Conversation

Notices

1. Embed this notice
   JindrⒶ, your locally Euclidean anarchist (jindra@todon.nl)'s status on Sunday, 22-Jun-2025 18:18:21 JST JindrⒶ, your locally Euclidean anarchist

   One question that I have about the framework of #MarketAnarchism

   In the book Markets, not Capitalism, they write:
   >The centrifugal tendency of markets: market anarchists see freed
   markets, under conditions of free competition, as tending to diffuse
   wealth and dissolve fortunes – with a centrifugal effect on incomes, property-titles, land, and access to capital – rather than concentrating it in the hands of a socioeconomic elite. Market anarchists recognize no de jure limits on the extent or kind of wealth that any one person might amass; but they believe that market and social realities will impose much more rigorous de facto pressures against massive in-equalities of wealth than any de jure constraint could achieve

   book link: https://www.minorcompositions.info/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/MarketsNotCapitalism-web.pdf

   I would like to see evidence for this, as my assumption was the opposite. Obviously you see a centripetal tendency in today's markets, but one might say that these are not free markets (because of the state etc.). But even in a free market - as long as you have money, one can start optimising for it and start hoarding it. I think the market system encourages that.

   • Embed this notice
     JindrⒶ, your locally Euclidean anarchist (jindra@todon.nl)'s status on Sunday, 22-Jun-2025 18:38:30 JST JindrⒶ, your locally Euclidean anarchist

     • Håkan Geijer

     @hakan_geijer I did read Debt. I don't remember him endorsing a specific societal organisation, but he seemed to praise gift economies a lot iirc.

     When he talked about money (as in coins), it was always introduced by some ruler as a part of this "Currency–Slavery–Warfare Complex". When one says markets, currency is a big part of it in my mind - so I don't know why one would emulate that.

     But does that mean you can have markets without money? I guess yes, but that was not clear to me. I thought market anarchists were advocating for money.

     >Also the idea that an anarchist society can *only* exist if there is collective pressure against the accumulation of power and (social) capital.

     This makes sense.