France, Coordination of Anarchist Groups - IAL #98 - Economy -- Money and anarchism (en, fr)

This article was previously published reflections and discussions ? e ? s militant group 
the Haute-Savoie for the Coordination of Anarchist Groups. It does not purport to reflect 
the position of all of the CGA, but to present lines compared to the monetary system aims.
What is money?
The term "money" is used here to designate the currency in form of coins or banknotes. 
Historically, money appears there are about 5,000 years to promote economic exchanges. He 
then takes the form of coins or metal coppers. Money is however not the first way to 
assign a value that you want to exchange. Before and simultaneously, we used anything 
considered rare, so precious, such as shells, salt, metals ... Some human societies past 
and barter (direct exchange between two objects) to the currency exchange, that is to say 
they have determined the value of an object with respect to exchange of a currency. Thus, 
it is conceivable that animal skin worth two monetary units (which corresponds in our 
monetary system 2 euros). The exchange then was to give the skin to receive the value 
thereof in the form of money (shell, ivory, silver ...).
Why do you use the money?
Currently, in most societies, money is everywhere. It allows you to feed in buying food, 
clothing (buying clothes), heat, move, get various things. Almost everything at a price 
estimated in monetary terms: such a thing is valued at 20 euros, another 25 dollars ... 
The problem is that hardly anyone is wondering why we have to pay for a good or service. 
Surely it must be a return to the good or service to ensure equity exchange. But why pay 
money for some rare ? e ? s or hard earned in exchange for his labor? In addition, recall 
here that the wage is the theft of the value of the work of the proletarians, because it 
is not difficult to see that the work is not paid back to where it should be, relative to 
capital. It is therefore logical that we rechignions to pay for the necessary. Except that 
the principle of a monetary capitalist system is to encourage consumption in order to sell 
goods and services. Obviously this implies consumption in return for payment of a price 
representing the monetary value of the good or service. The bourgeoisie as the ruling 
class owns the means of production and distribution, therefore has an interest in what the 
people in general have a little money to consume. This does not mean that many people are 
excluded from the system. Moreover, to preserve its privileges, the bourgeoisie's 
interests to ensure that the people get rich. For enrichment gives rise to a less 
precarious daily, can make time to reflect on the social organization and challenge 
inequality. However, the bourgeoisie needs ally ? e ? s, and even if they are from ? e ? s 
modest or insecure environments. More precisely, it is favorable to the enrichment of a 
portion of Popular provided that it is gentrified classes, that is to say integrates 
bourgeois ideology.
Adverse consequences
We affirm that the money is a factor of inequality. In fact, people who do not have money 
are in fact excluded from society, since it is based on the circulation of money. Of 
course it is possible to live without money in this society, but we can not take advantage 
of everything it offers. For example, instead of buying clothes can be used for structures 
that give his or exchange against others on alternative "markets". In addition to the 
precarious nature of parallel systems, some needs are necessarily pay, such as rail or 
acts of care. Talk about health just to prove our words! For treatment ? e must use a 
device (insurance, mutual, hedge, help ...). All this costs money to the individual or to 
society, nothing is free. Moreover, the fact that everyone does not have the same amount 
of money restricts the field of possible more difficult to access when you do not know how 
to pay for his studies. We can also see that the gap between rich and poor is not ready to 
be filled. Not only are there rich and poor - is already unacceptable, but it also speaks 
of a "gap" between these two categories to show that the difference is substantial. And to 
this is added the fact that the gap is not stabilized and dig a little deeper: the rich 
get richer, the poor get poorer. Normal we do we say, the rich are made ? e ? s to be very 
rich and the very poor poor! In 2011, there are approximately 8,729,000 poor people in 
France, 1 million more than 20011.
Inequality factor, the money factor is therefore violence. When you do not have money it 
is not illogical to try to get them to the detriment of those who have. Where flights and 
other behaviors motivated by a desire to appropriate the money we did not. This violence 
is also expressed by different attitudes such as greed, envy, and selfishness that have 
effects for the withdrawal and neglect of the collective interest. Too preoccupied ? e ? s 
by "how to get and keep the money," we lack time to think about "how to break this unequal 
system by nature."
A world without money?
Given this fact, we can already claim the drastic decrease if the free goods and services 
essential for food, clothing, health, housing ... Similarly, wages must be increased 
consistently to cope with cost of living, waiting to abolish the wage system. These 
proposals, which do not exclude others, want tracks to promote our emancipation and 
autonomy in order to fully mobilize on issues of social organization.
But our ultimate goal is the abolition of money and currency in general. First because in 
anarchist society we do not need it anymore: libertarian communism is based on mutual aid, 
solidarity, collective responsibility, money has lost its centrality and organizer of the 
Company. What form (s) (s) will then trade? We may use the barter economy, that is to say, 
the direct exchange between two goods or services. An example: a person seeking a certain 
amount of bread will seek a person willing to provide it, in exchange for assistance in 
making this bread. This is what we might call the interindividual barter. But it will also 
interest to make the community a trading partner. Indeed, one could argue for example that 
a company guaranteeing an individual access to electricity would be based, in turn, 
waiting for the individual participation in collective good operation. This participation 
may take the form of material support (help picking products of the earth) or intellectual 
(teaching).
Then we want the disappearance of the money because it creates conflict. This is not 
because a company assert its egalitarian nature that it will necessarily. We saw some 
disadvantages of a monetary system, and we affirm that they may well reappear in the 
anarchist society. Just one illustration: the resentment of those who have less money 
towards those who have more. Even if we can reduce inequalities in establishing such a 
device of the type "who earn more pay more, earning less pay less," we will always have 
people who do not have the same level of wealth. And we insist: this is the real problem. 
In addition, such a redistributive system will not remove the feeling of embarrassment, 
shame or humiliation that some people may experience when they are aware of their 
situation and realize that they live in is constantly helped by of other, they can not 
emancipate itself without the roles are reversed. Indeed, in this case there is nothing 
rewarding to receive devices related to our financial situation. In anarchist society 
would be better to draw a line on money and be independent.


Group Haute-Savoie


1. Source: insee.fr . 8,729,000 people have a lower standard of living in poverty. The 
poverty line is usually set at 60% of the median standard of living.