How would family heritage (personal property) be resolved in an anarchist community?

Question

It doesn't have to be a family, but people that you love so much, so you want to let them have some of your personal property, or would it be all of yours if you want? Would this lead to inequity?

I have read that Bakunin and Proudhon had some disagreement in this issue, Bakunin rejecting more firmly this type of heritage.

Do you think all personal property should be given to the community? How? Do you think personal property should be given to the people that the deceased wanted? Do you think it should be given to the community except sentimental goods?

Comments

How are the issues here distinct in your view to those of property as a whole? What I'm thinking is naive property rights lead to inequality over time. Inheritance may make that worse (allowing a longer time for accumulation) or not (the goods from the deceased may just pass on to the current elite regardless).

Answer 1

I think it would vary from individual to individual, group to group. I like the idea (from Bolo'Bolo, which I've still never actually read) of taku (a box 50x50x100cm) which holds a person's posessions. If it fits, it is theirs, if it doesn't it isn't, Would probably make dividing everything up a lot easier once they were dead.

I do think there is something to be said for items of sentimental value going to people that care about those sentimental items, but then again, depending on what someone feels sentimental about, that could easily lead to the accumulation of capital, and that is a big old shitshow (as evidenced by our current state of shitshowiness).

Honestly, I think it would be very dependent on the particular group of anarchyists, and the material realities of the moment. There is no way to be prescriptive about this.

Comments

 "There is no way to be prescriptive about this."

bingo!