If I am a woodworker, and I make furniture in a particular style, and that style becomes desirable so that other people want to have furniture made by me, and are willing to trade goods and services to me beyond what you might consider the normal value of the materials and labor cost of the furniture, am I now “accumulating wealth” by making furniture that is highly valued? Have I already accumulated wealth by acquiring the tools and the workshop needed to make the furniture?

If we are talking about already being in an anarchist society, then this example makes no sense. This woodworker doesn’t exist in a vacuum. They need food to eat, and material to produce with. The workers providing these services would do so under the expectation that the woodworker would provide according to their own capabilities and take according to their own needs. Why would other workers keep enabling someone who appears to want to hoard in order to exercise power over others.

Who defines “need” or “reasonable”?

We all do, collectively.

Ultimately what I am understanding from what you are saying is that this anarchist society requires individuals to be self-monitoring and self-limiting. I think all of human history describes how unrealistic that idea is.

Humans achieved civilization because we are the most cooperative of the animal kingdom. We’re so empathetic that we can feel emotional pain and attachment to inanimate objects. Human history shows that this is the most realistic scenario and that actually going against this with hierarchies and competition between us has brought not civilization, but the earth ecosystem’s capacity to maintain us to the brink.

Further, it would require that all 8billion+ people in the world have some collectively shared definition of what is reasonable, deserving, needful. This is a kind of conformity and uniformity that I find deeply uncomfortable.

Not at all. You don’t need 8 billion people to agree on what is reasonable for one to own. Just your immediate community, let’s say ~150 people. The rest happens through federation and cofederations

You misunderstand. Accumulation requires enforcement. Anarchists would just reasonably ask why one thinks they deserve to keep more than they need for themselves

, and builds a kind of stability out of this

Gestures wildly hwhat?!

Anyway, anarchism deals with this issue by not allowing anyone to accumulate wealth in the first place.

I hear they PM’d you. Did argue for that position adequately then? :D

@Cowbee@lemmy.ml believes so and usually can argue at length about it. You can see if they’re in the mood to elaborate.

What you call communism and what MLs call communism is usually different things. For them a state bureaucracy with wage labor below it is perfectly capable of being considered “stateless”. It’s quite absurd really.

But ML methods never create a stable socialist system. They all inevitably collapse into Capitalism proper.