Oddbean

For all those crying, "communism is coercion", "communism is authoritarianism", let me introduce you to Peter Kropotkin. Kropotkin was a zoologist and advocate of decentralized communist societies, a.k.a, anarcho-communism. Here's an LLM-derived short biography. Peter Kropotkin (1842-1921) was a Russian geographer, zoologist, and one of the most influential anarchist thinkers. He is best known for his advocacy of anarcho-communism, a form of communism that emphasizes the abolition of the state and capitalism in favor of a decentralized, stateless society where resources and goods are communally owned and managed. Kropotkin's vision of society was rooted in mutual aid, voluntary cooperation, and the belief that human beings are naturally inclined towards solidarity and communal living. Kropotkin argued that centralized state power and capitalism inherently create inequality, oppression, and conflict. Instead, he proposed decentralized communities, where local groups or communes would manage their own affairs, making decisions through direct democracy and consensus. These communities would cooperate with each other in a network, exchanging goods and services based on need rather than profit. By removing the hierarchical structures of state and capital, Kropotkin believed that individuals could freely associate and work together for the common good, fostering a society of equality, freedom, and mutual support. In summary, Kropotkin's advocacy for decentralized communist societies involves dismantling both the state and capitalist systems, replacing them with self-managed, cooperative communities that operate on principles of mutual aid and shared resources. This vision aims to create a society where individuals have autonomy and equality, and where the social fabric is strengthened through collaboration and collective responsibility. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Kropotkin

An anarchist form of communism was indeed tried in Spain to varying success. They were eventually overpowered by fascists and centralized communism. https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/murray-bookchin-to-remember-spain-the-anarchist-and-syndicalist-revolution-of-1936

Emphasis on voluntary. If you don't want to be part of the production process, you can advocate for change and get consensus on that, or setup up your own society where it works the way you want. That's a lot how bitcoin works, doesn't it? Don't like the way the protocol works, submit a BIP and convince others its a good idea or fork the software and build your own network.

I now consider myself an anarco leftist. But that utopia is very naive. People CAN get together today and create those communities and they don’t. It also doesn’t have any meaningful trade. I’d rather start with let’s *try* to abolish formal hierarchies.

There’s really nothing to argue about - let’s embrace sound money and a genuinely free market and spontaneous orders will give us the answer. We can speculate all we want, but the order that gives the most amount of people the most value is the one that will emerge when money can’t be corrupted. That’s the entire point

So basically things like monasteries, convents, kibbutzes, and communes. I’ve always maintained that communism can and does work on a small scale like this. It requires the community being small enough that everyone knows each other and some shared values, principles, and/or beliefs. They are often religious based but not a necessity.

We could certainly use stronger local communities today rather than relying heavily on big corporations and governments to solve our problems. The key thing we always need in society is freedom. Freedom to form a small commune or freedom to start a business and live in a city. Any centralized power that forces any kind of economic structure is bad.

anarcho-communism, voluntary democracy, non hierarchichal direct democracy, these are all inherently unexistable: in democracy there is always a minority being overpowered by the rest -> that is involuntary and hierarchical if there is no minority overpowered, it is not democracy. it then is everybody ruling only over themselfes. what he is advocating for is the same as advocating for "dry liquid". this 'philospher' can bend his words however he likes, he won't manifest unicorns. ever. the funny thing is though: violence-free-market capitalism is the actual solution that is going to bring you the results that you guys are hoping for with 'anarcho communism'. long term, through deflation, there will be enough for everybody. and in abundance, most humans share automatically. also humans grow strong communities by nature if they don't get divide and conquered. however this reality is impossible without prices on goods and services. just as relationships are impossible without communicating needs/boundaries. they are truth finding and value creation mechanisms. if you don't want to put prices on your property, sure go ahead, as long as you don't coerce anyone into the same. if you don't want your community to use money, go ahead but be consequent about it. your community won't even be able to produce a pencil. congratulations.

You're making the same mistake that Yuval Noah Harari made in his book Sapiens... the belief that capitalism REQUIRES you to make every single decision in your life based on monetary profit motives. This is obviously incorrect. Do I need to charge my kids money before feeding them dinner in order to be in adherence with capitalism? Obviously not. Does capitalism allow me to be charitable with my neighbor? Obviously yes. Can I decide to buy something local even though it costs more than a similar item on Amazon or Walmart? Yes I can, and that doesn't mean I am violating capitalism. Capitalism IS free/voluntary exchange and engagement. People can voluntarily join a commune under capitalism!! What makes it "communism" — the way 99.9% of human use the word — is when there's a centralized government pointing guns at people's heads, forcing them to behave in certain ways. Your post describes people voluntarily engaging with one another. You are describing free markets / free exchange / capitalism. Additionally, these are nothing more than meaningless feel-good nonsense: > "in favor of a decentralized, stateless society where resources and goods are communally owned and managed." > "manage their own affairs, making decisions through direct democracy and consensus." > "exchanging goods and services based on need rather than profit" > "work together for the common good" > "operate on principles of mutual aid and shared resources" These all mean NOTHING until applied to a specific situation. And then anyone with the tiniest bit of mental maturity would understand that SOMEONE is going to decided what different people's "needs" are... SOMEONE is going to decide what "consensus" means... SOMEONE is going to decide what "the common good means" etc etc So, yes, communism IS coercion... and nothing you said in this incoherent post above demonstrates otherwise.

It seems to me that commies understanding of economics still remains at a very primitive level. Marx wrote Das Kapital during the marginal revolution and he never seemed to quite grasp it, his critique of capitalism was still based on the classical/ Ricardian framwork. I would say the reason why communism won't work really comes down to economic calculation, and coercion being the offshoot of the incentive problem, which can be solved in a compulsive and coercive way. But the ECP can never be solved by AI or big data or any technology, however advanced. For prices cannot emerge via any equation, the price of a good is based on the subjective valuation of both parties, and this presupposes private ownership in not just the MoP but consumer goods as well. Higher Q lower P or lower Q higher p, this relationship between P and Q is in no way linear, it's in no way pre-existed. It's solely based on the subjective valuation of both parties. It can very well be the case that when we cut the price in half, the quantity demanded does not simply double. For the marginal utility of a good does not diminish in an exactly inverse proportion. The seller must set the price at the most profitable level, and he can only do that with the apparatus of economic calculation. It is precisely the fact that there are so many ways to make the same good that we need economic calculation to find out which way is the most profitable, and whether there are any more valuable uses for the MoP remain unsatisfied and unrealized. The failure to grasp this leads to production chaos. As per Mises "we have a socialist community which must cross the whole ocean of possible and imaginable economic permutations without the compass of economic calculation. All economic change, therefore, would involve operations the value of which could neither be predicted beforehand nor ascertained after they had taken place. Everything would be a leap in the dark. Socialism is the renunciation of rational economy." Socialism, Mises, p.122.