by Ebony Bandera Mon Dec 21, 2009 22:57

If you and like-minded individuals wish to establish a commune based on practicing "from each...to each..." I for one wish you well and hope for your success. I would not wish to be a part of your commune, however. The only possible conflict here is if either you or I attempted to force the other to live in a way not freely chosen.

by José Antonio Gutiérrez D. Tue Dec 22, 2009 04:21

Yes, the internal organisation of the Kibbutzim is in harmony with the libertarian communist principle of "from each according to their ability, etc.", but I don't know if its general philosophy is. I mean, building "libertarian communist" communes in land whose original inhabitants were displaced through naked terrorism and through sheer violence is an idea that gives me the shivers to be honest with you. I don't know if libertarian communism can be built upon the oppression of others, or upon ethnic cleansing, or upon any comparable practice. This holds true for Israel as for anywhere else. I don't know if the principles of "equality and solidarity" have any meaning when they apply only to a certain type of people (while the others get injustice, poverty, hunger, bullets, white phosphorus, etc.). As Bakunin says, you are not free unless anyone around you is equally free -the freedom of the others is the necessary condition for your own freedom!

by Nestor McNab Tue Dec 22, 2009 15:47

José Antonio, I think the point Ilan is trying to make with this brief article, is that the notion of communist economics (contained in the "equality & solidarity" part of the libertarian/anarchist communist motto "liberty, equality & solidarity") is not so difficult for people to accept. Even Israeli ex-government ministers can accept it. Obviously however, from our point of view the most important part of the equation is missing: "liberty", and Ilan is certainly not trying to say that the Israeli kibbutzim he mentions are anarchist societies.

by José Antonio Gutiérrez D. Tue Dec 22, 2009 19:26

Sure Nestor, and I appreciate this, as he stated that they have not break with the Zionist setller colonialist project. I was not intending to have an argument really... All I'm doing is emphasizing something I am sure Ilan agrees with but that does not appear clearly in the article -that is that anarchism cannot flourish in occupied territory in any form. Though he does not say that the Kibbutzim are anarchists societies, the title may be a bit confusing as it talks about "Libertarian Communism".

by Ilan Shalif - AAtW; ainfos; Matzpen; Wed Dec 23, 2009 00:37 Tel Aviv

The context of my short text was to refute an egoistic aspect of the capitalist ideology few antiauthoritarians tend to accept.

The specific point is the so called essential personal economic gain for efforts/work done by individuals.

Scientific finding that show intrinsic trends of human to prefer cooperation over competition do not get wide publicity.

Zionist settler colonialist project is a kind of big laboratory of community organization.

All along the years national socialists, pro-capitalist, and even fascists groups adopted internal libertarian communist relations when they built colonialist settlement.

I am sure that most of the 70 still sharing kibbutzes in which the internal relations are libertarian communist (if not all of them) have no problem with exploiting wage slaves.

And still, regardless of reactionary ideological trends, they still find the internal libertarian communist relation preferable over the "economic compensation according to work or efforts" as some anarchist do...