How Anarchism Exploits Workers

[Selkie]

AHAHAHAHA!

It was really, really hard to read that. I'll try to type a response for the one paragraph I managed to get through while my sides are busting...

First of all, let's assume what you said is true, which it isn't. Now, let's compare it to the current system...

In our current system, around the world people are forced to work under cruel conditions and for little pay just to feed their families. They have NO say in how the means of production should work and are exploited more and more and more as the one person in charge of them profits. This person in charge usually knows more about running a business than running a factory/group of workers, whatever you want to call it. How can they know anything about the actual work when all they do is sit in an office all day? Under this system, they are exploited. This is obvious and much worse than what you are describing.

Now, let's look at what you said. It's bullshit. Everyone having an equal say is the opposite of exploitation--why the hell would they exploit themselves? They would have more knowledge about how to run the factory or other means of production because they themselves are the ones both benefiting from the means of production and they are the ones who know how the means of production works. Thus, they'd likely do a great deal better than some idiot in an office.

[qkrthnu]

I apologize upfront since my response is somewhat off topic. I just had to address some of things being said.

Had P2P failed, had people cared about copyright and capitalist property online, had not copyleft become so pervasive, then, perhaps I would have written anarchism off as a fantasy. However, we have these clear and obvious examples of people not caring about capitalist property, and I find it hard to justify how they would feel differently if physical resources could be shared similarily.

Apples and Oranges.
Until someone builds a nano-fabricator or a magic wand I can't Download a combine, a factory, an engine etc. Capital has to do with real property (i.e. scarce objects). We can't both use the same physical object at the same time.

Why would anyone rationally want to continue working their asses off for capitalists if they didn't have to? It makes no logical sense.

Good question. Why does anyone work their ass off? Perhaps because they made an economic decision to do so. You certainly don't HAVE to work for anyone right now. Plenty of people are self-employed and do so without going into debt to obtain any capital they may need. Not everyone gets loans or uses credit cards you know, and you can buy lots of tools at Home Depot. Of course I get the idea that you think those tools should somehow be "free".

The problem with these systems is that they rely on external capitalist support to exist. This is why you can't just freely go into a factory and come out with a bunch of clothes you made yourself utilizing the machinery.

I guess it's also why I don't have to learn how to use a new machine and a new manufacturing process every time I want something. Not to mention that there doesn't have to be a bazillion factories for all different types of goods within close proximity of anyone who would want to use them.
i.e. I don't have to drive 500 miles find a factory that has the capability to produce what I want.

And also why I don't have to repair those "free for all to use" machines prior to making my stuff (Tragedy of The Commons).

Pfft, how would we be imposing our beliefs? If I make a factory using my own capital, and then I say "Come in and enjoy this factory at your leisure," and then a lot of people go in and make their own clothing, how, how on earth I ask, am I imposing on anyone?

How very altruistic of you.
Just out of curiosity what prevents me from monopolizing this "free" factory that you built to churn out crap 24/7/365?
Why don't you do something like this now? I'm sure lots of people would take you up on the offer to enjoy your capital.

BTW, Where can I get one of those "Means of Production" Trees? I'd love to grow a machine shop.....Or do they just fall out of the sky? I keep forgetting which it is.

[Crustanarchy]

You're obviously stuck in the here and now. Of course what Y is saying is for the future. But he's also mentioning that if we didn't restrain ourselves with "funding" and other bullshit, humanity could be centuries ahead.

[antithesister]

Regarding the original post:

con⋅text   /ˈkɒntɛkst/ [kon-tekst]

–noun 1. the parts of a written or spoken statement that precede or follow a specific word or passage, usually influencing its meaning or effect: You have misinterpreted my remark because you took it out of context.
2. the set of circumstances or facts that surround a particular event, situation, etc.

I don't think any anarchist in their right mind wants to rise up and finally have their anarchist society realized, only to have it operate in the EXACT SAME WAY IT DID UNDER CAPITALISM. I don't even understand the argument about anarchist factories, to be honest. Like hell if I'm going to step foot in a fucking factory of any sort without the pressure of capitalistic gain. Factories make "things". We don't fucking need more "things". Anarchy is not about the elimination of heirarchy in order to better acheive our society's present goal of dying with as many possessions as possible. Also, correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think those little green paper rectangles that we all agree are "worth" anything more than any other little pieces of anything, would have any place in an anarchist society. Using money to argue against anarchy makes it all the more obvious that you're a fucking one dimensional right-wing ass hat.

Sorry if this argument has already been brought up (I'm sure the ass hat argument has, goddamn), reading through this whole thread really seemed like a massive waste of time.

[Zazaban]

Agreed, the guy who made this topic described some sort of weird fusion of corporate capitalism and extreme syndicalism, which is not anarchy and not a ideology upheld by anyone at all. Thus, the OP does not have the faintest clue what he's talking about. Rather comical actually.

[BlutAusBeherit]

I don't get how the OP's argument can be rationally made. Maybe I'm just stupid, but does anyone understand it at all? Abolish, you do know the definition of anarchy right?

[Jawn Disease]

By removing the “boss,” and replacing him with every single other worker in the business, ‘anarchism’ would create exploitation and tyranny that would be unprecedented.

Your very life would be subject to some group of rank amateurs, no matter how clueless they are on how to run a business. The bigger the business, the more they would bicker and fight all day. Workers would be difficult for the sake of being difficult. They would make terrible decisions you would be forced to follow, even if you disagreed strongly with them. There would have to be eventual submission or nothing would get done. Tears of anger and resentment would stream from your eyes as you watch the life savings you poured into the “cooperative” travel straight down the shitter at lightning speed.

Workers will not be able to be hired or fired. Unlike an experienced entrepreneur who knows what he is doing, they will constantly make bad decisions, and bad decisions WITH YOUR MONEY, at that. Unlike under a capitalist, you will be piss-broke when the bankruptcy occurs. You will have absolutely no other choice. There will be no other option whatsoever. Such is the idiocy of anarchism.

These are the choices anarchism gives: Either entrust your life and money to group of inexperienced dummies who will make sure it goes to waste, or starve in the streets.

Everybody would have to answer to unreliable class clowns and apathetic no-shows. Capitalism beautifully weeds out the useless and incompetent. Anarchism puts a collar around your neck and hands them the leash.

There is no system more exploitive or cruel than anarchism. I will tell you right now that I would refuse to participate in this idiocy. You will have to force me at gunpoint when the “big day” comes--force me to be “free.” I will not do anything against my own will.

But the anarchists object. “You will keep all of your labor’s value!” Of course, without a successful business, you will not be getting one red cent, so it will be irrelevant. Without any alternative to having untold amounts of workers and governments..oops.. “committees” tell you what to do and how to live, you would be enslaved.

Isn’t it about time we abolished the brutal system of exploitation called anarchism?

Unfortunately no one really attempted to actually address the concerns of AbolishAnarchism. I agree that businesses run in the way he describes would probably fail quickly. However, I wanna point out that the point is not to completely abolish any sort of direction and organization. A business which cooperatized would still require full- or part-time managers who would organize the labour of the workers so it is efficient. These managers would not be bosses, they would be elected by the assembly of workers in the cooperative and would receive policy directives from this assembly. This is economic democracy. This is what I believe very strongly in.

Cooperatives, furthermore, would be very capable of firing and hiring workers. Why do you think that they wouldn't be able to? They would want to hire workers who are qualified and reliable. The business could choose to pay salaries to part-time workers who are not interested in investing full-time with the collective, for example students or transitories. As long as a worker is not being exploited and is being paid a fair wage there is nothing wrong with labouring for a salary.

I believe in an economic system which is both socialist and libertarian. Capitalism is a word which can be defined in many ways but some elements of capitalism extend into such a socialist libertarian philosophy; I think the people will certainly want to produce and sell goods and services for profit and should do so, with economic democracy giving workers control over their production -- no CEOs being payed hundreds of millions of dollars, just a group of people doing what they know how to do and doing it well, in order to provide for the needs of their community and earn their own livelihoods doing honest work and creating actual value rather than sitting at a desk juggling numbers around until they're bigger on your side than the other side.

[|Y|]

Bit late to respond, but I thought qkrthnu deserved a response. I didn't see the reply.

Until someone builds a nano-fabricator or a magic wand I can't Download a combine, a factory, an engine etc. Capital has to do with real property (i.e. scarce objects). We can't both use the same physical object at the same time.

This does not negate the fact that people, when given the opportunity and choice, do not give one shit about capitalist property. For all they care the capitalists can rot.

If the claim is that "people care" about capitalist property because of "scarcity," it is really that capitalists use force to maintain scarcity, by force people to ascribe to systems that do not allow them to have what they want given their capacity to get it.

Good question. Why does anyone work their ass off? Perhaps because they made an economic decision to do so. You certainly don't HAVE to work for anyone right now. Plenty of people are self-employed and do so without going into debt to obtain any capital they may need. Not everyone gets loans or uses credit cards you know, and you can buy lots of tools at Home Depot. Of course I get the idea that you think those tools should somehow be "free".

Does everyone have the choice to not work their asses off yet enjoy the level of luxuries and lifestyle that they currently experience? No. Perhaps a small, select, lucky few, but by and large the overwhelmingly vast majority do not. Thus those people are essentially forced to be wage slaves in order to live at the standard that they enjoy.

I want everything to be free, because the only thing keeping capital from being *not* free is the threat of external systems of force. Nothing else. Mind you, capital is distinct from possession. A store shelf with lots of chainsaws on it is capital. A chainsaw in your garage is your possession. You can easily protect the tools in your garage, protecting a store full of tools requires you to hire police forces. The more capital that exists, the more police forces that need exist, the more law need exist, the more judicial systems need to exist. I agree to none of those things existing.

I guess it's also why I don't have to learn how to use a new machine and a new manufacturing process every time I want something. Not to mention that there doesn't have to be a bazillion factories for all different types of goods within close proximity of anyone who would want to use them.
i.e. I don't have to drive 500 miles find a factory that has the capability to produce what I want.

The basic idea is to automate things as nicely as possible. Tools that are, inherently, easy to use. Computers used to require punch cards and university level educations to get them to spit out a bunch of numbers. Now 6 year olds in New Delhi can walk up to a computer and download mp3s, all without ever having to touch one. The difference between specialized, obfuscated knowledge and skill, and knoweldge which is derivable from the interface which you operate.

So yes, it's entirely concievable for me (and you) to go into somewhere and come out with a few pieces of clothes after playing around with an interface that lets me design the clothes myself or download other peoples designs because it's something they like to do in their spare time.

And also why I don't have to repair those "free for all to use" machines prior to making my stuff (Tragedy of The Commons).

Nah, guys like me will do all the repairing, similarily as to how only a small number of people work on open source compared to the numbers of users, and only a small number of people seed files compared to the number of leechers. It just takes a few people who enjoy something to set up the groundwork. And, hey, if a lot of people aren't forced to slave away, perhaps, just perhaps, they'll have interest in doing those repairs.

How very altruistic of you. Just out of curiosity what prevents me from monopolizing this "free" factory that you built to churn out crap 24/7/365?

Well, there's nothing preventing you from building a similar factory in order to stop people from having free stuff. Indeed, I expect it, because some capitalists cannot let go of authoritarian control over things. But, the people who run these factories would quickly catch on to your behavior, that is, creating capital and inducing scarcity in an environment where there is none, and they might ask you to politely stop doing that. If you don't they may see it as a threat of force (since the only way you can continue doing it is if you utilize force).

The real question is, what incentive do you have to monopolize a freely accessable factory like that? It is akin to saying that you want to monopolize a public park. Or a public road or public transportation. You just can't do it without completely taking it over.

Why don't you do something like this now? I'm sure lots of people would take you up on the offer to enjoy your capital.

Actually, I have done this to an extent. And people tend to stop eating when their stomach gets full. They don't just take food and walk off with it, then come back ten minutes later and do the same. Particularly because of queues and lines and so forth. Indeed, the popularity of one of these factories would preclude anyone from overly taking advantage of one. As they became more pervasive, of course, then there may be problems, but as I suggested, free association would handle people like you who irrationally want to control other people.

BTW, Where can I get one of those "Means of Production" Trees? I'd love to grow a machine shop.....Or do they just fall out of the sky? I keep forgetting which it is.

Actually, there are websites and email lists that focus entirely on machine shopping. You can, as I did, aquaint yourself with these people and they will actually build you the tools, using their machine shop tools, for you to build your own machine shop. It's self-refrential, kinda like a compiler, once you have the compiler made you can use it to compile itself. Once you have a machine shop you can use it to make most of the parts that compose a machine shop (actually you could theoretically use it to make an entire machine shop including the power tools, and that's what the factory idea proposes to do).

For most things that are useful the future is now. We don't necessarily have to wait forever for it.

[Caz]

This place is absurd, and humorous to boot. Where do I subscribe?

[AndyMalroes]

And another thing, when and if the revolution happens, all infrastructure wont magically disappear. We can expropriate the capitalist factories that have already been set up and change the management style. Hooray for common sense.

[Guernica]

Workers would be difficult for the sake of being difficult. They would make terrible decisions you would be forced to follow, even if you disagreed strongly with them. There would have to be eventual submission or nothing would get done. Tears of anger and resentment would stream from your eyes as you watch the life savings you poured into the “cooperative” travel straight down the shitter at lightning speed.

Is this supposed to be irony?