants certain basic liberties that even in the persuit of profit it will not impede upon, as it doesn't want to be too overt in its barbarity.

However it a time of crisis for finance capital, fascism (a mere different form of capitalism) does establish a totalitarian state, similar to what you envisage in your first option.

So I'd say capitalism, when functioning with an economic downturn that cannot be resolved peacefully, resorts to the slave-like authoritarian system you mentioned. Otherwise however it gives the illusion of democracy and liberty.

[Havet]

I don't believe there is anarchist consensus on this matter, any more than say, there is Marxist consensus on this matter.

Persoanlly however I believe it's the latter. I think capitalism grants certain basic liberties that even in the persuit of profit it will not impede upon, as it doesn't want to be too overt in its barbarity.

However it a time of crisis for finance capital, fascism (a mere different form of capitalism) does establish a totalitarian state, similar to what you envisage in your first option.

So I'd say capitalism, when functioning with an economic downturn that cannot be resolved peacefully, resorts to the slave-like authoritarian system you mentioned. Otherwise however it gives the illusion of democracy and liberty.

Good post. I must say though, i wasn't expecting any consensus on the matter

[leninwasarightwingnutcase]

Depends on the class struggle. The more effectively it is waged from above, the closer we get to option 1. The more effectively it is waged from below, the better things get.

[Havet]

Depends on the class struggle. The more effectively it is waged from above, the closer we get to option 1. The more effectively it is waged from below, the better things get.

Interesting view. How would you classify the current class struggle and, therefore, the kind of capitalism (or less capitalism) we are approaching?

[Misanthrope]

The state is not a form of economic oppression, it is oppression carried out by physical force to protect the minority of the opulent. If the state were to be abolished, the capitalists would simply form a new state to forcefully protect their business interests.

Capitalism doesn't regulate itself. It makes one social class ultra-rich and ultra-powerful, anarcho-capitalism would fade into a quasi-feudalistic hell hole. The only way such a system can exist is through extravagant market competition but what I don't understand is how after the state is abolished, the smaller corporations would compete with the corporations that benefited from the state. In order to achieve anarcho-capitalism you must first abolish capitalism, imo. Why replace an unideal system with the same thing? Why not replace it with a system that meets everyone's needs?

[Gleb]

dystopian 1984 world?

Stopped reading there.

[Havet]

The state is not a form of economic oppression, it is oppression carried out by physical force to protect the minority of the opulent. If the state were to be abolished, the capitalists would simply form a new state to forcefully protect their business interests.

Capitalism doesn't regulate itself. It makes one social class ultra-rich and ultra-powerful, anarcho-capitalism would fade into a quasi-feudalistic hell hole. The only way such a system can exist is through extravagant market competition but what I don't understand is how after the state is abolished, the smaller corporations would compete with the corporations that benefited from the state. In order to achieve anarcho-capitalism you must first abolish capitalism, imo. Why replace an unideal system with the same thing? Why not replace it with a system that meets everyone's needs?

Well the state intervenes in the market in various ways. Whether this was done to benefit capitalists or not is another question. But you cannot deny that there is economic oppression. It all depends on the state though. Some state's initial purpose was not to mess the economy, while others state's purpose was to just handle the economy.

[Havet]

Stopped reading there.

Why? It could happen?

Or do you think 1984 was not dystopian?

[Misanthrope]

Well the state intervenes in the market in various ways. Whether this was done to benefit capitalists or not is another question. But you cannot deny that there is economic oppression. It all depends on the state though. Some state's initial purpose was not to mess the economy, while others state's purpose was to just handle the economy.

Yes, the state also gives discriminatory bailouts to benefit capitalists and further monopolize the market.

[Havet]

Yes, the state also gives discriminatory bailouts to benefit capitalists and further monopolize the market.

Yes i know. But you kind of evaded my original question: do you think we are approaching more oppression (as in 1984), or that we will stay in the current level of oppression we now are in?

[Misanthrope]

Yes i know. But you kind of evaded my original question: do you think we are approaching more oppression (as in 1984), or that we will stay in the current level of oppression we now are in?

I believe we are approaching more oppression but I have hope, the economic crisis isn't getting better. Odds are the workers are going to turn to radicalism.

[Bud Struggle]

Odds are the workers are going to turn to radicalism.

No. They will get more afraid of losing their jobs or getting less pay and hunker down even further into conservativism.

Workers are vastly conservative by nature.

[Pogue]

No. They will get more afraid of losing their jobs or getting less pay and hunker down even further into conservativism.

Workers are vastly conservative by nature.

If this is so how did Paris 68, Russia 1917, Spain 36, the attitudes of French workers, Oaxaca uprising, the visteon strike, lindsey...

oh fuck it, theres not much use with you is there?

[Misanthrope]

No. They will get more afraid of losing their jobs or getting less pay and hunker down even further into conservativism.

Workers are vastly conservative by nature.

Why is there a worker movement then?

[Bud Struggle]

Why is there a worker movement then?

I honestly don't see it beside for some undergraduate posturing. I work with workingpeople every day and there isn't even a vague interest in unionizing. The word "union" has never been mentioned in my working place (and even if it was it would be of the AFL-CIO variety.) I had been part of the IWW for a couple of meetings and they were a half dozen college kids with summer jobs singing the Internationale.

That's Florida USA--maybe things are different in the UK.

People are afraid that the economy will shrink even further and they'll loose their jobs. People seem to be scared not radical.

An example. I took on a new account. Visited them today and I saw Raisa, a worker from a former account that went bankrupt last September. When I saw her she had just worked 20 hours on Sunday--dead tired and happy to be working at all--she hadn't worked since her last company folded. She'll work what time she's given and she'll be happy to get the hours.

That's the worker's movement.

[Havet]

People are afraid that the economy will shrink even further and they'll loose their jobs. People seem to be scared not radical.
.

Workers threaten use of explosives

[Misanthrope]

I honestly don't see it beside for some undergraduate posturing. I work with workingpeople every day and there isn't even a vague interest in unionizing. The word "union" has never been mentioned in my working place (and even if it was it would be of the AFL-CIO variety.) I had been part of the IWW for a couple of meetings and they were a half dozen college kids with summer jobs singing the Internationale.

That's Florida USA--maybe things are different in the UK.

People are afraid that the economy will shrink even further and they'll loose their jobs. People seem to be scared not radical.

An example. I took on a new account. Visited them today and I saw Raisa, a worker from a former account that went bankrupt last September. When I saw her she had just worked 20 hours on Sunday--dead tired and happy to be working at all--she hadn't worked since her last company folded. She'll work what time she's given and she'll be happy to get the hours.

That's the worker's movement.

I completely agree, America is a lost cause in relation to worker justice but I am speaking in broader terms than just America.

[Pogue]

I honestly don't see it beside for some undergraduate posturing. I work with workingpeople every day and there isn't even a vague interest in unionizing. The word "union" has never been mentioned in my working place (and even if it was it would be of the AFL-CIO variety.) I had been part of the IWW for a couple of meetings and they were a half dozen college kids with summer jobs singing the Internationale.

That's Florida USA--maybe things are different in the UK.

People are afraid that the economy will shrink even further and they'll loose their jobs. People seem to be scared not radical.

An example. I took on a new account. Visited them today and I saw Raisa, a worker from a former account that went bankrupt last September. When I saw her she had just worked 20 hours on Sunday--dead tired and happy to be working at all--she hadn't worked since her last company folded. She'll work what time she's given and she'll be happy to get the hours.

That's the worker's movement.

Wait, one person who you met is the workers' movement?

[Bud Struggle]

I'm the Worker's Movement at my factory.