[zabuni]

I've seen very apolitical people do a buy nothing for kids stuff. I called it the great chain of baby stuff. Just last week a coworker dropped off some diapers that their kid grew out of at another coworkers desk who could use them. Cribs, toys, clothes, handed from one family to another. I've seen a crib go to three different families.

[liveoneggs]

Our crib was on its 6th kid (I only have two) when I got rid of it. I assume it is well into the 10th by now.

[cauthon]

What do politics have to do with it?

[adamjb]

The project has a strong anarchist spirit.

> The Buy Nothing Project is about setting the scarcity model of our cash economy aside in favor of creatively and collaboratively sharing the abundance around us

[j2kun]

Somehow this feels less like anarchy and more like a free market solution, where the market finally realizes that monetary value is not the only factor in rational decision making.

[adamjb]

This is absolutely anarchist and can be placed as part of a long tradition of mutual aid that can be traced back through Kropotkin.

I don't think it's possible to view this as a free market solution unless you want the term "free market" to lose all meaning. The free market does not have a monopoly on rational decision making. Any market is based around exchange, which this project expressedly rejects.

[j2kun]

Not all markets are based around exchange. Kidney exchange markets, for instance, have a component based on a donor giving a kidney for nothing in exchange, starting a chain of kidney donations that could otherwise not occur.

Matching markets are another example that is not based around exchange

[kubanczyk]

It can be traced back to hunter-gatherer populations honestly. So what?

Mutual aid is pretty far away from abolishing the state or abolishing the private ownership of the means of production, which were the bigger ideas of Bakunin and Kropotkin.

[chandra381]

The entirety of modern economics is based on the presupposition that monetary value is the only factor in rational decision making.

A "free market" is literally defined as - "a system in which the *prices* for goods and services are self-regulated by the open market and by consumers" - all goods and services have a monetary price in such a system.

It is both inappropriate and in bad taste to call this a free market solution when it is clearly not.

[j2kun]

> inappropriate and in bad taste

This is inappropriate and in bad taste, and you missed the point of my comment.

[bgreezy]

so you either don't understand free market theory or anarchism or both!

[HenryBemis]

Wikipedia on Free Market Theory: In economics, a free market is a system in which the prices for goods and services are self-regulated by the open market and by consumers. In a free market, the laws and forces of supply and demand are free from any intervention by a government or other authority, and from all forms of economic privilege, monopolies and artificial scarcities.

Anarchism.. in my definition, is the lack of a singular authority. Not to be confused with "chaos".

I see this example (Buy Nothing Project) breaking the linear-ness of economy. Harvest, Build, Sell, Consume/Use, Discard. No re-use, no re-cycle. This is not sustainable, especially with population growing. We need to re-use. I don't think that anyone is doing (donating/giving away) to hurt the profits of XYZ company, I strongly believe that we all got so much 'garbage' in our home, things that we haven't touched/used for a looooong time, that as the Minimalists said (the first 120 podcast episodes - after Patreon I dropped them) "find this thing a new home".

[KozmoNau7]

Circular economy is what we should be working towards, to get the most possible utility out of any given resource, rather than squandering them in the mistaken belief that there's always going to be plenty more where it came from.

> "I don't think that anyone is doing (donating/giving away) to hurt the profits of XYZ company, I strongly believe that we all got so much 'garbage' in our home, things that we haven't touched/used for a looooong time"

Both motivations are true for my girlfriend and me. We both want to make sure we don't get bogged down with superfluous stuff, so we give them to people who will appreciate and use them, but we also see it as an opportunity to not support corporations that do not have our (societal) best interests in mind.

The less stuff we buy, the less our money is used for purposes we disagree with or even abhor, in many cases. By buying the few things we do buy from small companies with responsible profiles, that's another step towards our money going to better purposes.

I don't really believe in the "power of the consumer" or "voting with your wallet" (both of which just lead to unnecessary consumption), hence why we try to buy as little new stuff as possible and prefer buying second hand whenever possible, but at least the little money we do spend won't be going (directly) to the exploiter's pockets.

[yjftsjthsd-h]

Insulting people is against site rules and doesn't advance the conversation. If you disagree with someone, explain whatever you think they're missing.

[adolph]

Clearly they havn’t seen https://wonderfulloaf.org

Once you see cash as a broad p2p communication method it’s hard to imagine an Anarchist seeking to undo it as it allows people to collaborate over space and time in so many more ways than barter or physical gift economies.

[eyelidlessness]

Speaking as a former anarchist, saying it’s hard to imagine an anarchist not embracing ____ is folly.

[WaxProlix]

They're not opposed to currency necessarily, as I read it, but a scarcity model which happens to be tied to the current paradigm.

[smt88]

I don't think "political" or "anarchist" are the right labels here. Anti-capitalist maybe? Unorthodox?

Just because economic systems are politicized in our society doesn't mean it is inherently political to change your own personal economic system.