Mike Ballard:
> > CB: Anarchy of production is definitely a crazy and stupid
> > idea. Getting rid of the state is not.
>
>
> And replacing it with what exactly?
>
> Wojtek
>
> ***************
>
> Sorry to intervene, but how about a classless governement, a class based
> government being the essence of a State?
>
> I always liked this take:
>
> Socialism will be a society in which the things we need to live, work and
> control our own lives--the industries, services and natural resources--are
> collectively owned by all the people, and in which the democratic
organization > of the people within the industries and services is the
government. Socialism
> means that government of the people, for the people and by the people will
> become a reality for the first time.
>
This sounds like a state to me - and an extensive one.
^^^^^ CB: It should. In socialism , there is still a state. See _The State and Revolution_ . The state doesn't whither away until the second phase. The socialist state cannot whither away until there are no more capitalist states. The socialist state is the state of the working class as the ruling class.
^^^^^
The question is how to facilitate the practical, real communication between producers and consumers. Without a financial system, how do you do that?
Boddi
^^^^^ CB: You have a system by which you keep track of costs of production. That will require symbols, writing, markers , counting and accounting, numbers, but not private ownership of finance companies that make loans ,collect interest and make profits. You keep accounts and measure population so that all 6 billion plus people have food, housing, soap, fun, clothing, air, water, half have cotexes, etc.