Has a socialistic state ever functioned without trade? Perhaps this theory only succeeds in theory? Obviously it's good for a nation to have some socialistic elemets but as they say too much of a good thing ca turn into a really bad thing.
Socialism does not necessarily preclude the existence of markets. Furthermore; it is entirely possible that a Libertarian Federation could trade with other economic actors, such as Nation-States.
Can I have a book or a website containing your terms of discussion? That would help a tremendous bit. If not then how does one know what you mean when you communicate? Where can I find this key stone of lore?
We've got a number of individuals, here, representing several different ideologies. You might want to read the Wikipedia articles on Anarchism, and Marxism, as a start. (As well as the article on the differences, and points of conflict between Anarchism and Marxism.) I could also recommend some basic, introductory texts, like
The Communist Manifesto, or the
Anarchist FAQ, etc. You can also Google any terms ou don’t understand, or just ask. I can’t speak for anyone else, but I’m usually quite agreeable to elaborating or clarifying things.
Well, you can't always get what you want. Why should a worker decide how many hours he'll work regardless of his boss's opinion?
Under Libertarian Socialism private property doesn’t exist, and there are balanced job complexes, so there is no pure, elite, managerial caste. There would be a workers’ council, which would represent the specific facility, which would be interlinked with broader workers’ councils with broader decisions encompassing a multitude of enterprises. Decisions would be made democratically, with bigger decisions requiring a vote by a higher council, or a broader majority, whereas smaller decisions would be made in-house, requiring a smaller majority, or, perhaps, made by consensus, depending on the circumstances.
You're going to have to back these statements up with evidence.
I’m not sure what evidence you seek, but if you search this historical record you’ll find very few precedents for anything like a Free Market. This is why I characterize the present economic modality, as some economists do, as ‘Corporate Mercantilism.’
Imho you should make a thread encapsulating your comprehensive political beliefs and link it into your sig. That way there'd be no more confusion.
Anarchism is a deeply misunderstood philosophy. Virtually no-one who isn’t a history major, or whatever, knows anything about it. It isn’t typically covered in the core curriculum in High School, or History survey classes. I tried to start a thread on Anarchism some time ago, with all sorts of media; articles, pamphlets, videos, etc. It didn’t generate much interest. You can check it out, here;
http://www.debatepolitics.com/general-political-discussion/105091-anarchist-faq.html
Sarcasm for the win. This is similar to that one statement I heard in the past that communism is the most concentrated form of freedom
'Communism' has several meanings, so context would be key. Libertarian Socialism is,
absolutely, the least authoritarian model of social organization, imaginable.
