LeftLibetyAppendix

3. Therefore, it is rational to decrease inventories which protects yourself against failure. Not only that but it is also rational tomorrow and the next day. What isn't rational is to decrease prices which is why capitalists don't do it. And that is why they don't do it over the long term either. There is no incentive unless you like your companies to go under. So the question becomes: what happens to employment if I decrease production?

"The second point (sorry about writing four of these) is that anarchists really need to develop our own distinctive form of consequentialist ethics."

Yes, I agree. I think I might have to set up a skype conversation on this very subject. If I'm not mistaken, I think anarchopac is attempting to do exactly this. Thanks for all your comments:D

I think many of the problems would be solved by a Mutualist society. Going beyond that would be my solution but that just my opinion.

...Why are they against the G20? Am I against the G20? etc.

I think of the BB as a natural outgrowth and frustration within the protest movement. I didn't hear anything about the protest (in the US) until BB. Why doesn't the media talk to the organizers? Why not explore this subject? Instead, protesters are shut out. We could also ask why protesters dress up, sing, dance, carry funny signs etc. It's to get attention. BUT NO ONE IS LISTENING. So people end up breaking shit.

Yes, I have. I think most class analysis (by different groups) get it right but they tend to focus on particular aspects. So Agorist focus on the state and how the rich pull resources. I agree but I think it ignores the fact that states come about through the rich and powerful. Agorist also have a limited concept of liberty which reduces the whole concept to voluntarism - while ignoring social coercion.

That was exactly my thought. I'm not really sure why nobody seems to have made a response to this subject.