I readed that book few months ago, and i want to hear opinions on that book

In our capitalist world, people living in the Global North enjoy a certain standard of living, dependent upon the exploitation of the Global South.

For example, our smartphones are made with Congolese child labour.

How should we go about a worldwide revolution, and reorganising global supply chains along non-hierarchical principles?

What’s the difference?

Anarchists don’t have a detailed, pre-planned vision of the future society, yet we also believe in organising anarchically in the here and now.

Is prefiguration a sort of prescription, or are these distinct concepts?

My biggest obsticale for being 100% market anarchist are things that we need to survive, healthcare is not an elastic good, people would pay literally any pric to stay alive or to save their children or othervfamily member, without the state or totally decomodifying healthcare in anarchist society, how would it look like?

I hope it's a good reddit, I am not looking ror AnCap responses like, people would just die. Have a nice day and thank u in advance!

While, on another subreddit, I came to encounter some criticism on proudhonism by a Marxist. One were advocating for the original poster to read the poverty of philosophy by marx and another added that proudhon was an important stepping stone towards modern science but now it's ridiculous to support any form of proudhonism in modern times, basically agreeing with the reply.

I relied why to see his view.

His rely said "Fichtean's understanding of dialectics, idealism, his support for bourgeois socialism, anti-revolutionary, borderline reformism, and just overall a non-liberty form of socialist thought... The mutualist society proudhon advocated for wouldn't have abolished class, capital, or even state. (as much as he calmed to be an anarchist) "

I'm writing this post quickly since I'm getting very late for my school, but before I go, I'm a new mutualist and not educated on the matter, I could use some opinions from my educated brothers and sisters Untill I can form my own. That's why Im posting this here in the first place.

And also, I tried to post this same question with the pictures but it seems they were deleted. I assume that screen-shots are not allowed.

Currently working my way through it.

I've found plutophrenia's series has helped me a lot, I watch a video after reading a chapter.

But he doesn't have videos for every chapter and I think I'd like to read some more anyways (like I'm still confused about the God thing in the prelude).

I feel like I understand 70% of what I am reading but I can get tripped up on his rhetorical style and older language sometimes. So notes or a discussion or something would be a tremendous help that I could read through to make sure I get that last 30%.

Do you have any good resources or had any discussions about the book you could link to? I tried searching libertarian labyrinth but I didn't find anything, though I could have just missed it if it's there.

Thanks!

So there is this concept in the West called "free-range parenting" where children are free to roam outside or do as they wish throughout the day with minimal parental intervention. That's really how most parents operate with their kids in my part of the world, at least in urban areas, where they basically do whatever they want outside until its time to go home.

However, anarchy, with its emphasis on integral education through integrating education into daily life, caregiving by affinity rather than by obligation through blood, and emphasizing cultivating independence and critical thinking among new human beings as quickly as reasonable, likely would be more extreme in its "free-range parenting" wouldn't it?

How would public infrastructure be built or maintained since there are no taxes? Like roads or pavements or sidewalks or traffick lights etc. You can't just pay to walk on sidewalks Everytime. Like what mechanism or institution are you introducing which would replace taxation so that "fruits of labour" are put into collective good? I mean construction cooperatives for roads are not going to be funded out of thin air.

I'm new to Mutualism btw

So I think most of us here are information communists.

What I mean by that is that once information has been produced, thanks to the wonders of the internet, it's basically cost free to reproduce (hell even before the invention of the internet the cost would have been solely the manufacturing of paper, ink, and the price of labor, amongst others. The information itself didn't cost anything).

I've been thinking about the implications of this position a lot and I'm quite fond of it. However I ran into a bit of a snag when thinking about technology and wanted some input.

Basically, within mutualist markets profit is socialized through reduced costs yeah? The initial inventor is compensated for the cost of innovation (and possibly a little extra as a reward) by the sudden increase in business she gets when she cuts production costs. This is temporary though, because competitors adopt similar strategies and the disparity in price dissappears.

What I am wondering is, once that innovation has been discovered, how does is spread to other producers?

If it was the work of multiple people, it's easy to see how, labor mobility means they bring that knowledge to other projects.

But what about individuals? Say our inventor is tinkering in her bedroom and discovers a way to reduce Widget production costs by 1%.

She then implements this when selling widgets. Why would she share that innovation? After all, she gets more business if she doesn't right?

I suppose competitors could pay her to tell them how she did it. Or they could reverse engineer it?

But it seems much simpler to have her share the innovation. Like, early computer clubs used to share their schematics for free with each other, and i think that's pretty cool. So, my question is, is there a good incentive for that sharing? If so, what is it?

If not, how would such an innovation spread within mutualist markets or a broader mutualist society?

Perhaps there could be reciprocal information sharing? Or perhaps the customers reduce their own costs in exchange for sharing it? Or perhaps reputational benefits would go to the innovator which can be transformed into commissions and customizations (my only hang up here is, do you need to share the tech for that? In a cost-price economy any decrease in price means you figured out a way to decrease cost which could boost reputation anyways right?)

So I was researching National Syndicalism its routes. And in an Article by Edouard Berth "Anarchism and Syndicalism." He used this quote to refer to Proudhon opinion on war. I am not a Proudhon scholar, nor has read War and Peace. However it makes me very curious on Proudhon's opinion on war.
“War is the most profound and sublime phenomenon of our moral life. Nothing else can compare with it: neither the interesting ceremonial of worship, nor the actions of monarchical power, nor the gigantic creations of industry. In the harmonies of nature and humanity, war sounds the most powerful note; its works sweep over the soul like thunder, like the voice of the hurricane. A mixture of genius and boldness, of poetry and passion, of the highest justice and tragic heroism … its majesty dazzles us, and the more we contemplate it, the more our hearts are filled with enthusiasm. War, perceived by a false philosophy and an even falser philanthropy as nothing but a horrible scourge, an outburst of our innate evil and a manifestation of heavenly anger, is the most incorruptible expression of our conscience, the act that confers the most honor on us in the light of creation and Eternity. The idea of war is equivalent to its phenomenology. It is one of those ideas that, from the very first moment of their appearance, absorb all one’s attention, that make us confess, so to speak, with full knowledge and with full feeling, and to which, by virtue of their universality, logic gives the name of categories. For war is both unitary and triune like God, it is the unity in one nature of these three roots: force, the principle of movement and of life, which is found in the ideas of cause, soul, will, freedom and spirit; conflict, action-reaction, the universal law of the world and, like force, one of Kant’s twelve categories; and justice, the sovereign faculty of the soul, the principle of our practical reason, which is manifested in nature by equilibrium. If we pass from the phenomenology and the idea of war to its object, it forfeits none of our admiration. The purpose of war, its role in humanity, consists in encouraging all the human faculties and thus creating, in the center of and above these faculties, law, and making it universal and, with the help of this universalization of law, in defining and forming society”

Did Proudhon mean this, or was it took out of context? I'd really like to know.

Would there be money or labour vouchers, or other form of exchange?

I recently learned about the federation of worker and consumer cooperatives operating in Venezuela called Cecosesola thanks to this video: https://youtu.be/xfE6Nsuaf50?si=A8jWp-xrTvXanrCV

TL;DW - As I understand it, Cecosesola is a federation of horizontal worker and consumer cooperatives where discussions are held and mostly informal decisions are made through those discussions. Positions are rotated frequently and through informal means to distribute experience in a variety of skills and the overall orientation of the cooperatives is focused on meeting and sustaining the needs of those involved.

I'm new to mutualism so I would like to hear the thoughts of those who are more familiar with the theory and historical practice.

My question is what are your thoughts on Cecosesola? Are there any gaps or critiques missed by this YouTuber? Can they be seen as an example of mutualism in action? And finally, is this an example of prefiguring an alternative market economy of freely associating workers and consumers?

Of course, this is probably very much discussed by Proudhon but I haven't the time to really read through those specific works so that is part of the reasoning I'm asking this question. Not for a comprehensive answer but simply food for thought.

If anarchy gives us the means to produce justice or social equilibrium through our freedom and the high costs associated with conflict or harm and thus balance, what happens when we understand hierarchy as imbalance and artificially imposed imbalance? How does our understanding of hierarchy, how it emerges and how it functions, change?

Hello,

This is the first writeup by us, a loose anarchist and mathematics collective, which formed after a post on r/Anarchism. We focused here on understanding the economics and ideas underlying Warrenism and Warrenite experiments. We include a mathematical model, a historical analysis, and suggestions for updates to the modern day for Warrenite experiments or counter-economics. The PDF can be downloaded and read here: https://drive.google.com/file/d/128l_jak7gk8JczoVs-1l5prjrVEn6mWm/view?usp=sharing

We hope that this writeup can help the imaginations of any anarchists or organizers involved in counter-economics or base building. I'd be happy to take questions here. Some other contributors that may lurk in this sub might also jump in. We'll hopefully work on another writeup soon, this time in the realm of more anarcho-communist ideas.

Personally speaking, the content of these writeups are a little too on the complex and technical side, but hopefully this is readable for anybody interested, not just those with technical know-how.

Hello everyone, do you know any good books on mutualism? I mean explicitly books that describe in concrete terms what a mutualist society should look like. I recently read "Theory of Property" by Proudhon in the hope of learning more about mutualism. The book was very interesting but unfortunately Proudhon only very briefly describes how he thinks a mutualist society works.

A few thoughts, from elsewhere, about the trajectory of the New Proudhon Library project:

Over the next few days, I'll finish up drafts of Proudhon's "Confessions of a Revolutionary" and "Revolutionary Ideas," the collection of short works published in 1849. Over the weekend, I should finish a draft of "Acts of the Revolution," the short collection from 1850. With the first "Solution of the Social Problem" pamphlet already complete, I can then use these three historical publications as the basis for dividing up the remaining material from the "Mélanges," plus some unpublished material from the newspapers, into three collections.

I'm thinking that the "Confessions" and the articles from the "Représentant du Peuple" and the "Peuple," minus the mutual credit material, will make up one volume. The mutual credit material, including Ramon de la Sagra's book and other articles, will make a second. The debate on the State, with material from Blanc, Leroux, Duchêne, etc., will make up a third. "Interest and Principle" will go somewhere, depending on the relative size of the last two volumes. "The Right to Work and the Right of Property" might end up with the three memoirs. There's a legislative proposal on railways that, if I can track it down, might go in a volume with the transport industry publications, but it looks like the works for 1847-1850 should fit pretty neatly in three volumes, with plenty of supplementary material.

The logical companion volume to those would be a collection of some of the best of the large number of articles and pamphlets written about Proudhon during those years — perhaps with the period translations I have been collecting.

I have a rough outline for an edition of Proudhon's works — minus the correspondence and, for now, some manuscript material that should eventually see publication — in about 20 volumes, which I am using to guide my draft-translation efforts. But what is increasingly clear, as I work back and forth across Proudhon's works, is that the path forward to a really useful edition of the works probably involves the preparation of a sort of provisional, interim edition—revised drafts of some significant portion of the whole—which can then be used to construct the tools for a really thorough revision and annotation in the next phase, establishing a standard for continuing work. That was always likely—and daunting—but the current pace of bulk translation makes success seem much more likely. And, should things not proceed, for whatever reason, to the final stages of completeness, the interim edition will serve the purpose of preserving and documenting the work done to that point.

Here is the first work and here is the second.

Essentially, I am interested in works discussing child-rearing, anarchist families, and other similar topics either within the works themselves or as the subject of the entire work.

If I find enough, I may make a post where I list all of them for the purposes of anyone interested in anarchist education, family organization, or child-rearing. If you are familiar with any, please cite them to me.