[BobbyO]

Quote by: grandpa Actually, Chomsky didn't appear in that clip. The point isn't even entirely about efficiency (although I would argue that deprivation and hogging of resources is not a true application efficiency, let alone firect democratic ideas). I haven't been totally indifferent to solutions. The solution is simple: Get rid of the authority titles and organize in an egalitarian manner. Again, your points assume that the incentive for plumbing would instantly disappear if money did. You've just redefined human beings as incapable of performing tasks and retaining basic knowledge without money. But people needn't be perpetual children, nor are they. You fail to consider how people are literally compelled to be motivated by money, for they are not supposed to survive unless they have it. Obviously, that's a motivator. Exploitation and the domination is guaranteed to breed reliance when the only other option seems to be being a total outcast from social and economic life. And any society set up in this way is obviously going to cause problems. As an alternative, consider Anarchists in the 1936 Spanish Civil War, which had in its name egalitarianism: YouTube - Anarchists in the 1936 Spanish Civil War It wasn't perfect, but whatever is? Also, not all the Spanish anarchists totally eliminated the money idea, but that's not the main point. They wanted to basiacally do things for their own sake. Just as pertinent is the practicality of not demanding that "someone else do chores for me." Well, these questions have obvious answers. Yes, proximity is very important, and an individual with plumbing experience could certainly want to focus more on plumbing emergencies--especially ones closer to him/her. If you don't want plumbing, that's your prerogative. If anything, though, most people would go in the other direction. They would want to know more about mechanical skills, especially in an independent fashion. I wouldn't say there is no use for some level of required status or qualification in certain types of work (for example, a doctor or an airplane pilot), but, even then it still comes down to knowledge and skills, without which Not all is working correctly with capitalism, as you suggest. For example, there truly are auto mechanics who fix some parts to vehicles and sabotage others, or hospitals which don't treat patients with care. And there are companies who will fix water systems, only to come back and deprive them of water if the bill isn't paid in full (I've seen it happen). I would hardly call depriving people of resources the best, most rational and fairest way to organize society. In fact, it's indefensible. You haven't provided an argument for it, you just assume that because people can survive by following economic rules that these rules must be benign. They are not. They are grounded in inequality, in elitism, in distrust--and it follows quite naturally that we'd see all kinds of problems come out of this. People can still survive through basic solidarity under these conditions. But people have lived under all kinds of conditions and worked and survived. It doesn't mean an authoritarian archetype is the best people can do. Seeing as to how you dismissed Chomsky's views, here is a much better, much more in-depth take on what anarchism could be like: Part one 1974 Anarchism interview with Chomsky p.1 - Google Video Part two 1974 Anarchism interview with Chomsky p.2 - Google Video Grandpa h.

Why would people want to know more about technical skills as an aside from their regular jobs more so than today? If anything why would not the opposite be true, considerig that in your ideal situation there is no "cost" for a person to utilised a trained professional as opposed to using one's own limited knowledge?

As you yourself has said, no system is perfect. and there is no reason to suppose that one would not encounter shoddy service in an anarchial community. I would suggest the odds are greater there would be shoddier in such a community, as you have not described how goods and services will be allocated (I am not talking about here about some sort of council casting otes. In order to do make such decisions, there needs to be an underlying knowledge. What is that knowledge?)

In the capitalist community, prices and money is how allocation is determined. Its the knowledge used. So far, all you have said is that people will "want" to to do certain things. I am sure they will, but even so, a person cannot do everything at once.

So resources are always limited. So there needs to be fways to allocate those limited resources. And those ways ought to be fair and impartial.

The Spanish Civil War example always seems a flawed example. Because that example is in a situation where the workers HAD to work in a certain way, to make certain decisions. It was a certain motivation.
But hopefully warfare is not the expected nom for an anarchist community, so using it as an example does not seem quite right.