Can society develop without a competitive system?

Excerpt from: Klaus Schmitt: Silvio Gesell - "Marx" the anarchists ?;
Karin Kramer Verlag; Berlin; 1989; ISBN 3-87956-165-6

15. Market economy liberated from capitalism - an anarcho-physiocratic basis for
communist communities and free associations?

"Take away the competition ... and that of your instincts
deprived of strength society will stand like a clock-
stay whose pen has run out. "
"Nature made people sociable."
P. J. Proudhon
Of course, you can also use Gesells' natural economic
order "does not solve all the economic and social problems in the world.
However, after we know Gesell's free-land-free money doctrine-
have learned to be unlikely to be doubtful that his concept is one
Market economy without capitalism and without feudal relics of capitalism
stisch-feudalist-patriarchal system goes to its roots that
it could kill two central institutions of the system:
the interest-extorting money and the private property of land and land
the. With their money, interest and business cycle theory and their shrinkage
money concept could evidently be an essential part of Gesell's free money theory
Contribution to overcoming exploitation, sales crises and unemployment
efficiency and to reduce the concentration of capital and growth
pressure. And with its matricial land law concept, it can
his outdoor teaching undoubtedly essential to the liberation of mothers
and children of material dependency and thus also of patriarchal
lic social structures. Lots of other problems like that of the
Hierarchy and rule in the company or that of the power and violence of the
State in society must be resolved by other means.

However, we must not take the one-sided position that
some autonomists argue that what matters first and foremost is that
to fight the ruling system and not to create utopias for a new
to develop society. (233) I think that both are equally important. We
must take note of what history teaches: that without the
solving central socio-economic problems, every emancipatory and
social revolutionary movement is doomed to failure. We must
understand that economy, society and politics are inseparable.
The solution to central socio-economic problems is necessary
Prerequisite for the solution of many other social, political and ecological
nomic problems. So is z. B. overcoming the feudalist
Land rights an important prerequisite for overcoming social and
political problems in the Third World or overcoming conflicts
economic crises the prerequisite for overcoming structural crises
and unemployment in industrial societies.

In order to be able to solve socio-economic problems, not only revolutionary
lutionary power struggles, but equally well-founded economic analyzes
and solid alternative economic concepts are necessary.
Because without a stable floor and without a clearly thought-out one
The best builder cannot design a stable and habitable one
Build house. But to do this, neither the handle in the moth box provides us
the Marxist, nor the surrender to the liberalist economic
ideology, neither André Gorz's "plan" economy nor the market
economy of the eco "libertarian", the necessary tools. There the Re-
through the roof, the walls wobble here.

We don't want to renovate the old, rotten house, the "capitalist
mus modernize ", as demanded by a Berlin AL parliamentary group. (How et-
wa in Thatchers England or Reagens USA? This is supposed to be a joke
be!). (233a) The eco "libertarians" only want to repaint the facade. you
accept interest and pension, are therefore not in the interest and pension
hostile tradition of the anarchists, so operate fraudulent labeling
with the anarchist term libertarian. They are nothing but libera-
le from left FDPler. (234)

We want to blow up this prison. Yet Marxism is not
the dynamite that brings down his walls, he is one himself
Ideology of the penitentiary. While capitalism still does
Misery of interest bondage with material wealth and love
market economy, unites its Marxist age
native, the "real existing socialism", the misery of the interest servants
with the chaos, poverty and dictatorship of the state economy
shaft.

The liberalist-private capitalist like its counterpart; the Marxist
State capitalist economic ideology have historically become obsolete, they
both belong on the dung heap of history.

Also the "guaranteed" propagated by supporters of both ideologies
Minimum income "for all or for all unemployed people is not a very
ginelle idea that could show "ways to paradise" (Gorz). Already the
Rulers in ancient Rome had the
driven and for generations unemployed proletarians bread and games
le as a "guaranteed minimum income" from the reservoir of the
depressed, plundered and to the delight of the mob in the arenas
butchered races of the empire missed to it on whim and on
to the side of the imperialist-patriarchal slave-holding state
hold. (235) The guaranteed minimum income is merely the relocation
solution of supposedly left-wing political activists who are incapable
are coping with the current crisis. The eco "libertarian"
Gerhardt and Weber openly admit this when they
act on the minimum income in a chapter heading pro
grammatically demand: we have to "understand the crisis and read with it
ben ". (236)

This cynicism leads, as the "Karlsruher Stadtzeitung" (237) rightly claims
notes, to an "Indian reservation" for life to unemployment
condemned people and to split the working class into privilege
greedy job holders and an army of unemployed, the
from the producers, which are becoming less and less due to automation
would have to be endured. The latter then not only have interest rate parasites,
Subsidy recipients, armaments costs, etc., but also one more
Fund growing subculture. Unlike the CDU (!) - Mann Wolf-
ram Engels (238) and C. H. Douglas (238a) come the eco "libertarian" yet
not even the idea of ​​at least trying that
Fund guaranteed minimum income from interest. Gorz can
we at least credit that he developed a program that
does not completely exclude a part of the citizens from the production process:
only those who
can prove a certain number of hours worked. (239)
This would not turn the company into privileged owners of an
job and the long-term unemployed are divided.

Not just conservatives like the anthropologist Arnold Gehlen, but
Marx and Engels, too, see man primarily as a working man
Essence defined. With all the problems of alienated work and without
to give the floor to the conservative and socialist work ethic
want, it must be seen that the meaning of human work above all else
that is to enable the individual to make a living with
by means of their own productive performance.

A system that doomed young people to ever live in
able to make a living by doing their own work
to acquire, and instead makes them dependent on state alms
consequently an inhuman system. The requirement for the guaranteed
The lowest minimum income is the declaration of bankruptcy of the left and alternative
tive scene.

I mean that with the help of the social free economy
more humane, emancipatory demands sufficient perspectives
develop: an economic and social order that
anyone who is capable of work anywhere and anytime productive gainful
provides opportunities with working hours that he and she determine
men (permanently crisis-free full business management with the greatest possible
Freedom of movement); the income corresponds to the individual or collective
tive services and is not caused by exploitation mechanisms in business
shortened society and society ("full income from work", (56) "exchange
justice "); all those who are unable to work and through no fault of their own
have no income (such as children, young people, the elderly, the sick) receive a
ne pension corresponding to the average of all incomes from social
insurance contributions or from the land rent (synthesis of benefit
and socially fair income distribution on the basis of a performance
able and materially rich economics). In this system,
the incapable of working live decently and those able to work
through self-determination of working hours and through their own work management
their income level according to their personal needs.
design, possibly limited by ecological requirements.
That would be the ideal aimed at by the Marxists and Communists
"each according to his abilities, each according to his needs",
ties in with the socialist principle · "everyone according to their achievements",
optimally realized in a realistic way.

On the dialectic of competition and cooperation A problem that the situation is as witty as Raoul Vaneigen
rightly targets, (240), however, society's capitalist
The free market economy has not been put out of the world: the relationship between goods
nis as an interpersonal relationship in the economic field.
Nor is the competitive relationship between producers in the market.
However, since the market economy (even if that is the "plan" fetishist
Gorz considers "nonsense" (241)) to be the most informal and the most informal
The best satisfactory control system of the individual's needs
Economics has proven, we'll probably spend a little longer with us
have to put up with her. The only alternative to the
Market economy, the state-controlled central administration economy,
has failed and thus empirically refuted.

It is true what some claim: Marx is botch. Emancipation
let's finally renounce his state and planned economy ideology! If
we build a house, then we don't look for an architect,
whom we know designs houses, cold, expensive, collapsing
Shacks are. Let us get suggestions from other "architects
ten ", we make our own designs!

Since the "realm of freedom" (Marx), in which spontaneous
exchange instead of rational bartering could develop, not without that
"Realm of necessity" can be realized, and since the "realm of
Freedom "- spontaneity, self-administration etc. - even only in
to a limited extent in the "realm of necessity", should-
if we reasonably (in the sense of the late Marx (242) and Herbert Mar-
cuses) the "realm of necessity" to a minimum of time
restrict: i.e. shortening of working hours. However, this is only partially
stable, crisis-proof and income-fair market economy
possible without growth constraints. That is where the problems would be
the relationship of goods, competition and even that of the company
Put the human hierarchy into perspective and make it easier to cope with.

The market economy is in any case a competitive system,
but without competition, the individual companies degenerate like the general
entire economy in mischief, incompetence, inability, inability
economy and corruption. Many Marxists also seem to
to gradually emancipate from their communist idealism. To the
Example Ying Roucheng, Chinese Deputy Minister of Culture:
"I'm afraid it's human nature that people oh-
ne competition with others tend to get lazy. Regardless of all
the beautiful things we talk about: fatherland, socialism, neighbor
love etc "(243)

In addition, the market economy and competition
do not work out and mutual aid; teamwork, comrades
unions and professional associations countless examples.

Furthermore, we should consider that there is also a change in nature
competition and cooperation exist and that this is essential
contributed to evolution. This contrast between competition in the
ne Tuckers and "mutual help" in the sense of Kropotkins is evidently a
ne useful, development and life processes driving natural
legality that we apply in the physics, chemistry and biology of the whole
Find cosmos. The natural scientists Carsten Bresch and Her-
Mann Haken have impressively demonstrated this in their works. (244)

After all, natural competition does not consist of one another
Cutthroat, as many seem to believe; this behavior is
rather a specific product of alienated human "high" cultural
ren, especially of crisis-ridden capitalism. The natural
Rather, competition takes place in such a way that individuals, groups
and species that are particularly intelligent, cooperative and show solidarity,
survive more successfully in nature and therefore multiply and
spread than other individuals and populations. The natural competition
So competition is not a bloody competition like vulgar Darwinists
claim but a milder competition. And he has - so absurd that
may sound - contributed quite significantly to the fact that Homo sapiens
develops into a being with social dispositions and needs
has the biological-psychological prerequisites for cooperation
and solidarity and thus for the formation of communities. (245)

In a similar way, a competitive economy could also
contribute to the development of human culture - certainly also in
Direction towards more cooperation and solidarity. The prerequisite is all
thing that the current economy, which is just not performance, but
economic privileges are rewarded, eliminated and, through a genuinely benevolent
An efficient economic system is replaced. In a really sad
A healthy economy would, as in nature, be precisely those
genes "survive" in competition, which are also "performance" from a social point of view
provide: who behave in solidarity and cooperative! The fight up
on the knife is a manifestation of the capitalist crisis economy.

Market economy as a system of self-organization The market existed long before capitalism and without a market
it doesn't work under socialism either, said the former GDR-
Economic functionary Prof. Harry Mayer in a television program about the
Reforms in the Soviet Union. This insight into indispensability
Market mechanisms seem to apply not only to high functionaries in the
"real existing socialism", (246) but also in left circles here
to enforce more and more in the country. (246a) Only here as there is a capital
talistic market economy propagated and practiced. The dividend
Communism in Red China (see Chapter 12) and the high interest debt
the People's Republic of Poland with Western banks (see Chapter 2) are only two
Examples of capitalism in socialism.

At an event organized by the eco "libertarian" in Berlin in 1984,
te the "realo" Daniel Cohn-Bendit that we absolutely have one
- need a market economy in which collectives establish themselves and
others would have to compete; the members of the collective should
however, they all receive the same wages. The only astonishing thing is that these-
This leader of the anti-capitalist Paris May Revolution of 1968 won the
The problem of interest is completely ignored in the market economy.

Also the market economy ideas of the eco "libertarian"
are an example of capitalism-friendly ideology in the alternative
scene. Even market-affirming neo-anarchists come across a general
nes commitment to the market economy. So z. B. in one
Article of the respectable economy special issue of the Graswurzelrevo-
lution the market accepts, but completely ignores the interest rate problem. The
most important classics of anarchist economics, Proudhon, have their
The editor apparently forgot that Gesell's importance for an anarchist
alternative to the liberal and Marxist economy
knows. (247)

The anarchist Gustav Landauer was there three quarters ago
Century went a decisive step further when he (under
Reference to Gesell's doctrine of free money in his call to socialism; s.
Text 4) for his "republic of republics" a market economy without
Capitalism demanded. Landauer tried, presumably, without himself
to be aware of this, the "natural dialectics" (Engels) of cooperation
and to insert competition into his conceptions of socialism
to make these usable for socialism - a physiocratic posi-
tion!

If Landauer sees this socialism as a republic more autonomous,
self-determined and cooperating communities
thinks, then he builds it beyond that on the basis of someone else
"anarchist" natural law: on the principle of self-organization
tion and self-control of autonomous physical, chemical and biological
gical units and complex structures. These, too, in atoms, mole-
cells, animals, plants, biotopes, societies, galaxies in
natural laws that appear are disregarded
described in detail. (248) The natural scientist Carl Sagan designated
the individual cell of our body as "a kind of commune" that is autonomous
cooperates with other autonomous cells of this body and on them
This highly complex and highly differentiated human body
kept organized and functional - without a hierarchical
control system with a central unit that controls everything. (249) The
Actions and interactions of the hundreds of thousands of individuals of one
Tribe of ants, termites or bees are not
of a "queen", but rather through the cooperation of the individual ex-
emplare controlled. Dominance and central control are in nature
relatively rare occurrences.

Just like the dialectic of competition and cooperation, is
self-organization and self-control are also a principle of nature,
which is decisive for the evolution of the cosmos and life and the
plex animal and human societies. Her-
Mann Haken calls these anarchist laws of nature the
consequential secrets of nature ".

In a similar naturalistic or, if we will, "anarcho-phy-
siocratic "level (" physiocratic "in the sense of natural) argu-
basically also mention Proudhon, Tucker and many other
more anarchists when they control the self-regulation mechanism of the
Want to harness the market economy for a libertarian economy.
The market economy is also one of those cybernetic systems like them
everywhere in nature, in the interactions of animal societies and in the
non-dominant cultures of indigenous peoples can be found: cybernetics im
Sense of self-organization of nature and society through self-
control of their cooperating and competing autonomous parts.
Only in hierarchical patriarchy, in monopoly capitalist
Economy and in the centralized state and state communism becomes
self-regulation of the economy and self-organization "associate
ter "individuals oppressed and by paternalism and violent
Interventions and control measures from "above" replaced. (249a)

Without insight into this modern scientific knowledge
In their demands for decentralized
len and domination-free social structures, according to autonomy,
Self-organization, competition and cooperation between the individual
like their free associations and according to hierarchy-free self-control
economy and society spontaneously these natural laws
want to restore - Landauer in the form of his republic autono-
mer communities related to Gesells Freiwirtschaft.

A "natural" economic order? Since the economic system is very much a wealth and character
Society and the opportunities for development of its individuals
true, the question to be asked is which form of economy is general
People's prosperity, social justice and personal freedom are most important
First serves: the private capitalist market economy of the liberals? The
state-centralist and ultimately also capitalist "plan" -
economy of the Marxist communists? A mixture of both
Ill? The democratic socialist propagated
centralistic "plan" economy based on state capitalism?
The decentralized collectivist planned economy in the sense of the
Anarcho-communists and anarcho-syndicalists? One from the state and
Capital-free market economy with individually and collectively organized
ten enterprises in the sense of the individual and social anarchists?
Or what else?

Gesell rejects the centrally controlled state economy just as decidedly
off like the capitalist-monopoly private economy. He is all-
but also skeptical of all other forms of public
community, especially those of communist community of property with equal
cher wages. He says: "The larger the community (commune),
the greater the watering down, the weaker the instinct to preserve
contribute to the community through work. Anyone who works with a comrade
is less persistent than the one who works the fruit of the labor
enjoy working alone. If there are 10-100-1000 comrades, then one can
working drive also divide by 10-100-1000; should the whole human
If you divide this into the result, then everyone says to themselves: it depends on my work
it is no longer at all, it is what a drop is for the sea. Then
does the work no longer take place in an instinctual manner; external compulsion becomes
necessary! "(250)

Gesell's assessment may be overly pessimistic. Collectives
Cooperation can be economically beneficial. she can
have a stimulating effect, at least in small groups, and do a lot of work
can only be dealt with collectively. It can also work together
Making fun, which, however, is often less economical
Success must be paid for. On the other hand, the low economic
efficiency and state coercion in the "real existing social
mus "that Gesell's assessment of anonymous and
agreed large collectives is well founded. Due to more realistic
He gives an assessment of human nature to the
restrictions handicapped self-management with initiative and individual
dual remuneration for individual performance takes precedence over the combined
communist or even state-centralized economic system.

This does not mean, however, that he treats people exclusively as their own
useful or even selfish "Homo oeconomicus" sees. He understands
man as a social being, which he, among other things. with its utopia
acratic-physiocratic women's communities in its dismantled
State occupied (see Chapter 9 and Text 7). However, it separates (certainly not unproblematic-
matically (250a)) the economic of all other social ones
Areas. So that the individuals as "total people" (Marx) in
all of their abilities and possibilities, including their social
can fold, be a functioning, crisis-free economy without
Exploitation an indispensable requirement; however, they are not allowed to
or communist moral claims and ideologies
become. There was companion - in contrast to the Christian and communal
nistic idealists with their exaggerated negative or positive people
schenbild - a consistent materialist and realist and an opponent
any manipulation of individuals through education, morals and physical
coercion. In his opinion, a society as a whole functions
ches economic system only if it is based on the "natural egoism" of the
builds individual individuals as the engine of production. An economic
order that uses this self-serving striving of people and the
able producers and not the unproductive money-lending
forth, landowners and other parasites enriched, is - because they
in the opinion of Gesell corresponds to the nature of man - a "natural
economic order ". A system of competition without interest, tariffs,
Monopolies, subsidies and other privileges are optimally productive
and would also give people the material means of satisfaction
in the hands of charitable and altruistic needs. (251)

"Natural" (physiocratic) is an economic order that (through
conscious human action) "adapted to human nature
is ". (252) Its most important measure is the welfare of the people. In this
Senses and as if Gesell had our people today 70 years ago
and divine nature-destroying industrial and growth problems,
he wrote in 1918 in the foreword of the 3rd edition of the Natural Economic Regulations
tion: "Where people thrive best, the host is also
social order should be the most natural. Whether one proves itself in this sense
rende economic order is at the same time the most technically efficient and
delivers maximum numbers to the investigation office is a question of inferior order
tion. One can imagine an economic order today that
technically high performance, but overexploitation of humans
is driven. One can always assume blindly that an order
in which people thrive, also with regard to productivity
must prove itself as the better. (...) 'Man is the measure of all
Things', therefore also the measure of its economy. "(253)

This statement stands out pleasantly from the growth and industrial
lization fetishism of the Leninists in "real socialism", the capital
Talvertreter in this country and the "development" politician in the Third
World. Today the Physiocrat Gesell would certainly also include nature.
draw as a yardstick for a correct economic policy.

Non-capitalist market economy and small group communism Despite his skepticism towards collectives and municipalities and especially
because of his pronounced individualism, Gesell didn't want anyone
prevent them from conducting communist experiments. For Robert
Anton Wilson is Gesell mainly because of this "the only utopian ecological
nom, whom I ever liked "because he is also the competition of ideas and ex-
has demanded experiments and expose his own to this competition
wanted. (254) This includes communist production and consumption
communities in this competition. However, the Mei-
suggestion that the introduction of communities of property and collective
The economy is a relapse into the primeval communism of prehistoric times
was motivated by self-interest and individual initiative
and have overcome controlled monetary and "own economy". This is
historical progress, whoever represents it is a leftist; who goes-
want to reproduce communism is backward and political
table on the far right. (255)

This thesis is certainly correct to the extent that the market and money economists
the individual individuals from the dependencies and ties
of the primeval communist collectives. Money and self-economy
can mean individual liberation and autonomy for everyone
- provided certain monopolies in the money and market economy
do not cause other social and economic dependencies
ten. But this is what Gesell wants with its free-range and free-money program
yes overcome. However, the individualist Gesell pays too little attention to ours
prehistoric, natural history inheritance from the early communist
between hordes and clans. These communities have our social ones
Plants shaped over millions of years: we are, so to speak, genetic
programmed for primeval communism. Like Engels, man is correct
says, not just a "social" one that has become a cultural
a rational cultural being, but also a natural
denes emotionally "sociable" nature being. (256) "Sociability", however, is a
vital need, whose sociobiological purpose, among others. the pleasurable
cooperation is. This can take place in egalitarian, communist
unfold more with relish than in the self-employed
labor organizations that are used in modern industrial and
organization rationally and hierarchically and relatively un-
are sociable. However, we do not only bring original communist influences
and needs, but also many primary, highest individual needs
and countless secondary and tertiary, social
coined needs and interests that can only be found beyond
develop agile adaptations and subordination in collectives
and can realize. Marx's claim that the human individual
to unfold as a non-alienated, "total being", Kol-
lective as well as out, can only be seen as a dialectical interplay in
to be understood by society. The primary task of a new one
So it has to be economy, the material basis for development
of all (legitimate) human needs and interests in society
to provide society, and this also includes primitive communist ones. The
Development and satisfaction of natural social dispositions and needs
Nisse certainly corresponds to Gesell's physiocratic claims, too
when they want to become a reality in the economic field.
But other individual needs and interests also have to be
Train can come.

Max Stirner, to whom Gesell likes to refer, goes accordingly
about the claim to community in the sense of a natural bond,
like we did in the primitive communist tribal cultures and similar
found in family life today. He also sets himself apart from her,
like a society bound by ideology, belief, "fixed idea".
As an alternative, he posits the union of both, more consciously, more autonomously
self-sufficient and therefore self-determined individuals in free agreement
future and agreement for the purpose of realizing their own, that is
to "selfish" (society) interests and needs. (257) This
"Selfish" interests and needs can, however, be vital
be of a social nature, e.g. B. when it comes to the satisfaction of the erotic
the need for loving attention to other people
is possible (see Chapter 9). Eros (in the sense of love), millions of years on small
groups of one to two dozen people, works safely
fairly smoothly in collectives of this size, for
Realization of an anonymous, centralized and externally determined
Large and mass communism is likely to have the social, erotic and hilarious
In the long run, however, the munistic nature of people is hardly sufficient. Al-
at best it allows itself to be abandoned by nationalists, racists, fascists and religious
sen fanatics for their inhuman purposes in terms of mass psychology
abuse. Gesell's free economy, on the other hand, could well be seen as an eco-
Landauer's socialism is based on the small, auto-
nomen communities, for manageable communities and for associations
in the sense of Stirner. Because not the hierarchical-authoritarian, office
kratisch-centralist "plan" - and state economy, which also still the
Private capital, but the decentralized and self-organized, interest-based
and monopoly-free market economy makes small, self-initiated and
self-governing economic collectives are only possible and at the same time
tig (see Chapter 12) self-governed exploitation. Such, from the
A market economy freed from capitalism would become today's production and
Provide consumption communities with a similar space for action,
which in prehistoric and early historical times the natural environment
munist-anarchist hordes and clans made available
and in which people would act similarly: within
of the small groups ("primordial horde"), cooperation prevails, within the
large framework of the national and global economy (substitute for the natural
human biotope), production and distribution are milder
controlling competition between domestic and collective
Ventures before. This includes (as in tribal cultures) cooperation
ration also between the individual, autonomous enterprises (such as
among the clans, clans and tribes) does not start from the outset. The
Market and an interest-free and stable value delivery medium of exchange, however
(instead of the natural laws of the biotope) the indispensable economic
standards for economic activities - including cooperative
ration. (258)

"The market," comments economics professor Aleksander Bajk
Situation in Yugoslavia, "is the essential element of self-management
system, but that has been completely forgotten. "(258a)
fen Mr. Bajk and his comrades forget that there is a market
must be without "added value", without interest!

Certainly a non-capitalist market economy does not regulate either
everything automatically and perfectly for the benefit of everyone and nature. So can
z. B. not without intervening in the market, the contrast between the inter-
eat the unrestricted use of the car and the continued existence of the
Solve forests. On the voluntary renunciation of all individuals on the individual
we cannot hope for dual traffic. Market mechanisms can, however
be used for conflict resolution, e.g. B., in which the prices of those product
ts that damage the environment are heavily taxed. So
would already place a burden on gasoline prices with the societal
Driving costs of car traffic up to 4 to 5 DM per liter. (259)
That would - also in the sense of market economy intentions - lead to a
significant restriction of the environmentally harmful and uneconomical
individual traffic and lead to greater fairness of exchange: the
Motorists would no longer be at the expense of other road users
be subsidized. (259a)

But also do's and don'ts, especially as ecological
Control instruments, cannot be ruled out entirely. Completely without
social interventions in the market, as Keynes likes in his
Criticism of the radical liberals may be correct today
no longer go, but that is a third-tier question. (Exchange and Inter
Venture socialism is not, as Noebe thinks, necessarily in the
contradiction to one another, but both are in contradiction to the
socialism). With the use of market mechanisms, everyone can
if more than with state or "democratic" planning,
possibly up to the production and distribution of each trouser button.
When, where, which and how many trouser buttons are needed, that can
no one and nothing can find out better than the market than its law
of supply and demand. The market mechanisms make centralized
and administrative interventions to a large extent, if not at all,
superfluous.

70 years of state and centrally controlled "planned" economy are enough.
With its bureaucratic bad planning, sloppiness, un-
economic efficiency and its GAU in Chernobyl 1986 exactly what
Marx to the market economy with the accusation of economic anarchy
wants to hang: chaos. In addition, she has - because of the interest servant-
in western finance capital - not even in terms of surplus value
freed. And finally it is certainly not "anarchic", that is, domination
free. The state is not "dead", it is more powerful than in any other-
society and was used in the Soviet Union as a tool by Lenin, defiant
kis and Stalin, just as in Germany in the hands of Hitler, many mil-
lions murdered. State and state economy bring about that
highest degree of alienation.

But even "democratic" overall planning is not only inhospitable
socially, but also democratically: it is popular rule. More-
decisions in macroeconomics easily lead to disadvantages
meet the special needs of minorities.

The best "grassroots democracy", more precisely: individual-anarchist
Planning is the market economy via the "ballot" money - before-
exposed, not the finance capitalists, landowners, economic
monopolists, speculators, etc, but the producers have them
this ballot. Then each individual product decides as a consumer
duzent over the control of the production, investment and distribution in
of the national economy, much better than any civil servant bureaucrat or elected
te official. The individual companies take care of the planning in the company.
mer and economic collectives in autonomous individual or collective
ver self-determination, also better than state bureaucrats or radio
nationals.

Given the global failure of both liberal and
of Marxist economic theory, we will look for new ideas
have to look around. They are there. "Johannsen, Foster and Cat-
chings, Hobson, and Gesell all have brilliant ideas feasible today.
blows, but they fell on deaf ears, "writes the landlord-
Economist Lawrence R. Klein in "The Keynesian Revolution".
"It is to be hoped that in the future economists will be sympathetic to those
who have a great economic intention. "(260)

I would say we shouldn't pass this over to the mainstream economists.
to let. We ourselves should give them and the many others whom I
already some like Douglas and Damaschke have named (261) in the future
Encounter sympathy and use their intentions for our purposes. There-
at should Gesell, of whom Keynes says that the future is more of him than
would learn from Marx deserve special attention - especially in
anarchist circles.

Gesell continued Proudhon's attempt to use the model of an "acra-
tables "(domination-free) and" mutualistic "(exchangeable)
To develop economic order, and his monetary theory had in the
Practice even to show success. He also has a mother and child
developed a friendly land reform program that
sayings of all other land reformers goes far. These are contributions
ge to the economic and social utopia that could be expanded.

I am convinced that this nameless mouse breeder is me
Pinneberg is currently doing Gesell's free land free money apprenticeship with one of them
"Smart" (Suhr) as current theory has only made known that
thanks to a small, indefatigable minority, which also includes my mouse
heard from the dealer, has not been forgotten. That he got me with this
has infected the ineradicable bacillus of the "anarcho-physiocracy"
At this point I mean late, but all the more emphatic
Express thanks! (262)



This page was brought into the net by: W. Roehrig.
Further dissemination expressly desired.