Parecon

in response to this video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E5WBqs7HfYU

Category:

News & Politics

Tags:

• parecon
• anarchy
• agorism
• free market
• rothbard
• anarchism
• liberty
• libertarian

[coffeeintheface]

Excellent critique. With things like Parecon, there always is hierarchy: the hierarchy of the majority over the minority, no matter what "council" or "cooperative" you associate yourself with. And of course they make the age-old mistake of conflating modern capitalist-corporatism with free markets.

[thorsmitersaw]

yea the conflation thing is really a major problem. It is as much a problem with people like me as it is with them. When these sort of things are finally swept aside I think there will be a lot more ground we can share and work from.

[Rorshak1313]

Good video. But are you sick or something? You sound different.

Anyway, I hope you have a happy holiday.

[thorsmitersaw]

I am not exactly in the best of spirits

[ppbbs88]

I think you need to more thoroughly engage Albert's criticisms of markets per se, rather than the corporatist state which is irrelevant to debate about the intrinsic characeristics of markets.

[ppbbs88]

In markets those with greater bargaining power are in a position to extract a greater proportion of the total economic output than those who have less bargaining power. This is simply an inherent characteristic of markets, "free market" or not. Inequitable results and the socialistion of participants into 'competitive' relations with fellow humans are the predictable consequences.

Equally distributed bargaining power is a fantasy - genetics see to that. Markets reward power, injustice ensues.

[freedomthistime2011]

@SpectacularNumanist You own it by virtue of having a piece of paper saying you own it - and police/army to back up the piece of paper. I don't understand your second point. Are you saying that a reservoir should be communally owned? Why not land too? On what basis are you distinguishing what can and cannot be individually owned?

[SpectacularNumanist]

@freedomthistime2011

How did you get to own the towns reservoir? This is a land issue

[freedomthistime2011]

@SpectacularNumanist Here is Adam Smith explaining why markets/private property cannot exist without a state:

"The affluence of the rich excites the indignation of the poor, who are often both driven by want, and prompted by envy to invade his possessions. It is only under the shelter of the civil magistrate, that the owner of that valuable property, which is acquired by the labour of many years, or perhaps of many successive generations, can sleep a single night in security."

[freedomthistime2011]

@SpectacularNumanist "If an exchange is mutually beneficial then how can there even be a problem of relative bargaining power?"

Well, let's take a somewhat contrived example. I own the town's reservoir. You work for me in exchange for water. It's a mutually beneficial exchange - I get labour, you get water. But it's very exploitative and the wage you agree to work for will reflect the degree of exploitation - you need water more than I need work.

[gentzelpwns]

@SpectacularNumanist The state protects property, enabling the free market to operate. Without the state you have communes in which no one dares to accumulate to much more than his neighbors for fear of social consequences and robbery. This all depends on what you are calling "free" of course. I don't believe in free-will so I would say that nothing is free. I digress, my point is, without central government, something else will absorb power and suppress freedom. State, business, religion, etc.

[SpectacularNumanist]

@gentzelpwns

free markets dont exist without a state.

No the exact opposite of that is true. The freemarket cannot exist because of a state.

[SpectacularNumanist]

@absalaamLOSAC

the man making this video isnt promoting "what we have now"

[SpectacularNumanist]

@freedomthistime2011

If an exchange is mutually beneficial then how can there even be a problem of relative bargaining power?

And in the absence of the state granted monopolies, labourers would have the bargaining power over capital