The Anarchist Brewing Co.

[Garrett Burgwardt]

The property holders have no interest in simply holding their property because they still have to sustain it and themselves.

Nor do they necessarily have any interest in trading fairly. Desperate workers and tenants benefit employers and landlords most of all, as long as their discontent isn't so great as to provoke mutiny.

Anyway, I'm not trying to argue for one type of political theory or another. I'm just not convinced that anarcho-capitalism is anarchism. If I thought it was, I would have never created the thread. I doubt a brewery would function differently under anarcho-capitalist ideals than most do in our current society. How workers of a traditional anarchist persuasion might create, run, and make a living off of one interests me much more.

The Kid, any chance we get to read your thesis when you finish?  What is your major that you are writing the thesis for?

Also, the island thing has been done before: google "The Republic of Minerva".  However, if you let me join your island we won't suffer the same fate as I'll bring my friends and their arsenal of firearms. 

Do your friends have a navy? In the tradition of individualist anarchism, I think, I don't really like the idea of revolution or snatching remote islands. Can't we just adopt anarchistic behavior, in whatever little ways we can, to slowly convince our neighbors and change our present society? What if I were to start a brewery that embodied anarchist ideals in our present society? Could it work?

Of course we could just change the way our current society thinks, I just want my own island 

The Kid, any chance we get to read your thesis when you finish?  What is your major that you are writing the thesis for?

Also, the island thing has been done before: google "The Republic of Minerva".  However, if you let me join your island we won't suffer the same fate as I'll bring my friends and their arsenal of firearms. 

I'm not writing it for a major, it's one of the requirements to graduate my high school. And I'll post it with a bitcoin address for donations   

What, I'm not technically a kid anymore but I'm still quite young in most people's eyes, so I still don't really have to change the name I use on forums and such 

[1714840570]

1714840570

[1714840570]

1714840570

[kiba]

Instead of buying an island, buy a seastead.

[carp]

The property holders have no interest in simply holding their property because they still have to sustain it and themselves.

Nor do they necessarily have any interest in trading fairly. Desperate workers and tenants benefit employers and landlords most of all, as long as their discontent isn't so great as to provoke mutiny.

Anyway, I'm not trying to argue for one type of political theory or another. I'm just not convinced that anarcho-capitalism is anarchism. If I thought it was, I would have never created the thread. I doubt a brewery would function differently under anarcho-capitalist ideals than most do in our current society. How workers of a traditional anarchist persuasion might create, run, and make a living off of one interests me much more.

Same here. I tend to like to ask the question "How can we hack the current system, to work in a more equitable way?". Pure anarchism is great but, we are not founding an island full of fertile idealists. Also, the world is full of people, and thats not really a model which many others can emulate.

I am also not convinced of anarcho-capitalism, but, I don't think any pure ideal system is going to work, what you need to do is borrow a little bit of concept from communism and ask "Who owns the means of production?". I have been a landlord, and a bit much of a nice guy at it for my own good. However, that does mean everyone was at my whim, even I can't be the benevolent dictator all the time.

There is kind of a chicken and egg problem. More democratic systems work fine if everyone is informed and staked. However, putting a vote over the house to everyone, when ownership is mine alone and I bear all the cost of mistakes, is not going to work for very long.... because I am the only one staked.... but getting to that point where everyone is informed and staked is a hard problem.

So I tend to envision replacing the term "company" with "collective", much as the beer example describes of workers with voting stocks. However when you get to the talk of "the future workers caring enough to not stiff the current workers", I think we lead to one of the gaps. Its easy to see this is creating a schism amongst ownership and work again.

This is one of the nice things about the current system and capitalism. wealth, being portable, can be handed to third parties to hold and invest. So now, if my company goes under, or fires me etc, my retirement fund is held by some other company and I take it with me. Clearly, we still need some form of capital (not just for this but to work between the "collectives"). So perhaps the "tweak" is, that when you leave the company, any stock under your ownership is cashed out to your retirement fund?

It closes the schism, and, do you want an all inclusive collective? Why should choosing where you work mean choosing who you live with? What if my company is one collective, and my housing or home situation, is another? Now I definitely need capital to contribute to my home collective. Some interesting takes on this....

look at "The Farm" down in TN... a progressive communist community that functions in this sort of manner, and even provides its residents with a pension. Or "co-housing" which seems to be about upper middle class people building semi-collective enclaves away from the city. Usually setup as a bunch of privately owned houses around a common dining hall with common meals.

[The Script]

Do your friends have a navy? In the tradition of individualist anarchism, I think, I don't really like the idea of revolution or snatching remote islands. Can't we just adopt anarchistic behavior, in whatever little ways we can, to slowly convince our neighbors and change our present society? What if I were to start a brewery that embodied anarchist ideals in our present society? Could it work?

Of course not.  I'm not sure that the Republic of Tonga does either though.....
All we'd need is a few surface to ship missiles and then hope that a real navy didn't mess with us.

The Kid and I are not talking about "snatching" remote islands, but rather purchasing.  However, I agree that that is not the best system, and I believe in working to change society from the inside out.  But common, this is the internet, let us dream a little.... 

[The Script]

The Kid, any chance we get to read your thesis when you finish?  What is your major that you are writing the thesis for?

Also, the island thing has been done before: google "The Republic of Minerva".  However, if you let me join your island we won't suffer the same fate as I'll bring my friends and their arsenal of firearms. 

I'm not writing it for a major, it's one of the requirements to graduate my high school. And I'll post it with a bitcoin address for donations   

What, I'm not technically a kid anymore but I'm still quite young in most people's eyes, so I still don't really have to change the name I use on forums and such 

Oh, for HIGHSCHOOL.  I see.    I was thinking you were a Master's student in economics or something....disappointing....  Ha, ha, that's still cool that you chose that topic and I hope it goes well for you. 

[左]

Edit.

[FatherMcGruder]

... honest to god  ...

You seem to imply that God has some kind of authority over you. Contradiction?

[kiba]

Still, at least they are proper anarchists, unlike the capitalist apologists who would not be doing any better in mafia run state-less capitalist society.

*cough* what were ya'll talking 'bout 'gain?

Opposing anarchists tend to call each other "not a real anarchist", which tend to mean we have a non-debate and no attempt at understanding.

Anarcho-capitalist: You guys are a bunch of democractic mob!

Anarcho-communist: You're a bunch of capitalist pigs!

I am more worried about my libertarian comrades who refuse to join in to undermine the state because they are a bunch of goldbugs.

[Babylon]

Do your friends have a navy? In the tradition of individualist anarchism, I think, I don't really like the idea of revolution or snatching remote islands. Can't we just adopt anarchistic behavior, in whatever little ways we can, to slowly convince our neighbors and change our present society? What if I were to start a brewery that embodied anarchist ideals in our present society? Could it work?

I think we could.  It would have to interface with our current statist society, which would be a drain on resources, but there are breweries that are run as worker owned cooperatives (fishtail in Olympia WA is one example.)

[FatherMcGruder]

Opposing anarchists tend to call each other "not a real anarchist", which tend to mean we have a non-debate and no attempt at understanding.

Anarcho-capitalism seems to have come about out of a misunderstanding of anarchism which opposes both the state and capitalism, although not necessarily markets. Think of it as listening to someone confuse tea with coffee: both hot, liquid, contain caffeine, and served in similar cups, but not the same. People understandably get frustrated when they ask for coffee and get tea. Anarcho-capitalists shouldn't take offense with the correction. In and of itself, it doesn't mean anarcho-capitalists hold an indefensible position, but rather one that simply doesn't qualify as an anarchistic.

I think we could.  It would have to interface with our current statist society, which would be a drain on resources, but there are breweries that are run as worker owned cooperatives (fishtail in Olympia WA is one example.)

The brewery workers would also have to deal with capitalistic suppliers and customers. I wonder if workers would pay less taxes if they filed as co-owners instead of employees.

[kiba]

In and of itself, it doesn't mean anarcho-capitalists hold an indefensible position, but rather one that simply doesn't qualify as an anarchistic.

Anarcho-capitalists are committed to the principle of self-ownership and the non-aggression principle, by the virtue of being libertarians. Anything that oppose the autonomy and the right of individuals will be opposed. That include any authority that attempt to impose the others' will upon the individual. We do not oppose communes, worker cooperative, and so on, as long as they do not coerce people into joining their organizations.

Rather than say that anarcho-capitalists support only free market capitalism, it is far more accurate to say that they are in support of voluntary non-coercive human activities.

If you do not think we are anarchists in the true sense, so it will be.

[Anonymous]

Until I see evidence of a functioning Anarcho-Capitalist society, I will join them. At the moment, I think the only true way to have liberty is to have it enforced by a minimal government. The defense of one's life is not a market that can be set free, in my eyes. It could function for a bit but the balance can be usurped by one force or be made unstable by many very easily.

[Babylon]

I agree that some sort of money helps a lot as far as interacting with other communities.  It can be useful internally as well, or it can just complicate things.

As far as an Anarchist brewery in current society it would be advantageous to form relationships with other workers collectives to source hops and malt and so forth.  Hops are actually really easy to grow and could be incorporated with the brewery itself, barley takes a much larger amount of land, but would be a major expansion of operations and if there were a local agricultural collective that would make things easier.

As far as a housing collective the brewery would be taking in profits in sales that could be distributed to workers they'd have to buy food and clothes and all those fun things after all and as long as the collective is functioning as a part of a capitalist society they need to get those things from capitalist entities.

Forming relationships with other communities is always advantageous though, so, for example, if the agricultural collective that the brewery gets their barley from also grows food crops and perhaps chickens and such a relationship could be formed.  People in a housing collective are also likely to be working at cooperative ventures and there could be some sort of relationship between the whole, especcially if legal ownership is held by the housing collective rather than by an external landlord.  Taxes still need to be paid, but minimizing the interactions with the capitalist world is generally in the best interests of any collective.

[Garrett Burgwardt]

Until I see evidence of a functioning Anarcho-Capitalist society, I will join them. At the moment, I think the only true way to have liberty is to have it enforced by a minimal government. The defense of one's life is not a market that can be set free, in my eyes. It could function for a bit but the balance can be usurped by one force or be made unstable by many very easily.

I used to think like you, then after a large amount of thinking about it I decided that a complete lack of government would work fine. Free market enforcement of law and such are completely possible

Read some of the articles I've posted if you haven't. Very interesting stuff.

[Anonymous]

Until I see evidence of a functioning Anarcho-Capitalist society, I will join them. At the moment, I think the only true way to have liberty is to have it enforced by a minimal government. The defense of one's life is not a market that can be set free, in my eyes. It could function for a bit but the balance can be usurped by one force or be made unstable by many very easily.

Free market enforcement of law and such are completely possible

At what cost?

Also, I would love to read your articles.

[Garrett Burgwardt]

Well, not articles I wrote - here:

http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig3/long1.html

http://www.daviddfriedman.com/Academic/Iceland/Iceland.html

And at no cost - look at how it's done. An ingenious system, in my opinion

[FatherMcGruder]

I agree that some sort of money helps a lot as far as interacting with other communities.  It can be useful internally as well, or it can just complicate things.

As far as an Anarchist brewery in current society it would be advantageous to form relationships with other workers collectives to source hops and malt and so forth.  Hops are actually really easy to grow and could be incorporated with the brewery itself, barley takes a much larger amount of land, but would be a major expansion of operations and if there were a local agricultural collective that would make things easier.

As far as a housing collective the brewery would be taking in profits in sales that could be distributed to workers they'd have to buy food and clothes and all those fun things after all and as long as the collective is functioning as a part of a capitalist society they need to get those things from capitalist entities.

Forming relationships with other communities is always advantageous though, so, for example, if the agricultural collective that the brewery gets their barley from also grows food crops and perhaps chickens and such a relationship could be formed.  People in a housing collective are also likely to be working at cooperative ventures and there could be some sort of relationship between the whole, especcially if legal ownership is held by the housing collective rather than by an external landlord.  Taxes still need to be paid, but minimizing the interactions with the capitalist world is generally in the best interests of any collective.

Dairy farms can also make use of the spent grain from the brewing process. Cattle will eat it. The spent grain can also be fermented to produce methane fuel, or combined with peanut butter to make dog biscuits.

As for distribution of the brewery's profits, I would think that it would go according to the total amount that each worker will have invested. In addition to their labor, the original workers will have also had to acquire the building and equipment. It seems fair that they should receive more of the profits. Over time, as the brewery grows, the new workers' labor investments will grow larger than the original workers. I think the cooperative would also have to allow for outside investment. For example, if a builders collective builds the building which houses the brewery, their work would count as an investment entitling them to a decreasing share of the brewery's future profits. I don't think such an arrangement would qualify as unduly capitalistic because the profits get distributed according to real contributions. Furthermore, the workers could always refuse or undervalue investments that would otherwise reduce their shares to nothing.

[Babylon]

I agree that some sort of money helps a lot as far as interacting with other communities.  It can be useful internally as well, or it can just complicate things.

As far as an Anarchist brewery in current society it would be advantageous to form relationships with other workers collectives to source hops and malt and so forth.  Hops are actually really easy to grow and could be incorporated with the brewery itself, barley takes a much larger amount of land, but would be a major expansion of operations and if there were a local agricultural collective that would make things easier.

As far as a housing collective the brewery would be taking in profits in sales that could be distributed to workers they'd have to buy food and clothes and all those fun things after all and as long as the collective is functioning as a part of a capitalist society they need to get those things from capitalist entities.

Forming relationships with other communities is always advantageous though, so, for example, if the agricultural collective that the brewery gets their barley from also grows food crops and perhaps chickens and such a relationship could be formed.  People in a housing collective are also likely to be working at cooperative ventures and there could be some sort of relationship between the whole, especcially if legal ownership is held by the housing collective rather than by an external landlord.  Taxes still need to be paid, but minimizing the interactions with the capitalist world is generally in the best interests of any collective.

Dairy farms can also make use of the spent grain from the brewing process. Cattle will eat it. The spent grain can also be fermented to produce methane fuel, or combined with peanut butter to make dog biscuits.

As for distribution of the brewery's profits, I would think that it would go according to the total amount that each worker will have invested. In addition to their labor, the original workers will have also had to acquire the building and equipment. It seems fair that they should receive more of the profits. Over time, as the brewery grows, the new workers' labor investments will grow larger than the original workers. I think the cooperative would also have to allow for outside investment. For example, if a builders collective builds the building which houses the brewery, their work would count as an investment entitling them to a decreasing share of the brewery's future profits. I don't think such an arrangement would qualify as unduly capitalistic because the profits get distributed according to real contributions. Furthermore, the workers could always refuse or undervalue investments that would otherwise reduce their shares to nothing.

So long as contracts which are entered into are agreed upon by all members, and do not include obligation upon those that are not yet a part of the collective when the agreement is entered into.