1. How is Anarcho-mutualism different from distributism? Also isn't interest exchanging two goods valued as equal ie a good now for the cost of the good plus the time difference another person voluntarily agrees to trade temporarily? Similar with rent, isn't that paying somebody for the service of building and mantaining a structure so that one does not have to? Or am i mistaken in that opposition to exploitation, or use, is ideal or a value set rather than a principle or legislatable moral law?

  2. Doesn't sound like much of a free society to me!! If I leave my lawnmower or car sitting "idle" – I no longer "possess" it so someone can just take it away and use it??

  3. Cooperatives are simply a specific case of owning equity in the particular place that you work (risking profit / loss for the financial year). In a free society however, most would elect NOT to work in a coop because it makes more sense to compartmentalize your labour income (to where your human capital and talents are best developed) and your capital allocation / equity to various or diverse sectors of the market economy (where you predict there will be the most growth or future demand etc.) This works out far better for everyone. But in a truly free society there would also, of course, be no rules against people (stupidly) joining coops.

  4. What?? No profit, rent or interest?? Are you crazy! Don't you understand anything about the time value of money or Austrian economics??

  5. Society is starting to move gradualy to mutualism and free principle. This ultimatly will lay the ground for us communists/collectivists/syndacalists to offshoot and form our own communites

  6. If there is only "possession" in a mutualist society then you are "without the ability to trade or sell" which is contrary to what a market is.

  7. Please explain this.. You say "To own something implies the ability to trade or sell it, or to let it sit idle."
    "If you only control it, without the ability to trade or sell, you have possession"
    "Since possession is not ownership, mutualism does not include property rights."
    Then you go on to imply that one does not need to own something in order to trade or sell it.

    This looks contradictory.

  8. If both Anarcho Capitalism and Mutualism support a free market and you believe in a free market usury would disappear. So then wouldn't usury also disappear in an AnCap society? Also market anarchism is not strictly synonymous with mutualism. I'm a market anarchist and I'm neither a mutualist or a anarcho capitalist.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *