>
> samathustra writes to margaret:
>
> >D. No states at all. Why have a state?
>
> well hooly dooly, there's a constructive answer that fleshes out some
> positive vision for the future. come on down from the mountain zarathustra
> and tell us a little more, like why NOT have a state? tell us how you plan
> on ordering the distribution of power otherwise?
There's a ton of literature on 'visions for the future'. Check out an issue of the Review of Radical Political Economics called -The Future of Socialism- which is full of semi-utopian blueprints for a socialist future. This literature is valuable for people who say "I agree with you criticisms but what is the alternative?" but other than that, alternatives will be developed more through the struggle againsts capitalism-a process of trial and error- than through intellectual argumentation. There are a lot of faults with this literature but it is worth reading. The new society will be borne out of the struggle against the old. Think of Spain in 1936-7.
As for the state, there are no compelling philosophical reasons, unless you accept Hobbes' many background assumptions, why one should have a state rather than anarchy. People do not refrain from cutting each others throats and destroying public property simply because it is against the law. The reason Jane does not go around stealing and commiting violent acts is not because it is against the law. On a practical level, the way the world is in the here and now, it would probably be a good idea, mostly for economic reasons; to co-ordinate investment, provide incentives/disincentives for production, help with distribution, ensure everyone has decent nutrition, education, housing, transportation and the means to pursue the projects they want to pursue. In short, society today is in no shape to undertake the large scale co-operation that would be required in a stateless socialist society. People today do not have the intelligence, creativity and moral level that the people of Barcelona had in 1937.
Another issue is how long a socialist society can be maintained. Revolutionary enthusiam might, with some people, wear down after awhile and will end up resorting to old bourgeois habits.
Sam Pawlett