Textesammlung

  • https://books.google.de/books/…=GfiyCAAAQBAJ&redir_esc=y


    Private Governance: Creating Order in Economic and Social Life, Edward P. Stringham.



    From the first stock markets of Amsterdam, London, and New York to the billions of electronic commerce transactions today, privately produced and enforced economic regulations are more common, more effective, and more promising than commonly considered.

    In Private Governance, prominent economist Edward Stringham presents case studies of the various forms of private enforcement, self-governance, or self-regulation among private groups or individuals that fill a void that government enforcement cannot. Through analytical narratives the book provides a close examination of the world's first stock markets, key elements of which were unenforceable by law; the community of Celebration, Florida, and other private communities that show how public goods can be bundled with land and provided more effectively; and the millions of credit-card transactions that occur daily and are regulated by private governance. Private Governance ultimately argues that while potential problems of private governance, such as fraud, are pervasive, so are the solutions it presents, and that much of what is orderly in the economy can be attributed to private groups and individuals. With meticulous research, Stringham demonstrates that private governance is a far

    more common source of order than most people realize, and that private parties have incentives to devise different mechanisms for eliminating unwanted behavior.

    Private Governance documents numerous examples of private order throughout history to illustrate how private governance is more resilient to internal and external pressure than is commonly believed. Stringham discusses why private governance has economic and social advantages over relying on government regulations and laws, and explores the different mechanisms that enable private governance, including sorting, reputation, assurance, and other bonding mechanisms. Challenging and rigorously-written, Private Governance will make a compelling read for those with an interest in economics, political philosophy, and the history of current Wall Street regulations.



    Ok. Ab und zu muss man auch mal die Gegenseite lesen. (das buch ist eine pro-privatisierungs apologetik)

  • Aus seinem Buch "Das Unvernehmen".



    Das bedeutet nicht, dass alle Menschen gleich intelligent sind, aber wenn ich 1. In der Lage bin zu Kommunizieren und 2. In der Lage bin etwas zu verstehen, dann ergibt sich sofort die Frage, wieso brauche ich einen Herr über mir? Ich kann in der Gesellschaft zurecht kommen, ohne Befehle zu empfangen. D. h. die Grundlagen, die erfüllt sein müssen, damit ein Herrschaftsverhältnis funktioniert, untergraben sofort dieses Herrschaftsverhältnis selbst.👌

  • https://theanarchistlibrary.or…-gelderloos-anarchy-works

    There are hidden stories all around us,

    growing in abandoned villages in the mountains

    or vacant lots in the city,

    petrifying beneath our feet in the remains

    of societies like nothing we’ve known,

    whispering to us that things could be different.

    But the politician you know is lying to you,

    the manager who hires and fires you,

    the landlord who evicts you,

    the president of the bank that owns your house,

    the professor who grades your papers,

    the cop who rolls your street,

    the reporter who informs you,

    the doctor who medicates you,

    the husband who beats you,

    the mother who spanks you,

    the soldier who kills for you,

    and the social worker who fits your past and future into a folder in a filing cabinet

    all ask

    “WHAT WOULD YOU DO WITHOUT US?

    It would be anarchy.”

    * * * * *

    And the daughter who runs away from home,

    the bus driver on the picket line,

    the veteran who threw back his medal but holds on to his rifle,

    the boy saved from suicide by the love of his friends,

    the maid who must bow to those who can’t even cook for themselves,

    the immigrant hiking across a desert to find her family on the other side,

    the kid on his way to prison because he burned down a shopping mall they were building over his childhood dreams,

    the neighbor who cleans up the syringes from the vacant lot, hoping someone will turn it into a garden,

    the hitchhiker on the open road,

    the college dropout who gave up on career and health insurance and sometimes even food so he could write revolutionary poetry for the world,

    maybe all of us can feel it:

    our bosses and tormentors are afraid of what they would do without us,

    and their threat is a promise —

    the best parts of our lives are anarchy already.



    ;)

  • The Principles of Representative Government, Bernand Manin.


    Besonders das Kapitel A Democratic Aristocracy, wo er die Debatten über die amerikanische Verfassung durchgeht, legt wirklich den Kern offen, warum ein repräsentatives System, bei dem die Repräsentanten gewählt werden (anstatt durch Zufall), im Grunde aristokratisch ist und das auch so gesehen wurde bei allen großen Revolutionen (englische, amerikanische, Französische). In der Antike (Athen, Rom) wurden repräsentative Wahlsysteme sogar gar nicht mit Demokratie in Verbindung gebracht. Zufallsauswahlen (election by lot) wurde als Demokratie gesehen.

  • The Principles of Representative Government, Bernand Manin.


    Besonders das Kapitel A Democratic Aristocracy, wo er die Debatten über die amerikanische Verfassung durchgeht, legt wirklich den Kern offen, warum ein repräsentatives System, bei dem die Repräsentanten gewählt werden (anstatt durch Zufall), im Grunde aristokratisch ist und das auch so gesehen wurde bei allen großen Revolutionen (englische, amerikanische, Französische). In der Antike (Athen, Rom) wurden repräsentative Wahlsysteme sogar gar nicht mit Demokratie in Verbindung gebracht. Zufallsauswahlen (election by lot) wurde als Demokratie gesehen.

    Antike: ich glaub, demokratie wurde das athenische system erst im nachhinein benannt oder während Perikles oder so da waren. eigentlich hieß es erst isonomie (sowas wie gleiches gesetz oder so) und war halt ergebnis von Bürgerkämpfen auch zwischen Bauern/einfachem Volk und adel. aber durch die gesamten Reformen hindurch war es eher eine art work-in-progress-herrschaftsform ohne König/Tyrannen erstmal. Und es gab eben später propaganda gegen Perser.


    allgemein muss man zu heutigen Staatsystemen sagen, dass es mischformen sind: man findet halt sogar monarchische Elemente im Kanzler, aristokratische im parteiensystem, demokratische in der wahl, manch einer würde sagen man findet gar noch ganz andere elemente...

  • allgemein muss man zu heutigen Staatsystemen sagen, dass es mischformen sind: man findet halt sogar monarchische Elemente im Kanzler, aristokratische im parteiensystem, demokratische in der wahl, manch einer würde sagen man findet gar noch ganz andere elemente...

    Republiken :) Obwohl das kein traditioneller Republikanismus ist, der von einem politisch aktiven Bürger ausgeht, der die Regierung kontrollieren kann. Und die plesbizitären Elemente, über die der Bürger diese Kontrolle hätte, fehlen auch völlig.

  • https://hegel-system.de/de/veinl1.htm


    Das ist eine gute kurze Einführung in die grundlegenden Ideen von Hegel. Es macht IMO schon viel Sinn, sich mal mit Hegel zu beschäftigen, vor allem weil halt ziemlich viele kapitalismuskritische Theorien von Hegel und darauffolgend von Marx beeinflusst sind. Leider sind die Texte von Hegel nicht wirklich verständlich, ohne dass man wenigstens ein bisschen die Grundlagen kennt. Ich denke, es lohnt sich auf jeden Fall, sich damit zu beschäftigen.

  • Das ist ein ganz netter Text über anarchist-social relations:


    Contemporary anarchism offers a mid-range movement organized somewhere between the levels of everyday life, to which it is closest, and insurrection. Rooted in the former they seek to move towards the latter. Anarchists look to the aspects of people’s daily lives that both suggest life without rule by external authorities and which might provide a foundation for anarchist social relations more broadly. This commitment forms a strong and persistent current within diverse anarchist theories. This perspective expresses what might be called a constructive anarchy or an anarchy of everyday life, at once conserving and revolutionary.


    Colin Ward suggests that anarchism, “far from being a speculative vision of a future society…is a description of a mode of human organization, rooted in the experience of everyday life, which operates side by side with, and in spite of, the dominant authoritarian trends of our society” (Ward, 1973: 11). As Graeber (2004) suggests, the examples of viable anarchism are almost endless. These could include almost any form of organization, from a volunteer fire brigade to the postal service, as long as it is not hierarchically imposed by some external authority (Graeber, 2004).


    Even more, as many recent anarchist writings suggest, the potential for resistance might be found anywhere in everyday life. If power is exercised everywhere, it might give rise to resistance everywhere. Present-day anarchists like to suggest that a glance across the landscape of contemporary society reveals many groupings which are anarchist in practice if not in ideology.


    Examples include the leaderless small groups developed by radical feminists, coops, clinics, learning networks, media collectives, direct action organizations; the spontaneous groupings that occur in response to disasters, strikes, revolutions and emergencies; community-controlled day-care centers; neighborhood groups; tenant and workplace organizing; and so on (Ehrlich, Ehrlich, DeLeon and Morris 18).


    While these are obviously not strictly anarchist groups, they often operate to provide examples of mutual aid and non-hierarchical and non-authoritarian modes of living which carry the memory of anarchy within them. Often the practices are essential for people’s day-to-day survival under the crisis states of capitalism. Ward notes that “the only thing that makes life possible for millions in the United States are its non-capitalist elements….Huge areas of life in the United States, and everywhere else, are built around voluntary and mutual aid organisations” (Ward and Goodway, 2003: 105).


    Kropotkin (1972: 132) notes that the state, the formalized rule of dominant minorities over subordinate majorities, is “but one of the forms of social life.” For anarchists, people are quite capable of developing forms of order to meet specific needs and desires. As Ward (1973: 28) suggests, “given a common need, a collection of people will…by improvisation and experiment, evolve order out of the situation — this order being more durable and more closely related to their needs than any kind of order external authority could provide.”

    Order, thus arrived at, is also preferable for anarchists since it is not ossified and extended, often by force, to situations and contexts different than those from which it emerged, and for which it may not be suited. This order, on the contrary is flexible and evolving, where necessary giving way to other agreements and forms of order depending on peoples’ needs and the circumstances confronting them.


    Living examples of the anarchist perspectives on order emerging “spontaneously” out of social circumstances are perhaps most readily or regularly observed under conditions of immediate need or emergency as in times of natural disaster and/or economic crisis, during periods of revolutionary upheaval or during mass events such as festivals. Anarchists try to extend mutual aid relations until they make up the bulk of social life. Constructive anarchy is about developing ways in which people enable themselves to take control of their lives and participate meaningfully in the decision-making processes that affect them, whether education, housing, work or food.

    Anarchists note that changes in the structure of work, notably so-called lean production, flexibalization and the institutionalization of precarious labour, have stolen people’s time away from the family along with the time that might otherwise be devoted to activities in the community (Ward and Goodway, 2003: 107). In response people must find ways to escape the capitalist law of value, to pursue their own values rather than to produce value for capital. This is the real significance of anarchist do-it-ourselves activity and the reason that I would suggest such activities have radical, if overlooked, implications for anti-capitalist struggles.


    For Paul Goodman, an American anarchist whose writings influenced the 1960s New Left and counterculture, anarchist futures-present serve as necessary acts of “drawing the line” against the authoritarian and oppressive forces in society. Anarchism, in Goodman’s view, was never oriented only towards some glorious future; it involved also the preservation of past freedoms and previous libertarian traditions of social interaction. “A free society cannot be the substitution of a ‘new order’ for the old order; it is the extension of spheres of free action until they make up most of the social life” (Marshall, 1993: 598). Utopian thinking will always be important, Goodman argued, in order to open the imagination to new social possibilities, but the contemporary anarchist would also need to be a conservator of society’s benevolent tendencies.

Jetzt mitmachen!

Du hast noch kein Benutzerkonto auf unserer Seite? Registriere dich kostenlos und nimm an unserer Community teil!