Why do you object to mutualism?
Markets aren't capitalism
Why do you object to mutualism?
They literally are.
Any market is going to be based on the profit motive, the law of value, and exploitation of workers. In other words, any market will inevitably be dominated by the interest of capital (ergo, capitalism).
Better than capitalism, but still suffers from the same problem all market systems do.
I don't want to join a dead movement
But all capital (if you call it that) is collectively owned. Mutualism isn't just capitalism with worker co-ops
Such as?
The workers will still exploiting themselves because the their actions will have to be line line with capital in order to satisfy their profit margin.
Capitalism isn't distinguished by bosses and employees. That's incidental. The main feature of capitalism is capital accumulation.
half-measures
But there's no capital just currency which acts more as a calibration method and there'd be a universal basic income to gauge what needs to be produced.
...
The workers literally own the means of production and no capital is accumulated for private consumption/enjoyment.
Proof? Evidence?
Mutualism is pretty cool, but it's a dead ideology. Titoism is the way foward
Titoism is State-Mutualism
i rather say mutualism is stateless-titoism
Is Mutualism basically just stateless Market Socialism?
this
that's an oversimplification, but if that works as a heuristic for ya…
Markets aren't capitalism
But that doesn't mean they are a good thing.
Marketsocs of all stripes are spooked by capitalist propaganda about breadlines.
indeed.
Don't get me wrong i fully support cooperatives but only as a transitional stage to planned socialism and ofc, FULL COMMUNISM. Modern information technology has really obviated any need for a market to exist as you can now get better performance out of a computerized planning system than any market, capitalist, mutualist, or otherwise.
Don't forget that the main defining feature of capitalism is reinvestment of the surplus into a circuit of capital ( M-C-M' ) The problem with market socialism is that it isn't socialism, its still capitalism. Basically if the whole market was cooperatives, the law of value would still apply if the workers reinvested their surplus into the means of production, the exploitation of labor by capital still applies.
Basically cooperatives-socialism is really just capitalism with more evenly distributed ownership of capital. Even though it would lead to greater income equality, the basic process of exploitation, as well as the other negative aspects of market capitalist economies such as unemployment, instability/periodic crisis, environmental problems, etc. Would be there still.
Plus, what about non producers like the retired, young ,students, etc? how would they get an income.
Also, what about a company like amazon which makes 80 billion a year, with only 80 high tech engineer employees, would they get $1billion each per year?
While a local grocery store which grosses $500,000 a year with 15 employees would make $33k a year?
that's circular logic. Explain how it's this way without say "it's x because x"
no, fuck off
...
fuck all these spooks. egoist anarchism is best.
Would the reinvested surplus into capital not be a good thing? More capital would make labor easier until there's no demand for more capital.
Sounds to me like things would balance themselves out.
The problem of people not able to work is a whole nother factor. Perhaps something like UBI would work in this case. This would allow more free movement of workers between different jobs also, so more free market action.