(en) Turkey, DAF - Meydan #23 - Economics Discussion of
Anarchists (12): "Accumulation of Freedom" - Iain McKay (tr) [machine
translation]
Square Anarchist Economics Newspaper article in a series of discussions, however, we
continue with the text of a panel discussion held on the anarchist economy. 2012 this
panel held in London Anarchist Book Fair, before we quote two articles through
"Accumulation-Anarchist Economics of Freedom" organized on the interest shown from the
assembly. Iain McKay, the prepared text to speak on the panel, while today's anarchist
economy when making connections with anarchism history of the concept, it also brings a
critique of the socialist economy, understanding over predictions that eliminated the
justification today the anarchist comrades. ---- Entrance ---- Economics, rightly, a topic
often humiliated. As Malatesta put it in a memorable way: "The priest says that the will
of God to keep you docile and obedient to everything; Economists say the law of nature.
"So economists" There is no blame for poverty, so against her rebellion has no meaning of
the heat. "Brings to say. As Proudhon correctly stated, "political economy ... is the only
economy m?lkl?, the application of the nature, causes people's misery as inevitable."
Around the world, are suffering the pain of austerity measures agrees with him:
"Economists are the enemy of the people."
Nothing has changed, only showed the usual alternative is worse. But no one could have the
vision of workers Lenin: "All citizens ... all salaried workers to be converted to the
state of society in a single office and a single factory will ". In another statement,
"Our whole economy ?rg?tleme such as mail service," says should consist of sums up the
scarcity of this socialism.
As Kropotkin noted long ago, Marxists "of Socialist States of thought, what kind of state
capitalism in which everyone is a servant of the state, they do not care to explain that
difference."
Put bureaucrats instead of the capitalists ... We need a better vision.
Alternatively needs
Anarchists have long (on both sides) are fighting against the limited vision. For example,
Emma Goldman "the real wealth of useful and beautiful things, strong, beautiful bodies and
that consists of things that help create the environment" advocates. You bulmazs textbooks
in this economy! Kropotkin located well understood:
"Economists, profits, rents, under the capital interest in the name ... of land or capital
owners ... low-wage-interests will be able to get the work she did the laborers ...
eagerly discussing ... the most important question is 'What do we produce and we produce
it?' was compelled to remain in the background ... Therefore, the main topic of social
economy -that is, examining the energy needed to meet the humanitarian needs of the thesis
that the economy Economy-anticipated latest issue. "
These bourgeois economics is not a science, an ideology of capitalism and protect the rich
and only shows that a little more would be born as a true science of the economy when it ends.
What is the anarchist economy?
Then, what is the anarchist economy? In my opinion, it means two things. The first
anarchist analysis and critique of capitalism are thinking about how to work the second
anarchist economy. Certainly the two are interrelated. What we are against capitalism,
anarchist economy will be reflected in our vision. At the same time, our analysis will
inspire our imaginary free society did.
But before you start quickly anarchist economics debate, I need to mention the
non-libertarian alternative. Historically, the socialist economy problem areas addressed
two perspectives seen and both are wrong. The first is to provide detailed descriptions of
the future society; the second is to be limited to short comments on socialism.
Recipes for the refectory of the future ...
The first socialists, such as Fourier and Saint-Simon, detailed plans were presented and
two things became clear. First, the impossibility of perfect design their communities;
second elitist nature - indeed, they think they know themselves so the most accurate and
"socialism" in the vision of democracy and freedom did not matter. Proudhon criticized
this system as tyranny.
Since how desirable or practical to discuss their vision of this one, underlying them, are
false idea that we can create detailed descriptions. For example, Adam Smith has submitted
a detailed model about how capitalism should work; currently has described how it works.
The abstract models are then combined with the neo-classical economics has emerged to
defend the existing system. These economists impossible based on assumptions, models will
be produced during the post-war economy reached its peak. Unfortunately, in the real
economy which was used to impose the terrible conditions to real people and is still used.
As an impossibility (in the best case) or as state capitalist (the worst case) Marxism
A second perspective is called socialist economy with Marx. No doubt in response to the
Utopian socialists and their detailed plans, he wrote little about socialism.
Unfortunately, has led to a number of article comments he made about socialism disaster
planning.
The problem Poverty of Philosophy, wrote Proudhon market as alternative to socialism, can
be seen in the criticism that can be summarized in three sentences. Marx makes it one of
the most simple example of where the composition error: proposed for two people (Peter and
Paul) economic relations between discussing the possible appears in, but millions of
people, it is absolutely impossible for an economy consisting of product and work place.
Criticism is utopian in such circumstances they suggest, it tries to explain how to handle
Marx clearly visible.
Marx argued that philosophy directly in Misery (center) gave up easily defended from
communism and capitalism as a transitional state in the Communist Manifesto. Founded on
capitalist structures marked by centralization and socialism, to be put into practice
slowly on this basis. But this defense of central planning was based on a mistake: when
they are older than the capitalist market, the company independent, they can make informed
decisions on a large scale. However, we had to create a narrow decision criteria under
capitalism and Marx did not question it: big companies plan their planning was based on
only one factor of the things that makes it possible - profit. This reductionist approach,
creating the illusion of central planning can handle.
In addition, a happy coincidence, and the criteria governing minority profit for
increasing the power of an industrial-economic structure of the format, which deprived us
needs capitalism to socialism, which is an interesting claim to be perfect welcome.
As the neo-classical economics, there are serious consequences of wrong thinking. These
thoughts are the Bolsheviks during the Russian Revolution, factory committees instead of
destroying capitalism inherited from the central industrial structures (Tsarist Glavine
in) provided the ideological infrastructure necessary to place - a result the economy has
been disastrous for both communities.
Iain McKay
Britain's important (and oldest) anarchist magazine Black Flag (Black Flag) 's broadcast
Iain McKay, a member of the collective, as well as Black Flag Freedom magazine writer and
Anarchist Writers website. In 1996, published on the internet and then two volumes as a
book that "the Anarchist FAQ" (an anarchist Frequently Asked Questions) 's is one of the
main authors, AK published the Press and Kropotkin's "Mutual Aid" is the author of an
introduction and evaluation of ideas.
To draw the outline of the future by analyzing today
That is flawed Marxist perspective: a few sentences is not enough. Draft of the future
should be based on the analysis of modern society and trends.
Anarchists, I must emphasize that make abstract comparisons between capitalism and an
excellent model. Proudhon 1846 (Economic Contradictions in the system), as he explains,
the labor organization "present form is inadequate and temporary." While the utopian agree
with the Socialists about this, create their vision of rejecting the style, its socialism
to the analysis of the trends in capitalism and contradictions has chosen to base: "We
must start economic realities and exploring the meaning of the practice and philosophy of
research, which revealed ... Socialism ever mistakes, instead of realizing her oppressors
reality was due to continue imaginary beliefs throwing a fantastic future." This analysis
and critique of capitalism feeds positive vision.
For example, Proudhon, the workers, they produce by controlling labor "collective power"
seized the boss' arm dropping their freedom to sell "he argued. But "the principle of
collective power is not equal and partner of workers and leaders." However, "for the
realization of this partnership, in a parliament based on the equality of the
participants, should be a conscious sound and active a factor." This is the free access
and requires to be socialized and workers to work they are joined "immediately to
colleagues and even the manager of the rights and privileges" must have. That's why "a
solution based on equality, in other words, the denial of political economy and a labor
organization that includes the property's -State-including removal" should be created.
Create the future by fighting today
Today only we analyze capitalism, we understand the dynamics and identify the factors that
determine the future. There are two structures: in capitalism, trends and the
corresponding tendency for purposes such as large-scale production (eg trade unions,
resistance s, strikes).
The second pivotal Marxism and anarchism usually separate the first highlight. Therefore,
Proudhon pointed to businesses and credit cooperatives created in the 1848 revolution,
revolutionary anarchists like Bakunin and Kropotkin gave importance to the labor movement.
For example, Kropotkin, "the workers organized in unions ... seized all the branches of
industry ... for the benefit of their community enterprises" was advocated. And today, the
fight against capitalist oppression and exploitation to which the strike assemblies,
committees and federations, the parliament of the future socialist economy free, we can
see how that could easily turn into committees and federations.
From this perspective, the base of the revolution shows that the creation of the
oppressed fight for their freedom they provide. This shows that, the basic structure of
libertarian socialism, in the struggle against exploitation and oppression of the working
class will be created by the working class.
And it will take time. As stressed by Kropotkin, anarchists "Revolution, as imagined by
some socialists, in the twinkle of an eye, do not believe can be achieved with one shot."
Again, as predicted his right, to solve the face of the economic problems of the social
revolution will be especially time. Therefore, "the revolution begins with rebellion as
soon as we waited to be really clear with communist or collectivist character, Revolution
first and last time the idea that we would be at sea. "defense is correct. And this can be
seen in every revolution - a revolution in Spain in 1936, not even the members of the CNT
anarchist collective creations of planning or proposal, then it should have been created
for conditions (Marxists are not aware of it so).
Anarchist Economics Building Blocks
After anarchist economics revolution that will develop anarchist evolving economy.
However, based on those described basically can draw a sketch.
There are many things that are common to all current anarchism. Proudhon's "society where
land and labor to have the tools in a wide federation united, democratic, organized labor
unions" summarizes the vision for the defense of the base.
In such an economy, the private and the state will remain the property, the right to use,
in production with retention and socializing will become self-government (because, as
Kropotkin's constantly stressed, workers "industry should be the real rulers of").
Industrial, agricultural and municipal levels will be socio-economic federalism as well as
user groups and interest groups.
This should be a decentralized economy. As Kropotkin directly stated, "economic changes
will bring the social revolution so great and so will be the basis ... [new] will be a
impossible to make one or several people to identify social forms business ... [It] can
only be the collective work of the masses." This is, in economic integration, requires
real autonomy and free agreements with the horizontal connection.
Basically, the production of the decentralized structure and so has the need for agreement
between the unions. A central organization, the nature of the need for all of the
conditions are not even unique. Not even required by or acceptable cost to meet the need.
They can not know when or where they will be. Even try it to know, (I assume you know what
to ask and can collect all the data) drowned in the data.
This, as well as for individuals, as is the case for work places and communities. As
Kropotkin guessed straight, "a predetermined certain amount of material per day, at a
specific location is sent to the controller that a strong central government" thought "is
not something to be desired" and "a crazy utopia." Realistic and attractive system, people
"together compatible with work, enthusiasm and local knowledge "requires.
Such a system based on appropriate technology. Here I must emphasize, anarchists are not
entirely against large-scale industry and clearly stated that since Proudhon. For example,
Kropotkin "If we analyze the modern industries, for some, hundreds gathered in the same
place, even we see thousands of workers is required. Giant steel and mining enterprises of
this kind certainly; ocean-going ships, the village can not be done in the factory. "In a
free society, determine the diameter of objective needs of the industry. In capitalism,
the diameter to increase profits, because it requires the technology expands much more.
Moreover, it should not be based on the integration of production division. Thanks to the
combination of manual labor and thought the combination of labor and industrial and
agricultural labor, (labor) section instead of dividing the amount of work is the future.
In free communities, agriculture and industry come together and increase the diversity of
the majority of the works that deal with the tedious work in unhealthy environments,
order-giving and destroys the division command-shaped areas.
This means, of course, establishments, the environment and the work itself is transformed.
Unfortunately, as it was in many of the industrial structure of capitalism and working
conditions are likely to remain unchanged, such as after a social revolution in the same
way as if the workers are going to do the work!
Libertarian Communism
Let again, it is almost the same in all of them all the current anarchism. Lock is the
difference distribution: to be based on labor consumption (the old contract) or communism
(need to discuss).
Most anarchist communists - not in the sense of the Soviet Union (smart appearing tell
people I was witness to it), "according to the ability of everyone, according to his
needs" means. Ethically, Kropotkin's very good, I will summarize the reasons stated by
many anarchists and will agree that it is the best system.
Such a system can be achieved and how quickly will operate in exactly how the anarchist
milieu debate. For now, a libertarian communist society, the desire of creating it and
will be sufficient to say that they are developed in accordance with the conditions.
However, we can discuss some of the problems evident today.
For example, there is no price is different from mutualism. The need for profit under
capitalism leads to economic crises and uncertainty, but markets are problematic, even
though the capitalist. Market prices because economic decisions direct labor, raw
materials, time, and so on. reflect the real costs (but not many others counts, or hide at
best), and on the other hand (monopolies under Although capitalism, profits and so on.
With ?arp?t?ls also) reflects the changing production conditions.
So, how can we best allocate resources without prices? It is not very clear. For example,
let's use one or the other of gold and why to use if you have similar values ??of the
bullet? Markets (albeit badly) does this (to select for the gold weight is 100 pounds and
10 pounds of lead is simple, but it is too simple). For this libertarian communist
economy, without distorting effect created by the market, people must be informed about
the real costs and conditions of production. As suggested by Kropotkin, "these compounds
results in what we call price, we do not have to analyze rather than accept as the supreme
and blind to our behavior?" So the price we have to analyze and to inform the process of
making economic and social decisions "have to keep separate the different components."
Principles that we use to share resources, a free society, we need to specify an agreement
within the federal structure. For example, to be used in the decision-making process, a
variety of factors to make a cost-benefit analysis at each stage in the creation of a
product (previously based on the accuracy of the calculated costs and the decision) is
collected by multiplying the degree of importance to form a coefficient. Thus, objects can
be projected costs (time, energy, resources), but what will be the supply and demand
changes? This is an important issue because the libertarian communist society, must
produce to respond to the needs of the product. First, a stock-holding for unexpected
changes will occur in every workplace in the production or demand would be sensible. In
addition, the demand for every business and / or relative to the production can be a
scarcity measure that identifies changes and other businesses can search for alternatives
to using them - that is, increase this value can not be supplied a product and using the
product come in contact with other businesses or they explore different options.
Businesses federations will follow all these changes, interest groups, user groups and
other social organizations and in dialogue with the federations, large-scale projects and
large enterprise organizations and closures. These initiatives may be at different levels.
For example, one business may try to shorten the production time to allow more free time
to work: a real incentive for innovation in work processes and productivity. Federalism
needs are fully based on the fact that different decisions, different (appropriate) should
be in level.
But production is something beyond producing the products. Sale and a human issue is much
more important than the mechanical feasibility questions. So individual targets or (Gain
increase or abbreviations such as time), we must look at the whole and should be rejected
by the official. Capitalism is based on the "cheap Yet?" While the question, the
foundation of a liberal economy, "right?" Will be.
The results
After all, our own conclusion is that economic freedom. I could not ever be given as an
example of selfishness to make slavery a boss, but he said that the bourgeois economy.
As stressed by Kropotkin, "production, lost sight of the needs of the people and was
completely a wrong direction and is responsible for this faulty organizational structure
... point ... production really ?rg?tleyel again to meet all needs." And these needs are
the needs of the whole person, a user a manufacturer of unique individuals that are part
of a community of members and ecosystem. Denying that capitalism or equally important part
that needs are met at the expense of other aspects of our lives.
Unlike the Marxists, the class hierarchy and the profit motive are aware of the defects
caused by the current economic structure. So I put on a short-term goal is to transform
our hands and make him a capitation meet human needs. Long-term goal is to transform the
industrial structure is clean. The reason exactly, under capitalism, "efficient", which
Lenin what you say, that it is not good for people.
As I said earlier, the development of anarchist economics, after the revolution, which
will be evolving anarchist economy. We can not predict the point to be reached, because
our view is attenuated by capitalism. The only thing we can do today, while emerging
liberal society is no hierarchy of classes and templates. The basis of our analysis and
our critique of capitalism sketch, our hopes and our dreams and our struggle against it.
Translation: Free Oktay
http://meydangazetesi.org/gundem/2014/12/anarsistlerin-ekonomi-tartismalari-12-ozgurlugun-birikimi-iain-mckay/
