Anarchist principles at work

[Mathurin]

[The Dharma Bum]

[Mathurin]

[The Dharma Bum]

Not cyclical, dialectical.

Remember how I was talking about how feudalism developed and was great innovation that led to much development of humanity but then transformed into capitalism? Well while reaching a state of maximum efficiency that economic order started falling prey to developments that were inconsistent with that worldview and order, such as the massive growth of the mercantile class in the late medieval age. So that economic order was transcended by a new one that was more suited to society's new structure. One that fit the new paradigm of the free artisan and merchant classes in the new urban setting of the late Middle Ages.

Capitalism developed from this origin and brought with it a vast development in the state of humanity, but now is starting to show strain due to many internal consistencies that have developed as we have learned to maximize the efficiency of the capitalist system and are now being brought to the forefront by the rapid social and technological changes we are experiencing. The current order too will pass and a new economic order will be born. The transformation has been underway since mixed economies were adopted in 20s and 30s.

I would like to see this new world order be one in which humanity is finally liberated.

[broken robot]

I don't know why we're trying to insert this story about indigenous communities, criminality, and the state in Mexico into some vague battle of anarchy and the state or communism and capitalism. The story's pretty interesting on its own. From what I got from the two articles (original and the nyt), there are several traditions of Mexican peasant protest, indigenous rights, and international radical politics that are being worked out here to create a framework for autonomous communities. Given the different context of US society, you'd probably not be able to achieve the exact same project. But there are interesting tools and techniques you could detach from this situation and apply, particularly the use of international law to claim rights for local communities. I wonder if there could be a way to disentangle indigeneity from claims for regional and local autonomy, so that other groups and places, such as a manufacturing town, could participate in the construction of autonomous communities in the US.

[Mathurin]

[The Dharma Bum]

I don't know what you think a link from a commercial financial services firm shows. I guess you are conflating the business cycle with human history? Anyway what I am trying to show you is that history is the story of class struggle. It is far more complex than a simple cyclic pattern can explain and requires a the use of dialectic to evaluate. In the case above I was referring to dialectic materialism to analyze this segment of history.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialectical_materialism

Feudalism is a decentralized system that arises when central authority (the Roman Empire in the case of Earth history) can no longer perform it's functions and can no longer prevent the rise of local powers. The Romans came to point where they couldn't deal with the rise of the barbarian tribesman and fell, with the rise of feudalism being the result. But it is wrong to say that feudalism is development of tribalism. It is not.

You seem to be concerned about the free rider problem. I can assure you it is an imaginary issue. A the effect of free riders is negligible. That is really a nonissue in any economic system that is equitable and nonexploitative. Free riding is the excessive use of a public resource. In an equitable system there is no incentive for such behavior.

Most current conservative thought references idealism as it's philosophical basis, thus it's explanations of the world generally don't hold up to scrutiny very well. They aren't explaining the way the world works, but how the world should work. If you adopt some version of realism as your philosophical basis your analysis of history will become much more astute.

[Mathurin]

[The Comrade]

[Mathurin]

And yet, in their kingdom, each lord had complete power, thats not decentralized.

Large size is not Centralization.