I still have no idea what you’re trying to communicate with that quote.
Oh? Could you list them?
Any country with welfare. Some are even experimenting with a radical concept called UBI, a leftist policy that slots very neatly into existing socdem frameworks.
Did you read it?
Being a great capitalist doesn’t equate to being socialist or democratic fwiw.
Seeing as you’re incapable of actually listing welfare states that capitalistically yield free housing and food, I’ll consider your comments🧵 as hallucinations or delusions.
Take your pick of European country and look into social housing. Yes its not as widespread as it could be and has faults, but it is a system of providing housing to people outside the market/capitalist system.
Insisting on “free” as the marker of being outside a market system is illiterate, resources have to be expended to create things and their has to be accounting for this somehow. Even things that are are free at the point of use (oh look like the UK’s NHS, another example of a left wing policy in existence) have to manage their resources and ensure that they are distributed correctly.
manage their resources and ensure that they are distributed correctly
This is the key: managing resources to serve everyone, and distributing to the needed. Not the bourgeoisie.
Anarchists believe we can manage those resources efficiently and equivocally. Capitalist, and in the case of SocDems, believe they can do so for their populists.
Its not perfect therefore its not leftwing, gosh who could have predicted that.
A gift economy being a (unproven in an industrialised context) way of running an economy other than a market system does not mean it is the only way of being outside a market system. A is not B does not imply that C is B.
And you still need to account for resources, just handwaving gift economy does not relieve that pressure, you need a system for how much gets put into healthcare as opposed to education as opposed to transport as opposed to research. That means tracking resources numerically and that means something along the lines of money.
Therefore your argument is imperfect. Correct your argument a little better, maybe you’ll convince us how King Charles should own more housing and food than the entire population of the UK, imperialist scum.
Now now, we don’t need to be exclusionary when clearly the respondent is having a temporary lapse of comprehension.
As anarchists, we have to intersect on the ignorances as we see them, and mutual aid resources for them to get educated on their failings.
We lift people up, not kick bridges down.
So housing and food is free in those SocDem states?
chrislundartist
In some of them the state will pay for those, yes. There’s other kinds of leftist policy besides communism.
I have no idea what you’re trying to communicate with that quote.
Apparently I misquoted the wrong excerpt, on the wrong threads post. Corrected the exact quote I meant to post now, unaware the exact URL.
Oh? Could you list them?
I still have no idea what you’re trying to communicate with that quote.
Any country with welfare. Some are even experimenting with a radical concept called UBI, a leftist policy that slots very neatly into existing socdem frameworks.
Did you read it?
Being a great capitalist doesn’t equate to being socialist or democratic fwiw.
Seeing as you’re incapable of actually listing welfare states that capitalistically yield free housing and food, I’ll consider your comments🧵 as hallucinations or delusions.
Take your pick of European country and look into social housing. Yes its not as widespread as it could be and has faults, but it is a system of providing housing to people outside the market/capitalist system.
Insisting on “free” as the marker of being outside a market system is illiterate, resources have to be expended to create things and their has to be accounting for this somehow. Even things that are are free at the point of use (oh look like the UK’s NHS, another example of a left wing policy in existence) have to manage their resources and ensure that they are distributed correctly.
If I were to use your pick (UK), your argument is invalid.
Oh, so you can’t see a system outside capitalism.
And it should be policy to be free to reuse.
nrly.
This is the key: managing resources to serve everyone, and distributing to the needed. Not the bourgeoisie.
Anarchists believe we can manage those resources efficiently and equivocally. Capitalist, and in the case of SocDems, believe they can do so for their populists.
Its not perfect therefore its not leftwing, gosh who could have predicted that.
A gift economy being a (unproven in an industrialised context) way of running an economy other than a market system does not mean it is the only way of being outside a market system. A is not B does not imply that C is B.
And you still need to account for resources, just handwaving gift economy does not relieve that pressure, you need a system for how much gets put into healthcare as opposed to education as opposed to transport as opposed to research. That means tracking resources numerically and that means something along the lines of money.
Therefore your argument is imperfect. Correct your argument a little better, maybe you’ll convince us how King Charles should own more housing and food than the entire population of the UK, imperialist scum.
You really don’t.
In anarchy, everyone one of these gets supported. In UK, everyone of these get gutted. The priorities of privatizers are theirs, not ours.
Again, nrly.
Which you know is theft.
UBI is capitalist bull crap. Get the fuck out of here if you’re not a leftist.
Now now, we don’t need to be exclusionary when clearly the respondent is having a temporary lapse of comprehension.
As anarchists, we have to intersect on the ignorances as we see them, and mutual aid resources for them to get educated on their failings.
We lift people up, not kick bridges down.