So you believe in Communism?

3년 전

You may believe each person should have equal access to resources and receive equal pay. You may be one of those that takes it to the level where the concept of "Pay" should not even exist. You may not be. You may believe that someone else getting more is them hoarding resources or wealth. You may not believe in the concept of private property, and in fact if you are truly a fan of communism you should believe that.

However.

If the revolution happens I assume that means you are volunteering to be...

The hazmat cleanup person.
The crab ship operators (one of the most dangerous jobs out there)
The fire jumpers.
The garbage man.
The sewage treatment operator.
The street sweeper.
EDIT: The nightman (with the return of being able to legally defecate on the streets in many liberal cities we need to resurrect the old night man/soil man job of the person who goes around each night cleaning up the human feces)

Remember in communism there should be equal access, and no special rewards.

I doubt in the communist land you'll find many people that desire to take on the unpleasant and perhaps looked down upon jobs.

So who will do them?

Will you have to force people?

What incentive that goes along with their human nature and even biological imperative would convince enough people to voluntarily do these tasks?

Will they do it simply due to pride in communism? Kind of like pride in nationalism, or imperialism?

This is a simple question I'd think anyone considering communism (and even socialism) would consider.

Yet I note there generally is not a lot of long term thinking done by people that push for such ideologies. It seems more based upon short term gratification, or idealized imaginary views of the world in their minds that leave out so many things in human nature, ignoring the dangers, and the unpleasantries. They also ignore the fact that it is likely the only way many of these things can be accomplished is via force. So who get's to decide who is forced? If they get to decide then is the environment truly equal or are there some with more power who get to dictate how others must behave? If there are not those that decide then how do these necessary but dangerous or unpleasant tasks get done? How do you insure you have enough people to do these tasks?

This is easy to solve when we are not talking communism. We simply pay them more, or the rewards of their product (such as crabbing) are so valuable that the danger they put themselves in when weighed against the potential benefit is deemed as WORTH IT to them. No one has to force them to do it.

Yet how would you do that in communism?

Trickle down... why work hard? Again pride? What incentive is there? If I can receive what I need without doing anything special then why would I choose to do anything special? Sure there would still be some people that would choose to. Yet let's be real. They would be very few and far between.

Mostly the answer is force. Also known as involuntary. Also potentially known as slavery.

Authors get paid when people like you upvote their post.
If you enjoyed what you read here, create your account today and start earning FREE STEEM!
STEEMKR.COM IS SPONSORED BY
ADVERTISEMENT
Sort Order:  trending

I look forward to the day when only historians, archeologists, and anthropologists debate the relative merits of economic systems, because non-point source production has rendered them all obsolete.

Even capitalism is not freedom, and also necessarily has elements of socialism. Freedom from the tyranny of stake will come with freedom of want, and I expect that time will bring freedom of place - the entire universe is at our feet, untrodden.

We will be truly free one day, or at least our posterity will.

Thanks!

·

Even capitalism is not freedom, and also necessarily has elements of socialism.

That depends. For me capitalism simply means free market. There is no socialism in that. Yet governments step in and give favors to some, block others, or people decide they are going to try to use their wealth/capital to force others. At those points I no longer consider it truly capitalism.

If the government and these "capitalists" are colluding then it becomes more fascism, and if it leads to corporations dictating the laws of the government then that can even be called corporatism.

Yet at it's roots capitalism if you view it as free market does not require any socialism.

·
·

Since capitalists can be singularly focused on financial gain, markets which don't have some mechanisms to prevent collusion and other forms of corruption quickly become something other than free markets too.

Given the need to some kind of enforcement agency, mechanisms, and taxes to pay for such governance, all of which I consider socialism to greater or lesser degrees, I don't see that truly free markets are possible without socialist aspects.

If you and I were to make trades, that could be a truly free market, as it would preclude all of the problems I mention. Broader public markets can't though I think.

·
·

Capitalism has nothing to do with free markets o.O Both are two independend concepts!

·
·
·

Ever heard of Laisez Faire Capitalism. ;)

·
·
·
·

Nobody said you could not combine those two concepts. But they are definitely not the same!

·
·
·
·
·

Depends on who you talk to. To many that IS capitalism. Do other things and it requires a modifier such as crony, etc.

Which the concept of applying a modifier is not unique to capitalism either. Crony can just as easily be applied to socialism and communism and in truth if I were to blame the failing of any of these systems on something it would be that single modifier.

Yet only one of those systems does not start out at the outset already having a crony situation (favored by those that govern, direct).

So now when I say capitalism without a modifier. I speak of Free Market. You've read enough of my works over the years that this is no the first time I have stated that.

Why do I state it?

Capitalism, Socialism, Communism, etc all have different subjective meanings in the persons mind. So personally I have found that providing clarity on your definition when you are speaking of something is important.

Neither you, nor I can force our version upon the other. All we can do is share it. So when a person who wrote something defines what the term means to them then you deciding to base it upon what it means to you will not really accomplish much. Though you sharing what it means to you has value.

I am beginning to hate such conversations...

in that, communism as a form of govern-cement is a thing to destroy people. However, there is this... piece of truth, down at the core of what "communists" adhere to.

Lets say some alien race dropped (Star Trek) replicators (self powered) all over the globe. After that point, doing anything is mostly a matter of what is it that you desire? And that is all well and good... BUT

What happens when you break your leg? How many people are purely motivated by the joys of pulling apart mangled skin, muscle and bone and putting it back together more or less where it was?

Do you have a joy of cutting up dead people so you can practice cutting up live people? I know of very few that enjoy this.


So, i went off track...

There is this core of getting everyone what they need to survive. That is compassion. We, as a human race, should leave no person to starve or be out in the cold.

BUT! the only way to achieve that is to grow enough food and build enough houses. Taxes and welfare do not provide this.

So, the govern-cement form called communism is the worst form of govern-cement where you de-incentivize anyone to do the hard/tough jobs that are the basis of society, and you encourage everyone to rape the system.

Of course, everyone gets to have equally shitty free houses, and equally shitty food.

·

Of course, everyone gets to have equally shitty free houses, and equally shitty food.

Except of those labeled "collateral damage" or "the price of doing business" or "gotta break a few eggs to make an omelet" type of saying.

Those that die to achieve that.

We have enough shitty houses and shitty food because enough people died so now we have enough.

·

Funny that you mention Star Trek because it looks like you are not aware that Star Treg. TNG is communism. And yes, it was intended as that by the creators.

·
·

Yep, communism via advanced technology.

However, i was pointing out its flaws.
Such as, there is a famous artist... who gets that person's art?
Or, there is 9 units of health care for 10 units of health care needed, who gets that health care?

i know there is kinda a technological solution for these, but not really.
The general class of problem still persists.

Further, you see communism break down in TNG... badly.

·
·
·

Further, you see communism break down in TNG... badly.

Um... no. Or I have missed a whole story arc??

·
·
·
·

For me it was just everywhere.

Like the time ... #2 needed some info, from the "underground", so he called up Quark... but needed something to pay him, so the writers came up with the story that Riker won a huge jackpot that couldn't be paid out

I suppose that we can have free universal medicare just as soon as doctors, nurses, other health care workers, and medical equipment manufacturers all agree to work for free. I look forward to it :-)

·

We may well have those things even without the consent of the medical industry. We may soon have many free goods and services because the technology providing them will be owned by individuals.

Free doorknobs? 3D printer. Free food? Aquaponics. Free internet? Mesh networks. On and on, up to free designer babies via CRISPR, sex dolls, and artificial wombs. These technological advances are new, and it takes time for dispersal, but that's really all it takes.

All economic systems are temporary. Communism, Capitalism, Anarcho Syndicalism, all of them, because in the coming world where these (and more) technologies have fully matured, no one will need a job to earn money to buy stuff from industries.

Today Capitalism remains the most freeing system of our choices available. A day comes when people will wonder at our barbarism and lack of ingenuity because we didn't just make what we needed ourselves.

We still see doctors as impossible to imagine being unnecessary, but there is no particular knowledge that isn't just data, and in time data is democratized. The technology needs to improve yet, but I do not doubt that it will improve until we can eschew with human labor, including every specialty you can name, including all those @dwinblood specified.

It doesn't even matter if we want this world, because physics determines what it possible, and people will inevitably work out what is possible. Since each of these developments enables individuals to spend less and keep more of what they earn, people will adopt these means of improving their lot.

I don't think that's a bad thing. Especially not for folks that presently are the least able to benefit from health care. That's what I look forward to.

·
·

I think you are extremely overoptimistic here.

But generally, yes, we could go to 15 hour work week for most jobs in a matter of maybe 20-30 years if we really put our effort into that.
Same is true for fighting climate change, de-soilification and the oceans dying from plastic.
Now we just have to get our heads around the idea that having a job is not the most important thing in the world, but rather not destroying the only planet we have.

·
·
·

I grant that all the miraculous tech I see forthcoming isn't here yet, but the basics are already, and time is all it takes from there. I didn't predict a time frame, but considering how fast smart phones basically took over the world, 30 years seems very pessimistic to me. I'll settle for ever, frankly.

I agree that restoration of robust and natural ecosystems is perhaps the most valuable investment we could undertake, as the invaluable evolutionary mechanisms, incredible and fecund diversity (that is our life support system), and perhaps least, the ready made blueprints for uncountable biological mechanisms we can learn to understand, emulate, and adapt for bespoke purposes.

Thanks!

Communism is a huge failure.
Socialism leads to communism.

·

The only communism that ever has existed was quite successful (see Jesus and his apostles).

Socialsm does not lead to communism, it is the prerequisite. There is no automatism.

·
·

THINK AGAIN SUNSHINE !

·
·

Pls see the definition of prerequisite and see Jesus and his apostles.

·
·
·

It is hard to see them, because they are dead and there are no photos of them. ;)

Fun beside, what would be the point?
You seem to imply that my words were factually wrong. If that is the case I want you to point it out in ways that a reader of words can understand, because I am not a reader of your mind.

·
·
·
·

You contradict yourself.

·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·

when you affirm that earth is flat ;)

·
·
·
·
·
·
·

Ah, so you really are just trolling. Sorry for not getting it earlier.

Curated for #informationwar (by @Gregorypatrick)

Ways you can help the @informationwar!

  • Upvote this comment or Delegate Steem Power. 25 SP 50 SP 100 SP or Join the curation trail here.
  • Tutorials on all ways to support us and useful resources here

Thr communism is a really Absurd fantasy, since in a society it is very difficult for this to be carried out efficiently. people always seek to improve their lives and take everything equally is to deprive the majority of improvement, only to benefit the mediocre.
Have nice day, hugs from Venezuela.

Posted using Partiko Android

·

Have nice day, hugs from Venezuela.

You and your fellow Venezuelan citizens are often in my thoughts.

I truly hope you guys can find liberty and that you get the nation you seek.

I am not a fan of MY or any other government IMPOSING unasked for "help" on places.

I think we need to get our own house in order and if we do that then be willing to help those that ask for it as opposed to imposing it upon those that do not ask.

I'd say you are in my prayers, and as far as such things exist within me... you are. I'm a Deist. I pray in my own way.

·
·

Thanks for yours kind words dear, i'm grateful for yours prayings, i really hope see my country improve, see our society get better, with respect of our goverment, they don't want get out of the power, they only want get more and more Money of our mineral riches at the country.

Get themselves more rich, until the normal people have hungry, or die for miss medicines.

I sometimes don't have what eat before go to work, and A week ago I was bitten by a dog, and thank God I do not need antibiotics, cause 20 pills cost 180.000, that is 5 times what i get in my work monthly.

So, they really don't care communism or socialism is only empty words, cause they only want get themselves more rich.

·
·
·

Yep I tell people that Communism and Socialism actually end up in the long run being state run monopolies.

It is ironic that one of the boogeymen (bad things) people use against capitalism when trying to convince people to try socialism and communism is stories about some of the monopoly situations in some past capitalist environments.

Yet they are being suckered into endorsing about the most powerful forms of monopoly that we've invented as a species.

I am a capitalist. Yet I know that a lot of these ugly jobs will be taken over by robots. They are promoting state ownership of everything. In the days of John Dillinger folks robbed banks. Today the banks and government robs us. The carrot is universal income that is being beta tested now. The idea is become property of the state, never work again, and let them send you a check. This is so wrong, yet folks are way to dumbed down and lazy to say no. They have drank too much kool aid. The entitlement idea was introduced to the poor and seniors and now has become a form of conditioning. So what do we do?

As I said I am a capitalist and anti-communist. Yet their argument may be that Jesus was a socialist (which of course he was not) in the parable of the employer who paid everyone the same regardless which hour they started working. The 11th hour received the same wages as the guy working all day. This is where many Christians get suckered into this concept of socialism. So how do we fight this information war??????? Blessings my friend. @dwinblood

·

Yet I know that a lot of these ugly jobs will be taken over by robots

I expected that answer from a communist. You took away my chance to pounce on them for it.

You see they WILL fall on this. They will want to be communist or socialist now and will talk about this great technology that "does not yet exist" at the level required to do these tasks as the solution.

So what happens until that technology exists in your newly communist/socialist revolution nation?

Do you ignore all those unpleasant tasks and just let them go unattended until you invent and manufacture the tech needed to do them? (putting your hopes that someone will have the desire to invent when they won't get any special benefit other than perhaps pride for doing so.)

Does the trash pile up?

Does the sewage go untreated?

Does the feces accumulate and spread on the streets?

Do you stop eating crab?

Also how long will it take for someone to actually make this technology when the people that have to make it receive the same resources as the person who sits on the couch waiting for it to be done? As I said before some will likely do it, though I can guarantee many will not.

What about safety inspections of such robots or tech?

Who is going into those unpleasant environments to do that?
:)

·
·

My friend we are on the same side as I am a capitalist patriot who is saturated in the truth movement. I woke up about 9 years ago and have never looked back.

·
·
·

Oh and I know. Like I said you jumped on something I was hoping some proponent for communism would jump on. :) I was prepared.

·

Banks didn't rob less in Dillinger's day, my friend ;)

It is strange that anti-communist posts etc. always start by setting up the least likely and strangest setting instead of something more realistic.

Do I think communism would work?
No, because of how humans are. But even then I am not thinking of communism where pay does not exist.

And equal access as you called it does not mean everyone gets the same regardless of what he does.
It does mean that everyone gets the same good health care (since you took that example) and not only the rich and/or powerful.
It also does mean that a small group of people does not get fantastically rich by exploiting the masses (Amazon anyone?).

This, to me, reads like a high-school garden-variety take down of “Communism”. The author seems to have a set vision of what a communist society would be like, obviously influenced by the various socialist regimes of the 20th century. These obviously had glaring failures, which is why they collapsed. The socialist view has shifted from heavy handed authoritarianism to a focus on raising living standards and opportunities for all. Obviously, not all jobs are equal and I don’t think that’s one of the main goals of socialism/communism. Clearly you need to do some more reading on socialism.

In the meantime, unchecked capitalism is destroying the damn environment. Corporations can’t be trusted to protect the environment so new, sweeping policy is needed if we don’t want to live in a hellish world.