FREE MARKET COMMUNISM (yes, you read that right)

                                                  

Mutualism, communism with free markets and fair trade. Because of this it supports alternative currencies, like labor notes, or mutual credit. And is where I believe reasonable “Anarcho-communists” and “Anarcho-capitalists" alike can come together. Pierre Joseph Proudhon, was the first person on record to identify as an “Anarchist” and coiner of the term “Mutualism”. Now “Ancaps” are likely to reject the idea of “public ownership” and “Ancoms” will have their own problems with “alternative currencies”. But if there is any ideology that could be a common ground between Ancaps and Ancoms alike, It’s Mutualism, It’s free market communism.

Now I've long thought that the free market is an economic tool that can be utilized on ether side of the communist capitalist spectrum. A lot of people though seem to think (and say) that it is exclusively capitalist. This is why I was overjoyed when I found out about “economic mutualism”. Mutualism is considered a form of anarchy. Now I’m not an anarchist (though I do have anarchist tendencies) but I am a libertarian communist and hardcore confederalist, so it works. So what would a mutualist society look like? Well it starts with a mutual credit union, grass roots democracy, workforce and housing cooperatives. Also a greater understanding on the “labor theory of value” the differences between private and personal property as well as ownership and possession.

The “labor theory of value” states that the value of something is dependent on the “labor” it took to produce. I think an updated version of this is something along the lines of energy cost of overall production. In other words how much energy it takes to get all tools, material, and work involved at every stage of every item involved in the production of the end product. The primary criticism I hear for this is that “value” is inherently subjective. “Everything is worth what someones willing to pay”. And here's the thing, I agree. That being said something that is inherently subjective can be given an objective basis (this is what utilitarianism does for morality). Also Marxists and other proponents of the labor theory of value don’t discount your “willingness to pay” they just call that price to distinguish it. But one could essentially define price as “subjective value”.

Personal property is like “possession” basic everyday things you use that don’t turn you a profit, or usus. Private property can be used to turn a profit, or fructus. Usufruct is a term that refers to property in use for profit that is not owned, and therefore cannot be destroyed for profit (or abusus). Ownership implies the right to usus (use) fructus (profit) and abusus (abuse). Usufruct is where your stake to any property would end. In other words if you are not using something it is not yours. Now complaints to this will likely be a straw-man like “if I leave my house anyone can just move right in”. I would hope no one thinks that's what I'm saying. Leaving is different than abandoning. In a broad sense your home is still in use if you go stay the night at a friends house, for example, you don’t pack up all your shit, shut off the power, and ditch. That being said I think use is a better term than occupy (which I have heard before) but maybe not “Investment”. We could quibble over if you’re “using” your house when you leave it (you’re certainly not “occupying” it), are you “using” your toothbrush when you finish brushing and set it down by the sink? Maybe not, but you certainly still have an “investment” in it, a continuing interest in use, if you will, just like if you leave your house to stay at a friends. Now if you abandon your house, “squatters” should face no legal issues, and if you throw away your toothbrush, nor should the “dumpster diver” that takes it.

Numerous ideas in mutualism could ease the problems that we see today, and could make a freer fairer society and market for tomorrow. For insistence, a mutual credit union would eliminate what is referred to as “the money monopoly”, housing cooperatives would decrease homelessness, workforce cooperatives would increase productivity, and labor notes are impossible to steel, and all of these things would equalize opportunities and negotiation power, there by making trade inherently more fair and therefore free. But all of those great things aside (and they are great) one of the greatest things about mutualism is that it can work in our current system. That's right no revolution, Just build a mutualist society and let it catch on. Believe me it will. “If you build it, they will come”. Now you might say “then why don’t you”? And, well, believe me, I intend to.

Now I would love to talk (or write) more about the free market, competition, the good , the bad and the ugly. Like the evils of patents, the wonders of competitive opportunity, the simultaneous overrating and underrating of government intervention and regulation. And I intend to discuss these things more in-depth at a latter date. But for now, give this some thought, look into economic mutualism, capitalist, socialist, or communist, mutualism has something for everybody, and, could maybe, just maybe, provide the foundation of unity we so desperately need.