Agorist Youth Cadre

[AgoristTeen1994]

Hello everyone. I recently came across mention somewhere, though I can't remember where of an "Agorist Youth Cadre" and am very curious as to if that is an actual group or just a general term for young agorists like myself (I'm 17 almost 18 for those who are unaware) if it is an actual group/organization do they have a website? And if so is it only accessible through things like Tor or I2P? Thanks and have a nice day.

[victim77]

Hello everyone. I recently came across mention somewhere, though I can't remember where of an "Agorist Youth Cadre" and am very curious as to if that is an actual group or just a general term for young agorists like myself (I'm 17 almost 18 for those who are unaware) if it is an actual group/organization do they have a website? And if so is it only accessible through things like Tor or I2P? Thanks and have a nice day.

I'm an agorist youth mahself...tell me if you find anything, or contact me if you want to set something up.

[bastiat]

Are there any philosophical differences between agorists and plain AnCap's?

[Rothbardian]

Are there any philosophical differences between agorists and plain AnCap's?

Only a few philosophical differences. For instance, Konkin considered wage labour somewhat illegitimate, or so I've heard. He didn't think there would be wage labour in an anarchist society.

The main reason I'm rather opposed to agorism is our strategical differences. No, I'm not against black markets. I'm against black markets as a valid means toward a libertarian society.

[Will]

Only a few philosophical differences. For instance, Konkin considered wage labour somewhat illegitimate, or so I've heard. He didn't think there would be wage labour in an anarchist society.

From what I've read of him (still havent had the time to finish his manifesto...) was that he thought wage labour was undesirable and would gradually fade away in a free society.

Im not quite sure it will ever be completely eliminated, but it certainly wont be near as rampant as it is now.

But yeah agorism is generally used to describe a subset of AnCapism who use/rely on counter-economics to end the state.

[Syock]

Im not quite sure it will ever be completely eliminated, but it certainly wont be near as rampant as it is now.

I see no reason for it not to be rampant.  With the incredible efficiencies made possible with specialization, even in a small company, everyone benefits with wage labor.   

[Freya]

I see no reason for it not to be rampant.  With the incredible efficiencies made possible with specialization, even in a small company, everyone benefits with wage labor.  

Division of labour does not imply wage labour. This is a false dichotomy. You can have division of labour AND shared ownership of capital.

Being somewhat of a mutualist/voluntary socialist I strongly believe that small cooperatives will eventually out-compete large hierarchical organizations in almost all areas of the economy. I think there might be a few areas that naturally favour hierarchy, and I think that wage labour has certain benefits that it will never die out completely.

I get to this belief using logical reasoning and my own unique perspective though. It's a strong belief and not an objective natural law. Your mileage may vary.

[Syock]

Division of labour does not imply wage labour. This is a false dichotomy. You can have division of labour AND shared ownership of capital.

I was not trying to state it as a dichotomy.  You can have shared ownership and wage labor too.  I was suggesting that a small organization, as that which was suggested, limits specialization.  Limiting specialization limits productivity.  When you have someone willing to build big to get heavy specialization, they tend to want to use wage labor, and have a buy in for ownership.  They won't build things to just give it away.  

For an example, when Ford started up, they paid very high wages.  They didn't have to pay very high wages, but the specialization of the factory allowed each person to be more productive, and be worth more to the company.  It attracted the best skilled workers because it was far more than they could have ever made on their own or in a smaller company.  The increased productivity allowed for an increase in the quality of life for everyone.  

[derick]

Why would wage labor be undesirable?

I am reading Rothbard now, I'm not sure where he stood on wage labor but he is making me rethink some of my beliefs.

[Rothbardian]

I am reading Rothbard now, I'm not sure where he stood on wage labor but he is making me rethink some of my beliefs.

He was very for it.

If there is no wage labor, as there was not in most production before the Industrial Revolution, then each worker must have enough money to purchase his own capital and tools.  One of the great things about the emergence of the factory system and wage labor is that poor workers did not have to purchase their own capital equipment; this could be left to the capitalists.  (Thus, see F.A. Hayek’s brilliant “Introduction” in his Capitalism and the Historians.)

Konkin’s fallacious and unlibertarian rejection of wage-labor, however, allows him to do several things. It allows him to present a wildly optimistic view of the potential scope of the black-market.  It also accounts for his curious neglect of the “white market,” and his dismissal of it as unimportant. In point of fact, even though the black market is indeed important in Russia, Italy, etc., it is enormously dwarfed in importance by the legal, white market.

[JustSayNoToStatism]

I'm not "for" or "against" wage labor. My guess is that it would exist in a voluntary society as well.

[derick]

I dont understand how wage labor, couldnt be part of a voluntary society. Many jobs couldnt be contracted without wage labor. It seems to me to be the most simple system of exchange.

[Will]

Its undesirable because you are under the control of someone else. I think as a free society moves along it will become much scarcer, but not eliminated as our socialist brethren would like to think. Some people just prefer the structure of being told what to do and the consistency of a paycheck, also temporary work, part-time work, and work done while someone is trying out a co-op will probably always exist. However, with the downfall of corporations businesses will almost certainly shrink and self-employment will become a much more viable option. For bigger operations the option of a workers co-op is vastly more enticing to the people involved than wage labor, imo.

If there is no wage labor, as there was not in most production before the Industrial Revolution, then each worker must have enough money to purchase his own capital and tools.  One of the great things about the emergence of the factory system and wage labor is that poor workers did not have to purchase their own capital equipment; this could be left to the capitalists.  (Thus, see F.A. Hayek’s brilliant “Introduction” in his Capitalism and the Historians.)

I agree with this analysis, but I think a free society would trend towards economic equality and most people would have enough 'money' to purchase capital and tools, either as individuals or as a collective.

[JustSayNoToStatism]

I agree with this analysis, but I think a free society would trend towards economic equality and most people would have enough 'money' to purchase capital and tools, either as individuals or as a collective.

This is definitely possible. Imagine a world without mind-rotting state "education," and state-sponsored underclasses. I bet people would be much more competent and motivated. Fewer brain dead drones is something I'd bet on.