Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

> I've tried to start multiple non-heirarchical anarchist cooperative organizations and the number one challenge is finding people who will put the group ahead of the individual. It just doesn't happen.

I could have saved you the trouble if you'd just asked me!

Over 20,000 communes have been started in the US. None have survived. What baffles me is why people keep believing they can work.

Free markets work because it harnesses the inherent selfishness of everybody, rather than trying to override selfishness.



> it harnesses the inherent selfishness of everybody

the biggest lie we're constantly being told: https://www.econlib.org/library/Enc/bios/Ostrom.html. this really annoys me, we're not inherently selfish. at least not most people. free markets don't work in any rate. how do you even come to this conclusion?

also, lots of counter examples here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_worker_cooperatives


Spot on, it's so sad to see this kind of thinking so ingrained in people, when literally 3 seconds of critical thinking would lead to the opposite conclusion. Are kids just as selfish as adults, at every age? Does their selfishness change depending on what they're taught and how selfish their role models are? Is selfishness among adults at the exact same level across decades, eras, cultures, nations?

If the answer to any of these questions is "no" (and anyone capable of using HN should realistically be answering them as such), then it's abundantly clear you can't just hold up your hands and say "oh well, everybody is inherently selfish, 'ts just the way it is". Even the idea of everyone being somewhat selfish isn't really true when you consider the countless cases of people literally sacrificing their own lives through history - and not for some kind of post-mortem glory. One can argue semantics over that still being "selfish" as it's done to further a goal of themselves but that's just wasting everyone's time.


> when literally 3 seconds of critical thinking would lead to the opposite conclusion

Understanding why free markets work takes a lot longer than 3 seconds, as it is counter-intuitive.

> the countless cases of people literally sacrificing their own lives through history

Decades ago, the Scientific American ran an article about this, where a study showed that people self-sacrificing can mathematically be shown to ensure the survival of their genes. For an obvious case, parents sacrificing themselves for their children's sake. This makes it selfish. People are less willing to sacrifice themselves the genetically further away the people benefiting from such sacrifice.


BTW, it's perfectly legal to set up a commune in the US. Feel free to start one and let us know how it works out!


Ostrom: "the ones that worked did have a kind of property rights system"

LOL. And the fact that she gets a Nobel Prize for this shows how unworkable it is in general.

> we're not inherently selfish

You're selfish, so am I, so is everyone you know.

> free markets don't work in any rate. how do you even come to this conclusion?

The success of free markets in the US, Germany, Japan, Hong Kong, Taiwan, Vietnam, China, Singapore, etc.

Worker cooperatives: A worker cooperative is not a commune. In any case, there are what, a hundred examples listed? What that shows is they are so rare that a global list can be compiled on Wikipedia. Set that against the scores of millions of businesses.


> You're selfish, so am I, so is everyone you know.

you can ignore the evidence all you want. Doesn't make it correct. Google it for yourself then.

> The success of free markets in the US, Germany, Japan, Hong Kong, Taiwan, Vietnam, China, Singapore, etc.

how have they succeeded? enshittification and wealth accumulation is success? what's the metric here? decreased health? decreased lifespan? increased addiction? increased unhappiness?

> Worker cooperatives: A worker cooperative is not a commune.

Let me quote the discussion, which you obviously didn't even understand:

>> I've tried to start multiple non-heirarchical anarchist cooperative organizations and the number one challenge is finding people who will put the group ahead of the individual. It just doesn't happen.

> I could have saved you the trouble if you'd just asked me!

> Over 20,000 communes have been started in the US. None have survived. What baffles me is why people keep believing they can work.

they talked about cooperatives, you answered with communes. I gave proof that cooperatives work.

do better.


> how have they succeeded?

Bootstrapping poor people up into the middle class and beyond.

> they talked about cooperatives, you answered with communes

You score that point!

> I gave proof that cooperatives work

So go start one. What are you waiting for?


I’m very aware of those unfortunately

I was a devotee of Mr Rogers growing up and I’ve seen really successful people start from nothing and help others

40 years of hope in humanity is hard to kill but it finally died so that’s that

It took proving it mathematically to get me there


I don't know, there are plenty of (long running) examples to be found here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_worker_cooperatives


A list of about a hundred, compared to the scores of millions of capitalist businesses? That's a rounding error.


Mr Rogers was indeed a special man.


The Kibutz model in Israel seems to work. What makes that different?


The Kibutzen are subsidized by the Israeli government. They would otherwise collapse.


That's not true. I just checked on it, and they used to be subsidized, these days not so much.

A lot of them are hybrid models with some capitalism, mixed with the socialism. So I guess it sort of confirms your opinion that these things don't work when pure?

But they do seem to have found a successful hybrid model.


If you mix enough gasoline with water, you can get your car to run on water, too!

Capitalism can do well despite being taxed to support socialism. The other way around doesn't work.

The Soviets starved until they allowed farmers to have their own private plots of farmland. Collective farms => famine.


You’re going really hard on loving capitalism

The problem is that capitalism mathematically ensures inequality which subverts the concept of survival because it creates extreme imbalances in agency.

What results is that capitalism must always use as reference a forever unchanged “state of nature” mythology which never existed.

Capitalists view themselves as a different species than modern anatomical humans, more enlightened etc… but I have seen firsthand that millionaires billionaires and even “middle class” people have less consciousness than those who have very little capital.

Capital enables alienation by letting the capitalist offload “life” to people who do it for them, leaving them nothing but Vice. It always corrupts




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: