/leftypol/ - Leftist Politically Incorrect

>>480083
DIY production won't be as efficient as having a large plant with large machines, but it might be a way to build a socialist mode of production within capitalism. There is a related thread here that discusses some ideas >>>/tech/12778


Software is already all built on top of open source, even the largest corporations can't ignore this. I believe the open source model is a type of socialist production, except it cannot produce tangeable goods and things you can eat. But with smaller manufacturing machines, 3d printers and such, it's possible to make more and more stuff yourself.

As an example, one of my favorite youtubers is a russian guy who has a blog about him building stuff in his garage. Over time he overhauled a metal lathe and began making more complex things, he's currently working on making a formula car from scratch based on a yamaha r1 motorcycle engine. I think it's impressive what he's accomplished, but he's made model airplanes and jet engine stuff before too.

>>480090
>DIY production won't be as efficient as having a large plant with large machines
Well you still would buy many industrially produced components, so it's not like you make everything from scratch. But you're right, it's not filling a big building with machines to produce things at maximum efficiency. I don't know how'd you'd sneak something like that past the neolibs, without them noticing and inserting their agents of decay into your operation that ruin all efficiency.
>a way to build a socialist mode of production within capitalism.
Yes if that's possible, that's definitely the way to go. Tho honestly this diy scheme isn't going to uproot the current structures.
>There is a related thread
I'll check it out
>Software is already all built on top of open source, even the largest corporations can't ignore this. I believe the open source model is a type of socialist production, except it cannot produce tangeable goods and things you can eat. But with smaller manufacturing machines, 3d printers and such, it's possible to make more and more stuff yourself.
I largely agree with that, except with your point that free open source software production has to be necessarily socialist production. Capitalist production can do FOSS as well. I think FOSS inhabits the market competition aspect of capitalism while proprietary software inhabits the monopoly cartel aspect of capitalism. Also proprietary technology sometimes creates feudal social relations.
>building stuff in his garage. Over time he overhauled a metal lathe and began making more complex things, he's currently working on making a formula car from scratch based on a yamaha r1 motorcycle engine.
Yeah that's really advanced stuff. Maybe diy race cars are bit too ambitious, at least initially.

>>480083
This is nice, but the real solution is ending neo-liberalism. Living under it isn't broadly viable at this point, let alone trying to mass-produce under it, and the way things are going the financial sector is just going to take their winnings and leave the west while the workers there are left with a hollowed-out industrial sector.

>>480100
>ending neo-liberalism
Okay but that's easier said than done, and seizing the means of production is the point

>>480097
Just thinking out loud here: how does DIY production differ from a worker coop? We're still inside capitalism, you have to interface with it somehow…

>>480100
>but the real solution is ending neo-liberalism
right, but unless you have a quick way of doing that, we need mitigation strategies for harm reduction in the interim.

>the financial sector is just going to take their winnings and leave the west while the workers there are left with a hollowed-out industrial sector.
I'd argue that has already happened in some sense, the western industrial sector has been hollowed out. But i do not think that the imperial big bourgoisie intends to leave. It appears that they want total militarization of the west in a last ditch attempt of violently imposing their neoliberal doctrine on the entire world.

>>480111
>how does DIY production differ from a worker coop?
My thesis is that neoliberals do not want (for unknown reasons) industrial production in their economic circuits. As in workers in factories building consumer commodities with extremely efficient machine tools. Whether a production facility is corporate controlled or worker controlled seems to make little difference to them. The neo-liberals are a lot more prejudiced towards worker-coops, as evidenced by how impossibly difficult it is to get capital for starting a coop, but they still are plenty prejudiced against regular bourgeois production businesses too. As in they actively try to sabotage those.

DIY production differs in the sense that it removes the production step that produces the consumer commodity from intermediate-commodity inputs, from the economic circuits.

>We're still inside capitalism, you have to interface with it somehow…
You have to buy intermediate commodities for your diy projects, that's how you interface.

I tried analyzing what the neoliberals do, thinking it was some clever scheme for gaining wealth and power, with nested layers of subterfuge and what not, but i couldn't find anything that made sense. I basically think that they're gremlins that infest and destroy factories. So if you want to produce things avoid building factories.

Distribution is almost as important as production, it would be pointless to grow food if you can't get it into comrades hands in time. Of course we can piggy back off of existing infrastructure for shipping, but logistics probably informs what can be produced practically (and also requires money).

>>480131
>Distribution is almost as important as production
true
>it would be pointless
>if you can't get it into comrades hands
true again
>Of course we can piggy back off of existing infrastructure for shipping
just curious, do you see a reason to attempt building alternate distribution system ?
>logistics probably informs what can be produced practically
it goes both ways, logistics gets influenced by production too.

>>480110
At this point, there's been enough said about it. Easy or not, it's time to do it.

>>480115
There's no "quick way" to do anything. The quickest way is to start the work now and not stop.

>I'd argue that has already happened in some sense, the western industrial sector has been hollowed out. But i do not think that the imperial big bourgoisie intends to leave. It appears that they want total militarization of the west in a last ditch attempt of violently imposing their neoliberal doctrine on the entire world.

The industrial sector is hollowed out, yes, but the financial sector, the cash, is still here. Lose both and it's an even bigger disaster than it already is. We need to reindustrialize, and small-scale won't cut it.

I think you're right that they don't intend to leave… to an extent, anyway. Yes, they want to militarize the west and crush resistance, and we need to prepare to crush that and stop them from fleeing.

>>480144
>The quickest way is to start the work now and not stop.
So grinding for political power ?
I guess that requires analyzing what the neo-libs do to entrench their power and then use that to fuel the grind, the harder they seek to entrench: the more fuel. This type of activity is incredibly miserable for normal people, we won't be able to do it unless we find a way to counteract the "mental abrasion".

>We need to reindustrialize, and small-scale won't cut it.
The small scale stuff is something that can be done right now.
Reindustrializing only happens as a public sector expansion via appropriate industrial policy, that requires political changes, ie later.

>Yes, they want to militarize
>and we need to prepare to crush that
Sure, reigning in military spending is needed, but how would you achieve that ?
They continue to provoke conflicts to justify military spending.
They make the people in other countries fight and die, to avoid political backlash at home.
If they try to conscript westerners, we'll have a unstoppable peace movement of epic scale within a week, but as long as the dying is externalized…

>and stop them from fleeing.
This seems like sentimentalism, why would you bother with that ?
Besides they made most of the world their enemy, where'd they go.

>>480133
>just curious, do you see a reason to attempt building alternate distribution system?

You have to pay for shipping, so that means whatever we produce, part of it would have to be sold so that we have cash to pay for our operations. An alternate distribution network would be necessary if we can't do that, or for example if we have perishable food that we need delivered quickly, locally.

Can we think of a commodity that's going to be the most impactful for the people to produce for themselves?
I'm sitting here thinking what to eat for lunch so it's gotta be food right?

Let's think it through:

The criteria should be:

1. It has to make sense for us to produce ourselves, either because it frees us from reliance on corporations, or because it can be made competitively and we get rich, and use that money for socialist shit.

I was going to also include this:

<2. It has to be uncomplicated enough that production can be feasable

But then I remembered something: one of the ways imperialists extract money from the third world is by taking their raw materials, processing them into commodities at home and then selling those commodities back. This works mainly because the exchange-value that is added during refining raw materials is more profitable than creating those raw materials in the first place. Now I don't know if this is true because the imperialists can use force to secure more lucrative contracts like that, or it's because the imperialists have more advanced means of production (more capital) and can use higher technology to add more value. I think it's the latter actually, but in any case that's the mechanism.

This leads me to believe that rather than like trying to produce steel at a small scale, we should buy raw steel and create high tech shit. Ship out parts between production groups and have an assembly stage. Maybe making high precision tools, cnc machines or other instruments would be worth it.

But perhaps small scale production is only one aspect of a functioning mutual aid network. The more people that can coordinate the more skills and labour power you have, and the more of the what's needed from an economy can be obtained.

I think you can start really simple: get together with some folks and cook a bunch of food. Like cooking is a type of production. You can make a huge pot of ramen and someone with a pasta making machine can make some noodles, everyone pitches in some stuff and you can have food for few days, plus it's fun to socialize.

The next step would be to try and make meals using locally grown ingredients and find more ways people can pitch in. This is just an example, maybe we can think of other ways beside collectively feeding ourselves, but that's a powerful one.

So I think you have to start simple and grow an economy before you know exactly what higher-tech stuff you need. Now I'm curious about already existing or past-existing mutual aid networks that have been created…

>>480162
So you want
- food preparation with a local distribution network.
- Value added metal production, for "high tech shit" like machine tools.
Sounds reasonable enough, can i ask why no end-consumer stuff ?

> It has to make sense for us to produce ourselves, either because it frees us from reliance on corporations, or because it can be made competitively and we get rich, and use that money for socialist shit.
I can agree with the idea of reducing corporate dependency.

But if you want to get rich in current conditions, there's basically just energy and war industry, every other sector is getting shafted. Those are very dangerous monopolies that are racking in preposterous profit margins, they will sabotage your operation or just flat out murder you if you compete with them.

>>480171
Actually isn't what I want closer to a commune then?

>>480199
Lets say there is some overlap with a commune.