posted on Jun, 30 2012 @ 07:23 PM
Originally posted by The Old American
reply to post by ANOK
Socialism requires no government? The workers own the means of productions? Been Wiki-surfing, have you?
No I read books, you should try it sometime. From my book collection...
As Socialism in general, Anarchism was born among the people; and it will continue to be full of life and creative power only as long as it
remains a thing of the people.
From the book 'Modern Science and Anarchism' p.5, Peter Kropotkin, 1908
Is it necessary to repeat here the irrefutable arguments of Socialism which no bourgeois economist has yet succeeded in disproving? What is
property, what is capital in their present form? For the capitalist and the property owner they mean the power and the right, guaranteed by the
State, to live without working. And since neither property nor capital produces anything when not fertilized by labor - that means the power and the
right to live by exploiting the work of someone else, the right to exploit the work of those who possess neither property nor capital and who thus are
forced to sell their productive power to the lucky owners of both.
From 'The Capitalist System' p.1, Michael Bakunin 1814-1876
Convinced that freedom without Socialism is privilege and injustice and that Socialism without freedom is slavery and brutality.
The League [for Peace and Freedom] loudly proclaims the necessity of a radical social and economic reconstruction, having for its aim the emancipation
of people's labor from the yoke of capital and property owners, a reconstruction based upon strict justice - neither juridical nor theological nor
metaphysical justice, but simply human justice - upon positive science and upon the widest freedom.
From 'Stateless Socialism: Anarchism', Mikhail Bakunin 1814-1876
The mainstream of anarchist propaganda for more than a century has been anarchist-communism, which argues that property in land, natural
resources, and the means of production should be held in mutual control by local communities, federating for innumerable joint purposes with other
communes. It differs from state socialism in opposing the concept of any central authority. Some anarchists prefer to distinguish between
anarchist-communism and collectivist anarchism in order to stress the obviously desirable freedom of an individual or family to possess the resources
needed for living, while not implying the right to own the resources needed by others.
Anarcho-syndicalism puts its emphasis on the organized industrial workers who could, through a ‘social general strike’, expropriate the possessors
of capital and thus engineer a workers’ take-over of industry and administration.
Colin Ward, 'Anarchism: A Very Short Introduction'. ch.1 p.2, 1995
Economists, the ultimate authority on economic systems, have defined Socialism as the public owning the means of production. In economics
"public" means "government". Under Socialism all production and planning are performed by a huge, central government. Our government isn't near big
enough to oversee a truly Socialist U.S.
You really need to stop with the disinformation.
Wrong, socialism is the workers common ownership of the means of production. Common ownership not public ownership. Sorry but you are the one
confused by disinformation. Go read a book or two because what you are saying comes directly from the net lol. Some socialists were economists.
List of socialist economists
Anton Pannekoek 1947
Public Ownership and Common Ownership
The acknowledged aim of socialism is to take the means of production out of the hands of the capitalist class and place them into the hands of the
workers. This aim is sometimes spoken of as public ownership, sometimes as common ownership of the production apparatus. There is, however, a marked
and fundamental difference.
Public ownership is the ownership, i.e. the right of disposal, by a public body representing society, by government, state power or some other
political body. The persons forming this body, the politicians, officials, leaders, secretaries, managers, are the direct masters of the production
apparatus; they direct and regulate the process of production; they command the workers. Common ownership is the right of disposal by the workers
themselves; the working class itself — taken in the widest sense of all that partake in really productive work, including employees, farmers,
scientists — is direct master of the production apparatus, managing, directing, and regulating the process of production which is, indeed, their
You really should do research before simply assuming what capitalists have told you is the truth. How can anarchists be socialists if it requires
government? Even Marxist socialism is ultimately government-free. The only reason some socialists called themselves anarchists is because they
apposed the political path of Marxist socialists and wanted direction action. The ultimate goal is the same...
Free association (communism and anarchism)
In the anarchist, Marxist and socialist sense, free association (also called free association of producers or, as Marx often called it, community
of freely associated individuals) is a kind of relation between individuals where there is no state, social class or authority, in a society that has
abolished the private property of means of production. Once private property is abolished, individuals are no longer deprived of access to means of
production so they can freely associate themselves (without social constraint) to produce and reproduce their own conditions of existence and fulfill
their needs and desires.
Colin Ward, 'Anarchism: A Very Short Introduction'. ch.3 p.31, 1995
The 20th century experienced or witnessed every variety of state socialism, and learned that if its rulers are ruthless enough, they can impose,
for a while, the most bizarre regimes and describe them as socialism. As socialism has been grossly misrepresented, so anarchism suffers from the
widely held view that it is simply another variety of millenarianism, the belief in the eventual arrival, ‘after the revolution’, of a period of
ultimate happiness when all the problems that beset humanity will have been solved, permanently.
Public ownership, as in owned by the state is nationalisation not socialism...
Nationalization (British English spelling nationalisation) is the process of taking an industry or assets into government ownership by a national
government or state. Nationalization usually refers to private assets, but may also mean assets owned by lower levels of government, such as
municipalities, being transferred to the public sector to be operated and owned by the state. The opposite of nationalization is usually privatization
or de-nationalization, but may also be municipalization.
I can't help it if you don't like the source, the information is correct.
edit on 6/30/2012 by ANOK because: (no reason given)