Daily Anarchist Forum
August 18, 2019, 12:20:27 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Welcome to the Daily Anarchist Forum!
 
   Home   Help Search Members Login Register  
Pages: [1]
  Print  
Author Topic: Leftist Regression  (Read 3070 times)
Script
Full Member
***
Posts: 249


View Profile
« on: January 22, 2012, 09:38:52 PM »

It seems that the argument I hear from a lot of leftist statists is that free markets would lead inevitably to feudalism where a small group of individuals own all the land and wealth. This is why we need a State: a small group of individuals who ensure that the masses are protected from the ravages of free markets. The State is valid because of the social contract, which is valid only if the State owns all the land. 

This could probably be refined down to one of Eddy's succinct circular arguments, but I'm not quite sure how.
Logged
dpalme
Solder Monkey
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 798



View Profile
« Reply #1 on: January 22, 2012, 11:08:20 PM »

Unfortunately that's true. That's what my hippy friends get worried about when I spoke to them about Ron Paul.
Logged

http://cur.lv/fgf0 <--- Accepting bitcoins!
Script
Full Member
***
Posts: 249


View Profile
« Reply #2 on: January 22, 2012, 11:23:44 PM »

The problem, I think, is that they don't view the State as an oligarchy because of the delusion of democracy.  They think they have some sort of input into the State which is why it's better than some "private" individuals owning everything.  It's the myth of democracy and the myth of members of government being more moral than "private" individuals.
Logged
rahvin
Full Member
***
Posts: 138


View Profile
« Reply #3 on: January 23, 2012, 01:48:37 AM »

To keep the property from being owned by a few people we have to give ownership of the property to a few people...later, rinse, repeat

Something like that?  Any other ideas on how to word it?
Logged
Syock
Epic
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 2427


Existing Beyond Time


View Profile WWW
« Reply #4 on: January 23, 2012, 08:55:11 AM »

I actually see this as only a possibility with crony capitalism.  As someone buys up more land, the costs to protect it from fire/theft/invasion/flood/etc increase.  With the current "capitalism" (crony capitalism) that people see, those costs are eaten up by the state.  

In real capitalism if people don't like that your buying up all the land, they can stop dealing with you and you will run out of money quickly.  That is quite different from crony capitalism where many people are becoming incredibly rich through government contracts and political influence which doesn't go away, despite nearly universal hatred of congress.  

There is also the issue of people being unwilling to sell.  With crony capitalism, it has been common practice to force people off their land and the government gives it to a company that they believe will bring in more tax revenue.  That can't happen with real capitalism.

The ability to choose who to trade with makes all the difference in the world.  
« Last Edit: January 23, 2012, 12:09:20 PM by Syock » Logged

Freya
Tranarchist
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 353



View Profile
« Reply #5 on: January 23, 2012, 09:13:58 AM »

To keep the property from being owned by a few people we have to give ownership of the property to a few people...later, rinse, repeat

Something like that?  Any other ideas on how to word it?

Do i need to create it in GIMP or is this good enough? Tongue
Logged
Script
Full Member
***
Posts: 249


View Profile
« Reply #6 on: January 23, 2012, 03:07:33 PM »

To keep the property from being owned by a few people we have to give ownership of the property to a few people...later, rinse, repeat

Something like that?  Any other ideas on how to word it?

Do i need to create it in GIMP or is this good enough? Tongue

Ha ha, Eddy you're the best!  Smiley You don't have to make it into anything if you don't want.  I'm going to think about this a while and see if I can make what's in my head a little more concise in text.
Logged
Script
Full Member
***
Posts: 249


View Profile
« Reply #7 on: January 23, 2012, 03:10:49 PM »

I actually see this as only a possibility with crony capitalism.  As someone buys up more land, the costs to protect it from fire/theft/invasion/flood/etc increase.  With the current "capitalism" (crony capitalism) that people see, those costs are eaten up by the state.  

In real capitalism if people don't like that your buying up all the land, they can stop dealing with you and you will run out of money quickly.  That is quite different from crony capitalism where many people are becoming incredibly rich through government contracts and political influence which doesn't go away, despite nearly universal hatred of congress.  

There is also the issue of people being unwilling to sell.  With crony capitalism, it has been common practice to force people off their land and the government gives it to a company that they believe will bring in more tax revenue.  That can't happen with real capitalism.

The ability to choose who to trade with makes all the difference in the world.  

Good analysis and I completely agree.  My point was that even accepting their arguments it becomes a circular regression.  I probably didn't do a very good job of demonstrating that.  I'll work on it.  Smiley
Logged
Pages: [1]
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines
SMFAds for Free Forums
Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!