Points of Unity template for shared practices and processes (for social movement groups and popular organizations of various kinds): ***Although descriptively accurate, the above is not formulated to be the best name for practical use in movement context as it is too jargon heavy and wordy. Alternative names: Points of Unity, Group agreements, Shared Agreements, Group Practices, Shared Practices, Group Processes, Shared Processes, etc

Direct-Democracy: Direct democracy refers to direct collective decision making. Direct democracy enables collective dialogue, decisions, and actions to achieve various goals and solve various problems. Deliberation is foundational to a practical direct democracy as it enables questions, amendments, conversations, problems, solution criteria, multiple perspectives, critiques, concerns, alternative possibilities, dissent, and evaluation of pros and cons to round out proposals and decisions made. After deliberation, there is an aim for full agreement. If there is not full agreement, there is further discussion and then a decision is made by majority vote. ***The specifics of direct democracy can be tweaked and even left out of this section and simply included in the bylaws.

Horizontality: Horizontality refers to the presence of self-organization and the absence of hierarchy. Hierarchy refers to institutionalized top-down command obedience relations. Horizontality includes horizontal rights such as freedom from hierarchy, freedom from oppression, freedom from domination, freedom from exploitation, and freedom to participate in self-managed groups and relations. This group strives to be internally horizontal and contribute to horizontal relations. etc. ***can alternatively be called or framed as: non-hierarchy, or egalitarian relations, or opposition to hierarchy. With different groups, different framings and wordings will make more sense. Depending on group and context, it may or may not make sense for a group to give a list of various hierarchies in such a points of unity document.

Free Association and Participatory activity: Free association refers to freedom of and from associations and participatory activity within associations. For there to be free association and participatory activity, persons and groups must have the guaranteed freedoms to choose their activities and associations while respecting and enabling freedoms of others to do the same. All labor, work, and action within this group is to be voluntary and non-coerced. If someone does not like a policy that is made, they can continue to argue for and advocate an alternative proposal, continue to argue one’s point formally and informally, choose to not participate in the implementation of the policy they disagree with while remaining in the group, or choose to leave the association. *** This point can potentially be included in other points of unity without being its own point. Also, it is often implied that a group is such a voluntary association so including this for a group as an explicit point may or may not make sense.

Direct Action: Direct action refers to opposing exploitation, domination and oppression through self-managed action to achieve various goals. Direct action can be contrasted to indirect action of top-down organizing and relying on rulers to solve social problems. Direct action includes a wide array of potential activities and campaigns against specific hierarchical institutions for short term, mid-term, and long-term goals. *** A description giving examples of direct action tactics such as occupations, blockades, strikes, boycotts, etc. is optional. An alternative to the wording to “domination, exploitation, and oppression” can be “unfreedom and injustice” or something sufficiently similar.

Mutual Aid: Mutual aid refers to voluntary multidirectional help to meet needs. Mutual aid can exist within a group, between groups, between groups and persons, between persons etc. Mutual aid enables groups and people to pool abilities, needs, ideas, proposals, actions, infrastructure, resources, tools, etc. together. Mutual aid can include a wide array of potential activities from mutual assistance towards common goals, creating or participating in development of the commons (including communal fields, factories and workshops, social centers, libraries, eco-technology projects, etc), free food distribution, communal childcare, etc. ***Such a list or variation thereof is optional to include.

For groups that collaborate with other groups in various formal and informal ways:

Co-Federalism: Co-federalism refers to ways organizations can freely collaborate for inter-collective coordination, decisions, and actions in a way that enables decision making power to be in the hands of people directly. Delegated persons and councils of collectives can meet up for deliberation and administration. Such delegates and co-federal councils are mandated and recallable to their respective popular assemblies, are merely communicative, administrative, and have no policy making power. All policies are made and ratified by general assemblies directly. ***Alternatively the words federalism, confederalism, intercommunalism, inter-collectivity, egalitarian federation, etc. can be used in place of co-federalism. Co-federalism is a neologism, and confederalism and federalism both have connotative issues despite them referring to an essential practice for horizontal and free inter-organizational relations.

Addendum point for Community assembly groups in particular:

Communal Self Management: Communal self-management refers to horizontal, democratic, participatory community politics and economics. Such communal and intercommunal self-management can exist on every scale from the block, to the neighborhood, to the city, and beyond. Means of existence and production needed by communities are to be held and managed in common. Policies and protocols for communal economics are managed by communal assemblies and co-federations thereof. Such communal assemblies and co-federations thereof have embedded participatory councils that self-manage implementation within the bounds of their respective mandates and protocols. Such a communal economy aims towards providing each and all with free access to needs.

***The above point is specifically for community assembly groups. It generally makes the most sense for groups that are at relatively a mature level development to the point where they have sufficient power, means of production, and popular support.

Alternative framing that synthesizes the first three points of unity into a single point:

Participatory Democracy: Participatory democracy refers to a combination of direct collective decision making, without rulers, where people freely participate in decision making and implementation of decisions. ***By condensing the substance of the first three points into a single point, a lot of clutter disappears. From here, people can fill out this point through their own descriptions or through copying, pasting, and blending some of the more essential sentences from the first three points of unity listed as needed. An alternative framing for this point could be “self-management” in such a way that includes the substance of direct democracy, horizontality, and free association. As coherent as the first three points are as separate points rounding each other out, they are rather cumbersome and can be difficult to wrap one’s mind around. Creating a single point that combines the essential features of those points can help clear up confusion. Something like a practical unity of Participatory Democracy (as defined above), Direct Action, and Mutual aid can lead to a lot of coherence and functional use for groups starting from scratch or otherwise developing such points of unity overtime.

https://usufructcollective.wordpress.com/2023/01/14/liberatory-points-of-unity-template-2023-remix/

#anarchism #anarchy #socialism #communism #communalism #socialmovements #libertariansocialism #libertariancommunism #egalitarianism #horizontality #federalism #democracy #mutualaid #freeassociation #pointsofunity #pou #organizing #freedom #revolution #organization

"Elinor Ostrom’s rules for governing the commons provide criteria for how a common sector can function well (Ostrom 2021). Even though her politics differ in crucial ways from libertarian communism, many of the overall principles and practices for managing the commons that she outlines can strengthen libertarian communist praxis (Libertarian 2013). And although not stated until now, the above approach of libertarian communism satisfies Elinor Ostrom’s 8 rules for governing the commons: It has clear and non-hierarchical processes/practices/nomos/decision making, planning, and rules, it matches rules governing commons to local conditions (while also retaining specific universalist features), it ensures that those affected by decisions can modify them, it aims towards the commons being respected by others (through a focus on global revolution as well as defending the commons against hierarchical forces), it develops ways for people to hold each other accountable to rules of the commons without resorting to hierarchical strata and without hierarchical security forces, it has ways of dealing with rule violations as well as accessible dispute resolution (via free association/disassociation, self defense and defense of others, breaking up fights, diffuse social disapproval, and dispute resolution via mediation), and has responsibility for governing common resources in nested tiers from lowest level up to the entire interconnected system. "

https://usufructcollective.wordpress.com/2022/02/01/the-conquest-of-sandwiches/

#anarchism #anarchy #libertariansocialism #libertariancommunism #socialism #communism #communalism #utopia #federalism #confederalism #federation #confederation #postscarcity #abundance #mutualaid #intercommunalism #commons

Communist production, reproduction, economic decision making, and implementation could technically be done through multiple kinds of ways of arranging socialized production (socialized production as in means of production held in common and governed by self-managed collectives of some kind). Communalism ought to be the complimentary political economic form of communism. Communalism is for communalized economics and means of production and not just socialized production. Communalism properly distributes means of production according to needs of communities and persons without putting policy making power in regards to communal economics in the hands of relatively privatized sources of power. Communalization is a way of gathering all who need, use, and contribute to the commons to govern the commons at multiple scales. Such communalized economics can only be communal if managed directly by horizontal communal assemblies and networks thereof. Such community assemblies and federations thereof would have constitutions, bylaws, shared processes, practices, and goals in harmony with the following qualities: direct democracy, non-hierarchy, free association (participatory activity of each and all), mutual aid, distribution according to needs, and co-federation. Within such a practical framework, decisions about common economics would be made by such communal assemblies deliberating about how to meet aggregate needs. People would deliberate in such assemblies and pool needs, ideas, knowledge, alternative proposals, abilities, volitions/desires of persons, skills, resources, and technology together to make decisions in relation to solving common problems or developing common projects. Participatory, horizontal, and directly democratic decision making processes would exist on a plurality of scales–from communal to intercommunal to broader co-federated scales. Such communal assemblies would have embedded participatory councils and working groups that implement decisions and self-manage within the bounds of the policies made by communal assemblies and members thereof. Such a process harmonizes self interest and social interest, is rooted in cooperative conflict and deliberation for decision making, has a form and a content that guarantees self-management of each and all on every scale to the degree it develops, has maximal political transparency, allows for decision making and coordination on a plurality of different scales, allows for function redundancy, etc. and is not internally limited by the profit motive or positions that give people power over others (and what is entailed by the maintenance of such power over others). Additionally, such an approach does not put the economy at war against itself by pitting different relatively private sectors against others.

https://usufructcollective.wordpress.com/2022/02/01/the-conquest-of-sandwiches/

#anarchism #anarchy #libertariansocialism #libertariancommunism #socialism #communism #communalism #utopia #federalism #confederalism #federation #confederation #postscarcity #abundance #mutualaid #intercommunalism #commons

Institutional virtues include but are by no means limited to the political, economic, and social virtues of direct democracy, horizontality, free association, communality, and intercommunality/federalism. Institutional virtues also include qualities such as mutual-aid distributive justice, justice more broadly (justice as related to the criteria of freedom and equality), practical reasoning (phronesis on an organizational and collective level), wise development and use of technics (techne), deliberative/communicative virtues, the virtue of unity in diversity, etc. Various virtues that Aristotle described–such as phronesis, techne, episteme, and justice– are not reducible to being mere properties of persons; they can also be properties of collectives.

Institutional and relational qualities can shape one another and can round one another out. For some examples: direct democracy with a form and content of horizontality is distinct from direct democracy that is entangled with hierarchy, domination, exploitation, and oppression. Direct democracy without deliberative/communicative virtues will negatively impact decision making and decisions made. Communal self-management without federalism and intercommunal mutual-aid can lead to and/or be caused by vices of parochialism and xenophobia. Self-managed production without distribution according to needs leads to distributive injustice. Horizontality without free association would inhibit the kinds of options people should have about what groups they join and what activities they do. The right kind of equality in the right ways is distinct from equality of squalor or equal rights to compete within an unjust/hierarchical system. Institutional virtues are the right kinds of specific qualities, in the right ways, in the right contexts, for the right ends. Some good institutional qualities can develop lopsidedly, yet only be made sufficiently virtuous through the mutual flourishing of multiple institutional virtues as a gestalt. Sometimes an institutional quality may merely approximate the virtue thereof rather than be sufficiently virtuous– and sometimes this happens because it is not rounded out by other institutional and/or relational virtues and gradations thereof. And even when an institutional quality is sufficiently good enough to be virtuous, it does not make it perfectly/ideally virtuous; virtuous qualities can be further rounded out and are in need of being developed overtime and recreated in differentiated and emerging contexts. And even in a good-enough society, there are additional good institutional and relational virtues that can be developed.

Given what human needs are and what human wellness consists of, flourishing virtuous institutional and relational qualities entail, include, contribute to, and are in harmony with non-hierarchical rights and duties and an expansive realm of permissibility. In contrast to statist and liberal notions of good rights so in vogue within social contract theory, good rights would at least include rights to the means of production, rights to the means of existence, rights to the means of horizontal politics and economics, rights to participatory activity and free association (and the means thereof), as well as freedom from hierarchy, domination, and exploitation. Good duties at least include the duties towards the above rights for persons and groups. Good rights and duties by themselves are not sufficient for their actuation– they require sufficient means thereof. And good rights and duties far from exhaustively encompass what is good; merely acting within such minimal bounds is not enough for a person or group to act wisely. Good rights and duties benefit from and contribute to a wider array of institutional and relational virtues. Sets of good rights and duties are institutional virtues themselves (as properties of institutions that contribute to the flourishing of volitional beings), are related to other institutional and relational virtues (in terms of cause and effect AND in terms of containing some dimensions of other institutional and relational virtues within such good rights and duties), and can be evaluated in relation to coherence and correspondence to webs of institutional and relational virtues.

https://usufructcollective.wordpress.com/2023/07/18/gestalt-of-the-good-2023-remix/

#ethics #normativeethics #philosophy #politicalphilosophy #virtues #virtueethics #morality #freedom #equality #moralrealism #anarchism #anarchy #communism #socialism #libertariansocialism #libertariancommunism #communalism #socialecology #dialectics #dialecticalnaturalism

The virtue of equality is the right kinds of equality, in the right ways, in the right contexts, towards the right ends. It is constituted by the freedom from hierarchy, domination, and exploitation and constituted by the guaranteed freedoms to horizontal power and decision making processes, and equal minimal rights. The virtue of equality, understood as such, is mutually constitutive of the freedom of each and all. Within such bounds of the self-management of each and all, groups and persons can choose what actions and practices they do according to their needs, abilities, and desires– a boundaried yet relatively infinite realm of permissibility constrained only by the freedoms of others, the means thereof, and what is possible given relevant conditions and variables

https://usufructcollective.wordpress.com/2023/07/18/gestalt-of-the-good-2023-remix/

#ethics #normativeethics #philosophy #politicalphilosophy #virtues #virtueethics #morality #freedom #equality #moralrealism #anarchism #anarchy #communism #socialism #libertariansocialism #libertariancommunism #communalism #socialecology #dialectics #dialecticalnaturalism

Volition exists on a continuum in the ecological world (Bookchin 2022). Robust self-management of each and all has specific requisite qualities when it comes to political economic beings and political economic institutions. The political, economic, and social virtues of freedom and equality require each other as well as a gestalt of other institutional and relational virtues to flourish. For some examples: 1. There needs to be direct democracy so that collectives can make direct collective decisions through deliberation. 2. There needs to be both a form and content of horizontality so that collectives and individuals are free from hierarchy, domination, exploitation, and oppression and by extension able to self-determine their lives. 3. There needs to be free association so that persons and collectives choose their associations and activities. 4. There needs to be rights and duties in relation to self-management so that there are guaranteed freedoms for collectives and persons and duties towards such freedoms. 5. Self-management on every political economic scale entails communal and inter-communal self-management and the means thereof (Usufruct Collective 2022). The above qualities can be adapted and elaborated according to relevant variables while retaining their essential features. *** The above is a non-exhaustive account of political economic virtues (such political economic virtues being subsets of institutional virtues more broadly), a non-exhaustive account of what they consist of and entail, and a non-exhaustive account of reasons justifying them as such.

Institutional virtues include but are by no means limited to the political, economic, and social virtues of direct democracy, horizontality, free association, communality, and intercommunality/federalism. Institutional virtues also include qualities such as mutual-aid distributive justice, justice more broadly (justice as related to the criteria of freedom and equality), practical reasoning (phronesis on an organizational and collective level), wise development and use of technics (techne), deliberative/communicative virtues, the virtue of unity in diversity, etc. Various virtues that Aristotle described–such as phronesis, techne, episteme, and justice– are not reducible to being mere properties of persons; they can also be properties of collectives.

Institutional and relational qualities can shape one another and can round one another out. For some examples: direct democracy with a form and content of horizontality is distinct from direct democracy that is entangled with hierarchy, domination, exploitation, and oppression. Direct democracy without deliberative/communicative virtues will negatively impact decision making and decisions made. Communal self-management without federalism and intercommunal mutual-aid can lead to and/or be caused by vices of parochialism and xenophobia. Self-managed production without distribution according to needs leads to distributive injustice. Horizontality without free association would inhibit the kinds of options people should have about what groups they join and what activities they do. The right kind of equality in the right ways is distinct from equality of squalor or equal rights to compete within an unjust/hierarchical system. Institutional virtues are the right kinds of specific qualities, in the right ways, in the right contexts, for the right ends. Some good institutional qualities can develop lopsidedly, yet only be made sufficiently virtuous through the mutual flourishing of multiple institutional virtues as a gestalt. Sometimes an institutional quality may merely approximate the virtue thereof rather than be sufficiently virtuous– and sometimes this happens because it is not rounded out by other institutional and/or relational virtues and gradations thereof. And even when an institutional quality is sufficiently good enough to be virtuous, it does not make it perfectly/ideally virtuous; virtuous qualities can be further rounded out and are in need of being developed overtime and recreated in differentiated and emerging contexts. And even in a good-enough society, there are additional good institutional and relational virtues that can be developed.

https://usufructcollective.wordpress.com/2023/07/18/gestalt-of-the-good-2023-remix/

#ethics #normativeethics #philosophy #politicalphilosophy #virtues #virtueethics #morality #freedom #equality #moralrealism #anarchism #anarchy #communism #socialism #libertariansocialism #libertariancommunism #communalism #socialecology #dialectics #dialecticalnaturalism

Internal motivation towards helping others, forging good relationships, building community, self-development characteristically leads to wellbeing in those who have such virtuous internal motivations (Ryan and Deci 2022). Self-determined social relations characteristically develop wellness and virtuous character traits that give people integrated regulation to do that which is good for themselves and for others (Ryan and Deci 2022). “Integrated regulation involves doing activities because they are important for and congruent with one’s goals or values,” (Ryan and Deci 2022). Ryan and Deci, and many others, provide very good philosophical arguments enriched by mountains of scientific research demonstrating the above as well as the conclusion that, “self-determined functioning is associated with greater creativity, superior learning, better performance, enhanced well-being, and higher quality relationships,” (Ryan and Deci 2022). It is important to note the distinction in well-being and happiness as Ryan and Deci use the terms. We agree with their assessment that well-being and happiness are related yet distinct. Even though happiness is good, “Happiness cannot fully define well-being,” (Ryan and Deci 2022). “Wellness is more than merely a subjective issue,” and “In contrast, happiness (e.g., assessed by the presence of positive affect and absence of negative affect) is a subjective issue,” (Ryan and Deci 2022). But “It is not that happiness is unrelated to wellness, nor should happiness be ignored,”; Happiness is a “symptom of wellness,” that ”typically accompanies or follows from eudaimonic living and is associated with basic need satisfaction and growth,” (Ryan and Deci 2022).

Humans are not just volitional animals (nor are humans merely rational dependent animals– as relevant and true as such a notion is); humans are also institutional animals–as well as political, economic, and social animals (Bookchin 2022). Institutional animals exist within, and are able to create forms of malleable structured social organization with specific forms and functions (within the bounds of conditions and potentiality). Different qualities of institutions enable and constrain different kinds of behaviors. That which is good for humans includes good kinds of institutional forms, contents, and relations that partially define as well as enable the self-determination of each and all. When it comes to good institutions and what is good for institutional volitional beings, what is good is not a mere quantitative aggregation of hedons, happiness, and the like (as good as hedons, happiness, and the like can be); what is good for such beings includes the wellness that comes with meeting needs (including needs for sustenance and self-determination and good relatedness), a multiplicity of good institutional and relational qualities and the means thereof, qualitative rights and duties in harmony with the self-management of each and all, activities and practices entangled with and flowing from such freedom, and individual virtues. Although institutional beings have the potential to create the most horrific kinds of hierarchical formations, institutional beings also have the potential to create good sets of rights and duties, formal equality of decision making power, deliberative and democratic decision making processes, and a guaranteed minimum in terms of access to means of existence, common means of production, and horizontal politics (Bookchin 2005, 2022). Human nature and history demonstrates that depending on the presence and absence of various conditions, humans have the potential for everything from radically egalitarian relations to radically hierarchical relations (Bookchin 2005).

For political economic beings, “true freedom is to have full self-determination about one’s social economic and cultural development,” (Ervin 2021). The freedom of each and all includes the “freedom to develop as one sees fit… integrated to the fullest extent with social responsibility to others,” (Ervin 2021). The right kind of autonomy for rational, dependent, institutional, volitional, political, economic, social beings consists of: the self-management of each and all, the means thereof, political economic expressions thereof– including rights and duties in harmony with such self-management, as well as a panoply of institutional and relational qualities contributing to the living flourishing of the above. The right kind of relatedness to each other politically, economically, and socially includes and gives rise to the self-management of each and all– which itself requires certain kinds of political, economic, and social qualities and practices.

https://usufructcollective.wordpress.com/2023/07/18/gestalt-of-the-good-2023-remix/

#ethics #normativeethics #philosophy #politicalphilosophy #virtues #virtueethics #morality #freedom #equality #moralrealism #anarchism #anarchy #communism #socialism #libertariansocialism #libertariancommunism #communalism #socialecology #dialectics #dialecticalnaturalism

"Despite various benefits that localization can have, there are many contexts where considerations come into play that make intercommunal and confederated economic decision making and planning into something that makes more sense for multiple reasons such as: 1. That which affects multiple communities should be decided by multiple communities as various decisions are not just about a single block, neighborhood, town, or city 2. To pool needs/abilities/volunteers/resources/technology/ideas/proposals together to solve problems and develop projects on multiple scales 3. To provide for needs and desires when local scales are not absolutely self-sufficient (which they rarely are) 4. To reduce overall labor/work through mutual support and assistance on an intercommunal scale. 5. As an extension of choice and freedom of intercommunal associations to undertake joint projects. 6. To uphold responsibility and commitment towards other communities and towards forging the right kind of interdependence between communities 7. to enable intercommunal provision of the means of production when needed/desired. The above are examples of reasons why intercommunal decision making and planning can make sense in various contexts for various functions compared to mere localized approaches. Decentralized and Co-federated planning and economics enable the benefits of non-local scales without the cons of centralized power over and above self-managed collectives. And such co-federation is a desideratum beyond mere necessity as the right kind of decentralization is not about absolute self-sufficiency but the right kinds of self-governance and self-sufficiency in tandem with radically egalitarian ways of organizing interdependence. Such a mutually interrelated and multitudinous political economy enables people to associate in various communal associations, embedded councils, working groups, and varied social groups that fit their dynamic preferences– enabling a radical differentiation and pluralism in harmony with non-hierarchical freedoms and duties."

https://usufructcollective.wordpress.com/2022/02/01/the-conquest-of-sandwiches/

#anarchism #anarchy #libertariansocialism #libertariancommunism #socialism #communism #communalism #utopia #federalism #confederalism #federation #confederation #postscarcity #abundance #mutualaid #intercommunalism

New essay on Police Abolition. Includes a critique and analysis of the police and other state security forces, some good enough non-state forms of conflict resolution and the like, as well ways to get from here to a world without police.

Heavily influenced by anarchism, transformative justice, and broader police abolitionist movements.

https://usufructcollective.wordpress.com/2023/06/04/kick-the-cops-off-your-block-2/

#anarchism #acab #abolitionism #libertariancommunism #libertariansocialism #transformativejustice #mediation #selfdefense #freeassociation #allcopsarebastards

#anarchism #libertarianism #libertarian #anarchist #anticapitalism #capitalism #libertariansocialism #libsoc #libcom #libertariancommunism

"There are also non-libertarian approaches–or more appropriately authoritarian or hierarchical approaches– to arriving at communism which have been shown to be disastrous failures such as parliamentary social democratic approaches and the various Leninist statist approaches. All social democratic and Leninist approaches towards developing communism have kept capitalism and the state rather than abolishing both. Both social democratic and Leninist approaches towards trying to arrive at socialist and communist conditions are thoroughly rooted in state power/hierarchical politics. Such hierarchical politics, to the degree that they are reproduced, continue class relations intrinsic to the state and inhibit socialist and communist relations. A prerequisite for communism is the socialization of means of production. For means of production to be socialized they must necessarily neither be owned privately by capitalists nor by a political ruling class via the state (Goldman 1987). State approaches towards communism did not develop socialist relations, a precondition for communism, let alone communism in addition to socialized economics. Horizontalist politics–to the degree such politics are reproduced– at least develop their own necessary features (direct democracy, free association, non-hierarchy, etc.) and are by extension are consistent with and conducive to socialist ends. Although revolutionary anti-state movements towards communism have been imperfect, have made tragic mistakes at times, and have not yet developed global communism, such revolutionary anti-state movements towards communism have not created the extent of the failures and compromises and violations of fundamental human freedoms (and violations of basic socialist principles) that state approaches towards communism have produced. And on a positive note, libertarian and anarchist communists have developed and participated in thousands of self-managed organizations, countless actions towards a better world, as well as several revolutions with anti-hierarchical and communistic features–the overall movement spanning millions of people and all continents. "

https://usufructcollective.substack.com/p/the-conquest-of-sandwiches

#anarchism #communism #anarchy #utopia #libertariancommunism #libertariansocialism

Our essay "The Conquest of Sandwiches" is now on our Subtack page

"Communist decision making would start with finding out the general needs and economic desires of people and then move into how such needs and desires can be met through self-managed arrangements (Crump 2014). Materials, means of production, technology, and overall societal labor/work needed to meet aggregate needs under specific conditions can be calculated to inform decision making and implementation. Deliberation and relevant economic information would inform horizontalist assemblies to change and tweak plans as needed and as relevant changes happen. Such economic calculation can be assisted by computers and cybernation, but even when that happens all policy making power would be in hands of people directly. Dialogue augmented by cybernated systems can give people relevant information for economic decision making. Surveys, numbers from last year’s production, resources available within ecological regeneration rates, new technology, what people want to do, new needs, new desires, new luxuries, and new ecological factors (and more) can assist the iterative planning done by communal and intercommunal assemblies. It is important to note that even though such overall societal economic calculation can help assist with self-management of communal economics, communism “consists in consuming and producing without calculating the exact share of each individual” (Kropotkin 1901). Under contexts of scarcity or disaster–such as the revolutionary development of communism out of terrible conditions– there would be priority production and distribution schemas where needs take priority over relative luxuries. As such communist institutions and content develop, mutually equitable access to luxuries would be integrated as needs of all or otherwise things people have access to. Such a communist economy would ideally develop into a full post scarcity economy (which would still retain the necessary features of communism, but also be a “higher phase” thereof). Despite lack of actuation, there has been a technical potential for a global post-scarcity economy for decades (Bookchin 2004).

Once overall needs are aggregated, communal assemblies, federations thereof, and embedded councils would devise plans to meet such needs and desires. There would be back and forth dialogue within and between assemblies of communal and intercomunal associations until common plans and policies are arrived at (which would continually get updated by participatory planning processes). Ideally, general and relevant propositional and practical knowledge would be sufficiently generalized among communards. Embedded councils, working groups, or relevant experts within or outside of specific communities can be thoroughly consulted to help round out overall knowledge communards have so they can make more informed decisions. After deliberation, political economic policy making power would be retained within horizontalist and participatory communal assemblies with an aim towards full agreement with a fall back to majority votes within free association of persons– in harmony with the minimal norms, rights, and duties of libertarian socialist practices (Bookchin 2007). Implementation of policies would be self-managed by those who agree to implement such policies (Kropotkin 1892). Embedded councils and rotating delegates of communal assemblies would be mandated by and instantly recallable to the assemblies that they are a part of."

https://usufructcollective.substack.com/p/the-conquest-of-sandwiches

#anarchism #anarchy #communalism #communism #socialism #postscarcity #utopia #kropotkin #anarchocommunism #libertariansocialism #libertariancommunism #commons

Points of Unity template for shared practices and processes (for social movement groups and popular organizations of various kinds):

Direct-Democracy: Direct democracy refers to direct collective decision making. Direct democracy enables collective dialogue, decisions, and actions to achieve various goals and solve various problems. Deliberation is foundational to a practical direct democracy as it enables questions, amendments, conversations, problems, solution criteria, multiple perspectives, critiques, concerns, alternative possibilities, dissent, and evaluation of pros and cons to round out proposals and decisions made. After deliberation, there is an aim for full agreement. If there is not full agreement, there is further discussion and then a decision is made by majority vote. ***The specifics of direct democracy can be tweaked and even left out of this section and simply included in the bylaws.

Horizontality: Horizontality refers to the presence of self-organization and the absence of hierarchy. Hierarchy refers to institutionalized top-down command obedience relations. Horizontality includes horizontal rights such as freedom from hierarchy, freedom from oppression, freedom from domination, freedom from exploitation, and freedom to participate in self-managed groups and relations. This group strives to be internally horizontal and contribute to horizontal relations. etc. ***can alternatively be called or framed as: non-hierarchy, or egalitarian relations, or opposition to hierarchy. With different groups, different framings and wordings will make more sense. Depending on group and context, it may or may not make sense for a group to give a list of various hierarchies in such a points of unity document.

Free Association and Participatory activity: Free association refers to freedom of and from associations and participatory activity within associations. For there to be free association and participatory activity, persons and groups must have the guaranteed freedoms to choose their activities and associations while respecting and enabling freedoms of others to do the same. All labor, work, and action within this group is to be voluntary and non-coerced. If someone does not like a policy that is made, they can continue to argue for and advocate an alternative proposal, continue to argue one’s point formally and informally, choose to not participate in the implementation of the policy they disagree with while remaining in the group, or choose to leave the association. *** This point can potentially be included in other points of unity without being its own point.

Direct Action: Direct action refers to opposing unfreedom and injustice through self-managed action to achieve various goals. Direct action can be contrasted to indirect action of top-down organizing and relying on rulers to solve social problems. Direct action includes a wide array of potential activities and campaigns against specific hierarchical institutions for short term, mid-term, and long-term goals. *** A description giving examples of direct action tactics such as occupations, blockades, strikes, boycotts, etc. is optional. An alternative to the wording “unfreedom and injustice” can be “domination, exploitation, and oppression”.

Mutual Aid: Mutual aid refers to voluntary multidirectional help to meet needs. Mutual aid can exist within a group, between groups, between groups and persons, between persons etc. Mutual aid enables groups and people to pool abilities, needs, ideas, proposals, actions, infrastructure, resources, tools, etc. together. Mutual aid can include a wide array of potential activities from mutual assistance towards common goals, creating or participating in development of the commons (including communal fields, factories and workshops, social centers, libraries, eco-technology projects, etc), free food distribution, communal childcare, etc. ***Such a list or variation thereof is optional to include.

For groups that collaborate with other groups in various formal and informal ways:

Co-Federalism: Co-federalism refers to ways organizations can freely collaborate for inter-collective coordination, decisions, and actions in a way that enables decision making power to be in the hands of people directly. Delegated persons and councils of collectives can meet up for deliberation and administration. Such delegates and co-federal councils are mandated and recallable to their respective popular assemblies, are merely communicative, administrative, and have no policy making power. All policies are made and ratified by general assemblies directly. ***Alternatively the words federalism, confederalism, intercommunalism, inter-collectivity, egalitarian federation, etc. can be used in place of co-federalism. Co-federalism is a neologism, and confederalism and federalism both have connotative issues despite them referring to an essential practice for horizontal and free inter-organizational relations.

Addendum points for Community assembly groups in particular:

Communal Self Management: Communal self-management refers to horizontal, democratic, participatory community politics and economics. Such communal self-management can exist on every scale from the block, to the neighborhood, to the city, and beyond. Means of existence and production needed by communities are to be held and managed in common. Policies and protocols for communal economics are managed by communal assemblies and co-federations thereof. Such communal assemblies and co-federations thereof have embedded participatory councils that self-manage implementation within the bounds of their respective mandates and protocols. Such a communal economy aims towards providing each and all with free access to needs.

***The above point is specifically for community assembly groups that are at a mature level development to the point where they have sufficient power, means of production, and popular support.

Alternative framing that synthesizes the first three points of unity into a single point:

Participatory Democracy: Participatory democracy refers to a combination of direct collective decision making, without rulers, where people freely participate in decision making and implementation of decisions. ***By condensing the substance of the first three points into a single point, a lot of clutter disappears. From here, people can fill out this point through their own descriptions or through copying, pasting, and blending some of the more essential sentences from the first three points of unity listed as needed. An alternative framing for this point could be “self-management” in such a way that includes the substance of direct democracy, horizontality, and free association. As coherent as the first three points are as separate points rounding each other out, they are rather cumbersome and can be difficult to wrap one’s mind around. Creating a single point that combines the essential features of those points can help clear up confusion. Something like a practical unity of Participatory Democracy (as defined above), Direct Action, and Mutual aid can lead to a lot of coherence and functional use for groups starting from scratch or otherwise developing such points of unity overtime.

https://usufructcollective.wordpress.com/2023/01/14/liberatory-points-of-unity-template-2023-remix/

#anarchism #socialism #communism #communalism #assemblies #socialmovements #popularorganizations
#anarchy #freedom #egalitarianism #solidarity #anarchistcommunism #anarchocommunism #libertariansocialism #libertariancommunism #commune #community

In a communist society, political economic organizations– including communal reproduction, production, and distribution–would be decentralized and co-federated. The virtue of such decentralization would be the right kinds of decentralization, in the right ways, in the right contexts, for the right ends, in tandem with other features that enable such decentralization to be rounded out. Such a virtue of decentralization has decentralized and federated decision making, power, and planning from the bottom-up through horizontalist participatory associations. Such right kinds of decentralization of the economy enable political economic assemblies to exist at scales that are easy to deliberate within and self-manage (which can in turn easily scale out into confederated forms and networks), enable redundancy of functions within and between multiplicities of locales in such a way that fits people’s needs and preferences (creating more resilience when it comes to disasters and emergencies and everyday life), enable greater degrees of self-sufficiency, and provide various ecological benefits. Such a decentralization would also blend town and country: infusing each with good/desirable functions of the other as well as creating mutualistic relations between more urban and more rural associations. Additionally, decentralization of political economic organizations into multiplicities thereof (as needed and desired) enables people to find communities that make sense for them, allows people to use relevant local knowledge to solve problems, and enables people on local scales to utilize informal social relations, approval, and disapproval to supplement upkeeping the commons. Despite various benefits that localization can have, there are many contexts where considerations come into play that make intercommunal and confederated economic decision making and planning into something that makes more sense for multiple reasons such as: 1. That which affects multiple communities should be decided by multiple communities as various decisions are not just about a single block, neighborhood, town, or city 2. To pool needs/abilities/volunteers/resources/technology/ideas/proposals together to solve problems and develop projects on multiple scales 3. To provide for needs and desires when local scales are not absolutely self-sufficient (which they rarely are) 4. To reduce overall labor/work through mutual support and assistance on an intercommunal scale. 5. As an extension of choice and freedom of intercommunal associations to undertake joint projects. 6. To uphold responsibility and commitment towards other communities and towards forging the right kind of interdependence between communities. The above are examples of reasons why intercommunal decision making and planning can make sense in various contexts for various functions compared to mere localized approaches. Decentralized and Co-federated planning and economics enable the benefits of non-local scales without the cons of centralized power over and above horizontal collectives. And such co-federation is a desideratum beyond mere necessity as the right kind of decentralization is not about absolute self-sufficiency but the right kinds of self-governance and self-sufficiency in tandem with radically egalitarian ways of organizing interdependence. Such a mutually interrelated and multitudinous political economy enables people to associate in various communal associations, embedded councils, working groups, and varied social groups that fit their dynamic preferences– enabling a radical differentiation and pluralism in harmony with horizontalist freedoms and duties. 

https://usufructcollective.wordpress.com/2022/02/01/the-conquest-of-sandwiches/

#communism #socialism #communalism #kropotkin #anarchism #anarchy #utopia #ethics #libertariansocialism #libertariancommunism #anarchistcommunism #anarchocommunism #commons #decentralization

Like a lot of new arrivals, we’re taking our time to see the lie of the land, try out different apps, learn how things are done here. We will respond to respectful interaction, but if we haven’t noticed your query or we haven’t followed you back, give us a nudge. By way of introduction: we’re into #MutualAid #solidarity #CommunitySelfManagement #WorkingClassSelfEmpowerment #LibertarianCommunism