Question

I'm concerned about how we'll help those of us that need long term care. Like disabled people or the mentally ill?

Answer 1

one argument is that people will have more time, energy, and capacity to care for other people because they will not be subsumed by capitalist concerns (making enough money to survive themselves), and will be aware of their own capacity to care for other people (instead of thinking that they are not skilled enough, or not allowed to, take care of people).

another argument is that there will be fewer instances of disability and mental illness because the human world will make more sense.

another argument is that it's not awesome now, so changes are unlikely to make things worse, even if they don't make them tons better.

Answer 2

Chances are, infrastructure wouldn't change a whole lot. As of right now, in North America, long term care is dictated by capital and often government subsidy. If long term care isn't dictated by capital, there's very little reason for government subsidy.

As for the mentally ill, it's worth noting that science has shown that the "mentally ill" are only psychology non-compliant with given society. For example ADD is not a neurosis in a hunter-gather society, but rather seen as an essential part of survival. And schizophrenia was useful during the black plague. Under democracy and capital, the people who fall in these categories aren't considered useful.

We aren't certain what "mentally ill" will look like in an anarchist society.

Comments

can you explain why government subsidy is an issue in an answer to how anarchists would deal with health care? i'm not sure what point you're trying to make in your first paragraph.

---

I think they're implying that, currently, the State performs a necessary/positive role in the medical industry by subsidizing certain costs, rather than leaving everything to the profit-driven logic of capitalism - but once capitalism is out of the picture, the "need" for State subsidies no longer exists, so there's no reason to question the ability to provide medical care to people.

Although I could be wildly misinterpreting that.

---

Yes. And the biggest issue concerning long term care is care for the elderly/nursing homes. Most of this is subsidized by the medicare, because the average cost is $70k a year. That's more than one year of student loans and that's more than most people pay a year for a mortgage on a fancy house. It's only astronomical because the market dictates the cost. The reason why it's relevant to the  question is because it's one of those common pinpointed questions people ask to show just how stupid/unprepared anarchists are. Maybe we are stupid, but cost will always be an issue in a world that puts capital first. Infrastructure that exists now probably won't disappear. What will could/would change is the emphasis on money.

Answer 3

to each according to need, yo.

Answer 4

Disability is viewed not merely as a physical, mental or behavioral condition, but as obstacles that society has placed in the way of quality of life and employment for all that excludes  persons with disabilities.  In an anarchist society labor owns production, so that employment of the contributions of all, including that of PWDs is paramount.  Anarchism will remove the barrier of property rentals and ownership as a main residence.  Work in many instances can be farmed out to shut-ins, while counseling and CBR can help them venture beyond for work and play.  Mortgages will be cancelled, removing major sources of capital burden on individuals and organizations.  Spaces for health care in primary, secondary and tertiary forms continue, although the technology used in medicine must be shared and developed through persons devoted to providing technology to the community.  In this sense, anarchists have a lot of homework to do.  In a  fair-trade market system, these various roles of production, services, care, education/promotion and technology/innovation are of equal importance and provided to one another on an exchange basis.  eg., I need a nurse or doctor, and I can provide plumbing services.  In a mixed market anarchist economy, currency can be used as a means of exchange as well, although that too has its drawbacks as some in society inevitably seek to use it to overvalue their contribution to society.  The upside is that work of all forms produces excess which can be used to provide for  universal access and to provide for the common needs of people who require signals for orientation, mobility, assistive technology, steps to their bathroooms and kitchen designs for little kids, pregnant moms and elderly.  Anarchist society is much better at empowering the community to provide its own rehabilitation and support services much as is done through county rehab centers.  It responds better than authoritarianism or capitalism in this current non-welfare, social model of disability.

Comments

"The upside is that work of all forms produces excess "

that is only true of "work" as defined by economics. 

in any world i would choose to live in, everything someone does would serve to directly meet their needs and desires (which might include helping out a friend, etc). so the idea of "excess" as a side effect (let alone the primary objective) of work is meaningless. it is strongly tied to the concept of "profit" (and the accumulation of shit), which i would like to see ejected forcefully from all of life.

i really wish more folks could think further outside the box of institutions and economics. sure, that is where the world sits today. but that is exactly why i want a different world.

---

@ Ajarndp, your answer sounds more like a socialist utopian society where compulsory production aka work would still be required in order to replicate what we have now. The stigmatization of people with these disabilities or illnesses will still be there, just the owners of the property will be different.

Personally, I wouldn't want to have anything to do with an anarchist society that has community based training rehabilitation. CBR is basically the community deciding what is "normal" abilities/behaviors, and that they're helping to train rehabilitate the individual, that doesn't meet their arbitrary standard of "normal," to be "productive" and "contributive" to the community. It's a work based program and a questionable one, at least to me it is.