[anticlimacus]

Public records provide ample documentation of the Anarchist's collaboration with the central and regional governments throughout Spain.

This was actually well into the project. Not only had decades of grassroots groundwork been laid, but the revolution had already gone pretty far before cooperation with the state. In fact this cooperation led to its demise. The Spanish experiment was actually one of the more successful examples that anarchism could actually be a realistic possibility.

[ingliz]

but the revolution had already gone pretty far before cooperation with the state.

3 months, if that.

The Spanish Civil War began July 17, 1936. The CNT-FAI had agreed to join the Generalitat of Catalonia by September. On October 18, they joined the national government.

[ComradeTim]

Your geography needs work. Disregarding that small point, it is a strange anarchy when leaders in the Free Territory, rather than being elected democratically, were appointed by Makhno's military clique.

Marxist lies. The Free Territory was a Workers' Soviet democracy.

Again, a strange anarchy. We would expect that the organisation would start at village level and then federate upwards. No, the EAPM appointed the staffs and appointed them from the top down.

Marxist lies.The Shinmin Republic was a Workers' Collective democracy.

Public records provide ample documentation of the Anarchist's collaboration with the central and regional governments throughout Spain.


"Lacking training in economic matters, the union leaders, with more good will than success, began to issue directives that spread confusion in the factory committees and enormous chaos in production. This was aggravated by the fact that each union... gave different and often contradictory instruction."

CNT member Albert Pérez-Baró

Marxist and pseudo-anarchist traitor lies.

"In Spain, during almost three years, despite a civil war that took a million lives, despite the opposition of the political parties . . . this idea of libertarian communism was put into effect. Very quickly more than 60% of the land was collectively cultivated by the peasants themselves, without landlords, without bosses, and without instituting capitalist competition to spur production. In almost all the industries, factories, mills, workshops, transportation services, public services, and utilities, the rank and file workers, their revolutionary committees, and their syndicates reorganised and administered production, distribution, and public services without capitalists, high-salaried managers, or the authority of the state."

CNT activist Gaston Leval

The Spanish Civil War began July 17, 1936. The CNT-FAI had agreed to join the Generalitat of Catalonia by September. On October 18, they joined the national government.

Due to Marxist and liberal treachery and lies. We were in reality in control of all Catalonia, Aragon and other nearby areas until the self defeating Marxist's backstabbing allowed a fascist victory

More info for the interested.

[ingliz]

Marxist lies... Marxist lies... Marxist and pseudo-anarchist traitor lies... Marxist and liberal treachery and lies.

[ComradeTim]

D'you know, I'm sensing a pattern here...

[Truth To Power]

The left libertarians, anarchists, hold the position that power ought to be decentralized.

Unfortunately, they are objectively wrong, because military reality requires unified control of power.

This goes both for social organization and for the workplace. Part of that decentralization is the socialization of the means of production so that all share in ownership of capital.

In reality, this means theft of capital from those who produce it.

Democratizing ownership of capital (which is socially produced in the first place

No. In point of objective physical fact, capital is not socially produced. That's just an absurd Marxist fabrication. Capital is a product of individual contributions of initiative, labor, and capital goods. Each capital good is produced exactly by those who contribute to its production, and no one else.

and therefore should be socially owned)

I have just proved it should not be socially owned. It is produced by the contributions of particular individuals -- especially the entrepreneur who initiates its production and typically contributes his own capital thereto -- and they are the ones who rightly own it.

and democratizing the workplace in no way necessitates "group authority" or "commissars" as you have erroneously suggested.

There is no other way democracy can work.

It's a cooperative system which allows individuals to equally share in public life and to realize their own individual potential.

If you had any experience in either business or politics, you would know that few people have either the ability or the inclination to share in public life or the management of their workplaces.

From my perspective a federated system of syndicates within a market socialism is actually a realistic form of libertarianism that would do best in ensuring autonomy and self-determination (combining David Schweickart's "economic democracy" and Rudolph Rocker's "anarcho-syndicalism").

You are entitled to your incorrect opinion.

When you have no say over production and over your working life, you are controlled and your autonomy is greatly diminished. I don't see how "geolibertarianism" overcomes this.

Unlike either the feudal "libertarian" model of Rothbard and the Randroids or the collectivist -- i.e., anti-individual -- "libertarianism" of the socialists and anarchists, the geolibertarian model actually restores the individual right to liberty.

In the geolibertarian system, each individual DOES have full control over not only his own contributions to production and his working life but all of his relations to the economy and society. This is only possible in the geolibertarian system because only there does everyone have free, secure access to enough of the available advantageous natural resources to earn a living with (typically a place to live that has easy access to his preferred employment opportunities, but it could be a piece of farmland, a stretch of forest, etc.), and as much more as he is willing and able to compensate the community for depriving everyone else of. He need not ask permission of any commissars or fellow workers to use it as he wishes, or consult his Labor Committee, or anyone else. The decision of what resources to use and how to use them are his alone. Each individual has complete control and autonomy in his own life, until and unless he decides it is more advantageous to work for someone smarter than he is, who can make his labor more productive, enjoyable and rewarding.

Each individual's right to property in the fruits of his labor, and in what he produces by his contributions of initiative and capital, is secure. Everyone gets exactly the full, equal liberty they have a right to, no more and no less, and everyone gets exactly the share of production they have earned by their contributions to production -- and that means even those who cannot labor get a share, because they have contributed their abstention from exercising their liberty to use the resources the more productive are paying to use.