Why communism is easy and we still won't see it any time soon.

[luiz]

Most people would want it if they actually knew what it entailed. The USSR and China aren't shining examples of Communism in action: Corporate Capitalism with proletarian sauce does not Communism make.

Try to view the USSR in a way comparable to the VOC or the British East-India Company: The only difference is that the USSR in legal theory was ruled by the Soviets (councils), whereas effectively, it was ran by a corporation known as the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, which was in theory democratic too, yet practically had a system of stake- and shareholders which was simply less transparant.

Most critics of 'communism' make the mistake of interpreting laws of self-declared Communist as principal matters, when these are in fact, legal fiction.

That ain't true. First, a quick point about the USSR, China, Cuba and co. : they actually did try to become socialists / communists. It's a bit of a whacky conspiracy theory to believe the leaders never cared about socialism. They sure did. Even Stalin, who was obsessed about his personal power, certainly believed in communism (or at least Marxism). Just read his writings. If they didn't reach communism (or even socialism), it's because it just isn't reachable.

But a more general point. People don't want equality. It's true, they just don't. Look the lengths people go to be different, or to flaunt just a tiny bit of wealth. Even in extremely poor communities, the slightly less miserable will find a way to signal their status. People also like competition. They like both collaboration and competition. But there must be competition: a world without winners and losers isn't a human world.

I'm not saying here we've reached the "end of history" or any such crap. What we today understand as capitalism will certainly evolve into something completely different: in fact it is already quite different from the 19th Century form, which in turn was different from the origins of Capitalism. But we won't have communism, and we certainly won't have Marxism. It's time to change the record, and look for something different.

PS: I'm always a bit scared when someone say stuff like "most people would want if it if they only knew what it meant!" Sounds like a religious prophet to me - which is not that far off from Marx. I think people know what communism means, at least the Marxist version, and they certainly do not want it.

 

[Terxpahseyton]

This is a bad thread and I feel bad.
"Communism" .. yeah... there is so much so say about it. But this thread says very little. I am sorry.

 

[warpus]

Just saw this thread

We have already proven that we can produce enough material goods to sufficiently satisfy everyone.

No we can't. There are 7 billion people on this planet. We're only producing material goods to satisfy a small fraction of that.

 

[Hrothbern]

Just saw this thread
No we can't. There are 7 billion people on this planet. We're only producing material goods to satisfy a small fraction of that.

yes
And for the simple basic need of food we were worse in 2016 as the years before, and likely to increase.
Especially in (sub-Sahara) Africa, already buying food from US-China, growing fastest in population, and expected to being hit harder than average from climate change. Water to become a real issue.
Keynes believed in 1930 that it would take two generations to have freed ourselves from at least the basic needs.....
Human nature is so far prevailing.

 

[luiz]

yes
And for the simple basic need of food we were worse in 2016 as the years before, and likely to increase.
Especially in (sub-Sahara) Africa, already buying food from US-China, growing fastest in population, and expected to being hit harder than average from climate change. Water to become a real issue.
Keynes believed in 1930 that it would take two generations to have freed ourselves from at least the basic needs.....
Human nature is so far prevailing

View attachment 477323

The positive thing is that only Africa poses a problem. Their demographic situation is absolutely nuts, but it seems rather pessimistic to think they can't fix it until 2100. Birth control in Africa should be a global priority.

 

[BvBPL]

We have already proven that we can produce enough material goods to sufficiently satisfy everyone.

We've developed this ability as a result of our capitalist institutions. It is capitalist self-interest that has driven the motivation to create and promulgate these system with the efficiency that would enable universal satiety.
We may well question whether the pace of deployment would continue under another value system.

 

[Tahuti]

PS: I'm always a bit scared when someone say stuff like "most people would want if it if they only knew what it meant!" Sounds like a religious prophet to me - which is not that far off from Marx. I think people know what communism means, at least the Marxist version, and they certainly do not want it.

Marxism is a theory of analysis, not a policy perscription. Though I sincerely think that most people would rather work to the extent necessary for them to easily obtain their living. Work is not fun because the wages earned, rather because the work itself can be cool.

That ain't true. First, a quick point about the USSR, China, Cuba and co. : they actually did try to become socialists / communists. It's a bit of a whacky conspiracy theory to believe the leaders never cared about socialism. They sure did. Even Stalin, who was obsessed about his personal power, certainly believed in communism (or at least Marxism). Just read his writings. If they didn't reach communism (or even socialism), it's because it just isn't reachable.

I'm not a state socialist and I can certainly recognise that the USSR and China are in many ways behind on the West.

Let's for a minute presume that all the individual Soviets do not answer to a Soviet above (say the Supreme Soviet of the Soviet Union). That's basically sums up what I would like to work towards, politically speaking.

No we can't. There are 7 billion people on this planet. We're only producing material goods to satisfy a small fraction of that.

We live too lavishly.

 

[tuckerkao]

Of course South Korea would still be much better, which basically answers the question which system is better. One need only look at North and South Korea.

South Korea is much better economic-wise and has more allies around the globe. The Incheon region is very prosper and can hold Olympic events.

Politically, South Korea has a similar Democratic voting system as the United States.