Anarcho-Communism distribution of wealth


How would a society based on anarcho-communism, or even communism without state, distribute the wealth so people could buy food, leisure products and other varied items. Who would distribute the currency, if there is any currency at all. Would there be banks? Who would manage them?

If everybody has the same equal amount of wealth then it limits liberty, because some things cost more than other things. If not, if somebody has more than another there would arise jealousy and hatred.


Posted 2017-07-24T15:49:28.277

Reputation: 457

1There is no such thing as anarcho-communism, since communists want the implementation of a proletarian dictatorship, anarchists do not want any dictatorship or concentration of power at all. You may be thinking about a) anarcho-socialism b) anarcho-unionism c) the socialist society that is supposed to be implemented when the proletarian dictatorship is obsolete (cf Karl Marx; the dictatorship is in theory not supposed to last forever) – user5751924 – 2017-07-24T15:55:12.640

@user5751924 I refer you to and

– guerrier – 2017-07-24T16:03:27.323

Agree with @user5751924. The practical application of communism on a wide scale requires a very powerful central state to own and order the collective community. Anarchists are by definition against such a powerful state. Maybe you should research pre-1948 kibbutzism, which is kind of a communist/socialist microcosm without an effective national government. – Smith – 2017-07-24T16:06:35.180

@guerrier #toc31 (Chapter 29: Consumption and Exchange) from your first link seems to cover a fair portion of this stuff, what exactly is your question? – None – 2017-07-24T16:14:24.970

@notstoreboughtdirt You're right. My bad. I haven't reached that part. I wanted to short-circuit the answer. – guerrier – 2017-07-24T16:18:44.813

That brand of political thinking is usually referred to as "revolutionary anarcho-socialism": we do a revolution, then build an anarcho-socialist society right away. – user5751924 – 2017-07-24T16:30:24.980

@user5751924 can you point me in the right direction of "revolutionary anarcho-socialism". I don't seem to find it on a search query. Is it by another name? – guerrier – 2017-07-24T16:59:30.207

Anarcho-Socialism != Anarcho communism – SoylentGray – 2017-07-24T17:16:03.903

@user5751924 actually the dictatorship of the proletariat is just meant to be a transitional phase to "true" communism: that this dictatorship, itself, constitutes no more than a transition to the abolition of all classes and to a classless society

– SJuan76 – 2017-07-24T17:17:35.597

2@SJuan76 - With the problem being that the Dictator never feels the time is right to let go of the absolute power. – SoylentGray – 2017-07-24T18:38:57.993

4There is a disconnect with some people believing that communism is a type of government. Communism is a form of economy not government. Anarchy would be the government type with a communist economy meaning that there is no private ownership of anything everything belongs to the community. – SoylentGray – 2017-07-24T18:43:04.023

2@SoylentGray - while you are correct; the reason for that disconnect is because it is not obvious how communism can work with a form of government that's NOT a dictatorship, in practice. No matter what Marx theorized. Only a dictatorship can stop someone from keeping the tools of production they themselves make. Hmmm... now that you mention it, it's something I am curious enough about to ask a question. – user4012 – 2017-07-24T20:14:07.857



Basically it would mirror Communal living that you see in areas like here or here. With the exception that these communities are forced to live within the legal structure of their host states. In a more anarcho-Communism society those limits would not exist so those things that are currently prohibited to these communities, like the cultivation and processing of certian plants, would be up to the community to police.

At the same time each community would be responsible for their own protection. The reason being that just because your society decided in a non violence and aggression policy does not mean that those people who do not subscribe to those policies will not exist. Another thing to consider is that it is possible that people who would prey on those outside of your community could use your community as sanctuary.

These are the points that tend to break down any anarchy based societal group. The reason is these are the points that breed corruption into communism. The need for defense means the need for a leader for that defense organization. The need to discipline leads to the need for a set of rules, but the majority can choose to side step the rules in special cases, which leads an group of "More Equals" which leads the community towards statism and away from the anarchy based society.

Also there is no personal wealth in a communist economy. Everything is shared and needs are provided with excess consumables shared in an as equal as possible basis. Any accumulation of wealth would belong to the community not any individual. This excess would be traded with other communities for items of use to the community. So any wealth, ie something you can accumulate and not have an immediate need for, would stay in the community stores until needed.


Posted 2017-07-24T15:49:28.277

Reputation: 8 282