Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Good idea

My answer is anarchistic syndicalism:

https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/george-woodcock-what...

In short, labor has to organize our own capital to create syndicates that peacefully outcompete existing unethical structures

Its going to take hundreds of years of organizing and reduction in the pervasive sense of social terror and fear which leads people to hoarding behavior

12000 years of this structure won’t end by force or overnight

It can only be done through steady peaceful direct action to transfer wealth from existing hoarders to individuals

We then disincentive personal consumption and vanity the same way we got here, through Bernays style propaganda (marketing) and building infrastructure that incentivizes community development over personal consumption



> labor has to organize our own capital

But then labour becomes the business owner – exactly what they don't want to be. Labour chooses to become employees because they don't want the headaches of owning and operating a business. They just want a steady paycheque and let someone else take the risk.


What risk is being taken? Financial risk? Opportunity risk?

Employees take the most risk because they gave the fewest options in the market

The risk a PE or bank takes giving a loan isn’t the same risk a loan holder takes by collateralizing their home.


While certain estimations can be made, it is impossible to truly know if work is worth doing until after the work is already done. As such, workers have to make a choice:

1. Do the work and find out. If the work was worthwhile, they'll reap the benefits in spades. If not, they are left with the detriments.

2. Sell the work at a discount to someone else who is willing to find out.

Most workers opt for #2 because they don't care to find out. They want the guarantee and are happy to let someone else suffer the consequences when things go wrong, even if that means letting someone else indulge in the rewards when it does work out.


You should choose a different name, because anacho-syndicalism will forever be linked most closely with a Monty Python scene.

Arthur: Then who is your lord? Woman: We don't have a lord! Arthur: (spurised) What?? Man: I told you! We're an anarcho-syndicalist commune! We're taking turns to act as a sort of executive-officer-for-the-week-- Arthur: (uninterested) Yes... Man: But all the decisions of that officer 'ave to be ratified at a special bi-weekly meeting-- Arthur: (perturbed) Yes I see! Man: By a simple majority, in the case of purely internal affairs-- Arthur: (mad) Be quiet! Man: But by a two-thirds majority, in the case of more major-- Arthur: (very angry) BE QUIET! I order you to be quiet! Woman: "Order", eh, 'oo does 'e think 'e is?


I mean…it’s one of the better sendups of capitalism that persists today

Hard to argue with the logic




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: