Can Communism Work? page 18

594 posts

Flag Post
Originally posted by Zachary_Greene:
Originally posted by vikaTae:
The human brain was not an adaptation intended to work in a communist society. Whilst the society style works really well, it runs into problems when you try to involve humans in it, because of the way the human brain itself works.

That’s one of the biggest issues.
It used to work fairly decently back in the day with families and tribes and all, but now things are too advanced and people have changed to become even more greedy than back then.

That’s one reason why I disagree with a large group of communists that say everyone would and should be equal and get the same.

Actually communism is not about everyone getting the same but what they need. Sadly the believers in Marxist communism and many off shots, while correctly assuming the ever growing pace of production miss judged the ever growing pace off consumption. And this is actually not about greed but about the staggering advances in technology that allowed ever more Products in ever greater quality to become “necessary”.
The communist models only worked when the consumption stayed stable while productivity ever increased into the unimaginable. Quite easily think of todays modern societies as they are, with the current productivity these societies can enable a decent living for all most all of its citizens and give many of them even more. With the upper 10% living in riches. The communist models rely on the Belief that every one can live as the 10% do now if the ownership and thus profits of the businesses is shared and the productivity is increased 10 fold.
The vision was a shared utopia of the overproduction. A great buffet where everyone could chose their own course with there always being enough to satisfy.
Turns out that does not work so well when technological advances change how that productivity is consumed.

 
Flag Post

The vision was a shared utopia of the overproduction. A great buffet where everyone could chose their own course with there always being enough to satisfy.
Turns out that does not work so well when technological advances change how that productivity is consumed.

Even at the most basic level it’s a flawed vision. Mountains of unsold goods represent dead money, and suck up even more in storage and depreciation costs. Cash flow is vital in any business model, and without it the whole system grinds to a halt without ever increasing subsidies.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by beauval:

Even at the most basic level it’s a flawed vision. Mountains of unsold goods represent dead money, and suck up even more in storage and depreciation costs. Cash flow is vital in any business model, and without it the whole system grinds to a halt without ever increasing subsidies.

It should work if you use the more extreme high-end tech. The concept of a molecular assembler in the home, would be compatible with communism, as well as a few other models of home manufacturing. However, that would require a massive paradigm shift, where we don’t have physical goods, beyond the basic elements used in assembly.

It would only really work on an almost purely information-driven economy, where the physical basic needs and luxury items could be made for the same basic cost, by all residents.

As I said before, communism is viable, but not at our present level of development. It is a system worth keeping in mind, but beyond making individual factories internally communist, it is not something that is going to work, yet.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by beauval:

The vision was a shared utopia of the overproduction. A great buffet where everyone could chose their own course with there always being enough to satisfy.
Turns out that does not work so well when technological advances change how that productivity is consumed.

Even at the most basic level it’s a flawed vision. Mountains of unsold goods represent dead money, and suck up even more in storage and depreciation costs. Cash flow is vital in any business model, and without it the whole system grinds to a halt without ever increasing subsidies.

I think your criticizing the wrong things. Dead money is totally okay to certain extents in any economy, it is actually a signature of most capitalistic economies.

And in the communist vision Money quite often does not exist, because peoples primary income is the shared ownership of all companies and businesses. If Money is used at all its concept is quite different, since the buyer basically gets his money back once used, because he is one of the owners of the company selling/providing to him. The money symbolizes more of a Vote/Maker representing which products should be produced are necessary and which because of lack of buyers should not.

The communist vision was heavily influenced by the repeated technical advances that made the former basic jobs of whole industries obsolete, Machines replacing human-workforce enabling 1 worker with the help of a machine to do the work of 100 or 1000 of workers without such machines.

The idea is still held by some communist that the technical advances will reduce the amount of work to be done ever more and that the “high” number of jobless is an expression of this advance. The optimum of this imagined future would be a world where humans do not need to work at all, since all necessary and non liked work is done by machines, while the less necessary work is done by those who preform the work more as hobby(mostly entertainment and creative work).

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by JohnnyBeGood:

The idea is still held by some communist that the technical advances will reduce the amount of work to be done ever more and that the “high” number of jobless is an expression of this advance. The optimum of this imagined future would be a world where humans do not need to work at all, since all necessary and non liked work is done by machines, while the less necessary work is done by those who preform the work more as hobby(mostly entertainment and creative work).

We were supposed to be living in such a utopian world now. However, instead of that, work hours have shifted to be more and more service based, and less and less about making a physical product. Even if we automate all of the physical construction of goods, it is difficult to believe we won’t have legions of tasks demanding the attention of potent minds to deal with.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by vikaTae:
Originally posted by JohnnyBeGood:

The idea is still held by some communist that the technical advances will reduce the amount of work to be done ever more and that the “high” number of jobless is an expression of this advance. The optimum of this imagined future would be a world where humans do not need to work at all, since all necessary and non liked work is done by machines, while the less necessary work is done by those who preform the work more as hobby(mostly entertainment and creative work).

We were supposed to be living in such a utopian world now. However, instead of that, work hours have shifted to be more and more service based, and less and less about making a physical product. Even if we automate all of the physical construction of goods, it is difficult to believe we won’t have legions of tasks demanding the attention of potent minds to deal with.

Yes, true. Thats the quint essence why communism as envisioned by Marxist theory can not work(until we actually reach the utopia state of machines duplicating and even outperforming anything a human can do). Even today there is a legion of tasks that are not being (adequately) performed even though society could profit from them. In richer/more advanced societies many tasks are seen as “necessary” which are not considered as such in less rich/advanced societies.

 
Flag Post

As a related tangent Johnny, how do we deal with those individuals whose cognitive capabilities are below those of our machines? If a communist society is to function as it should, unrest due to essentially not having a place in the world, has to be eliminated. Otherwise the system slowly tears itself apart.

How do we find tasks for those whose minds are sub-par to perform, when we can do all menial tasks far more efficiently with automation?

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by vikaTae:

As a related tangent Johnny, how do we deal with those individuals whose cognitive capabilities are below those of our machines? If a communist society is to function as it should, unrest due to essentially not having a place in the world, has to be eliminated. Otherwise the system slowly tears itself apart.

How do we find tasks for those whose minds are sub-par to perform, when we can do all menial tasks far more efficiently with automation?

Don´t get me wrong i am no believer in communism(i tend more towards certain forms of socialism). So i can´t speak for what the communist solution to this would be.

From what i hear the communist solution is mostly these people doing nothing except what ever hobbies they might have in societies where all necessary work is being done by machines or those humans who are capable and actually want to work as self-fulfillment or have them doing make work(menial tasks that are not really necessary but still at least somewhat beneficial and are just there to create jobs).

From my experience as a social worker working with jobless individuals and especially retired senior citizens, i don´t think that the the former idea of doing nothing except hobbies is the right solution for the majority of people. While some people have learned or instinctively know how to fill their days with fulfilling activities many seriously degenerate physically, mentally and socially when confronted with long extents of time that used to be filled out by work.
Here i think entertainment could be a valuable bridge, but for that entertainment would have to change largely from the passive audience experience it commonly is today into more inclusive active experience. So instead of watching/listening people play sports, perform music and so on, more being the one playing sports, performing music and so on. And this with the limitations in mind that many people bring with them.

 
Flag Post

Nope.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by Crash301:

Nope.

Why not?

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by JohnnyBeGood:

Don´t get me wrong i am no believer in communism(i tend more towards certain forms of socialism). So i can´t speak for what the communist solution to this would be.

I see communism as a solution in some cases, but not in every case. My views tend towards more complex, dynamic social structures, but for the purposes of this thread, I’m sticking with communism.

From what i hear the communist solution is mostly these people doing nothing except what ever hobbies they might have in societies where all necessary work is being done by machines or those humans who are capable and actually want to work as self-fulfillment or have them doing make work(menial tasks that are not really necessary but still at least somewhat beneficial and are just there to create jobs).

Make-work won’t work. I suspect you know why. Work needs to be fulilling and rewarding to give the worker a sense of accomplishment. make-work is neither; it is just there to fill up timke and the worker is well aware of that fact.

From my experience as a social worker working with jobless individuals and especially retired senior citizens, i don´t think that the the former idea of doing nothing except hobbies is the right solution for the majority of people. While some people have learned or instinctively know how to fill their days with fulfilling activities many seriously degenerate physically, mentally and socially when confronted with long extents of time that used to be filled out by work.

I would definitely agree. In order to prevent degradation there needs to be challenge, something to test the limits, and force them to constantly push those limits. If they don’t grow cognitively, at least they are not declining.

Here i think entertainment could be a valuable bridge, but for that entertainment would have to change largely from the passive audience experience it commonly is today into more inclusive active experience. So instead of watching/listening people play sports, perform music and so on, more being the one playing sports, performing music and so on. And this with the limitations in mind that many people bring with them.

You’re describing active entertainment along the lines of SimStim, or full-body virtual reality aren’t you. Even the modern holodecks don’t go far enough in that regard. Are you suggesting however, that once we do have full sensorium VR that this will be the tipping point towards being able to dispense with work for work’s sake, and being able to create fulfilling experiences for each individual, whether or not they are in traditional employment? More pertinently, do you believe this is a prerequisite to having such an experience, that we won’t accomplish it in a meaningful way before we reach this point, other than through the same types of technologies?

 
Flag Post

Currently communsime is not a viable form of gouvernement, But I belive in the future it will be.
If everybody could beceome doctors or scentists, company managers or a lawer, who would be the country farmer? the worker or the janitor? even the stupidest of people have higher ambitions.
Plus, currently, If people slack off, it would result in them leeching of the system, taking the same chunk as hard working pplz without doing anything.
I think in the future the costs of manufacturing basic human needs (housing, food, water) and goods will fall to a point where, if distributed equaly by a central system would be able to provide all humans with enough of watever that even if half the population are slackers it would not matter, as all humans would be able to live comfortably (if the wealth is evenly spread out, that is)

Right now, we have capitilisme cause if we shared everything with everybody (comunisme) The pplz that work hard would be pissed that there living in the same shack as dudes who do abasutly nothing.
But when we get to the point where we can previde the hole human race with Nice houses in the suberbs, and no one lives in a shack or in a mansion, Everybody would be pleased.

 
Flag Post

I hope the dawning of communism teaches you how to spell.

 
Flag Post

EVERYBODY WINS Comrade!

 
Flag Post

Communism has never worked in it’s entire period of existence, still does not work, and will never, ever, ever work.

Some examples of communist failures (although every Communist country that has ever existed has failed or is failing or will fail):

North Korea: the country cannot provide for it’s people, people starve, are in political and/or enemy-of-the-state-and-communism concentration camps, have little or no education (unless favored by the government), and are daily subjugated and brainwashed to hate the free world through both individual brainwashing techniques and/or government instituted and produced propaganda in the form of posters, government television and radio, and even math problems (“One of our glorious land’s soldiers killed 654 American soldiers and 759 British soldiers. What is the difference between the American and British soldiers killed?”)

Actually, that describes pretty much every Communist country that has ever existed. So I don’t need to write slightly varying descriptions between these cesspools.
Here are the rest:

Cuba
U.S.S.R.
North Vietnam
East Germany
Romania
Somalia
Congo

And so on and so forth…

 
Flag Post

Hehehehe.

Now everyone’s trying to forget about this thread. lol.

 
Flag Post

Yes, you just dazzled us with your brilliant exposition.

Of course, N. Korea ISN’T in fact a communist country; it’s a dictatorship that deliberately masquerades as one, and conditions in N. Korea are far worse than in any communist country since the stalin-era purges.

Cuba was until recently somewhat similar, but had the advantage of being blessedly free of Americans.

Communism Vietnam, in case you didn’t get the memo, won the war and rebuilt their country into something vaguely approaching industrialized prosperity…they remain communist to this date.

None of the African countries you mention are considered to be Communist. Somalia was more of an anarchy but even that’s stretching the use.

But yes, on the whole, a gold star is you. Your middle school teacher would be pleased, I’m sure.

 
Flag Post

Communism Vietnam, in case you didn’t get the memo, won the war and rebuilt their country into something vaguely approaching industrialized prosperity…they remain communist to this date.

And ended a brutal genocide in a neighboring country that the rest of the ‘civilized’ world refused to acknowledge.

Also, no one referenced Yugoslavia. Which… did not end so well. But the odds were stacked against them. Unifying the Balkans and increasing general posterity was quite the feat. It was still a far cry from a utopia, and was heavily subsidized by both the Soviets and the West (good job Tito). Still pretty alright, and certainly list worthy.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by Jantonaitis:

Yes, you just dazzled us with your brilliant exposition.

Of course, N. Korea ISN’T in fact a communist country; it’s a dictatorship that deliberately masquerades as one, and conditions in N. Korea are far worse than in any communist country since the stalin-era purges.

Cuba was until recently somewhat similar, but had the advantage of being blessedly free of Americans.

Communism Vietnam, in case you didn’t get the memo, won the war and rebuilt their country into something vaguely approaching industrialized prosperity…they remain communist to this date.

None of the African countries you mention are considered to be Communist. Somalia was more of an anarchy but even that’s stretching the use.

But yes, on the whole, a gold star is you. Your middle school teacher would be pleased, I’m sure.

FAIL.

North Korea is communist. Same policy, structure, and results. (political labor camps, etc.) They still have a much lower standard of living compared to capitalist countries.

Under communism there is ALWAYS a dictator or dictators. I dare anyone to name one communist country that did not or does not have a dictator while purely communist.

The lack of Americans (unless they are reporters there to write stories about how great Cuba is) has nothing to do with this discussion.

Cuba still has political prison camps. People still have a much lower standard of living compared to capitalist countries.

Vietnam is approaching “industrial prosperity” because they are leaving communism and slowly moving to democracy.

If you paid attention you would have noticed that I wrote a list of these nations that EVER HAVE EXISTED. This means that most of these are no longer communist. (note USSR, East Germany, Somalia, Congo)

Name one communist country that “worked”. You can’t. Because one never has existed, does not exist, and never will exist.

Notice I did not use modern China as an example.

Why are they thriving? Because they have moved towards capitalism.

 
Flag Post

Without reading the last 18-some pages I would say—in general, communism can’t work.

Why? Because to have a communal pool of resources (in other words, extensive social benefits), a large part of the populace needs to be taxed. I think that the human nature and intent demonstrates that it is an unsustainable model—the more people that work while collecting benefits, the greater the strain on the system, and the less incentive for the rest of the population to work and provide resources to care for such programs.

 
Flag Post

Very astute Twilight.

 
This post has been removed by an administrator or moderator
 
Flag Post
Originally posted by Twilight_Ninja:

Without reading the last 18-some pages I would say—in general, communism can’t work.

Why? Because to have a communal pool of resources (in other words, extensive social benefits), a large part of the populace needs to be taxed. I think that the human nature and intent demonstrates that it is an unsustainable model—the more people that work while collecting benefits, the greater the strain on the system, and the less incentive for the rest of the population to work and provide resources to care for such programs.

so why then is Sweden at this moment the strongest economy in the world, when they have possibly the biggest communal pool of resources?

 
Flag Post

I’m not sure I’d call Sweden one of the strongest economies right now. It’s external debt per capita is about 100k, which is pretty outlandish. Pretty much twice that of the USA, which is generally given shit on account of it’s rating. It’s Net International is at a negative 729 Billion, about 22% of it’s total GDP. Also a worse off position then the US.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Net_international_investment_position
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_external_debt

 
Flag Post

I still don’t get how someone who has a right mind could say communism doesn’t work and never can.
It’s simple and logical.
Now that doesn’t mean it has or would work with how stupid most humans are and how horrible most are, but it can.

Originally posted by sanii:

If everybody could beceome doctors or scentists, company managers or a lawer, who would be the country farmer? the worker or the janitor? even the stupidest of people have higher ambitions.

It’s simple, you (could) give them a slight benefit for working the shit job.
I know many many people who love being a farmer, love being a lawyer, schoolteacher or even a janitor.

Most janitors don’t mind their job if people aren’t disrespectful when using the bathroom.

Better yet, don’t give someone a job as a janitor, being the normal janitor meaning. Split it up between workers or put each person in charge of their mess. If you go in and shit all over the floor, you have to clean it up or possibly get punished/shittier job slot.
There’s tons of options that I could explain solving such a problem, but they are all too long to explain here because it’d take well over a single post.

Plus, currently, If people slack off, it would result in them leeching of the system, taking the same chunk as hard working pplz without doing anything.

Non-existent.
People don’t get food for their family unless they work, as long as work is available in their field, or in one they could work in for a little while till one came up in theirs.
Only exceptions are if you get in a accident where you can’t work or something of that such.

Just get every person doing something productive unless they can’t.
If they try and leech like many would say what would happen in communism, they get nothing. No food, nothing.
That doesn’t mean people can’t be generous and give the extra food they have to them, or they wouldn’t get extra food before it goes bad.

Right now, we have capitilisme cause if we shared everything with everybody (comunisme) The pplz that work hard would be pissed that there living in the same shack as dudes who do abasutly nothing.

But that wouldn’t happen.
There is no way to slack if you don’t supply them if you give them the chance.
If they don’t work, they have to rely on others being kind enough to help them. If they get no one, they can feel free to beg for food from the government but they won’t get anything till they help out some how.
Of course people who can’t work because they have mental issues or are too old or something would be excused.


Originally posted by beauval:
Even at the most basic level it’s a flawed vision. Mountains of unsold goods represent dead money, and suck up even more in storage and depreciation costs. Cash flow is vital in any business model, and without it the whole system grinds to a halt without ever increasing subsidies.

So, we need to have money for a society to be successful?
That can be in a communist society, truly.

You can get paid like you do in a normal capitalist society, but with money you could only use here freely.
You could buy trips or vacations or food or whatever you want with the money.

People say it couldn’t go with communism, but it can.
You can have a currency in it with no issues.


Originally posted by PatriotSaint:

North Korea: the country cannot provide for it’s people, people starve, are in political and/or enemy-of-the-state-and-communism concentration camps, have little or no education (unless favored by the government), and are daily subjugated and brainwashed to hate the free world through both individual brainwashing techniques and/or government instituted and produced propaganda in the form of posters, government television and radio, and even math problems (“One of our glorious land’s soldiers killed 654 American soldiers and 759 British soldiers. What is the difference between the American and British soldiers killed?”)

You’re using one of the worst possible examples of communism.
It’s a small country, without tons of land to get materials from, that is hated by most of the world restricting them more, next to multiple giants, that constantly gets harassed by the USA and the South…
At least use the USSR as an example and explain why it’s bad there instead of the place it can’t do too well in.

And even there, communism hasn’t failed them.
Look at North Korea right now, it’s not doing all too bad compared to what you seem to believe.

  • People starve
    This happens in every country, and it actually rarely happens in North Korea.
    You might know this if you knew people who live in North Korea, or looked at anything aside from propaganda.
  • Concentration camps
    No such thing.
    I bet you’re going to start spouting crap about how the Soviets executed it’s citizens, but I’d like some proof of that and why they were.
    I’m sure it happened a fair amount, but surely as not as much as you seemingly believe.
  • No education
    You really are brainwashed, aren’t you?
    North Korea has education, just as “communist” China, as well as the USSR did.
    The USSR had one of the best education systems of the entire world for a good while if I remember right, although I’m not too sure about that.
  • Subjected to daily brainwashing
    And you aren’t?
    Holy shit, I know North Korea is acting like based North Korea, but they don’t do it any more than the USA does.
    It’s a illusion.
    America hides it and hides it well, North Korea doesn’t hide it at all.

America isn’t free at all compared to most other countries, and no matter how much you scream about your false freedoms it won’t help.
People can lie, and you can believe a lie.

  • Propaganda in forms of the television, radio, posters and math problems
    I have no idea where you’re getting this math problems from because I’ve never heard such a thing.
    And once again, it’s a illusion.

If you think there’s no propaganda, lies and government run media in America;“land of the free” then you’re insane.
Just because it’s said to not be, and they’re public about it doesn’t mean anything.
There’s a reason why I despise most American TV and news stations as well as most western ones. They’re all pushing a agenda and not speaking what’s happening.

Russia today is clearly based to Russia, and the Chinese one is clearly based to China, as well as the Arab one like the previous to. But the American version (CNN) doesn’t report on things like the others do. They won’t speak about the horrid bombings going on, the executions, the economy, the false attacks, nothing.
Why do “eastern” nations big stations report on things that aren’t nice and fun while the western ones don’t? And when the western ones do, why is it always so much later, and why is it always extremely different?

For example the Gaza Israel thing a few months back.
American media? Poor Israel, they’re getting attacked by terrorists and they’re defenseless! Children are having to run to shelters! Muslims are trying to kill Jews, multiple Israelis are injured. (Very little coverage)

Russian media? Israel is getting attacked by Hamas and other people from inside Gaza, and Israel is responding by attacking the Gaza strip. Drones are flying over Gaza strip and dropping bombs, Hamas may of just downed a chopper of Israel and may have a hostage… (Updates often, and are interviewing a few “western” Journalists)

I didn’t hear that much information throughout the entire thing, or after it ended to some extent from American media on local or widespread stations.
On the Russian counterparts and Journalists reports I heard people talking about the dead Gazan children, as well as the injured Israelis, the drones and more of the actual story.

If you think America is free after everything is controlled in such a manor, and just by a few companies/people, something is wrong.
I understand that the stations might have different viewpoints, but when EVERY American one is like this and avoids what’s actually happening and the actual death tolls, and what the Israeli prime minister said directly to the media LIVE, then something clearly isn’t right here.
If that’s not propaganda, what is?
Die for Israel.

Actually, that describes pretty much every Communist country that has ever existed. So I don’t need to write slightly varying descriptions between these cesspools.
Here are the rest:

Cuba
U.S.S.R.
North Vietnam
East Germany
Romania
Somalia
Congo

And so on and so forth…

Aside from how it was, lets look at what they became.
Where they better under Communist rule?

Most Russians say they liked the USSR more than the current day from the polls, from what I know.
The government has to take down statues that people put up quite often.
And I know for a fact Russia had a good amount of education during the Soviet times.

Cuba, Cuba in general is and will always be a shit-hole if it is just by it’s self. America kind of fucked them aside from it just being a trashy small place in general.

Somalia, I think it speaks for it’s self.
I don’t know anything about their “communist” days, but it’s clear it was better back then. They’re Anarchist, like almost all African countries, and have always been.

North Vietnam, didn’t they win the war Against the Capitalist Americans?

Congo, once again another shit-hole.
They clearly aren’t doing too well without communism, but I don’t know how they were with it.
Bottom line, it’s a shitty African country that isn’t doing too well right now.

Oh, and just so you know, North Korea isn’t really a communist country.

Originally posted by PatriotSaint:
Name one communist country that “worked”. You can’t. Because one never has existed, does not exist, and never will exist.

China, or if not them the Soviet Union.
The soviet union wasn’t successful, but it was.

The soviet union became a industrial country and was running it’s way into a super-power.
That doesn’t mean they were completely successful and all, but they did do a fairly good job in that sense.


Just used Ungeziefer’s links, and I realized something.
Every “communist” country, or former one has the lowest debt per capita.
So, isn’t this a good thing?

Look at China, Russia, Cuba, Vietnam, North Korea, or any of the other countries you keep throwing around, patriot.
Look how low these are.

Why are the most capitalist countries in the most debt per capita, or in general more in debt if they’re so much more successful?
lel