Thread: Does Communism still have a role to play, or is it dead?

Originally Posted by it-ogo

Impressive "towel", Cap. "Consumer society is incapable of self-restraint" TM

And I don't necessarily think it's a bad thing. I know it's probably common to compare the Communist regimes to the prison, but let's look at that objectively. The inmates have clothes, roof, work, and some leisure time. The basic needs are satisfied. To the cave men, that would seem like a very decent life. Nobody is dying from hunger. There's even some medical service. At least, much more than you could wish in the tribal society. Some leisure time allows for some intellectual and creative life, like books and art. So, the Communism exists now. For the cave men though.

If that would seem like stretching it out, let's look closer to a typical person on the financial relief (like Welfare) in a typical bloody-sucking capitalist country. That person would have free: one-room apartment, food, clothes, etc. and don't even have to work for that! Isn't that the Communism a typical proletarian of the end 19th century would dream? It's right here, before our eyes! No need for Great October Socialist Revolution, Civil War, Industrialization...

Why the prison or the welfare is not acceptable for everyone? Obviously it's due to the social competition, which I think is a positive and constructive optimization force. We want to maximize our comfort and minimize our efforts. It's thanks to that drive that we're not in a cave right now.

from all according to their abilities, to all according to their needs.

Who will determin the abilities and especially needs?

Originally Posted by Crocodile

If that would seem like stretching it out, let's look closer to a typical person on the financial relief (like Welfare) in a typical bloody-sucking capitalist country. That person would have free: one-room apartment, food, clothes, etc. and don't even have to work for that! Isn't that the Communism a typical proletarian of the end 19th century would dream? It's right here, before our eyes! No need for Great October Socialist Revolution, Civil War, Industrialization...

Oh well, but you bloody capitalists at the same time fill his mind with images of supercars, diamonds and opulent palaces by the seaside. You tempt people, you desire his soul in exchange for devil's gold. You turn him into a consumption machine. That's the difference. You impress him with false values ridiculing much more important virtues.
Capitalists say - everything's possible, you just need to work very hard and you'll be rich and successful. THAT'S BULL$HIT, you know.

Originally Posted by Ramil

Oh well, but you bloody capitalists at the same time fill his mind with images of supercars, diamonds and opulent palaces by the seaside. You tempt people, you desire his soul in exchange for devil's gold. You turn him into a consumption machine. That's the difference.

The difference between what and what?

Originally Posted by Ramil

You impress him with false values ridiculing much more important virtues.

Ok, so let's talk about the values a bit. The last time I checked on the Communist manifesto they said [:]File Not Found "Abolition [Aufhebung] of the family. [...] The bourgeois family will vanish as a matter of course when its complement vanishes, and both will vanish with the vanishing of capital."

I would say a virtue of "social justice" is much more false than the family values. What do you say? There are also: "But you Communists would introduce community of women."

Originally Posted by Ramil

Capitalists say - everything's possible, you just need to work very hard and you'll be rich and successful. THAT'S BULL$HIT, you know.

Well, not everything is possible. I think you might have perceived the capitalism at some point in some brilliant colours and then got disillusioned, hence the anger in your words. However, the capitalism is nothing more than the declaration of the private property. And the communism is nothing more than the abolition of the private property. That is all to it, really. Those capitalists which tempt the consumers with new cars, are not devils which are trying to get souls, they are just trying to sell it to you. It is your personal responsibility not to buy it if you don't have money.

Originally Posted by Crocodile

If that would seem like stretching it out, let's look closer to a typical person on the financial relief (like Welfare) in a typical bloody-sucking capitalist country. That person would have free: one-room apartment, food, clothes, etc. and don't even have to work for that! Isn't that the Communism a typical proletarian of the end 19th century would dream? It's right here, before our eyes! No need for Great October Socialist Revolution, Civil War, Industrialization...

Yes, this IS the Communism by fact. Why some people are unhappy?

When we speak about basic needs we forget to formulate strictly - needs for what? Needs for survival? With things like Welfare it is satisfied. In fact, they are needs for justice. If every person feels that everything is just - it is the Communism. But if everything is already just, what should we fight for and live for? If everything is forever just, the real life (with real work and real responsibility) is over and all we left to do are games of all kind. Homo ludens.

Communism is a kind of absolute abstraction like death or nirvana.

Crododile, I can only agree with it-ogo:

Originally Posted by it-ogo

Impressive "towel", Cap. "Consumer society is incapable of self-restraint" TM

Your speculations are wrong and here's why. You just put yourself and me (present day people) into a future so distant that normally even our great-grand children would be long in their graves by that time. You don't seriously expect our present day views would be still sound then, do you? Changes I spoke about will take time to happen, they won't just occur overnigt. Along with that peoples' views on life will change also and in great many ways. So we can only accept the fact that we cannot make any speculations about how people will act then. I'm only saying that technology level will eventually reach a point when, as I already said, 1-2% of population will be able to provide for the rest 98-99%. By that time, it is quite possible that people will live not only on Earth but on some other planets or even other solar systems. Yes, I'm speaking about that distant a future. So, Crocodile, you can calm your fears, no communism will happen during your lifetime. You can consume and continue being a capitalist without second thoughts.

Originally Posted by Ramil

I'm only saying that technology level will eventually reach a point when, as I already said, 1-2% of population will be able to provide for the rest 98-99%.

That's true I'm speculating as there's no way to tell reliably what will happen then. To tell the truth, both of us are speculating. I'm saying: here's the trend, it worked for hundreds of thousands of years. Let's extrapolate this trend and assume it will not change in the future. And then I make my conclusions. On the other hand, you make a leap to the unknown and say a totally new thing will happen and people would cooperate on the new level unimaginable in the entire previous history. Whose speculation is more reliable? We would never know. Predicting the future had never paid off.

I think that in the observable future the capitalism had not rotten to the point it had exhausted itself as a political organization of the society. Right now, there seem to be more capital than there are actually assets, meaning the entire humanity is basically in debt. That is because the humanity had capitalized on the expectations of the future profit. If the future profit does not turn out, it is going to be a global financial catastrophe. Very desirable for the communists and, perhaps, the anarchists. However, I would respectfully disagree with those who would insist that is inevitable. So far, the financial world had dealt with that issue by simply expanding the market. They cherish the 'innovation' and praise the 'education' so people could make up more and more ways to create more and more comfort in different ways. The next big market is in the outer space. In addition to the cheap energy [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asteroid_mining]:

"At 1997 prices, a relatively small metallic asteroid with a diameter of 1.6 km (0.99 mi) contains more than 20 trillion US dollars worth of industrial and precious metals.^[1][2] In fact, all the gold, cobalt, iron, manganese, molybdenum, nickel, osmium, palladium, platinum, rhenium, rhodium, ruthenium, and tungsten that we now mine from the Earth's crust, and that are essential for economic and technological progress, came originally from the rain of asteroids that hit the Earth after the crust cooled."

In the observable future, the expansion of the humanity to space should create many new markets.

But, even then, I do not believe a person on welfare would be content with him living in a 3,000 cubic feet of a house, eating five steaks a day, and driving a his personal jet. He would look up at the others who live in their private asteroid, drive a new 5-Mach robotic flyer, eat delicious fruit which only grows in the space greenhouses, etc.

I agree with those that say Communism is a lovely idea

I don't agree.

And your answer is?

I see the strong connection between socialist ideas and totalitarism. So I'm afraid that will be some kind of rulers who will decide. The state or something like that even if it won't be called like that.

Also, liars, manipulators and hypocrites. Funny how all Communist systems in history have been cut throat and people have suffered. These communists posting say they love it and then in a subsequent sentence pretend they're not communists. Human nature is human nature.

Capitalism is imperfect but it is practiced via STATE INTERVENTION (i.e. interference) and that intervention steadily increases in phases. So, when you criticize it, you might want to keep that in mind. Communists don't and left wingers always want to deceive as evident in this entire forum.

Maybe Gosplan would have worked if it had had great hardware and 1000 of the sharpest analysts and programmers working on continuously refining it?

Originally Posted by Hanna

Maybe Gosplan would have worked if it had had great hardware and 1000 of the sharpest analysts and programmers working on continuously refining it?

And why the market economy worked fine without the sharpest analysts and programmers working on it and still produced good results?

Just to keep in mind, if you parasite on the capitalist economy in the west, you get welfare and clash your hands in envy, but if you tried to parasite on the communist economy in the USSR, you had breached the law (Статья 209 УК РСФСР) and could be imprisoned.

Originally Posted by Hanna

Maybe Gosplan would have worked if it had had great hardware and 1000 of the sharpest analysts and programmers working on continuously refining it?

The problem is that most of the people don't want to live equally
They want to live better and eventually better than others
Deficit wasn't 100% fault of the bad planning, sometimes it was created intentionally by people who can influence the production
If one can control deficit of something one gets power and using this power one can make one's life better

read this - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maslow'...archy_of_needs
Communism cannot be built if most of the people in society haven't reached the top of the pyramid

"I will teach you profitable acts"-God (Bible). I am not using His Name in vain. It is written in the Word of God.

Originally Posted by heartfelty

"I will teach you profitable acts"-God (Bible).

Where in the Bible is this allegedly from? It is completely unfamiliar to me.

The word "profitable" has many meanings. Creating profit is just one of them. I believe that when the KJV version uses that expression it simply means "beneficial" or "good".

I forgot where in the Bible did I saw it. But I really saw and read it. The exact words. ...(Deleted.L.)

It's not in the Bible and you are talking absolute nonsensical rubbish as usual!

Maybe the solution is to set up a Communist nation somewhere and have people choose to join the "commune".
Then they would know what they were signing up for. Then if they do not pull their weight, they can be ejected

I think kibbutzim in Israel work in that way.That is a form of Communism I think. Inside of the kibbutz they don't use money, they just go and collect the stuff that they need. Everybody has a similar house, regardless of their position. They share everything that can be shared.

One question that interests me: Say I am a poor but clever person who is born in a backwards village deep in rural Russia and I want to study at a good university and get a nice job in a pleasant city: Would I have better chances of achieving this in the Soviet times, or today --- or is it not comparable?

Originally Posted by Hanna

Maybe the solution is to set up a Communist nation somewhere and have people choose to join the "commune".
Then they would know what they were signing up for. Then if they do not pull their weight, they can be ejected

That option is totally fine by me. And I think communes like that existed throughout the centuries. Think monasteries, etc. What usually happens with those communities is that there's division of the responsibilities. The entire community cannot participate in each and every decision, so the heads of the community are elected to run the community, and then the heads would select the lower level aides, which would select their aides, etc. In the end, you get a typical power pyramid. Similar assets, but different power.

Originally Posted by Hanna

I think kibbutzim in Israel work in that way.That is a form of Communism I think. Inside of the kibbutz they don't use money, they just go and collect the stuff that they need. Everybody has a similar house, regardless of their position. They share everything that can be shared.

Haha! Yes, they do. But, the kibutzim hire the workers to do the job they don't want to do. In a very capitalist way in the outer market. Does that makes the kibutz members 'better persons'? And also kibutzim regularly get subsidies from the Israeli government. Meaning, the kibutzim are, in part, parasite on the capitalist economy. Does that make them 'better people'?

But anyway - who will invent new things?
Who will innovate existing?
If they will not get any benefits for their hard work - why bother?
If they will get benefits - then sooner or later - everyone will not be equal anymore.

I think that USSR was lagging behind the West partially because its inventors/scientists/etc. did not get fair compensation for their work.
For example Mikhail Kalashnikov - his invention is produced in massive quantities - yet - he does not have any benefit from that.