You're assuming Marx equals no incentives, but that's not quite right. Early Soviet industrialization was brutally effective precisely because survival itself was the incentive. Post-apocalypse, you don't need stock options to motivate people to rebuild water treatment plants.

Yes, collective action can become mob rule, but so what? In a wasteland, organized mobs with direction beat scattered individualists every time. Look at how disasters actually play out - communities that coordinate survive, lone wolves don't.

Monopolization? You're worried about monopolies when there's literally nothing to monopolize yet. Someone has to organize the rebuilding. Better a planned monopoly on reconstruction than fifty competing warlords fighting over scraps.

Rothbard's elegant theories assume functioning markets and property law. Hard to enforce property rights when there's no government and everyone's armed with radiation detectors instead of lawyers.

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

My concern isn't that everyone should go lone wolf exactly. My concern is that collectivism under Marxist ideology will override the rights of individuals and the non-aggression principle, leading to innocent people being harmed by mob rule.

And if there are warlords competing, couldn't that could lead to innovation by factions to find creative ways to recycle and reuse scraps? If there was a monopoly or close to one, if there is terrible leadership and planning, that could lead to humanity progressing slowly or even worse, regressing.