Reddit mentions of Debt: The First 5000 Years

No problem. This sub can always do with more discussion!

So here's some responses:

> Yeah I see you're right. Except maybe for the rational part? Why wouldn't the feasibility of a thing be rational to consider? That just seems practical.

There are different ways to answer this but, for the sake of simplicity, look at this issue via a different example (the logic is the same) -- slavery. We, as Communalists, explicitly oppose the very conditions of it (i.e. Hierarchy) as unjust and immoral, not merely its symptoms and particular forms (i.e. wage-slavery). Now, if we look back at the history of human Civilization for a minute, we will clearly observe how deeply entrenched, normative and pervasive it was. Not just in one or two continents but global networks of slavery and domination of humans by humans existed. Without any stretch of the imagination, the cause of slavery-abolition, that is, the movement for the abolition of the conditions of slavery as such, either by force against slave-owning classes or by constitutional reform, was an exceedingly improbable and infeasible one to enact. Yet, it was never not the cause of the just, the moral cause, and the rational one. Because, again, justice is of a different order of logic to probability. Something either is or is not just. It doesn't matter how trying or difficult. There were also attempts, by more reformist actors, to improve housing conditions, recreation facilities and working hours for slaves; measures such as these are more likely to be palatable for slavers to concede, because it means the conditions of slavery remain intact. The logic of reformism always takes this form: short-term "victories" at the cost of prolonging, or worse, obscuring the conditions of a symptom. The outcome of this remains for all to see today: chattel slavery has for the most part been abolished and is illegal, sure, yet Hierarchy persists, the domination of human by human persists, the domination of nature by human persists...

To be clear, we don't oppose superficial gains through reform out-right. If child literacy improves this is positive. All like examples are filed under "of course!". But we are dedicated to the abolition of the social conditions which necessitate such reforms. Achieve this and you destroy the need for countless other reformist policies altogether. It's rational to be unreasonable about this.

> I remember a while back you linked to a website that allowed one to have e-books (or PDFs?)

Yeah I did but I can't remember which ones now. Failing that, what about photocopying a library book? Or asking a mate to print it out? I see there's $12 copies on Amazon now. That's less than photocopying the whole thing no? :)