• DaSaw@midwest.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    Just because some people have known about something for more than a hundred years, doesn’t mean all people have known something for more than a hundred years. I am a fan of Henry George’s work, but I wouldn’t be all “ho hum” if someone who was ignorant of George’s work (and derivatives) nevertheless managed to figure it out independently and present it to new people. I would be thrilled to see the idea spreading.

    • poVoq@slrpnk.netM
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Sure, but (contrary to the article linked) the headline here is “Anarchists should…” when Anarchists are actually the ones that have probably thought about this the most already and the article (without mentioning Anarchy even once) basically just re-invents 100 year old anarchist ideas.

      • DaSaw@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Don’t forget that the anarcho-capitalists have been muddying branding. Some folks may not realize that anarchism is not the same thing as absolute landlordism.

      • J Lou@mastodon.socialOP
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Most anarchists are opposed to private property in the products of labor, so my re-contextualizing the article for this community was valid. Personal property does not cover all products of labor because it excludes the means of production, which can be a product of labor. The anarchist closest to Ellerman on this matter was Proudhon. Ellerman acknowledges him in his other work as a predecessor. Ellerman’s critique applies even if wage labor is voluntary unlike many anarchic critiques @anarchism

        • poVoq@slrpnk.netM
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Personal property does not cover all products of labor because it explicitly excludes the means of production, which can be a product of labor.

          This isn’t quite true. A means of production can become personal property if it is actively used by the person that produced it. It is just that no property right is thought to be absolute and actual usage usually trumps other means to derive personal property status.

          • J Lou@mastodon.socialOP
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            Oh, you mean the occupancy and use sense of personal property. That does not allow one workers’ collective to rent out means of production to another workers’ collective and retain ownership. It is different from what Ellerman is arguing for. I also edited the comment to add another point

            • poVoq@slrpnk.netM
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              Not quite. Personal property can also be thought of as a group ownership. In fact often it has to be because it is difficult to manage in larger organizations otherwise.

              Renting out the means of productions seems like a non-issue as when you are not using them why not give them to someone else to use? This is well established in Anarchist library economics texts.

              The article also seems to be more concerned about investments into future returns from the means of production, but again this is basically just repeating the staking concept used in Mondragon for this, which is not uncontroversial, but benefits might out weight the risk that it creates a two class system within the company.

              • J Lou@mastodon.socialOP
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                Renting out means of production is another way for workers’ collectives to exchange products of their labor, and receive something else that they value more. Giving away the means of production would mean forgoing compensation. It isn’t clear whether the person you’re giving away the means of production to will use it in a socially efficient manner. Prices provide a rough approximation of social cost especially in an economy with common ownership of natural resources @anarchism