Joint ownership is already a thing in capitalism. Two or more people jointly owning a resource in no way implies that they must submit to a monopolistic arbiter of force. In fact, it's only when resources are jointly shared by everyone that a monopoly disappears.
-
-
Replying to @Nyetrifleisfine @Atomic_Ancap and
If and only if the "anarcho" part is legitimate, then yes, it would result in the collapse of actual capitalism. The problem is that when you must set up enforcers of property relations, you end up with de facto statism. Great for property owners, enslavement for everyone else.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Nyetrifleisfine @Atomic_Ancap and
Why does a very small percentage of people own the means of production while everyone else doesn't? If you look into the history of actually existing capitalism, you'll see that property was obtained through conquest and through state power.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
That's not how it historically went down though, unfortunately. And due to capital accumulation, it's not something that's currently possible to do now.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.