Military, Militia, whatever the word it is, any society need a force to defend against external threats. I’m not sure how co-ordiantion would work while not being authoritarian and thus inadvetently create a state.
Military, Militia, whatever the word it is, any society need a force to defend against external threats. I’m not sure how co-ordiantion would work while not being authoritarian and thus inadvetently create a state.
How do you envision other industries get their resources in a mutualist economic system?
They don’t, mutualistic economics doesn’t work at scale because human nature doesn’t let it.
It can work with a small enough group, but will break before you even reach 1000 individuals.
It was how the vast majority civilization worked for millennia until the rise of capitalism. Nearly every pre- and feudal state (and every place where one might think people bartered) used a gift economy until near the Middle Ages’ end. You also seem to be thinking that contributions have to be centralized, and you do need to realize that the abolishment of “hard” property is at the core of anarchism.
Either way, I don’t see how one would think the military is an exception to the economy unlike every other major industry.
Worked for millenia until the rise of capitalism
No it didn’t, we’ve had states for literally six to eight thousand years or more and capitalism for about three hundred years.
States have existed essentially since the moment the population of specific area became large enough to become a city.
Because again, as I said earlier, you can’t have completely stateless groups larger than hundreds of people, if just doesn’t work.
Though I think it’d also be interesting to talk about power, I’m talking about the economy, and unless discussing something that much broader interests you enough to discard talking about the economy and the military for you as well I think we should focus on what we were talking about instead of veering down further tangents.
You asked what would it look like, and I gave you a realistic answer. There’s no way that type of economy could exist in the real world, it’s never been done, and there’s plenty of evidence showing it failing even in small groups of people.
I asked you what you think they’d look like, and you’ve only repeated that “they don’t work have never worked and will never work” without answering my question.
https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2016/02/barter-society-myth/471051/ https://www.jstor.org/stable/20463826 https://www.medievalists.net/2014/12/gift-giving-middle-ages-new-exhibition-getty/
Your argument is like an 18th-century commentator saying federalism would never work to the scale of the thirteen colonies—it underestimates what has advanced. Whereas the federalism-skeptics underestimated advances in checks and balances (whose problem today is IMO with one branch just abnegating its power) from enlightenment thought and the consolidated power of the legislature developed through British Parliament, you underestimate modern social connection and networking. Sure, there are deep divisions, but within those separated groups are bonds, the strength of which on such a large scale never before seen.