View Single Post
  #237  
Old 02-29-2012, 09:21 PM
Untoward_Parable Untoward_Parable is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 656
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lumpy View Post
We The Living is a novel set in the 1920's Soviet Union based on Rand's direct observation of what happened there. She doesn't present an "argument", she simply relates what happened then, which speaks for itself.

Except that a "free association" that "takes over" the organization of production must inherently become a bureaucracy, which is what this whole thread has been debating.

If that's the case, then the Soviet Union reversed history, since it turned wage earners into slaves and serfs of the state; they just weren't privately owned.
Ok, let's talk a little about property. Let's start with land, since other than the clothes on your back if anything is "yours" you need a place to keep it: a house with four walls and the land it sits on. I don't know about you but I like having possessions. I like having four walls around me where I can say "this is my place, this is where I can be alone if I want and no one can come in here without my permission. And all the things in my place are mine, and you can't just walk off with them". I can't imagine any fundamental human privacy or individuality without this.

If I'm to take arguments about abolishing property at face value, then they seem to be saying that this is wrong. That as long as anyone else might decide that they had a better use for it, that it was wrong of me to "expropriate" the land by building a house on it and calling it Mine. That as long as there's anyone on the face of the Earth who is homeless, that I have no right to deny them shelter. That as long as anyone has unmet needs that I have no right to any surplus beyond a bare physical existence. That the entire mass of humanity, simply by existing, nullifies any rights I have by majority vote. Instead of being a human being I am now one-seven billionth of "humanity", and have exactly a one-seven billionth share of anything "humanity" might exert a claim to. That my friend is the Collective.
The soviet union was not Anarchism.

Again you argue by making strange assumptions and imagination of a dystopian nightmare. What people would have dibs on in an Anarchist society would be democratically decided in the first place. I imagine as you seem to that most people would like their own place that they might share with family or friends or themselves only and creature comforts. What my excerpt was talking about in reference to property were the non-human means of production. Materials, technologies, equipment ect. Can you go through life not owning an industrial steel mill? I can.