Reasons for anticapitalism
1. It violates inalienable rights to democracy and to get the positive and negative fruits of their labor, which flow from the principle that legal and de facto responsibility should match. In the firm, the employees are de facto responsible, but employer is held solely legally responsible.
2. It violates the equal claim to natural resources everyone today and future generations have. It, instead, incentivizes ruining the environment
Notices by J Lou (jlou@mastodon.social)
-
Embed this notice
J Lou (jlou@mastodon.social)'s status on Sunday, 04-Aug-2024 16:33:20 JST J Lou -
Embed this notice
J Lou (jlou@mastodon.social)'s status on Wednesday, 31-Jul-2024 18:18:50 JST J Lou @nixCraft Widespread use of permissive #OpenSource licenses. We should be using #copyleft as a bare minimum and probably use even stronger licenses like #copyfarleft. There is no point in releasing code under licenses that don't require some form of reciprocity from commercial capitalist users. There is no virtue in developing software for free for capitalists
-
Embed this notice
J Lou (jlou@mastodon.social)'s status on Friday, 26-Jul-2024 17:18:15 JST J Lou @burnoutqueen Freedom shouldn't be something you own that you can sell, but something you intrinsically have due to your personhood. You shouldn't be able to give up your freedom even if you want to
The fact that you can buy freedom is where America failed to live up to the principles of inalienable rights that have become part of its political religion
-
Embed this notice
J Lou (jlou@mastodon.social)'s status on Saturday, 13-Jul-2024 20:46:15 JST J Lou Does classical liberalism imply democracy?
https://www.ellerman.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/Reprint-EGP-Classical-Liberalism-Democracy.pdf
"There is a fault line running through classical liberalism as to whether or not democratic self-governance is a necessary part of a liberal social order. The democratic and non-democratic strains of classical liberalism are both present today particularly in the United States. Many contemporary libertarians ... represent the non-democratic strain in their promotion of non-democratic sovereign city-states."
-
Embed this notice
J Lou (jlou@mastodon.social)'s status on Saturday, 13-Jul-2024 20:46:13 JST J Lou @sofia A necessary condition is consent yes.
As far as I can tell, Ellerman is not an anarchist, but his democratic theory is still useful to anarchists and I would recommend reading it. Ellerman's notion of democracy isn't something that just applies to the state. For anarchists, democracy is the only legitmate way to make collective decisions when people have to come together in organizations and communities.
It does makes more sense to consider anarchy the sovereignty of none.
-
Embed this notice
J Lou (jlou@mastodon.social)'s status on Saturday, 13-Jul-2024 20:46:08 JST J Lou @sofia No modern democratic state has a basis in consent obviously. It's good point that considering the power imbalance implicit threats it isn't clear how you could genuinely consent to the state.
Have you read the article I linked? You would find it interesting. Like philosophical anarchist critiques question legitimacy of state power, it demolishes the legitimacy of employer authority and invalidates the promises/contracts associated with wage labor/employer-employee relationships.
-
Embed this notice
J Lou (jlou@mastodon.social)'s status on Saturday, 13-Jul-2024 20:46:07 JST J Lou @sofia Here is a short video of David Ellerman presenting the argument for abolishing wage labor :)
In a healthy work organization, temporary workers should be a minority, so there isn't any practical problem in giving them voting rights. The logic of collaborating in an organization is one of commitment, so the majority of workers should have some commitment to the success of the organization. Regardless, Ellerman's argument entirely rules out the wage labor contract