Rev Wrote:If I had an equal portion of the pie?
YES
You should have a portion of the pie relative to the value of your contributions. The problem is your proposed system has no non-arbitrary way to assign value.
Quote:I would also be a member of the electrical syndicate, which would mean that I would directly and actively be cooperating with other members of the same syndicate, and other syndicates to create new technology. I would have an equal share in all technological gizmos that you love to play with, and would work to build them.
And who is going to pay you in the mean time? Who is going to provide the capital needed for the infrastructure and other initial costs? If you're getting a share of the value of the finished product then what of your wages before this venture yields some technology of value that other people are willing to trade resources for? You're going to need investors, some persons to lend you resources in the interim for start-up capital and wages, and the only reason any company, investor or syndicate is going to want to do that is if they get something in return for their loss of resources.
Quote:the word "funding" would have no meaning in a syndicalist system though, as money would be abolished. A syndicate is almost always NON-capitalist.
Oh, so someone giving you resources to start the venture and provide for the persons involved in the interim magically isn't funding if you've got a no-money system?
And what are you going to use to endow people with value to exchange for that which they desire? Is there going to be some arbitrator who decides what it is the people need, or do you have to write a letter with a request and see how much of the allotted pool of resources is available to provide you with the items you seek?
Quote:Syndicalists believe that property is theft.
Property is theft? So if you make a guitar and claim ownership of it then you've "stolen" from someone?
Quote:Why would they hire guards to watch their property when they think that way?
99.99% of people DO NOT think that way and telling them that they should or must is NEVER going to work. If someone spends their time working towards some material end, be that exchanging the proceeds of their productivity for other goods or crafting goods of their own then they will see that object as their property, you have absolutely no right to tell them otherwise.
Quote:Why would I also hire guards to watch something that everyone else equally owns? As far as my life... I have crossed nobody.
Oh right, because that's the only reason people ever get killed
Quote:capitalists require guards because they fuck people over all the time.
Sure, and no socialists ever had protection!
Quote:A syndicalist is open armed. "Do you need food? Here, have some of mine."
No, a generous person is open armed, it doesn't matter one iota what system of government they are operating under, the attitude of a person being such that they would freely give their own resources to another person is something that runs much deeper than the facade of politics. Encouraging more of this behavior is apolitical.
Quote:Why would I need guards in a syndicalist majority nation?
Maybe the people who can paint two walls in the time their colleague can do one but is no better off for it are pissed off. Maybe the people who have ideas for goods/services which improve the lives of a great number of people are pissed off when their ideas are stolen by the collective and given to other people.
Quote:Why would there be so much stealing in a nation where everyone owns an equal share of the pie?
Because some people want more, there are people who are inherently greedy who will steal, irrespective of their circumstances. Changing a political system will do absolutely nothing to change this fact of nature, the only appropriate response is to punish those who take resources from other people without consent.
Quote:I work with the military on a day to day basis, and I have even worked with NATO. Military has its own agenda and rules regardless of wether a government or state exists. why cant you understand this? If the american government fell to shit, the millitary could easily take over. Some citizens say the military has already taken over, since they make up the vast majority of our economy. I tend to agree with them. Its hard to hide that in a capitalist system, that the majority owners/controlers of wealth are the rulers.
I agree with this, but it has more to do with the level of centralized control that exists than anything else, when the government or a collective (and subsequently the military) have authority over the rights and lives of other people then there always exists the opportunity for such a thing.
.
