It's voluntaryist in nature

and as are many other economic platforms

what was the original topic we starded with?

there is no reason for capitalism to be the predominate platform, corporatism is just capitalism clinging to the state and ironically it's the only way it can be sustained

I doubt a free market can truly exist under capitalism

I suppose we were arguing on the nature of communism

and you argued it's anti-equality of opportunity, when I'd argue it allows total association and dissociation and gives more opportunity than any other system

"Pure communism is freedom, Freedom from coercion, Freedom from force, Freedom to associate, Freedom from class and material slavery. By nullifying the value of property we can truly experience our subjective value of it."
Absolute freedom is anarchy until the strong controls you. In communism are you free too hire people under you in order to manage them for more efficiency under a set task? then thats just a speech

there is a force of some kind stopping you from doing things that will harm the system

You could try to do so

but whats stopping them is that they get all the rewards you could give them and more

essentially making it laughable

but there is a force taking anything you give them and resetting it

making everyone *equal* again

what do you mean?

what force?

No they can keep shit

whatever system you have keeping the system in place, anarcho-communism only works if there are no humans

It works perfectly fine with humans

capitalism works and fails because of humans

*venezuela*

Why do you think the keynesians start throbbing when the market fails

That was state socialist

I'm not pro state-socialist

I would only seek Ancom given it were in a post-scarcity climate and involved a voluntaryist platform

rather than the coercion of a state and the lack of infrastructure and resource to conduct any transformation

communism always becomes socialism because they realize they need a strong hand to stop people from disobeying the system

How can you disobey a gift economy?

communism has never existed so I'm not sure how you can say that

how can you say it works fine?

I don't

I aim to build or rather inspire the infrastructure for the hypothetical system

and I conclude that it would be the logical conclusion of a post-scarcity society given it were stable

communism has never existed because it cant. You need a government to stop people from gaining too much power and it becomes totalitarian because competitive people will try make more than others through companies or gangs. let a gang go free too long and you got a state in your country, ask mexico

What

or look at google, they are basically a country

now
they even have armed land the local government cant enter.

"you need a government to stop people from gaining too much power"
1) this is incredibly vague
2) what does it have to do with communism

I don't think you understand communism, in a communist system you cannot 'become too powerful' as the means of production would be available for all to milk

ok, how will the system stay equal and distribute the resources without a government of some kind?

3 ways