Comments on: Refutation is simple

By: Martin Fick

Martin Fick — Mon, 19 Jul 2010 15:48:10 +0000

“A wage slave has to work for a boss under threat of starvation”

No, completely false. The “wage slave” has to work for a boss under the threat of: “doing whatever else he would do to survive if no other man existed”. This is not even close to being a slave. By not admitting the difference, you are weakening the atrocity of slavery. Many anarchists also make this mistake by comparing paying taxes to slavery. This too is a horrible misrepresentation of slavery. Taxes are theft, pure and simple, not slavery. The state does practice slavery for real: conscription and jury duty for starters. But, let’s not mix the terminology for these horrible crimes, it only makes the argument against each weaker, not stronger. It makes it harder to advocate to those who might actually agree with you on every other point except for your misrepresentation of a term!

By: John

John — Sun, 12 Apr 2009 21:45:07 +0000

actually, the slave owner might have used starvation instead of a beating in order to compel the slave to work — though in fact history shows that, just as pet owners do with animals, they mostly used positive reinforcement (in fact southern slaves in, say, 1850 had increased their standard of living , were materially better off than wage laborers and had greater job security– unlike wage slaves, they actually had intrinsic value). Of course, we have a very bloody labor history, and capitalists use the deadly violence of the state or private thugs to prevent workers from self managing their workplaces without bosses (i.e. being free). In any case, whether or not starving is as natural as a beating is irrelevant here. It is a question of subordination and lack of freedom at the workplace. Imagine that I can compel you to work for a boss under the threat of giving you a deadly disease. That is very different than a situation where I must ( e.g. as a hunter gatherer) work, say collecting a certain medicinal plant, to prevent that disease. The disease in both cases is, in some sense “natural” — just as starvation (though in fact there is no law of nature that says that bosses must make you work for them under threat of disease or starvation) But that is irrelevant to what I’m discussing– Namely, the dictatorial nature of wage slavery and the capitalist workplace, which people are subject to whether or not they can actually switch bosses. The only reason why they “offer up their services” has to do with the threat of “work for a boss or else” which is “voluntary” in the same twisted sense that a person who can only choose between getting hit with a hammer or a stick “voluntarily” chooses his stick — it is a coercive and involuntary set of choices

By: Kel

Kel — Sat, 11 Apr 2009 20:21:04 +0000

@John:

But to make that comparison, you have to say that starving – a naturally occurring phenomenon if you do not produce stuff in order to consume – is exactly equivalent to being beaten, which is violence from one man used against the other. I contend that they are not equal.

I do not endorse the use of violence, and thus I abhor chattel slavery. However, a “wage-slave” offers up his services for payment, hopefully without the threat of violent enforcement. I know that if my boss began to threaten beatings because he did not think I was being productive enough, I would begin searching for another job.

By: John

John — Sat, 11 Apr 2009 18:22:50 +0000

we see it as a question of subordination. Imagine you were to argue in favor of chattel slavery on the grounds that “working the land to eat and be sheltered is not so different from working for another man”. A chattel slave has to work for a boss under threat of beating. A wage slave has to work for a boss under threat of starvation. Watch both videos refuting the 20 myths and you will see all other rationalizations for wage slavery refuted

By: kerrjac

kerrjac — Fri, 27 Mar 2009 01:49:29 +0000

It’s organic.

By: Azrael

Azrael — Mon, 23 Mar 2009 20:49:38 +0000

Nature is more dependable to work with then man lol. The only real way to solve this problem is to have multiple anti-state experiments play out and see which one works out the best.