Okay faggots I am a classical liberal

I'll have you know I am a 24 year old idiot, not a 23 year old idiot.

You do realize that this is more than just free markets - non-free markets, right?

@OP

If you have questions regarding the ecological impact, or how debt and automation will strangle the system. Just ask.

MAKE AN ACTUAL EFFORT TO ARGUE FOR 1800s UTOPIAN ECONOMIC THEORIES?

L O L
O
L

HAHAHAHAAHAHAH

Since you weren't very specific, I'll go ahead and give you some videos that go over the general basics.

youtube.com/watch?v=eGOA2WedIQo
youtube.com/watch?v=6P97r9Ci5Kg
youtube.com/watch?v=hy8y2CCGcwo&index=3&list=PL3F695D99C91FC6F7

Read marx, he was a classical liberal too.

Marxism is anti-Utopian.

get a job and read the news

watch this: youtube.com/playlist?list=PL3F695D99C91FC6F7

retard-proof intro the marxist conception of capitalism and critique of political economy.

ignore the other posters; they're hardcore shilling another type of left wing politics, not marx and communism.

no such thing
the true heirs of 18th century liberalism and enlightenment values are socialists, modern day liberals are reactionary

Communalism (or Democratic Confederalism as it is implemented in Syria) is a relative new ideology and economic theory.

There are a lot of alternatives to global capitalism outside of "Totalitarian Planned Economy".

To show this isn't some utopian bullshit:
cooperativeeconomy.info/the-economy-of-rojava/
opendemocracy.net/5050/rahila-gupta/rojava-revolution-on-hoof
kurdishquestion.com/oldarticle.php?aid=the-social-economy-in-rojava

So yeah. It works in practise, and it's growing.

What system? Where do I live? Why are you suck a retarded faggot? Read the new? What the fuck are you talking about?

LOL

Capitalism. The global system we all live in unless you happen to be an ayy lmao.

checkem

Read bookchin because his ideology is what runs Rojava, who are fighting ISIS. Production should be planned by the people involved and done for the use of the end product instead of for exchange as a commodity on a market. The best way to do this according to bookchin is at the municipal level. His books are good introductory material for our contemporary situation. Also read this. It's 20 pages long and explains what's wrong with capitalism.

It's not

Why don't you respond to this post OP. Instead of choosing the weakest arguments and then responding with all caps LOL and adhoms. Why do people so often come to this sub and say convince me when they clearly have no interest in learning or arguing in good faith? Why is everyone who describes themselves as a classical liberal an insufferable faggot?

>>>/liberty/

The law of value: Value can only be created by labor.

It doesnt matter what kind of labor this is, if the labor produces things nessecary to society it creates value. If it produces things not nessecary to society, it does not create value. Value cannot be created in exchange, because exchange does not make anything. If one person sells something for more than it's worth the person who it is sold to takes a loss. Although exchange helps commodities realise their use value, it does not create value because the use-values of different commodities are not comparible, you cant drink gasoline or fill your car with royal crown cola.
The system of capitalism is predicated on one simple idea: production for exchange. Production for exchange means that objects are not produced for their use directly, but for transmutaion into the form of the money-commodity, in order to be exchanged for other commodities that people need.

Here is the problem: production for exchange and the law of value means that in order for capitalist society to work, since value cannot be created in exchange, no worker in the entire economy can be paid the value of all of that which they produce. Labor power, as a commodity, is bought at rate less than what it is worth. Remember that exchange cannot generate value, this means that economically the cost of progress and innovation, in societies that produce for exchange, is exploitation. Innovation for example is a race between firms to devalue the existing commodities of their competitors faster, the "super profit" created by competition is not new value that is created, it is created at the expense of other firms. Innovation does not create new value, rather it reduces the value of commodities which allows more people to afford them, which is nice but not something that grows the economy. The economy only grows via exploitation of labor-power, this doesnt just refer to poorly treated workers; doctors and hedge fund managers are exploited too. This is similar to feudal or slave societies, but not as bad because people get to choose their work. Communism will end exploitation by structuring the economy on producion for use, rather than for exchange.

I can tell you're well educated

If you ever want to see why we need some form of socialism. Try to look further than your neighbourhood. There are plenty of problems caused by capitalism. Liberals are just under the impression that they can fix it within capitalism. And they call us utopian.

Please just sage this thread

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crisis_theory

...

wew, mathematics is not real live and all economic models that proclaim the perfect efficient market have huge assumptions. No economist would make such an argument.

I'm economically illiterate? You're arguing for market intervention, and calling AnCap inefficient. Top fucking kek.

The crises facing the world today are the direct result of the capitalist system. Both stagnation, debt, various wars and refugee crises, and ecological degradation.

Living in the consumerist bubble might make it look like things are "alright", but they're not. The developing world is feeding and clothing the west. What will happen if they too want to enjoy the same levels of prosperity?

It will mean the end of Earth and civilization through sheer over-consumption.

If you have any doubts about communalism (obviously not communism): It is based around a market system, but with the added focus on ecology, female liberation ("feminism", though Kurds tend to call it Jineology), and eschewing all forms of debt. The Kurdish variant conceptualized by Abdullah Ocalan is called Democratic Confederalism.

are you retarded nigger

there is no efficiency in leaving functions up to those who would intentionally obstruct the function to generate additional capital

Can you give an example?

What? Marx's economic theory is not utopian, it is dystopian because it exposes an internal incoherency in capitalism. "Markets work" is utopian.

Bell telephone

Ip laws

Right to work laws

What?

Öcalan has goof reason for not calling it feminism …

giving a sector of the economy the right to breach freely negotiated contract is obstruction

This classical liberal is the ancap retard samefagging isn't he.

Rojava is currently functioning on a market, but communalism is an anti market ideology and abolishing markets is a necessary step.

Your an ancap? This explains your retardation. Talking to ancaps is a pure waste of time.

Right-to-work is not obstructionist you fucking idiot. It doesn't eliminate unions, it gives people the choice to join them.

Capitalism is contrary to the very principles of liberalism, liberty, equality, and private property cannot exist in the same world together and do not.

>>en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mathematical_economics

Not an argument.

...

How is showing that mathematics, the only purely objective study in the world, supports AnCap as maximum efficiency "not an argument?"

Nigger it's 50,000 characters and you're a fucking retard. I do not believe you have read or understand that and are using it to be a dickhead and jump out the thread.

M O D E L S are not reality and perfectly efficient markets do not exist

What is even the purpose of your system? "Efficiency"? So do you suggest we start killing off the feeble and really anyone that can't keep up with this "efficiency", or would that violate the NAP?

Where does it end? 2 McMansions? 5? 10? How many cars? How many travels a years? How many calories of food, fuel and electricity per day?

Does this only end when the whole world (or dare I say the universe) has been converted into a grey goo of computronium used to simulate ever growing virtual stacks of money being slushed around?

The economy is not working for you, it's not working to sustain your life needs. You are working for the economy. As a slave of capital that only exists to grow and cultivate the system, that in the end, will devour you.

...

You're free to choose. Also, nice begging the question fallacy

Slippery slope

That has literally nothing to do with your ideology you imbecile.

HOLY FUCK I THOUGHT THAT IT WAS JUST A MEME AHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

That diagram represents maximum efficiency. It can only be achieved by a hand-off approach, i.e AnCap. If you claim that AnCap doesn't work, or isn't as good as communism, you are actually advocating for a less efficient system.

Never listen to poster with this flag btw

OP if you do nothing else in this thread, watch this video:
youtube.com/watch?v=SFDt_yv5a64

[CITATION NEEDED IN GIANT RED LETTERS]

>>slideshare.net/aseldis/economic-effiency

There is no hands-off approach in capitalism. Private property and the market are predicated on government intervention. The free market doesn't exist.

this

Even Marx argues that capitalism is efficient and a good way to industrialise a country. The problem is that absolute free market capitalism without any sort of intervention. Requires humans to not be greedy. Because someone who has earned a lot of money can spend this money on eliminating competition, slowly building a monopoly in a certain sector. And this is without mentioning that this greed might also lead capitalists to exploit workers and disregard nature. And that is happening right now even with state intervention.

AnCap requires the same cooperation between people as AnCom or regular communism. So there is no argument in that. But ask yourself the following. Do we need the most efficient way to mass produce commodities while letting supply regulate the market? Or do we just need to produce what we actually need and adjust accordingly?

It's a serious question. Where does it end? At what point will you be satisfied?
A nice condo? A mansion with swimming pool? A giant estate with several hectares of land?
A sports car? A Rolls Royce with chauffeur? A personal helicopter to drop you off at the office? A gold plated A380 that serves as a mobile home?

Then think what happens if everyone want to have that. Do you think we have the resources for that? Or will billions just live in impoverished shantytowns where once stood thousand year old rainforest and public parks?

It's often ignored because the inevitable reality of this system is not comfortable to realize.

You have a system that is marching towards nothingness. It is not a system that fulfills just the basic necessities to live a fulfilling life, it's moved beyond that.
It is a self-contained perpetual motion machine that must growth at all costs, with no limits.
What is your optimal rate of economic growth? 2%? 5%? 10%? At what point to we have a high enough GDP? 100 trillion? 200 trillion? 500 trillion? 1 quadrillion?

I really recommend reading Debord. You might find it an enlightening perspective (though it's pretty heavy for some).

I can come from a family people here like to call "porkies". And I can tell from experience, looking around me, that it's never, ever, enough. And that attitude is lethal. Because the carrying capacity of this planet is finite, as is the amount of debt people can hold.

disgusting

Remember how the Soviets were ridiculed for bread lines and black market turnips? Systems can create idiotic shortages. In free-markets, overproduction leads to starvation, when the supply of a commodity drops the price below production cost. This creates artificial scarcity.

Production cost is also part of a giant web of artificially created values, so production costs are artificially high, and it just ripples on. We are now at a point in history with capitalism, which is more absurd than anything observed under the Soviet system.

In cities across America, there are more homes than homeless people. Rent is kept artificially high by vacant units that are kept off market, just to create that shortage. The market drives this. Everything is more expensive than it should be, and this leads to poverty, crime, disease, and the stench of urine in the streets. People go uneducated, endure more stress, and all because some people believe the blind idiot-machine of the free market is somehow benevolent if not… which is fucking foolish, magical thinking.

Pardon an old joke, but i'm an old muthafuka: Why can't you take a picture of Russians? Cuz when you say cheese, they all line up.

how can I learn economics so I know as much as you? Capital seems quite heavy for someone with little reading like me. I've tried WLaC and I think I understand it, but it doesn't go very in depth about the theory of value.

Succinct explanation. Saved.

markets are ok. capitalists tho, they need to go.

This does not say a hands off approach is good, only that planned economies can't plan effectively because of shoes or something. You have put your ideology in place for what it is arguing for, when Keynesianism has been shown to be everything the powerpoint presentation talks about.

dumbass, in order for price signals to work, there must be constant divergence from equilibrium

Also because I am going to bed now and I get the feeling you will cite the welfare wastage part, Keynesianism was killed off because wages stagnated, leaving his welfare state payouts to get far too close to the minimum wage. A weeks work should leave you comfortably off, and state benefits should leave you enough to put your money back into the economy on some luxuries like clothing, cigs and booze and not get into financial difficulty. Look up the paradox of thrift.

a good place to start with the explanation of the law of value if you dont want to read capital is this series of educational videos:

kapitalism101.wordpress.com/law-of-value-the-series/

Geez, Rojava is not even Communalism as described by Bookchin.

Please do me a favor and don't act as this shit is the official Holla Forums stance. Really, nobody needs US-backed sand Kulaks with a human face.

no

It's an offshoot of communalism. That doesn't mean that we can't or shouldn't support it.
Just accept your communalist overlords already
Not an argument. cooperativeeconomy.info/the-economy-of-rojava/

It's not like a lot of people were making an effort at informative discussion.

Is it. A variant. We're not autistic leftcoms. We won't die if someone implements the system in a slightly different and locally tailored manner.

Phil Greaves. Please.
Russia and Iran back them. You know, Syria's closest allies? Even Assad is warming up to them.

It's time to the let the dead ideology go.

We're hitting revisionism levels previously held unimaginable.

Yeah but we should totally stand with the DPRK amirite?

No, thus hierarchy because I want a McMansion.

fuggin ancaps

Poop sex is a very important communist value.

I never meant to shoot you… now I've gone and hurt you! Hmm, I wonder if he really thought that would work?

I actually kinda like Brad, but trust him to act like he's in charge when he contributed nothing to saving Isabella. When she wakes up, we'll finally get the truth about the zombies, and see a big part of the game's moral message, but I think this is a good time to take a break. See you next time for what I really really hope will actually be the final installment!

Thanks!

Posting pdfs and definitions in bold letters isn't really an informative discussion without giving premises which your ideology apperently doesn't really need. Sure Bookchins work on the reciprocal relationship between sociology and environmentalism is alright, but to act as this is now the new messianic ideology is utterly ridiculous. His work is complementary, not essential.

Which means you stir it up with some nationalism and you got yourself some guerilla force. Without sustainable theoretical background or guide to long-term action this project will fail or fade into obscurity. I don't know how naive you can be to think that municipalist market-based semi-anarchism will work in a globalized, interconnected world let alone progress to socalism - but post-Marxists don't seem to have much interest in the latter anyway.

They are fighting ISIS so they are everybody's darling. If you seriously want to hurt global capital you unconditionally support Assad.

Indeed, calling a free market petite bourgeois state with some local councils and "qts" socialism is indeed very revisionist. It's a foul comprise, really.

His work, and that of Ocalan, are essential if you want to understand communalism and its implementation. Sure people should read Marx, but the condensed form of Bookchin and emphasize on eoclogy and municipalism is more applicable to current times.

How many times do people need to explain that the PYD rejected independence before you will believe it?

archive.is/mZz4W

They have a theoretical background. They even teach this to new recruits. What are you on about?

What are you talking about? It already works, see the links in the thread. This is no some armchair theorizing, it has and is being brought into practice, and it's functioning.

It's evident what you're implying. That Rojava is somehow the exclusive lapdog of the US, when in reality they're working with everyone including the Baath government.

No. Quit the leader cult. The Federation's goal isn't to topple Assad, nor should it be to unconditionally support Assad. Work together, but respect the wishes of the people of Rojava to run their part of the country as they see fit.
They've even said from the beginning that they will share the oild and gas revenues and have banned outside sales. Is that the language of people that want to oust Assad?

W E W
E
W

We're not even getting into the fact that "efficient" is just a euphemism for "profitable" in bourgeois economics.

I'm convinced and even shook. What do I read to find out more?

pretty much anything by Chris Hedges