as the wealth is controlled by the society as a whole the funding will come from the society or from anyone who wants to invest in us but respect our economical model and you clearly fall for a capitalist myth my friend CAPITALISM or any economic system doesn't help human evolution or human expenditure you can't justify capitalism as you can't justify fascism cause fascism in her short rule in Europe raised standard living very high but can you justify a totalitarian ideology like fascism ?? well no

donations from who ?? the federation will get funding from the syndicates that sell products and services and in general in such society wasted LAND will not exists in the current system some farmers actually get paid *not* to grow crops supply and demand reduces the supply of crops and it affects how much we pay at the grocery store in turn putting extra coin in active farmers pockets. non active farmers or land owners are currently being paid 1.8 BILLION dollars a year in the US to sit on their ass because they own the deed to some land and the money comes right from your pocket.

they, being the businesses (or syndicates) that sell the products and/or services.

they ain't getting taxed the federation is them the collective of syndicates they decide how much they will spend and where they will spend it nobody forces them everybody decides and gives his vote and his opinion

lol its an effect of capitalism don't deny it man the government uses the negative effects of capitalism in their interest

"The only way in which a state of Anarchy can be obtained is for each man [or woman] who is oppressed to act as if he [or she] were at liberty, in defiance of all authority to the contrary . . . In practical fact, territorial extension is necessary to ensure permanency to any given individual revolution. In speaking of the Revolution, we signify the aggregate of so many successful individual and group revolts as will enable every person within the revolutionised territory to act in perfect freedom . . . without having to constantly dread the prevention or the vengeance of an opposing power upholding the former system . . . Under these circumstance it is obvious that any visible reprisal could and would be met by a resumption of the same revolutionary action on the part of the individuals or groups affected, and that the maintenance of a state of Anarchy in this manner would be far easier than the gaining of a state of Anarchy by the same methods and in the face of hitherto unshaken opposition . . . They have it in their power to apply a prompt check by boycotting such a person and refusing to help him with their labour or to willing supply him with any articles in their possession. They have it in their power to use force against him. They have these powers individually as well as collectively. Being either past rebels who have been inspired with the spirit of liberty, or else habituated to enjoy freedom from their infancy, they are hardly to rest passive in view of what they feel to be wrong."

about the defense issue any anarchist society of any kind will defend itself in a non-statist fashion if its needed funding will go into defense . The actual defense is organized in a libertarian manner, based on federations of free communes and workers' councils and incorporating self-managed workers' militias. This was exactly what the CNT-FAI did in 1936 to resist Franco's fascists. The militia bodies that were actually formed by the CNT in the revolution were internally self-governing, not hierarchical. Each militia column was administered by its own "war committee," made up of elected delegates, which in turn sent delegates to co-ordinate action on a specific front. Similarly, the Makhnovists during the Russian Revolution also organized in a democratic manner, subject to the decisions of the local workers' councils and their congresses.

Yes private armies would be set in place, however, they aren't as dangerous as people think they are. Competition would keep private defense services from doing anything dangerous. Also, I would like to state after watching that video you posted on Participatory Economics that there is very little to no individual freedom at all in a "libertarian"-socialist society. Equality, yes, but not freedom.

no individual freedom ?? are u crazy ?? the base of that ideology is about stressing individual freedom to all extents you don't know the definition of individual freedom my friend the individual is free to do what ever he wants he is not obligated to join a commune or a syndicate nobody restricts nothing in the current system the STATE or capitalism never gave our rights they stated our rights but they never gave them we took them in workers movements in civil rights movements and such and even tribal cultures indicate that communalism defends individuality as Howard Zinn presents : No laws and ordinances, sheriffs and constables, judges and juries, or courts or jails -- the apparatus of authority in European societies -- were to be found in the north-east woodlands prior to European arrival. Yet boundaries of acceptable behavior were firmly set. Though priding themselves on the autonomous individual, the Iroquois maintained a strict sense of right and wrong". Living in a non-hierarchical society directly individuality is on the top