Practical Applications of Society in an Anarcho-Communist Community

Dedication...				system that is opposed to the will of the people.
To my street brother Twitch ("Brent Ballzner" to				By doing this, the will of the people is suppressed.
the police departments and governments)...				In an Anarcho-Democratic community, political
The man who taught me how to fight with a				parties could exist, but their prevalence would be
butterfly knife, who always had my back				irrelevant. In the end, it would be the people who
wherever I went, and though he had lived on the				would listen to the opinions of the speakers and in
fringes of poverty all of his existence, he will				the end it would be the people who would vote
always be rich with friends, and his heart will				for the laws and the rules. In our current political
never be bankrupt...				system, what political parties do is oppress dissent
And when I was taken from my prison tier, to go				-- whereas they would be deprived of such
to trial, I looked into the court room, and I saw				power (if they even existed) in an
my brother Twitch, holding my trench coat and				Anarcho-Democratic community.
smiling at me, letting me know that nobody stole				One final assault against Democracy -- the will of
it from the squat... And there are few times I				the people -- is that, if going by this system of
have ever been so cheered up.				voting on laws, there could be suppression of the
Introduction -- What is Anarchy? What is				minority. For example, a law could come to pass
Communism/Socialism?				that enslaved a minority to the majority. The law
Before I begin on this essay about the				could be anything similar to American racial
development of society in an Anarchist,				slavery, such as, "All members of this race are to
Communist, and/or Socialist community, I should				become obedient slaves of this race," to, "1 out
probably define these words as I use them. The				of every 5 people will randomly be picked by
word "anarchy" is from the Greek, prefix an (or				computer to be slaves to the others." It is very
a), meaning "not," "the want of," "the absence of,"				possible that this could occur in a purely
or "the lack of", plus archos, meaning "a ruler,"				Democratic community. However, it is incredibly
"director", "chief," "person in charge," or				unlikely. The reason why I would believe this is for
"authority." The pure, lingual form of Anarchy or				various reasons. First, it must be understood that
Anarchism is "Anarchos," or "Anarchia." However,				leaders of Republics and dictatorships have been
Anarchism taken in this sense is only one view of				the first to oppose any new reformers or
the matter of politics. It is not a system, but				revolutionaries. Not only have they been opposed,
rather, it is the absence of any authority system.				but they've been silenced. Whether this has been
In many Anarchist societies, they have relied on				through blackmail and torture, or by the very
Democracy. When I speak of Democracy, I				simple means of book burning, governments all
speak of it in the form which old philosophers and				around the world have been responsible to being
educated individuals have used it: meaning that the				obstacles to the advance of progressivist and
people in a society vote for bills before they				idealist groups. In a Democratic community, the
become laws, often times called "Direct				people would be forced to deal with the issues.
Democracy." Anarchy and Democracy are two				People would be allowed to speak on the matters,
sides of the same coin: Anarchy means no leader,				and Censorship would not exist. Another reason
whereas Democracy means the people choose				why I don't believe Democracy is productive of
the rules and regulations of society. Of course, I				slavery is because all of the great liberationist
am sure there are instances where there is				movements started with the people and not with
neither Democracy without Anarchy or vice				the government. The kings and presidents of the
versa. Our media and United States government				world have rarely ever destroyed shackles or
has so vulgarized the term Democracy, simply				removed fetters. It has been the people who
equating it with the idea of "living in liberty" and				decided that slavery was a crime, that brutality
promoting it every chance they get. The US				was inhumane, that cruelty is to be detested.
government is not a Democracy. As long as we				Furthermore, there is one more issue on this
have a president and a congress who decide the				matter that is to be considered. There is no
laws for the people, we are not living in a				bribery in an Anarchist society. It simply cannot
Democracy -- we are living in a Republic, a				exist, as there are no elected officials. In our
system where people choose the people who				modern society, the governments work for the
choose the laws, but in issence this is the same				interests of those with wealth. They will pass laws
as a Dictatorship, as the sole difference is how				to help investors, as investors spend some of
people are chosen as leaders. To an Anarchist,				their profit on aiding those political parties. But, in a
both the systems of Dictatorship and Republic are				Democracy, it's the will of the people not the
evils, as they are productive of depriving people				powerful that is enacted.
of their right to confront issues. To quote				Economics -- The Work of Bossless People
Joseph-Pierre Proudhon on Anarchism...				Of all things, a fair and just work environment and
By the word [anarchy] I wanted to indicate the				economy is something that has been desired by
extreme limit of political progress. Anarchy is... a				all Anarchists and Communists. When a person
form of government or constitution in which public				examines the Capitalist economy, as it exists
and private consciousness, formed through the				within any Western nation, they will see slavery. A
development of science and law, is alone sufficient				man is owned by his boss or employer, and is
to maintain order and guarantee all liberties... The				dependent upon him for sustenance. It is true that
institutions of the police, preventative and				as humans, as animals made of flesh and matter,
repressive methods officialdom, taxation etc., are				we are subject to slavery of the natural laws --
reduced to a minimum... monarchy and intensive				we cannot disobey the fact that we need food
centralization disappear, to be replaced by federal				and water to live. In that way, we are truly
institutions and a pattern of life based upon the				slaves to the Universe, but when I speak of the
commune. [Resource: Selected Writings, by				slavery of Capitalism, understand that I mean it in
Joseph Pierre Proudhon, page 105.]				a wholly derogatory manner. When a man
In my previous writings, I have given the				enslaves another man, it can be defined by one
differences between Communism and Socialism				man being wholly dependent on another man, with
always with this one caution: that in our society				no choice or option in the matter. In Capitalism, if
today, as far as the political parties and				a person refuses to work for a boss, there is an
philosophers are concerned, the only difference				extremely small chance that they can sustain
between Communism and Socialism is that				themselves with self-employment or their own
Communism is more extreme. When I wrote my				business, where they enslave others. But, in
concerns on the matter of Socialism and				general, it is incredibly unlikely to survive without a
Communism, I often tried to go to the historical				job. All workers of an economy need food,
roots of both ideologies: to the works of Marx,				water, shelter, and the basic necessities of life. In
Engels, and other thinkers. However, the works of				Capitalism, unless a person submits to the
Marx are so expansive beyond just "The				merciless work of an employer, they will not
Communist Manifesto," that any person, even				receive any money for these necessities. And
those of greatest interest and desire, would be				even with the Minimum Wage as it exists now, it
hard-pressed to read all of Marx's works. So,				is incredibly difficult for some people to make it
today, even many of the national Communist				by in this economy. So, when I speak of
parties are unaware of all of the ideas proposed				Capitalism being equivalent to slavery, I mean that
by the great thinker, and I will not deny that even				it provides no option, no fair work, no justice, no
I have neglected some of his more intimidating				respect for mercy or kindness or humane
pieces. To the definitions of our culture,				methods. In that regard, Capitalism is immoral, in
Communism is simply more extreme compared				that it produces the worst outcome for the
to Socialism, but more extreme to what? The				greatest (and worthiest) people. When I say they
concepts that these systems deal with are the				are worthy, I mean this: they are the ones who
rights of the workers, which often times manifest				do the work. Under Capitalism, the rich become
themselves in minimum working wage, minimum				wealthy by the work of the poor, while the poor
working hours, unions, boycotting, consumer				workers simply delve further and further into
rights, among other things; but, the greatest ideal				poverty, struggling to put food on the table for
of both Communism and Socialism, is that the				their family. Meanwhile, Capitalist investors become
person who works in the factory ought to be the				rich, spending their money on many lavish,
person who owns the factory. This is to say, the				unnecessary, purely luxury items. While millions of
individual who produces the goods of society				children starve to death in foreign lands, our
ought to be the one to determine what happens				Capitalist leaders are spending their money on
to such goods. As to the greater detail in the				buying their tenth set of cars, expanding their
difference between Communism and Socialism, I				mansions, and building golf courses. This is not
will not further explain, as it would not serve the				justice, and this is not fairness.
purpose of this paper. Yet, as far as this essay is				Of course, it would be irrelevant for me to go on
concerned, Socialism and Communism will simply				with the cruelty of the Capitalist system. Any
mean that the worker is in control of the means				person who is even slightly fluent in the statistics
of production.				of a Capitalist economy is thoroughly convinced of
Often in our society, from radical and				the necessity of Socialism for any justice to take
revolutionary groups, we will hear slogans, such as				place -- and those who are unconvinced of the
"freedom for all" -- "workers' rights, refugees'				necessity of Socialism, with the facts as they
rights, one battle, one struggle" -- "liberate labor" --				stand, are those with vested interests in
and the ever-famous, "power to the people." If				exploitation. For those further interested in the
one were to read the works of Communist and				statistics concerning the Capitalist economy, they
Anarchist thinkers, they would find a much more				may refer to my book Class War, or the essay
revealing description of these slogans. Proudhon,				"Socialism: A Broader Explanation" which further
Bakunin, Marx, Engels, Berkman, among others,				reduces the statistics to a more easily understood
have gone at length to describe the systems of				fashion.
Anarchism and Communism. Of Anarchism, there				There are many mechanisms of a Capitalist
has been a great deal said on the will of the				economy which are counterproductive: not only
people being the governing force of politics and of				towards the interests of the workers, but
matters of concern to the people as a whole. Of				towards the interests of the consumers. In a
Communism, there has been a great deal said on				very real way, investors are not interested in
the rights of the workers, of the fair share of				creating a vibrant economy and political arena,
income, of the economy being ruled by the				where there is no prejudice or discrimination and
workers and not by investors or businessmen.				every person is allowed their fair share, or where
Though, in all of my investigation into these				workers can be sure they will have work
matters, I have not discovered many pieces or				tomorrow, or where consumers can be sure they
articles which dealt with the practical applications				can afford food tomorrow. The only language
of society. By this, I mean what would happen in				that a Capitalist investor understands is the
reality once these ideals would be realized. If a				language of money: "If I can reduce the wages to
group of a revolutionary people were to get				the point where workers will become homeless,
together and have their own land to govern				how much more profit will I make?" -- "If I
themselves, all of them Anarchists and				decrease the safety standards of the factors,
Communists, the question may arrise, "Okay, now				how much lower will my expenses be?" -- "If I
what?" The will of the people shall rule them all,				fire all the unions workers and rehire those not
but how do they turn that into a realization? The				represented by independent unions, will that make
worker will be given a fair pay, and the workers				it easier to force workers to work 12 hours a
will be given the right to decide what happens				day?" The concerns of an investor are for his
with the products -- but how does this come to				own wealth, whereas the concerns of a worker
realization? This essay is a method of tackling this				and consumer are whether or not they will be
question. For a great deal of time, I was				able to survive. While one does no work, the
wondering what I could expect to see as social				other struggles to survive and does all the work
developments in an Anarcho-Communist society,				of society. There is no justification for Capitalism
and no publication could answer this for me. With				but pure malice and greed.
this essay, I will try to answer how the ideology				In our current Capitalist economy, if a person has
of Anarcho-Communism can be realized by a				a job, they must serve their employer between
willing people.				certain hours. Often times, this has been
Politics -- The Governing of Governmentless				translated to "the regular nine to five," indicating
People				the hours that are typically issued to workers for
It is not difficult to see the great, incalculable				the time they have to work. A practical
failure of a Republic government. Consider, for				alternative to this system, at least within a fair
example, the last presidential election. George				system of an Anarcho-Communist community,
Bush and Al Gore were competing. Both of them				would be to allow workers to work whenever
have inside connections to the government.				they wanted, for however long they wanted --
Neither of them are much different than each				provided that work existed to be done. This may
other. The public remained unconvinced that either				be hard to envision, but allow me to expand upon
of them would be capable of making any realistic				this concept. In an Industrial Society, the
changes. The election reached a historic low for				Assembly Line (with the aid of robotics) has
public interest. With such a low voter turn out, it				become the primary method of manufacturing, as
was quite easy to see that the peoples'				far as tools go, "tools" being loosely defined as
confidence in such a system was destroyed. And,				anything that can make our lives easier, such as
finally, once all the votes had been cast and Al				furniture or electronics. In each position of a single
Gore won the popular election, George Bush was				assembly line, there is a worker constructing one
decided president -- not by the people, but by the				part of of the tool in production. Under an
armies and navies that have supported every				Anarcho-Communist community, a worker would
tyrant. To know why a person is an Anarchist is				go to their place of work when they desired to
simply to live in the United States, or any country				work, and assume their position at this part of
where laws are determined by an unjust, unfair				the assembly line. Then, once they punch in an ID
aristocracy. The failure of the Republic, though, is				card, all the work that they do in that position will
not limited. At the beginning of the American				be registered as work done by them.
Revolution, it was often hypothesized by				However, there are certain complications under
philosophers and political writers that				this. For example, let us assume that under one
representation would bring about fairness, justice,				factory, they have such a demand on their
and a more Utopian idea of society. Monarchs				products that they are planning to make at least
were written of as though they were the very				100 units. Each unit will have its individual parts,
servants of iniquity and presidents were described				each part constructed by the workers with the
as the just, fair rulers of a free society. From				aid of technology. Now, consider one worker who
every quill and every mouth came these words,				assumes one particular role of the assembly line,
these ideas, that we are free when we choose				and then consider that this worker was so
someone to rule us -- but these were no more				devoted to their job and their personal
than lies. There is only one difference between a				advancement, and that they are so skilled, that
dictator and a president, and it is not in the				they are capable of building the 100 parts of the
amount of people they torture, the amount of				unit that they are responsible for in their part of
homes they burn, the amount of children they				the assembly line -- then they would have no
deprive of mothers and fathers -- both senators				more work to do. Well, in an Anarcho-Communist
and monarchs did this. The primary difference				community, education would be a top priority.
between an elected official and an unelected				When I speak of education, it would be helpful
official is how they are chosen: one comse with				that we rid ourselves of the idea of forcing
the consent of the people while the other simply				helpless, defenseless children and adolescents to a
assumes it. Yet, both dictators and presidents				building that does nothing, but convince them that
show unprecendented lines of corruption. The				learning is nothing. When I speak of education,
system of a Republic is a failure for the same				understand that I am speaking of voluntary
reasons as a Dictatorship: rulers typically deprive				learning. In these libraries and schools of the
their people of their rights as they search for				community, a person would be able to educate
their quest for power and wealth. When I speak				themselves on how to operate the different
of a Republic system, understand that I am				machinery of the factories, so that they could fill
speaking of a system where people choose other				the positions of other parts of the assembly line.
people to choose laws, not where the people				In that manner, if a person becomes bored with
choose the laws. If anyone needs a more sure				one position of the assembly line, or becomes
sign of the failure of a Republic government to				bored with the type of manufacturing altogether,
fairly represent the people of the nation, consider				then they can work in another factory doing
how Ralph Nader, a presidential candidate, was				another position. This can also be one solution if
refused when he wished to entert he public				one factory has already met its quota of units.
debates, where he was not allowed to speak to				Of course, this would work perfectly fine for
the people, where his views were shunned and				those businesses that employ the assembly line
thrown out of the light in regards to any				as a primary method for accomplishing work --
publicisizing... and yet Nader's beliefs about				primarily, manufacturing. However, there are other
government ran contrary to everything every				industries that must be considered for this idea of
president or senator ever believed, as he was				working whenever you want. For example, in
concerned with Workers' Rights, with the				farming, a person would not take a position on an
environment, with justice, with eqaulity, but his				assembly line, but they would take a position on a
opinions differed from those of mainstream				tractor, or a piece of farm machinery. In mining, a
political groups, and for this he was silenced.				person would take the position of overlooking and
When I say I believe in Anarchy, I mean that I				operating machinery. In construction, a worker
believe in a system of laws devised by the people				would take the position of simply a builder, most
for the people. The idea of representation is				likely a specialized builder who would build one part
insane. I don't need anyone to represent me. I am				of a building, and then travel to another building
fullying capable of representing myself. To make				that was ready for that part of the building, until
one man act as a representative for another man				there were no more buildings ready for that part
in such vital matters is to stir the ingredients for				or the worker was ready to stop working. For
injustice. I am not for a system where one				transportation, a worker would take the position
person rules other people I believe in Democracy.				of a driver. Yet not every industry can be so
A law should never be enacted unless it is voted				simple. Many of these industries are relatively
on by the majority of the people. When a				simplistic, in that no boss is required, and with the
Democratic society decides to have voting				aid of technology, workers don't all have to work
session, where laws are voted upon, they will				at the same time. There are some industries that
need to meet together. In the Democracy of				require workers to work at the same time,
Ancient Greece, where they met was called a				though. Consider, for example, the movie-making
"forum," a word that would trickle down through				industry: actors, assistants, makeup specialists,
the ages, meaning a place for the free discussion				directors, and all the other workers who are
of ideas. It is interesting that Anarchism would be				responsible for making movies -- they must all
responsible for such a creation yet all of history,				work at exactly the same time together
written by the leaders of the world, would come				cooperatively, if they are to be productive. Under
to condemn the Anarchists and their objectives. It				these conditions where many workers must work
would probably be best if the forum held sessions				together at the same time, only then will a
in a routine manner. The reason for this is that				worker have a set hour to work. Asside from
everyone would know when the next one is. Such				that, farming and manufacturing and other
a routined session could be as simple as, "every				relatively simple industries will not require set
night at 8:00 P.M.." Of course, the practical				hours and all that.
application of setting up such a time could run into				The service industry, however, must be taken
certain problems. Though I used a late time when				into consideration in a different light. I have read
everyone is probably done working as an				some Communist documents that have argued
example, it is very possible that certain people				that service industry is based upon servantry, or
find 8:00 at night to be the perfect time for star				menial slavery. However, in the context that it
gazing, while others find it to be the best time to				was spoken, it was mostly refering to clerks and
experiment with mind-altering, recreational drugs,				the like. There must be certain service people
while still others are asleep at 4:00 P.M. in the				who work in a society. The type of a service
afternoon and wake up at midnight. These are				person that comes to mind would be a doctor or
variations of the simple idea that some people				a surgeon. For these types of individuals, one
might be preoccupied to make it to a forum				practical method of solving their dilemma would be
meeting at a specific time. Whatever time, or				to have them work a set of hours, such as
date, the people choose to decide for the				twelve o'clock to four o'clock. This way, a person
meeting of their forums is up to them.				in need of a service person will know when they
When the time to vote on a bill comes, there are				are available. In the regard of doctors, one ought
a wide variety of ways to enable this into				to always be available. So, for their position, it
practical establishment. The primary concerns				would be adequate to have one doctor work
when it comes to Democratic voting in this				twelve o'clock to four o'clock, then four 'oclock to
manner are: (1) a person may vote more than				eight o'clock, and so on, until all hours of the day
once, (2) using certain techniques, once the votes				are covered. Another solution to this problem
have finally be cast in a high-population society, it				would be to have a service worker stay home
may be difficult to see which side won. Of all				and simply leave a sign out, that they are
importance, it must be understood that we will be				available for work. In this manner, they can go
living in a real Democracy, not in a psuedo-liberty				about their own affairs and do what must be
Republic or Dictatorship. In Ancient Greece, the				done in their own life, until they are needed by
people filled up two baskets, using either a black				someone. Then that person will go to the service
stone or a white stone, denoting their opinion:				worker and ask for work to be done upon them.
"Yes, I am for this law," or "No, I am against this				In that regard, the service worker is available and
law." This is indeed one simple process of doing it.				can go about their own life when they are not
It's a decent way of keeping anonymity among				available. Perhaps, though, since a service worker
the voters, so that no one is later discriminated				must stay in their home while they are available
against for voting a certain way, or their simple				for work, they should be paid for every hour that
privacy in their opinion is kept. One method of				they make themselves available, a small fee, along
preventing people from voting more than once is				side the work that they do for their customers.
to make a list of people and how they decided to				Of course, whatever decision about the matter
vote, but this would totally destroy a person's				must be agreed upon by the workers and the
right to privacy in these matters, and though this				people of the commune, as it is a Democratic
is not something that is of extreme horrors, it is				community.
certainly something we would be desirous of				Another outdated, antiquated mechanism of our
preventing. One good method of enacting a				modern Capitalism is how people are paid: per the
Democracy is, during the forum, to propose the				hour. I propose that instead of being paid per the
law, and then have large, vertical glass containers.				hour, a worker ought to be paid per the worth of
One is for the vote of "yes, I am for this law,"				their work. If we were to judge work by quality,
and the other is for the vote of "no, I am				then it is no mystery that the working
opposed to this law." Then, a person will put in a				environment would soon delve into that of a
small plastic ball, of equal size to every other				Bureacracy -- where more resources are spent
plastic ball, to the container of their decision. There				on governing the work than doing the actual
will be a clear, physical separation of people who				work. This would be counterproductive for
have voted and people who have not voted.				obvious reasons. If we were to have judges to
Then, once everyone has voted, it will be clear				measure the quality of work, it would be too
and simple for any person to see which side won				lengthy of a process and too obstructive of a
-- they can be by which stack of plastic balls is				free working environment. A worker ought to be
higher. The reason why I would suggest this				paid on the amount of work that they do. For
method of voting is because, it's not just one				example, in an assembly line, a worker would be
person counting balls to see which side won; it's				paid for each unit that they work on. On a farm,
the whole community, each individual, who is				a worker would be paid for each bale of hay they
capable of seeing whether the law won or not.				could get from a machine, or for each row of
However, there is another method for this that is				land they were capable of harvesting with a
more effective. At the bottom of the glass				tractor. In transportation, they would be paid for
towers, there will be scales for measuring weight.				every mile they were capable of driving. And so
Instead of putting in a plastic ball, a person will put				on, with the different industries and the marks of
in a small lead ball, weighted to 1 gram. Then,				production they hold.
once it is completed, the forum can see which				The value of compensation for a position would
scale is measuring more. This is effective for				be determined by several factors: (1) the varuety
those close, almost tied votings. There can also				of individual positions which are required to
be an technological piece implemented into the				produce the final product, (2) the difficulty of the
glass towers, allowing only one ball to be put in at				individual positions which are required for the final
a time (and no other ball can then be put in for 3				product. For example, consider that a factory was
seconds), and this would allow someone trying to				producing desks. The process of producing a
sneak in extra balls for their side of the vote. In				single desk was as follows: (1) first, the wood
regards to a whole community that lived with a				comes in and is either cut into legs or a top, (2)
sort of degree of Federalism, where several small				second, the legs are then attached to the top,
communities where joined together through a				and (3) third, paint is applied to the final product. It
sort of confederacy, and there was a bill to be				must be kept in mind, though, that each one of
passed that would affect them all, then it would				these tasks is done with the aid of technology.
be far too difficult for each community to get				The cost of the wood per desk is $10, and the
together and vote on the bills altogether. In this				final product cost is $20. This would mean that
situation, a practical solution would be for each				for every desk made, $10 would go to the
community to vote on the matter alone, and then				workers. As far as the variety of positions, that
to have all the votes added up from each				would deduct to each position earning $3.33 per
community and then used to find a conclusive				desk worked on. However, then it must be taken
result -- at least, if some Federalistic ideas were				into consideration that one job may be more
incorporated into communities, not that I am				difficult or stressing than another job. For
writing that I am for or against them now.				example, perhaps the technology for painting the
There is also the rather effective method of				desks was antiquated, and this would result in
counting off by voting, which would only work for				making it messy for those working that position,
a community of a limited population. Basically, the				and therefore it took them longer to complete
voting would occur on these grounds... The				the task and more effort. Then, for those
proposition, or the bill, will be stated. And then				working in the painting position, they might be paid
people would count off numbers. The first person				$5.00 per unit they work on, whereas those
would count off "1" or "-1," the first if they are in				working in the other areas would be paid $2.50
favor of the law, the second if they are opposed				per unit they worked on. In the end, a person is
to the law. Then each person will count off once,				rewarded precisely for the amount of work that
adding one or subtracting one from this number				they enact upon the product. This is fairness, this
as they see if. That is, they add if they are in				is justice, and this is the type of economy I would
favor of the proposition, and they subtract if they				desire.
are opposed to it. The particular nature of this				Finally, there is the primary question... How many
method of voting is easy to see. By voting, a				units are to be made per industry, and who
person is also counting. So, there is no need to				makes this decision? Since this would be an
count the votes once they're all complete, as the				Anarchistic community, where decision are
methods are one and the same in this case. That				decided by the people and not by a person, the
eliminates the possibility of having flawed,				answer is rather clear: units to be made per
corrupted, or bribed results, which means a true				industry are to be decided Democratically by the
Democracy reigns. The voting and counting				community. Of course, the complication that
method, too, is observed by all, so everyone has				arrises is that it would seem to be an extremely
the ability to see if it is succesful or inefficient, or				tedious and boring job. One solution is the
fake, or plagiarized. Furthermore, in only a few				community could hire several consultants to
minutes, a group of people will be able to make a				decide for them all -- but not absolutely. The
bill a law, in the amount of time that would take				consultants could research the matter, and then
the Congress and House of Representatives				recommend to the community an amount per
perhaps weeks, or even months. Of course, in				industry that should be made. The research would
high amounts of people, this method may seem				be based upon the statistics of how many people
difficult, or even impossible.				are currently purchasing what items and the
Of course, if you want to go with the best				factors of how that may change. Of course, if a
method of voting, keeping anonymity and				society believes that a consultant's predictions are
maximizes effectiveness, then one would go with				off, they have the right to change it --
computers. A computer program can be written				Democratically, as all decisions are made. Here,
to allow a community to vote for a law, and it will				though, is where the primary appeal to a
disallow them from voting another time on the				government is made: it is much simpler, eassier
same law. This offers some positive aspects: (1)				when only one person decides things, because
there is no double or triple voting, (2) a person				there is no conflict or disagreement. Regardless,
who is too preoccupied to attend a forum				when only one person decides things with a
meeting will be able to vote at home, (3) it is				military and police force to back them up, it is the
extremely quick compared to other methods, (4)				ingredients for corruption, brutality, and a
there can be no arguments about the results of				Totalitarian state, not much different than life in
the voting. However, one ought to be very				this contemporary America.
cautious when they employ a piece of technology				When an economic plan is brought up, it is a
to advance politic, economics, or justice. For				vastly complex thing. There are a hundred
example, the use of cameras, both for still and				numbers, each decided by a formula of its own.
moving pictures, has been a great method for				This is similarly the case with legislation passed
capturing evidence of a crime, and some people				today. It's not just one law, but a package of
may think, "With cameras now, it seems				initiatives. The problem with this is that in an
impossible to have conducted a fair trial 200				Anarchist community, it could possibly be an
years ago." I am not skeptical that there will be				extremely tedious and lengthy process. For
one day where photograph pictures can be				example, let's assume someone brings up the bill
altered to the point where there is no deciphering				that the community is to fund the building of a
an actually taken photograph and one that was				radio factory, with four different positions on the
made in a laboratory. Today, we may have				assembly line, importing materials from a particular
cameras and photographs, but tomorrow, we will				country, and then the bill set wages for the
have a method of producing whatever we want				different positions. Now, let's consider that another
in a photograph. So, too, someone must consider				person opposes this bill, but then proposes their
the implications of using computers for the sake				own bill in response to it: instead of a radio factor,
of Democratic accomplishment. While today				it's a television factory; or instead it has six
computers have advanced political thought a great				positions on the assembly line; or instead the
deal by linking together many differently minded				materials are imported from another country; or
people, as well as providing resources to activists				instead the wages for the different positions is
and those who work for different causes, I am				different. In a package of laws in one bill, it would
speaking of use of computers in a purely				not be difficult to find an Anarchist community
Democratic means -- as a voting machine. For				quickly divided among ten or twenty different bills,
example, it is just as possible that someone could				each proposing different standards. And, in a
use a device to hack the computer and change				community where each individual understood that
votes like that, or it is possible that the person				their vote was important, we would find someone
who built the computer could build it so they could				supporting a bill, because they agree with most or
change votes whenever they like. This differs				part of it, or where the bill is the lesser of the
largely from the system of the glass towers, in				two evils in their opinion. A person may like the
that a person can personally examine the				idea of a radio factory with four positions, but
construction of the glass towers whenever they				might disagree with where the materials for
like and see that their is nothing faulty about				construction are purchased from. Or a person
them, whereas most people are unknowledgeable				may like the idea of the four positions, but
in computer programming. Perhaps, though, for a				disagree with the wages given to each position.
society, the best attitude to have about it is to				What we found, then, is that the efficiency of
use the computers until there is suspicion that				Democracy is lessened. Every person in the
something is wrong. It is possible that someone				community is in the minority of at least one part
could hack into the computers, but somewhat				of the bill they detest. The way for a Democratic
unlikely. Still, it is a social decision, for the people,				community to solve this problem is easy, though.
by the people. One way to increase the				Once the bill is proposed, instead of proposing
effectiveness of computer voting would be to				alternative bills to it, there is a vote to make an
have a hand print, or preferably an eye retina,				alteration to the bill. For example, once the bill is
identification system, meaning a person cannot				proposed, if someone thinks that materials should
vote without being identified by a computer. The				be imported from another country, for the sake
reason to prefer eye retina identification is				of the humane working conditions in that country
because a hand print identification would give a				or for the sake of cost, then they will make their
reason for bandits to start amputating hands,				case to the public and someone else will say why
whereas it would be more difficult to obtain one's				they disagree, and then a vote will occur; this
eye without damaging the retina. Of course, the				process will be repeated until every person has
possibility of such occurences is unlikely, but				had their say on the bill and what they disagree
anything that ensures the success of a				about it, and the public has voted on what they
Democracy is a friend of the people.				like best and detest the least.
At the beginning of this paper, along the lines of				Essentially, what I covered in the last paragraph
the introduction, I made it strictly clear that a				was based more on Democracy; primarily how
Democratic society would be led by the people,				Democracy works within regards to Socialism.
not by the leaders. Anarchos and Anarchia come				Also, when a community decides that they are
from the Greek language, meaning "no leader."				going to enact a bill that requires funds, the best
However, this may be a bit of misleading. When I				Democratic choice is for the community to do a
speak of leaders in that sense, I am speaking of				tax with th passing of the bill. In this regard, it
people who rule others without their consent, or				eliminates the possibility of static funds being set
who make, pass, and enforce laws against the				asside. With regards to our American Republic,
people's will. In an Anarchist community, where all				massive amounts of taxes are collected (often
decisions are reached Democratically -- that is,				times, excluding rich, industrial sectors due to their
where every law comes into enactment only by				donations to political party campaigns), in our
people directly voting for them -- in such a				socio-political arena, taxes are collected, and then
community, there will be leaders. But, they will				bureaucrats spend years on what to do with the
vary greatly compared to the leaders of today.				taxes. In an Anarcho-Communist commune,
These leaders of Anarchist communities will not				though, a bill will be passed, with instructions for
force other people to do their will, nor will they				taxes, and then the taxes will be collected for
threaten or intimidate. Instead, during these forum				that bill alone. This will be a great technique for
meetings, they will simply speak their opinion, back				preventing corruption, as every person will be able
up their ideas with evidence, and then they will				to see where every dollar they spend on taxes is
rest. In a very real way, they are little more than				going -- no taxes will ever be collected without
an orator. They speak what they feel, then				the taxpayer's vote and knowledge of the
another person of an opposed ideology speaks,				matter.
and then the mass votes on the matter				A Western Commune Today
themselves. In this way, they are moral leaders,				Many, many, many years ago, there was a
and their power extends only as far as their				Socialist man by the name of Robert Owen (his
influence goes. This system of "leaders" is by far				followers to be known as "Owenites"). The social
more just, more fair than today's system of				significance of this is great though, because
politics. In our world, the presidents and dictators				Robert Owen was not a reformer or a
have sent millions of people to their deaths in				revolutionary. Instead, he was a factory owner,
wars, have stood by injustice and brutality. When				and in many real ways, he was a member of the
George Bush today made the claim that Iraq was				"Capitalist class," but in opposition to Capitalist
oppressing the people and that the United States				ideology. What made him a Socialist though was
government was required to free them, every				not just what he believed but what he did. He
person to disagree was silenced. There was no				lived during the rise of the Industrial Revolution. To
opposition to state that the United States had				any reader who is even only slightly education in
sold weapons of mass destruction to Iraq in the				working conditions of the Industrial Revolution, it
past, that previous US involvement with foreign				would be inane for me to cover them: the long,
conflict has resulted in creating extreme poverty				14 hour shifts of work, the extremely dangerous
and depriving citizens of their rights, that there				conditions, the starvation wages, the children
was no intention to give Democracy (in a				working under the condition of an overseer
meaningful sense) to the Iraqi people -- every				equiped with a whip, among other heartless and
word of opposition was silenced. The United				merciless brutalities. Robert Owen refused to
States government proceeded with its intentions				partake in any of these activities, despite the fact
to destroy another country and turn it into				that doing so would save him money -- and to
another jewel in the crown of Neo-Colonialism.				any Humanitarian, it may seem obscure to
Where was the opposition to speak to the				indicate that a person would ever be cruel and
president as he told great lies? Were they allowed				brutal to save small amounts of money, but to
to speak? No. In fact, when Saddam Hussein				those in the Capitalist class, it is the only language
offered to debate George Bush in an organized				they know, and it shows in the way they conduct
debate, Bush denied this. And why is that? He				their tyranny. Robert Owen built communities,
claimed that it was simply a public relations tactic				providing housing and education for his workers.
-- from a man whose army has funded the				Better yet, he made factories safer for workers
production and distribution of millions of pamphlets				and he reduced the work day to only 8 hours --
on why the United States government will restore				something that would later be realized by the law
order.				only 200 years later. He was under no obligation
The United States government is a failure and it				to do this, except the obligation of his heart to a
always has been. From the beginning, George				humane, rational method, but when I say he had
Washington and many of the other founding				no obligation, I mean he had not entered into a
fathers supported dungeons and jails for political				collective bargaining contract. Instead, he did what
offenders. This idea continued greatly into the				he did for his workers on account of the fact
next century where Lincoln imprisoned and				that he believed in fair and just working conditions.
executed people without a trial. The liars of				He did a great deal more than many of the
history can speak what they will on Lincoln, but				Socialist and Communist writers, despite the fact
though he removed the shackles from the slave,				that some philosophers have conceded that they
he certainly didn't have the idea of freedom in his				still deplore Robert Owen on rather farcical
mind when he released into a world where death				accounts, such as how some of his factory
awaited when one spoke certain owrds. If				communities went out of business due to the
someone today wishes to change a law or				economy and how this led to unemployment.
implement a law, in what way can they do this?				Some of his entrepreneurial ventures were
Through lobbyists. What does this mean? Instead				succesful, while some were not. The fact is, he
of convincing the public that something is good,				provided housing, better compensation, and
they try to convince the representatives. A great				education to his workers -- something that even
deal of laws are passed this way. It's not about				today Capitalists refuse to do. Above all, he
convincing everyone that your idea is right. It's				provided fairness and liberty. In an age and time
about convincing one single person that your idea				when there was no respect for justice by the
is right. If you succeed, then three hundred million				crowns of the world, he decided to make it be
people are under the yoke of a law that they had				the guiding force of his decisions -- and for this,
no matter in deciding. But, if you convince millions				he has my respect.
of people in the United States that a law is				In many respects, the type of community I
necessary, it'll be no to no avail. In this				proposed is far, far away from us, legislatively
government, who decides the laws? To say it's				and as far as the public is concerned. The
the people is an absurdity, and so the words "We				governments of the world will forever oppose
the People" in the Constitution are nothing more				Anarchism and Communism, because Anarchism
than a grievous lie. So, in analysis, who decides				puts them out of the job and Communism is a
the laws of the government in a Republic? Less				threat to their biggest supporters. But, it is not
than 1% of the population. This alone is a crime to				entirely out of the question to start an
humanity, but then think of the idea that lobbyists				Anarcho-Communist community today. For every
exist who try to convince just this one small				Socialist, Communist, or Anarchist that exists in
amount of the population. Of course, with one				this world, there are at least 10,000 people who
person in control of all the other people, there is a				want better working conditions, fairer wages, and
great deal of corruption. The interests of the				a more Democratic government. People are sick
people aren't represented. The interests of the				of working so hard for so much, seeing so much
corporations, the companies, the trade				wealth in the pockets of so few, and of the
organizations are represented. If anyone finds				corruption, the bribery, and the elitist industrial
reason to argue in this, then consider the fact				class making the decisions for all of society. The
that the United States government has granted				reason why people do not all call themselves
multi-billion dollar tax cuts for the industrial sectors				Socialists, Communists, or Anarchists is simple: the
of the economy, and consider how United States				government, the media, and the corporations
military action, in Cuba, the Philipines, Haiti, and				have so opposed these ideas that to even
Guetamala have always been at the benefit of				consider them makes you taboo. What I would
foreign investors and at the cost of local				like to see today is a group of workers pool their
populations.				money together and buy up several lots of land,
So, before voting for a law, the forum members				perhaps an old factory, and then focus around
will first hear opinions on this law. In fact, this is				that one industry. They would operate in a
the very nature of a forum: the free exchange				manner that I have described with this essay:
of ideas. If the community decided to implement				purely Democratic and Socialistic. Since they would
computers into the voting process, then those				be under the jurisdiction of the United States
who wanted to speak on the matter may be able				government's federal and local laws, a total
to type up their opinion and then have it published				disobedience to these laws would be in effect,
in the computer, so those voting may read the				meaning that every person would refuse to
opinions of the speakers. Now, then, the matter				cooperate with the government authorities. This
of who gets to speak and when is an important				would mean that those laws which today are
one. If everyone spoke what they thought all the				unjust would not be practised: recreational drugs
time, the forum would degrade from a place for				would become safe and affordable, saying and
the free exchange of thought to simply a rather				thinking what you want would no longer be a
noisy place. When a person proposes a bill, they				crime, and Euthanasia would be practised when
can stand up and say what a new law ought to				absolutely necessary. The mechanics of this
be, as well as why the law should be enacted.				community do not need to be elaborated upon, as
Then those who have an opinion to say on it can				that was the target of this essay. But if such a
stand up and say what they want, in an order				community existed, it would be of great moral
that they collectively decide.				support to all Socialists, Communists, Anarchists,
One of the primary faults of decision-making in a				Syndicalists, and persons in support of social
Republic is that decisions and political elections are				justice. In a very real way, once it was
based largely on political parties, and not the				discovered that such a community could exist,
opinions of the people. If someone desires to				that Anarcho-Communism was capable of
make a difference in a certain issue, often times				producing fair working conditions and a true
they need to side with a political party. And it's				Democracy, there would be a massive
nearly impossible for someone to get elected if				underground and mainstream migration to this
they're Independent. The reason for this is				community. Those who are poor, homeless, and
because the laws of the United States work to				living on the street, but their heart always living
favor only a two-party system. And why wouldn't				by justice, would have a place to travel to, where
they? Who decides the laws? The members of				they know they would be treated with respect
congress. It should be no surprise then why there				and kindness. With this commune, there would be
are so many Anti-Democracy and Anti-Anarchism				a sanction for those who were sick of Capitalism's
laws on the lawbooks: because those who choose				madness, and its disregard for the rights of the
the laws are having their power threatened by				Proletariat. And, in this community, unlike in
such ideologies. If someone in our society wants				America, when a person works, they work
to make a difference, they will have to join a				knowing that it is for the betterment of
political party. By joining a political party, with only				themselves and the betterment of mankind, and
two decisions and both parties not at all much				in this, we can find pride in our work, instead of
different, one must consent to a plethora of				knowing that it all simply ads to the wealth of
various ideologies before they can make a				some sickeningly rich, elite class.
difference. Furthermore, if someone tries to get				[Resource on information on Robert Owen is
elected in this political arena, they must have the				from: Contemporary Macroeconomics, by Milton H.
support of one of the two political parties. Not				Spencer, Worth Publishers, Inc., Fourth Edition.]
only does the system of political parties prevent				Truth, Justice, Humanity...
independent political thought from challenging the				This is Anarcho-Communism, as it was, as it is, as
system -- but it forges in concrete a political				it forever shall be...

Democracy

Practical Applications of Society in an Anarcho-Communist Community