Saturday, September 6, 2008

"Why are you so obsessed with economics? Isn't there more to life?"

The question is one that social anarchists commonly hurl at market anarchists: "Isn't there more to life than economics? Why do you care so much about it?"

The fact of the matter is that human beings cannot survive without a viable economic system. It is a life or death matter. What are some of the possible consequences of having a flawed economic system? Mass starvation, waste of resources, bread lines, unemployment, worthless money, fear, panic, chaos, and even civil warfare.

Economics determines nearly everything, including whether you get to put food in your mouth tomorrow. It is not something that can be toyed with at whim, or sculpted according to one's delusions or "feelings." A system that is not based on sensible economics is not one that will last. It is VERY dangerous to not take economics seriously.

Social "anarchists" can sneer all they want. They can revolt against reality all they want. But they have no idea how good they really have it. Most of them are spoiled brats and know-nothings who will never have to know the horrors of living under a system without some degree of capitalism. They take it for granted that they're able to make a quick drive to the store when they need something, instead of having to plan it out months in advance in some anarcho-syndickalips council.

Sometimes starvation and suffering are the only ways to change the minds of people who are willfully ignorant. But in my opinion, few people become radical lefties because they actually give a rat's ass about the poor or working class. (In fact, they mock and viciously ridicule them on a regular basis, calling them "rednecks," "retards," "hicks," "small town scum," "trailer trash," and so on.)

They want to be in the Cool Club so they can pretend to be smarter than the rest of us. This is common in social "anarchist" circles. They want to hold esoteric beliefs and act like they know something the rest of us don't (when they don't). They think they're awfully clever and enjoy watching us try to figure out what the hell is going their heads. "A bunch of vacuous drivel" is the answer, most of the time. As long as they can feel wise for knowing The Truth, that's all that matters to them.

They are starved for attention, and want to get "street cred" for being in the Cool Club (the leftist club). They have the need to be part of the protestors, academics, and critics of "big business." Because it's hip as fuck!

Or at least they think it's hip. It's really just lame, cliched, and idiotic. Their whole crusade is just so obvious and childish that it's laughable. I don't think any more highly of someone because he or she is a radical leftist. In fact, I tend to think such a person is either delusional or going through some stupid phase he'll be embarrassed about when he gets older.

So they aren't interested in "what works" or "what's sane." They just want to be left-wing because it "feels good." And who would want to worry about reality when they can just believe a bunch of horseshit that makes them feel good?


Mike said...

There's something quite utopian about the anarcho-communist school and its derivatives with respect to economics. There is this line of thought which proceeds to construct great castles in the air picturing how society might function if basic human nature were somehow different: if people stopped being greedy, if they really loved their neighbor, if they really chose to associate in "workers cooperatives" and suchlike. Problem is, with a few interesting historical exceptions, people don't behave or associate that way, and so imagining what a society based on those behaviors might look like is akin to, say, going to the beach and trying to build the type of sand castles you might be able to create if there were no gravity.

The goal of remaking human nature into a more noble form is nothing bad in and of itself. Doing so without respecting what exists now, though, is a recipe for disaster.

Cork said...

You're definitely right that they live in a fantasy land where human nature is whatever they want it to be.

I would argue that even if human nature did magically change and everyone became a bunch of selfless pussies, the commie utopia still wouldn't work. Even if everyone voluntarily tried their hardest, it would still be a failure for economic reasons alone.

I've noticed that an-coms tend to envision a small town with factories neatly lined up side by side, producing everything for the upcoming week. In reality, they're scattered all over the friggin' Earth, going moment to moment. There is just no possible way an economy can be planned. It takes someone laughably naive and/or authoritarian to think otherwise.