Why do you hate (freed) markets?

aaaaaaa I meant to say just skill in general. I did not mean people could exchange drawings for other drawings. I need to sleep.

I did not mean people could *only* exchange drawings for other drawings.
Fuck me.

what befit does a free market give me that a planned anarchist economy does not? I can only see downsides.

While people couldn't get extremely wealthy, why wouldn't they try to artificially increase demand for the products and services they already offer?

What about competition wasting resources, both physical and human? Wouldn't be more efficient and easier for everyone if they worked together instead of competing?

Well one people being also to do what they want because it's anarchism. Even if you don't see a benefit for you personally you obviously can't go around policing how others work together because, it's anarchism.

Also
Friend, these things oppose each other. Is this a typo?

Not sure what point you're trying to make here. The problem with markets is that they replace use-value with exchange-value. Use-value isn't fungible in reality but exchange-value is. It obscures the ultimate point of production (use) and allows the system to chase revenue from exchange in markets which will fluctuate according to the imperfect flow of information. In a society where you produce for use, you bypass this process and its problems. You don't need a market and all the associated costs of marketing to know that a need exists and to meet it. In the context of capitalism you do, and I get the impression that this context tends to blind people to other ways of doing things.

They can but would they? Wouldn't it make more sense to produce for people to freely use in exchange with everyone for the goodwill that others would do the same for you? There's little need for an explicit exchange in a case where relationships between people and their community or people and each other would last long enough for people to repay implicit debts and keep the cycle going.

I honestly don't see how one could go about doing so under such conditions in the first place.
People would only be competing making better things, and it would not be if they want to. Not competing to just survive because they are forced to like under capitalism.

Markets are inherently irrational and perpetuates exactly the kind of "grow or die" ethics that will destroy the entire human race through ecological disaster.

Right now, the thing that is the most beneficial is to have your washing-machine assembled on the other side of the world by starving people, have it shipped to the place where it's actually be used, and then for extra profit, make sure the thing fails after 4-5 years instead of 25 years, adding to the pollution the whole process makes.

This is beyond of course the fact, that for land-owners, for example, there is more insentive to let your community starve and sell cash-crops than there is to make sure people are fed.

An no, mutualism does nothing to fix this inherently irrational, unethical system.

The solution is to municipalize the economy and make it owned in it's totality by the direct-democratic community.
Call this totalitarianism if you want, but it is totalitarianism of the organic community rather than the state.

Because without a state the rate of return on capital would vanish as capital grows large. When someone makes billions of dollars, they use a tiny portion of it. The rest they invest all over the world. The government and international organizations like US Navy, NATO, IMF, UN, WTO, EU etc. artificially guarantee the safety of those investments.

In an anarchist society, managing large capital and guaranteeing its safety would be incredibly complex. So there would be nothing you can do with your money, and no reason to accumulate it.

Like I said above, international commerce is heavily subsidized by military and other means, such as the Import-Export Bank

The incentive is there only because the government will protect you from peasant uprisings.

In the US, yeah.
The rest of the world still imports from China without subsidies, because China doesn't care about environmentalism and have a ton of dirt-poor people.

And thus the Market cannot exist without a state, because as you say, people will immediately abolish the free market economy.

Landlords have nothing to do with a freed market.

US naval forces subsidize all international commerce. And many countries have equivalents of the Export-Import Bank. Mine does at least.

And why is that? Because of government.

Throughout history, local communities have been extremely effective at developing and managing the commons in a sustainable way. You need a totalitarian government uprooting people and giving large tracts of land to capitalists to destroy that.

People will abolish hierarchical and unfair forms of organization. That doesn't mean there can't be a free(d) market among equals.

You need to read more bucko, no offence.

You just explained exactly why.
Because people will abolish the Market rather than starve.

Did you read the OP? Mutual aid is necessary. Markets can't solve everything.

However, markets can get me my vibrating dragon dildos. No one is going to revolt if people don't have access to free dragon dildos.

On the other hand, politburo is never going to approve dragon dildos in the yearly consumption report.

What if some shitters form a cartel?

See

Answer: We kill the fuckers.

Planners r dumb lol

Wrong

The possession of property in market anarchism is voluntary, the lack of a state means there is no legal obligation to respect it

If someone forms a cartel then we can voluntarily decide not to respect their possessions

No. Human creativity gave you dragon dildos.
Something that is unleashed in fullness, one we abolish the need to work and trade in order to survive, but create an ethical economy, put fully in hands of the direct-democratic municipality.

I dont.
but you have to remember, that you are in Holla Forums, were all sorts of authoritarian leftists post.
don't even listen to them, they are full of shit and their central planning always goes to shit, they are even considering using super computers, to do the central planning for them, because they are too fucking stupid to do it, all of them suck at it, from Lenin to the most ridiculous Tankie and Nazbol that inhabit our lovely board Holla Forums.

Markets are complete shit that lead to inefficiency, planned obselesence, environmental destruction. We need central planning so that we can manage human economic activity sensibly.

Because free market is a myth like Marxist theories.
I just have to visit some shopping malls around the world and see they all have the same stores and sell the exact same products. What happened to the famous "freedom of choice" that was supposed to happen under "free" markets?

Resource based economy is the answer! Why do we need a shit ton of "brands" producing similar products wasting a ton of resources?

Won't a free market just wither into traditional liberalism? In a global competitive market, if someone sets up regulations or even goes to the extreme of implementing Mutualism, what's there to stop someone from implementing non-regulated competitive markets and basically making your society economically worthless in contrast to itself?

Surely a planned economy either done locally or centrally (providing it has local level organization along with it) is the best way to go about organizing a socialist society?

There is no such thing as a "free" or "freed" market.

Market systems inherently create inequality due to disparities of capital/currency. Any market society needs to be sufficiently divided and decentralized, and/or mediated by strong social institutions or a state, in order to ensure that these inequalities are small and temporary.

Monopolies on land, resources and even international commerce are heavily subsidized by the government. In an anarchist society, large amounts of capital can't be accumulated and maintained.

You need government to enforce large land titles, snatch away resource rich land from indigenous locals, uphold intellectual property rights, make sure your cargo ships full of riches aren't raided by pirates and rogue nations ,and so on.

Blame Intellectual Property for it and global state-subsidized capitalism for it.

Mutualism isn't regulation, its the absence of regulation, including an absence of intellectual property and absentee land ownership, as well as the monopoly on money that benefits the porkies and suits.

If someone comes and tries to lock us up for taking control of an abandoned building, or for violating copyright, we cook bacon.

Link is a short and nice introduction to how the government rips of you and me and subsidizes the porky.

If you look at the history of markets, large inequalities were always created and maintained through the state, right from Enclosure and Colonization to the IP rights that allowed scum like Gates to amass their entire fortune.

Because Pierre-Joseph "anti-semitism is my only argument against materialism" Proudhon was already burried deep in the dustbin of history in the 19th century, OP.

Google Kevin Carson

Google value-form.

ITT: anarkiddies

Markets cannot exist without those inequalities and the state.

If your plan is to prevent capital accumulation by permitting theft, why would anyone bother to bring anything to the market in the first place?
My toothbrush cart keeps getting robbed, and everyone is like, "you shouldn't have had so many toothbrushes in the first place." So from now on I only make the toothbrush I use and to Hell with the rest.

Nice strawman. Nobody will rob your toothbrush cart, and if someone does, they will be rehabilitated or given communal sanctions.

On the other hand, your claim to ownership of a large field which was passed down through the generations and originally acquired by your slave-plantation owning great-great grandfather wouldn't be recognized.

It's impossible to enjoy today's living standards while living in a self-siuficient commune, a degree of trade is necessary.

I don't understand what that is supposed to mean. Is voting less or more anti-authoritarian in comparison with price signals?

Government isn't something made by aliens from another dimension. What makes you believe that decentralized market forces freed of the stronk central government wouldn't re-produce it long-term?

...

Meme
Spontaniousness is another word for "there wasnt jack shit so we had to improvise something halfassed".

Economies can be planned by humans with computers and will be more efficient and less wastefull both in labour and resources. A "free" market is just planned according to profit, not according to what the people actually want.

Both. Voting is less authoritarian in our current capitalist economy as capital is in the hands of a few and your vote in a market is tied to your economic power. In a freed market among equals, voting is more sometimes authoritarian as it enforces the views of the majority on the minority. That doesn't mean that voluntary transactions are free of authoritarianism as they have effects on the entire community, and to that extent all those affected should have a say.

What makes you believe that your MLM dictatorship of the proles won't devolve to just another authoritarian state-capitalist shithole like the great experiments of the 20th century.

1. Depends on the voting procedure in question. 2. If the voting procedure is majoritarian, that still doesn't imply that there is one and the same majority about every issue, rather individuals are likely to experience both being on the winning and losing side (with winning being experienced more often).

Lottery for people who want to appear as candidates on ballots. Better election methods. Limits on how often you can run for office. Direct population lottery for a chamber that can block any proposed law change by the professionals and revert to the status quo. People's juries with right to give out a lesser sentence than what the law demands and even full nullification. Electronic consumption-point system that is democratically controlled, e.g. people can vote regularly on where to cap the maximum personal remuneration level and some other settings. Extreme transparency, so friend and foe and everybody in between can see how much steel, electricity, lots of other categories, got made and used in various places. No patents. No inheritance rights.

Hey I didn't say you could repost that image to defend anarchism >:^(

Your meme is now part of the commons.

(Intellectual) PROPERTY IS THEFT

REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE

People don't need to keep growing, people interacting in a mutualist fashion does not turn them into a cancerous corporation. They would have no reason to grow like that.

This. lol

The jew-hate card is a shit one to pull. Literally all leftists from that time hated the jews because at the time, jews were the richest people around. In the majority of christian/catholic peoples, loans and interest were banned because of Jesus. Jews has no such ban in their religion. So jews started banks, gave people loans, took interest and fees and collected debts. Proudon, Marx, Bakunin and Kropotkin all said bad things about the jews because they were all against capitalist economics and during the time they were alive, jews were the face of the bourgeoisie and capitalism itself.

Do you want us to quote Marx on his letter to Engels about ho he expressed himself about blacks or hispanics, you cherrypicking faggot?

Lmao
Like a babe in the woods
Never change, anarkiddies