RE: AUT: Neo-conservatism and workers

[billbartlett@xxxxxxxxxxxxx (Bill Bartlett)]

Paul Bowman wrote:

[...]

>In other
>words the communist attitude to the famine question is that any suggestion
>that the food surpluses in the non-famine areas are not available to the
>population of the famine region is anathema. I could go on but I'm you get
>the point. Hence Ilan's specification of "anarchist-communist" in response
>to this question.

Thank you, that was enlightening. It hadn't occurred to me in quite such
stark terms. I'm not sure I quite believe that all those who call
themselves "class struggle" and "social" anarchists are quite so devoted to
the concept of the product of labour being private property thought, but I
know some do.

I must say to those that do, that I think that the idea of workers
selfishly appropriating the product of the socially-owned means of
production seems but a minor variation on capitalism. For the products
created by the socially-owned means of production to be the private
property of whoever happens to be operating the machines at the time is
absurd and unworkable. The social ownership would be a meaningless legal
fiction, the means of production might as well be private property.

Bill Bartlett
Bracknell Tas




     --- from list aut-op-sy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ---