The Headroom Between Mutualism and Anarcho-capitalism

re: The Headroom Between Mutualism and Anarcho-capitalism

Mike — Fri, 29 Aug 2008 10:39:48 GMT

I heart this post. I also heart Jeremy's comment about prediction versus prescription. The intellectual tradition via which I arrived at anarchism is most usually associated with the "Right". There are also many who arrive at the position from the "Left". In terms of sheer volume, what I am learning about political philosophy today comes almost entirely from the "Left", and I find tremendous value there. That said, there's still plenty of blindness on the anarchist Right ("Wal-Mart is virtuous!") as well as on the anarchist Left (labor theory of value, etc.) that ought to be dispelled. Reading things like what you've written here reinforces my belief that there is a principled center we ought all to work toward. And I heart that.

no third solution » Blog Archive » August Carnival of Market Anarchy

no third solution » Blog Archive » August Carnival of Market Anarchy — Fri, 29 Aug 2008 01:37:09 GMT

Pingback from no third solution » Blog Archive » August Carnival of Market Anarchy

re: The Headroom Between Mutualism and Anarcho-capitalism

Chris Cook — Mon, 25 Aug 2008 22:11:36 GMT

We are accustomed to think of Property as an Object.

But as Jeremy Bentham pointed out , this is not in fact the case:

“It is to be observed, that in common speech, in the phrase 'the object of a Man's Property', the words 'the object of' are commonly left out; and by an ellipsis, which, violent as it is, is now become more familiar than the phrase at length, they have made that part of it which consists of the words 'a Man's Property' perform the office of the whole.”

In other words, “Property” is in fact the relationship between Subject ("Owner") and Object (land, knowledge, whatever) which consists of the bundle of rights of “ownership” and “use” of productive assets.

I believe that it is possible to encapsulate this relationship using partnership-based protocols (eg US LLC and UK LLP agreements) instead of the conventional, and conflicting claims over productive assets of the legal constructs of "Equity" ( ie the Joint Stock Limited Liability "Corporation" ) on the one hand, and secured "Debt" (eg mortgage loans) on the other.

Using "unitisation" within partnership farmeworks I believe that it is possible to "unitise" production in new ways, and to create a simple but radical new enterprise model to which the term "Mutualism" could well be applied.

Well said!

Jeremy — Mon, 25 Aug 2008 11:26:03 GMT

You've hit the nail on the head: mutualism and anarcho-capitalism *predict* different outcomes, but they don't *prescribe* difference outcomes (I made the same point <a href="blog.6thdensity.net, so it's good to see others arriving at this insight). Many, if not most, of the squabbles between schools of anarchism come down to this. If we're truly anarchists, what we care about is how people peacefully coexist, not realizing one kind of property or one kind of institution. Those are just means to the end: voluntary society.

re: The Headroom Between Mutualism and Anarcho-capitalism

Cork — Mon, 25 Aug 2008 04:22:27 GMT

Why I'm not a Mutualist (despite being a "fan" of it) :

corktageous.blogspot.com/.../why-i-am-not-mutualist.html

I reject it for some of the same reasons you put into your post--I'm not convinced it could work as a universal model, especially in our modern industrialized economy.

It's flawed, but not nearly as insane as anarcho-communism and other absurdities.

Tucker's periodical Liberty had very nice things to say about Gustave Molinari, and called him an anarchist (not that you'll hear any left-anarchist mention that inconvenient fact).