[Zeiter]

As I see it, anarcho-syndicalism would be an advantageous system of government for life post-peak for several reasons:

It's local and decentralized
It's democratic and cooperative, instead of reactionary or exploitative
It's efficient (unlike authoritarian centralized communism, there's no huge bureaucracy)
If the internet is still around post-peak, it would provide an extremely powerful communication network for anarcho-syndicalist communes to work together and band together for defense, if need be.

Is there a chance of something like anarcho-syndicalism taking shape in the U.S. or elsewhere post peak?

And just to clarify, for those who aren't familiar with the philosophy, here's a website explaining it:

http://flag.blackened.net/revolt/africa ... html#intro

My short, three word summary of it would be democratic, decentralized communism.

[scrod]

I'm so encouraged to find someone else suggesting this! It seems to me that the most immediate danger facing the world, and especially the United States, is steep economic collapse due to the practice of fractional reserve banking. It's easy to imagine a second great depression, where there is still more than enough energy to allow people to survive, but a terminally broken means of distributing that wealth to all but the upper class. This is going to be enormously magnified with the ridiculous trade deficit that the U.S. is running; there are increasingly fewer goods that we manufacture that are necessary for survival, and a majority of the middle class is already deeply entrenched in the service economy. As more people have to choose between shopping for magazines at Borders and paying the rent, the middle class could evaporate and the so-called working class will cease to be able to work. Those with money will have no choice but to purchase the cheapest goods from China. Americans have been selling out their countrymen in the long term for a profit in the short term. This trend is irreversible so long as we are dependent upon the business class for our livelihood. We are being forced to destroy each other for our own survival in the name of the free market.

Economic disparity is inversely correlated with liberty and equality in a democratic society. It's becoming increasingly clear that as the poor grow in number and the wealthy increase their power, we could very quickly end in a corporate-fascist dictatorship. This is not an issue of Democrats versus Republicans, but of control of this country's institutions--government, the media, business--in the hands of a financial elite. The reversal of the flow of wealth from the many to the few is the only real way that we will be able to combat this. And I'm not some nut who thinks that any kind of violent revolution against the U.S. government is even remotely conceivable. This can be accomplished peacefully, through the acceptance of the worker-owned cooperative as the premiere institution of commerce. People need to organize themselves and start local businesses that trade with neighbors instead of global conglomerates, and ultimately switch to a currency that is backed by something other than debt.

The development of such an alternative economy could probably become more vital to our survival in the short term than the most valiant energy conservation efforts. I fully believe that we will face the threat of global fascism long before we are unable to continue driving our SUVs.

[savethehumans]

Actually, most peak oil experts have been advocating relocalization, or the establishment of a community-based civilization, for some time now. Good to see other voices chiming in, no matter what you want to call the system! (A good idea by any other name....)

[julianj]

Excellent posts!

[bart]

Over at WorldChanging, Rohit Gupta posted a poem written in 1917 by Carl Sandburg. Somehow it seems appropriate now:
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', '
')I am the people--the mob--the crowd--the mass.
Do you know that all the great work of the world is done through me?
I am the workingman, the inventor, the maker of the world's food and clothes.
I am the audience that witnesses history.
The Napoleons come from me and the Lincolns.
They die.
And then I send forth more Napoleons and Lincolns.
I am the seed ground.
I am a prairie that will stand for much plowing.
Terrible storms pass over me.
I forget.
The best of me is sucked out and wasted.
I forget.
Everything but Death comes to me and makes me work and give up what I
have. And I forget.
Sometimes I growl, shake myself and spatter a few red drops for
history to remember.
Then--I forget.
When I, the People, learn to remember,
when I, the People, use the lessons of yesterday and no longer forget
who robbed me last year, who played me for a fool
--then there will be no speaker in all the world
say the name: "The People," with any fleck of a sneer in his voice
or any far-off smile of derision.
The mob--the crowd--the mass--will arrive then.

[born2respawn]

I've spent a good deal of time around Internet Anarchists* and I've come to the conclusion that the system they advocate is - especially if they advocate a Gift Economy - is implausible. Americans are, I notice, very individualist, and this isn't conducive to anything akin to Communism.

However, decentralized democracy sounds much more plausible in conjunction with a barter economy. And that, I imagine, would be the long term result of the hard crash scenarios and possibly many bumpy landings as well. One thing I'm certain of is that we'll see more people trying to put these systems in to use as Peak Oil progresses.

*Internet Anarchist - A wholy different breeds from ones that are out and about trying to make Anarchism work: These are, in turn, a different breed from the vandals who think scrawling "ANARCHy" on a sign is a blow against the state.

[gg3]

Very interesting. There's a lot of history to suggest that voluntary cooperation naturally emerges in times of crisis.

In the 1930s depression, in the Bay Area (San Francisco / Oakland), there was something called the Unemployed Exchange Association (later the Universal Exchange Association), or UXA, which was entirely privately organized and provided employment and barter that kept people alive during the worst of times. When Roosevelt introduced various government-operated programs, UXA eventually disbanded. But the point is, UXA was private, voluntary, didn't use tax money, and it worked.

So this is something that might be a point of agreement among liberals and conservatives. It fulfills conservative criteria because it's a private sector effort that doesn't require tax funding. I would have to believe it fulfills liberal criteria because it provides direct assistance to disadvantaged people, a kind of social safety-net.

We need a better word than "anarcho-syndicalism." Holy cow, talk about bad marketing! Technically, "anarchism" isn't terribly different from libertarianism, but the word conjures up scary connotations. As does the word "syndicalism;" even though a "syndicate" isn't much different from a franchise or a conglomerate, the word "syndicate" is also a euphemism for organized crime. (And the word "technocracy," a system of governance advocated by M. King Hubbert, was also twisted by the media into an epithet, that's another story for another day.)

So, maybe something like "voluntary cooperation," or "private-sector social programs," or "libertarian social democracy"...? I'm not being nitpicky here; if the core concepts are viable, they should be promoted with a name that doesn't scare people off.

After that comes the task of figuring out what types of situations are most likely to succeed in this type of structure, and then promote it for use in those cases. As a generality, we should be looking at every type of organizational structure to ascertain the areas in which it's most likely to succeed, because that will improve the resiliency of civilized societies as a whole.

Born2respawn: How would you describe "internet anarchists" as distinct from other kinds?

[born2respawn]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('gg3', 'B')orn2respawn: How would you describe "internet anarchists" as distinct from other kinds?

[Zeiter]

Great info, everyone!

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'I')n the 1930s depression, in the Bay Area (San Francisco / Oakland), there was something called the Unemployed Exchange Association (later the Universal Exchange Association), or UXA, which was entirely privately organized and provided employment and barter that kept people alive during the worst of times.

[born2respawn]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Zeiter', 'T')hen there's outright anarchy, which I do NOT think would be a good idea. Of course, anarcho-syndicalism is entirely different from anarchism, but I think most people regard the two as synonomous, which is yet another reason to label the concept differently.

[MonteQuest]

I moved this post as it was supposed to be a response to this thread.

MQ

CommunistAnarchist quote:
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'W')ell, what you are not recognizing here is the fact that Anarchism aims for the same things Real Communism aims for, The Abolition of class society, and all authoritarian relationships (whether they be socal, economical, and political - and this includes Capitalism). The kind of Communism we had in the 20th Centry was not real communism at all - It was State beauracracy Capitalism - the only real difference with them and western capitalism was the fact that State beauracratic capitalism or "Marxist"-Leninism had everything controlled by the state - and they claimed to be in the "Socialist stage". There has not ever been a Anarchist or Communist society in the world as yet. And Anarchism is not in-efficient at all.

The embryo of Anarchist and Communist society is the Commune - or community. In the
commune - the people directly control the commune through anti-authoritarian worker's
soviets (councils) and popluar assemblies. these popluar assemblies and worker's councils allow the people to have an equal say in the decisions of that commune or
community. This kind of Direct Democracy can only work in a classless society -
because the current system of capitalism can only function with Representative
"Democracy" - which is not real democracy due to the fact that the representatives
are the ones with a voice - once they are in office - they will not - along the line -
represent the working people - but they are only representing the interests of the
ruling class and the middle class. Only Direct Democracy in a class-less, stateless society can work for us.

Things are produced by groups of non-profit, non-authoritarian workers' collectives. These workers' collectives produce on the basis of use and need, not profit and sale.
So for example - a person wants a item, and goes to the collectivein their commune
which makes that item and asks the collective to produce one for your use. If they
wish to produce it for you - they will most likely do it. if they don't have a collective
willing to make the item you want - or if there is no collective that exist for that item
at all - then you can create one with others who favor that item. It's effecient as it
is for the needs of a classless society based on the commune.

As for those internet "Anarchists' - they are not real anarchists at all - they are
Self-proclaimed Anarchists at best.

[born2respawn]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('CommunistAnarchist', 'W')ell, what you are not recognizing here is...

-snip-

The embryo of Anarchist and Communist society is the Commune - or community. In the
commune - the people directly control the commune through anti-authoritarian worker's
soviets (councils) and popluar assemblies. these popluar assemblies and worker's councils allow the people to have an equal say in the decisions of that commune or
community.

[MrBean]

I'm loving this thread!

Naming problem is real. As someone pointed, Anarchism is the same as Libertarianism. 'Libertarian' used to be a good word before economic fundamentalists soiled it. Anyway, anti-authoritarianism and anti-hierarchic ism are things most people have natural sympathy for.

Ukraine and Spain have been mentioned. Nestor Makhno is one of my heros, as is George Orwell. IMO Zapatism and Subcomandante Marcos mark the birth of modern anti-capitalist movement and carnevalistic revolutions and embody the new slogan that seems to unite all the new movements: Think global, act local!

http://www.narconews.com/Issue34/article1083.html


The deeper question here seems to be can a society be more creative than rigid, and the "anarchists" give a positive answer, they are optimists about human nature. Hierarchics are pessimists and tend to think that a society that is not based on extensive use of carrot and stic, would fall into "anarchy"; in other word they - we - are control freaks. And too much control suffocates creativity and open and honest perception and forces us to cheat, individually and collectively, consciously and subconsciously.

There is something that all of us can do. We are all creative by nature, as we see especially from our children and even from our ape cousins. Creativite state of mind is it's own award, our children don't need reward for being creative, they don't need praise (nor punishment of negative critiquue) for their drawings etc. The automathic and well meanining "Oh how fine" (which, let's be honest, is a brush of) is an extra award children learn to expect, seak and fish for from very early age, but ultimately it suffocates creativity. They stop to act creatively and to seek for social award. I don't mean there should be no feed back, on the contrary. But the best feedback is not any kind of value judgement, positive or negative, but joining the creative play, letting our children teach us creativity instead of us suffodating that in them the way we were raised, carrot and stick.

And further, guidance and rules, which is the responsibility of an adult towards children. "Why" is the natural question, and we should try to play along that question to the best of our ability, instead of the usual authority and bribing. Explaining and exploring the causative chains of cause and effect and giving responsibility as much as possible as early as possible helps our children to remain creative instead of starting to act mechanically, and helps us to find some of that creativity we have lost when entering the carrot and stick systems of the current society.

What, if anything, has this rant about creativity got to do with anarchism, PO etc? I hope it's self-evident; think global, act local!

[CommunistAnarchist]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('born2respawn', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('CommunistAnarchist', '
')I find the desire to remove all hierarchy increadibly odd and counter productive, in a system based purely on people's ability (a meritocracy, shall we say) the people at the top are the more able. And this is the clincher: Some people are just down right better than other people, it's high time everyone realised that everyone is not equal. Some people are better programmers, some people are better farmers, some people are better leaders.