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.
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.