Re: Anarchism is Libertarian Socialism by Anarch0tec

[fede2]

libertarianism is fundamentally a negative position. socialism is a positive position. i'm not a libertarian to the point of considering anything in it's place irrelevant. likewise, i'm not a socialist by any means necesarry. plenty socialists have willingly accepted corporatism, so yes. the term is relevant to distinguish my position.

[SocialAnarchism]

"libertarianism is fundamentally a negative position"

"socialism is a positive position"

How so?

[fede2]

libertarianism can be reduced to the non-aggression principle. it's a form of negative liberty. this means being free FROM something. (aggression, violence, coercion, etc.)

socialism is a form of positive liberty in that it constitutes freedom OF/TOWARDS something.

[TheTollundWoman]

You're right:

Individual freedom cannot exist in the absence of a free society, in which people's rights and humanity are respected. Socialism is the only economic system which makes a truly free society possible; therefore it is also the only system that allows freedom on a personal/individual level.

[SocialAnarchism]

It's the only way that I see things working out. Noam Chomsky points out that libertarian socialism is the the best viable option for society.

We have a long way to go, but it isn't an impossible road by any means.

[TheTollundWoman]

You're right, it's certainly not impossible. And it's a lot better- and in the long run, easier- than the alternative (what we have now)

[anarkoFred]

In litterature, a socialist economy usually refers to economic planning which requires - to various degree - individual obedience, conformity, and centrals decisions ; all things that are not very pro-individual's freedom. But I suppose that you do not advocate obedience, conformity and centrals decisions. So i ask : what is that socialist economy you refer to ?

And what is your criteria to say that a society is free ?

[TheTollundWoman]

Socialism does not require 'central decisions'; in fact it can only work if decision-making is decentralized, so that members of each community have the maximum role in controlling their own affairs. this has manifested itself in the concept of worker self-management, in which the running of a factory or business is carried out not by a distant executive headquarters in another city or country, but by the local workers.

[anarkoFred]

If those self-managed business can freely produce and trade that's pretty much a market economy don't you think ? Do you think it is compatible with a socialist economy ? Is self-managed business enough for an economy to be socialist ?

[TheTollundWoman]

worker-controlled businesses are the basis of a socialist economy. if a "free market" economy does not require a hierarchical structure of "management" within the company (an "employer" and "employee"), then that definition of a free market is not incompatible with socialism.

[anarkoFred]

That seems a reasonable answer and it sounds good to me.

[SocialAnarchism]

Agreed completely. I don't know if I have said this here before, but "Markets" and a "Free Market System" isn't inherently corrupt. It's when capitalists (and others) get their hands on it that it turns to shit.

[seigneurvoland666]

@anarkoFred yes,

[seigneurvoland666]

@anarkoFred VIVE NEFAC

[TheVikingNinja]

libertarian socialist is an oxymoron, in my opinion. The two different groups have very different aims. Have you taken that political spectrum chart test? Thats an interesting test to mess around with. It only gives you a strong authoritarian rate on the left. and will usually say you are a libertarian 9 times out of 10. Its just a trick right wingers use to try and trick people into thinking they are libertarians.

[SocialAnarchism]

Libertarian socialism is only an oxymoron if you are using the the perverted American definitions for each word.

If you are using the classic definitions both American and historically across the world, they are not. Check out the two videos in the description and then let me know what you think. Thanks die the reply!

[TheVikingNinja]

I'll check it out. Do you know what test I'm talking about? its a graph. Anyway if you take, it take it a few times, Try to get high authoritarian left and high authoritarian right. It doens't really do it for the right. I noticed this when I tried to get authoritarian centrist as a joke. its a right wing libertarian deception.

[SocialAnarchism]

Actually no, I'm not familiar with that test. If you have a link I'd check it out.

[organdva]

I subscribed. Thanks for the shutout.

Libertarian Socialist is good enough definition.

[LatumWay]

Shit, I definately need to watch DannyOKC's video before I start debating with you.

[SocialAnarchism]

Debate is one thing and it would be fun I'm sure. However, You shouldn't hold yourself back from discussion.

[LatumWay]

In that case, may I ask, are you the kind of anarchist who is actively trying to work towards a stateless society?

[SocialAnarchism]

Yes, both in my current actions, and in the direction I see my life going towards.

Educating those on anarchism who wish to hear what it is about. Actively promoting and creating dissension where possible. Resisting both the State and Capitalism so much as possible.

[LatumWay]

How so? Protests? Starting anarchist organisations? I know you make videos to educate people but what else do you specifically do to get closer to a stateless society? (if you don't mind me asking).

[SocialAnarchism]

I don't mind you asking, I do mind me answering specifics. Suffice it to say that I do believe it is important to take part in Direct Action activism. It is important for Anarchists to also be insurrectionists. I'm not condemning those who are not. To each their own.

It's important to note that the road to a stateless society is a long one. It is likely that we will not see the end result in our life time. Just as anarchists before us have supported the movement, we also have that responsibiliy