The ideology of "Homaitism"
don't know exactly what to title this so that'll do. this is maybe a topic that could fit in ~talk but since it's something i came up with i'll put it here for now. move if necessary. i also don't know if it will "work" in the sense that it'll generate a discussion, but we'll see. never know until you try.
anyways, i am a writer at heart and to put a long story short one of the more interesting concepts i have going on is the social/political ideology of "homaitism", an ideology which at is core opposes property entirely and seeks to establish shared ownership of everything in a society. in a more Wikipedian serse, i think this best describes the ideas at play here:
[Homaitism is] the general term applied to a collection of far-left political philosophies and ideologies which, broadly speaking, reject the ideas of property ownership and sometimes small government. Many Homaitist schools of thought advocate the establishment of a large social net, the socialization of the most important services in a society (such as those of fire, police, healthcare, and so on), and the formation of a government which serves most if not all of the needs of its people. Others resolve that this is incompatible with a Homaitist society and suggest a more communal organization to society, in which groups are formed voluntarily on the basis of need rather than through the establishment of a state authority.
i think it goes without saying that there are some significant flaws in this idea, which is primarily what i want to explore. my main questions here that i'd be interested to hear people's responses to about this, if there's anything to be said (which maybe there's not? dunno):
-
what impression you get from that as an idea. far too utopian? far too many holes to be viable? impractical but not impossible? possible on a certain level? things like that.
-
are there reservations or flaws you see beyond the obvious questions of whether this is utopian or in any way viable?
other comments about the general idea here are also welcome (especially if you think some of these ideas are dumb and contradictory and/or would not work together at all). if people don't think this is enough to go off of i'll try to post some of the more detailed writings/sketches i have which elaborate on it more.
Right, "homaitism" sounds like it's just another name for Marxist communism to me. I'm curious @alyaza, how does your concept differ from that?
well i suspect that it's not, but i should probably ask what you mean by "Marxist communism" first since that's ambiguous to me.
Fair enough, but I'm not a Marxist and if I've learned anything from the internet over the years, it's to never volunteer a definition of a hotly contested political position that is not my own!
i wouldn't really describe myself as one either (i probablyfall much more in line with libertarian socialists and similarly leftist folks), it's just i've not really heard the term and there are a couple of things it could be interpreted as that might lead down wildly different paths. it would kinda suck to elaborate on something you never asked about, after all!
not really, no. the most glaring difference between them is probably that Homaitism ultimately seeks the abolition of both private and personal property, which immediately distinguishes Homaitist ideology from just being Marxism or a socialist/communist offshoot or a variant form of anarchism, although they all can overlap. there are no serious ideologies in the world (that I'm aware of anyways) that seek total property abolition and ultimately, that's kind of the lynch pin of Homaitism, hence the "too utopian/un-viable?" question.
there are other details that distinguish them, but I'm away from my laptop currently and that holds a lot of the writing i do have on this so they aren't necessarily available to me at this particular moment. i'll get back to you on those later today i guess.
Private property in communist theory refers to the means of production while personal property refers to, well, personal property. Clothes, your toothbrush, your computer, your house* these are personal items. A factory, a tractor, a railroad, an apartment building, a telecommunications grid, a huge swatch of land, these are private property.
* defined as shelter you can reasonably occupy. Trump Tower is not a "house".
I think this underscores how poorly the left is understood in the Western world, no one is coming for your toothbrush