If an anarchist is someone who rejects illegitimate hierarchies then anarchy cannot be purely communist or capitalist, as both contain hierarchies that may be considered legitimate or illegitimate by an individual, and the only real difference between the two is the duration you subject yourself to the hierarchy, and the method of value exchange. In a communist society it is expected that everyone would just do whatever they want and find ways that they like to contribute to society. Through this, all needs will be met by the cooperation of the collective. I feel the need to make the case that there are only small and insignificant differences from capitalism.
The first and most legitimate hierarchy is the one you have over yourself. You cannot be autonomous if you do not own yourself, therefore having a hierarchy over yourself. If you own yourself, every action you take is one that you own, therefore you own the benefits and consequences of those actions. If this is not true, then you are not responsible for anything that you do. If you hit someone without reason it would not be your fault with this understanding, which is not compatible with either ideology, so it must be that you own yourself. When you begin life you start out with only the tools given to you at birth, your body and mind. If you use those tools to learn, acquire, and build, anything that comes of those actions is a direct result of you and you must decide how to benefit from it. From there you can either choose to submit to a collective system where the community is the hierarchy, and constant, or you can choose to be an individual and sell your labor to acquire property for yourself, where the property owner or boss is the hierarchy, and only lasts as long as you are on a persons property, or handling their property. As an individual you are free to do as you wish with and on your own property. You have acquired it and therefore you get to rule over it. When you work for someone it is likely that they own the property and all materials within that property, therefore you must use it in a way specified by the owner. If you sign a type of contract of employment stating how you will act on the property and how you will use the property, then that is of your own free will and implies you have decided that the hierarchy is one you find legitimate enough to submit to. In a collective no one owns anything and therefore no one can make rules of their own and all must agree to live similarly and share the benefits of their labor, this is the hierarchy of the collective, and you must accept that as a legitimate hierarchy to submit to it.
In capitalism the method of value exchange is simple and understood. In communism it’s said there wouldn’t be an exchange in value, but that isn’t true. For instance, a man is hungry so another man gives him food. If the man then does something in return for the man because he gave him food, that’s a trade. If he doesn’t, it doesn’t matter, it’s still a trade. In communism you don’t need to trade directly because it is assumed that you have created value in some way. Sometimes you may do something that has directly helped that person. Sometimes you may help other people, who then go on to help the person you are dealing with. The chain can go on and on, but it doesn’t matter how far it goes it is still a trade. Value is just assumed to have been traded by each individual rather than the trade of physical value.
Capitalism is seen to be the more hierarchal because people with no property to sell must rent their self out to people who do. I don’t see it that way, I see it not as renting yourself out, but selling your labor. It’s like a glass half empty or glass half full kind of thing, they both are saying the same thing, it’s just your personal perspective, but I think the wording matters. Renting yourself out seems to imply wage slavery, while selling your labor implies that you are trading labor for capital freely. You can also use your labor to grow food and trade it. You have used your time and energy to acquire food and can then trade it while accounting for your physical labor, therefore selling labor. It is a choice to work for another and sell your labor to them rather than laboring for yourself, but if it what you would prefer to do, then you should be free to do so. Not everyone in an individualist society would choose to gain property to be traded and will resort only to selling their labor as a means of providing for their self. Others will horde property and turn it into more value for their self, to do this they will have to also buy labor from others, allowing others to obtain property for their self. Individualism/capitalism is hierarchal in the sense that those with property rule the property they own, and therefore can impose rules upon their property which others must follow, but not in the sense of wage slavery since there are more ways to create value and gain property other than working for someone else. Also the hierarchy over the individual ends when they leave the property of another person, or the contracted agreement has been fulfilled.
On the other hand, collectivists/communists see no need to own property for their self and prefer to cooperate without the need for direct trade, assuming that all other members of society are helping in some way and deserving of all benefits of the society, there is no need to sell your labor and to submit yourself to the rules of one individual for a duration of time. However, if the good of the community depends on you to take action, even if you didn’t want to, you would have to. If you are the only one around that can solve a problem, the collective will turn to you. You get nothing extra for having specific skills, being more motivated, or providing more than others. It is said that the desire to help others will be the driving force of those people and will compel them to help, therefore the majority has control over the minority. Without the exceptional individuals in a collectivist society being compelled to provide for those that cannot the system wouldn’t work. Those who are intelligent and compassionate would be controlled by the urge to provide for those who are not. The average person will still be contributing in helpful ways but not to the extent of others, and some would contribute even less. You are also unable to escape the hierarchy of the collective, if you wish be your own person outside the collective and grow your own food and build your own house it still wouldn’t belong to you because society would reject your claim of ownership. One individual cannot stand against the collective and would be taken over by force or forced to assimilate to gain access to what they need to survive.
In conclusion I think that what is important is for anarchists to realize that there is more than one way to do everything. Multiple ways work, and multiple ways don’t work. Fear and violence don’t seem to provide a peaceful and productive world, so governments are out. We can all agree on that. But when it comes to where we go from there we can’t agree. We call ourselves intellectuals and yet bicker like statists do during elections. Mindless arguments propagating our preferred system with attacks on the other. If in this essay it seems that I lean more towards capitalism, that’s because I do, but I still appreciate that there are others who would rather do things differently and I see the potential for communism to work. If that’s what makes sense to you then make it happen, be the best communist you can be, and I mean it. We don’t have to fight over who is right and wrong. Both ideologies are systems of exchange and organization where each individual works in a collective system and helps grow society. The methods that we use are irrelevant and all similar systems should exist. We should not say you must make money to provide for yourself, you must work within the collective, or make anyone choose between one or the other. The lesser of the two evils is still evil. Let everyone decide their own way. Without communism you are a wage slave, without capitalism you are a slave to the collective, and if you are forced to decide one way or the other with no alternatives you are a slave to the systems constructed by individuals before you that should have no control over how you live your life. Anarchists are changing the world right now, now is the time to set aside our differences and unite if we ever wish to succeed.
If you made it through this essay please share your thoughts below. Even though I am hoping for upvotes what I really want is to get a conversation started. We need to figure out ways to come together and make a real change. So please, if you think I’m wrong on something, call me out and lets talk about it. If I have missed something, add it in below. Don’t miss a chance to make a difference, no matter how small it may be.
