And who is going to stop a company from owning a factory or a farm? It wouldn’t even require violence for a company to do so. It just requires them to have enough resources to pay people to do it.

I guess I don’t see what you call “anarchy” as a system that would ever exist more than a year. The end result would always be “anarcho-capitalism”. That, or, people would have to form their own government to prevent that system.

[–] 10001110101@lemm.ee 9 points 11 hours ago (4 children)

The company would need violence. There's no reason for workers to work in a factory for less money than their goods are sold for, and there's no reason for the company to pay workers more than the goods are sold for. Without violence the workers could just produce and sell the goods themselves and ignore the company.

[–] danc4498@lemmy.world 6 points 11 hours ago (1 children)

Is this a society without computers and other modern day electronics? Or do you think workers will be able to handle developing technology on their own?

[–] 10001110101@lemm.ee 5 points 11 hours ago

Well, it's unlikely the entire world will turn anarchist all at once, and the modern supply chain is global, so the anarchist community would trade for what they need from outside the community. Or they may choose to go anarcho-primitivism I guess. I think some remote indigenous tribes we have now could be considered anarcho-primitivist. The most successful anarcho-socialist community would probably be the Zapatistas.

load more comments (2 replies)

load more comments (3 replies)