“AnComm fallacy” by Jaimine

Source: Indian Libertarians

It is thousand times more better to have common-sense without education than to have education without common-sense. In this context, I intend to highlight that anarcho-communism is a 16 letter word used by inferior magicians with the wrong alchemical formula for transforming earth into gold.

To simplify, Anarchist communism (AnComm) advocates the abolition of the state, private property and capitalism in favor of common ownership or control of the means of production. Only through such collective control, it argues, can “the individual” be free of governmental domination and economic, that is, capitalist, exploitation. Under anarchist communism, the actual tasks of governance and production would be accomplished directly through a horizontal network of voluntary associations, workers’ councils and a gift economy from which everyone would partake solely to satisfy his or her real needs. Anarchist communism, also known as anarcho-communism, communist anarchism, or sometimes, libertarian communism, advocates the abolition of government, which it refers to as the state; private property, especially the means and assets of mass production; and capitalism itself. In place of those institutions and systems, it calls for—as does its ideological competitor Marxism—common ownership or at least control of the means of production. Unlike Marxism, however, which advocates a dictatorship of the proletariat, anarchist communism opposes all bosses, hierarchy, and domination.

Despots or these AnComms are drunk with power of collectivism. They must reluctantly admit that they are subject to the laws of nature. But they reject the very notion of economic law. Economic history is a long record of various communitarianism that failed because they were designed with a bold disregard for Austrianism. AnComm, through various phony calls, clamors for social just. But, according to me, social justice is purely against natural justice because social justice is the anti-concept that employs the concept of justice in order to gain moral credibility—and then obliterates that concept in people’s minds and replaces it with the idea that the forcible redistribution of wealth and compassion is moral. Moreover, AnComm abhors subjective theory of value in all ways and always. Will you give up drinking tea, when forced you with a cup of coffee in an AnComm society, if going by the logic of communism i.e. from each according to his abilityto each according to his needs? Last but not least, AnComm is holistically against self-ownership. Thence, they are unready to even learn praxeology, catallaxy and methodological individualism.

If there is one thing, for example, that anarcho-communism hates and reviles more than the State it is the rights of private property; as a matter of fact, the major reason that anarcho-communists oppose the State is because they wrongly believe that it is the creator and protector of private property, and therefore that the only route toward abolition of property is by destruction of the State apparatus. When owning any private property, according to AnComm, is conscientiously corruptible then how come collective ownership incentivizes the means of production and consumption in an ethical way? They totally fail to realize that the State has always been the great enemy and invader of the rights of private property. And, when private property is theft to the AnComm then what makes public property so sacrosanct over robbery? Furthermore, scorning and detesting the free-market, the profit-and-loss economy, private property, and material affluence — all of which are corollaries of each other — anarcho-communists wrongly identify anarchism with communal living, with tribal sharing, and with other aspects of our emerging drug-rock “youth culture.”

Anarcho-communists have always been extremely vague and cloudy about the lineaments of their proposed anarchist society of the future. Many of them have been propounding the profoundly anti-libertarian doctrine that the anarcho-communist revolution will have to confiscate and abolish all private property, so as to wean everyone from their psychological attachment to the property they own. Furthermore, it is hard to forget the fact that when the Spanish Anarchists (anarcho-communists of the Bakunin-Kropotkin type) took over large sections of Spain during the Civil War of the 193Os, they confiscated and destroyed all the money in their areas and promptly decreed the death penalty for the use of money. None of this can give one confidence in the good, voluntarist intentions of anarcho-communism.

Philosophically, this creed is an all-out assault on individuality and on reason. The individual’s desire for private property, his drive to better himself, to specialize, to accumulate profits and income, are reviled by all branches of communism. Instead, everyone is supposed to live in communes, sharing all his meager possessions with his fellows, and each being careful not to advance beyond his communal brothers. At the root of all forms of communism, compulsory or voluntary, lies a profound hatred of individual excellence, a denial of the natural or intellectual superiority of some men over others, and a desire to tear down every individual to the level of a communal ant-heap. In the name of a phony “humanism”, an irrational and profoundly anti-human egalitarianism is to rob every individual of his specific and precious humanity. Furthermore, anarcho-communism scorns reason, and its corollaries long-range purpose, forethought, hard work, and individual achievement; instead, it exalts irrational feelings, whim, and caprice — all this in the name of “freedom”. The “freedom” of the anarcho-communist has nothing to do with the genuine libertarian absence of interpersonal invasion or molestation; it is, instead, a “freedom” that means enslavement to unreason, to unexamined whim, and to childish caprice. Socially and philosophically, anarcho-communism is a misfortune.

Economically speaking, anarcho-communism is an absurdity. The anarcho-communist seeks to abolish money, prices, and employment, and proposes to conduct a modern economy purely by the automatic registry of “needs” in some central data bank. No one who has the slightest understanding of economics can trifle with this theory for a single second.

The AnComm are against taxation too but they are professional liars when it comes to georgism. The good thing with my rothbardian ideology is that we can tolerate the existence of AnComm in our stateless society, but the AnComm will never tolerate any form of Anarcho-capitalism. The prime motive of AnComm is to not set man free from men. A rose smelling better than a cabbage doesn’t mean that a rose makes a better soup. At first whiff, the altruist rose (AnarchoCommunism) may smell better than the “egoist” cabbage but the  former surely makes a lousy soup.

Anyways, stay tuned for an upcoming “robotic marxism” if these cretins have their way.

One Response to ““AnComm fallacy” by Jaimine”
Check out what others are saying...

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: