Communism doesn't work because people are by nature self centered.
I'm just gonna focus on this bit because its the easiest to explain. No, humans are not naturally self-centered. We are not, by and large, really naturally anything. The idea that humans are naturally self-centered comes from the fact that we live under capitalism, which is inherently and out of necessity, self-centered. You take what you can without regards to other people's needs, because that's what you have to do to survive, and "win". Take monopoly vs something that takes group effort (let's say soccer, but forget the other team because I can't think of any board games that require everyone working together). Monopoly is capitalism, I don't really think that needs an explanation, and I think at some point we've all said "well you should have tried not being poor <3" and we all know how it affects family dynamics or w/e. But in a team sport, the same person who says "you should have tried not being poor" works with their team to win (survive)
We aren't inherently selfish or selfless, but the society we live in, our surroundings, and the way we were raised influence the way we think and act pretty heavily (mostly society)
I'd also like to point out that as far as I know, Marx never defined socialism, and socialism is meant as a transitional period of sorts to communism, though a lot of leftists are socialists and not communists
I admit I was being a bit more venomous with my words than usual but yeah, I was more trying to prove a point than start something.
Communism doesn't work because people are by nature self centered.
I'm just gonna focus on this bit because its the easiest to explain. No, humans are not naturally self-centered. We are not, by and large, really naturally anything. The idea that humans are naturally self-centered comes from the fact that we live under capitalism, which is inherently and out of necessity, self-centered. You take what you can without regards to other people's needs, because that's what you have to do to survive, and "win". Take monopoly vs something that takes group effort (let's say soccer, but forget the other team because I can't think of any board games that require everyone working together). Monopoly is capitalism, I don't really think that needs an explanation, and I think at some point we've all said "well you should have tried not being poor <3" and we all know how it affects family dynamics or w/e. But in a team sport, the same person who says "you should have tried not being poor" works with their team to win (survive)
We aren't inherently selfish or selfless, but the society we live in, our surroundings, and the way we were raised influence the way we think and act pretty heavily (mostly society)
I'd also like to point out that as far as I know, Marx never defined socialism, and socialism is meant as a transitional period of sorts to communism, though a lot of leftists are socialists and not communists
Poor choice of words I admit. Perhaps, we are by education self centered then. rather, what I was trying to say is Communism is extremely Idealistic, and pretty difficult if not impossible to execute.
Communism doesn't work because people are by nature self centered.
I'm just gonna focus on this bit because its the easiest to explain. No, humans are not naturally self-centered. We are not, by and large, really naturally anything. The idea that humans are naturally self-centered comes from the fact that we live under capitalism, which is inherently and out of necessity, self-centered. You take what you can without regards to other people's needs, because that's what you have to do to survive, and "win". Take monopoly vs something that takes group effort (let's say soccer, but forget the other team because I can't think of any board games that require everyone working together). Monopoly is capitalism, I don't really think that needs an explanation, and I think at some point we've all said "well you should have tried not being poor <3" and we all know how it affects family dynamics or w/e. But in a team sport, the same person who says "you should have tried not being poor" works with their team to win (survive)
We aren't inherently selfish or selfless, but the society we live in, our surroundings, and the way we were raised influence the way we think and act pretty heavily (mostly society)
I'd also like to point out that as far as I know, Marx never defined socialism, and socialism is meant as a transitional period of sorts to communism, though a lot of leftists are socialists and not communists
Poor choice of words I admit. Perhaps, we are by education self centered then. rather, what I was trying to say is Communism is extremely Idealistic, and pretty difficult if not impossible to execute.
In this lifetime, it can't be executed. I'm not saying we can make such a drastic change. But if we can work towards it isn't that a good thing?
Yall. Can. You. Stop. Fighting.
I'm afraid you asked a very controversial question. But I would hardly call this fighting.
For once I agree with Dom, whose name sounds really weird for a site with mostly minors on it.
OOF Bruh… Short for Dominic.
OH SHIT. I did not know, genuinely. Sorry, I did not mean to come off as weird.
fdajgdasg my dad has his computer respond to him "yes master?" as an i dream of jeannie reference, and the other day he goes "but some people in the day and age think it's about something else and I don't like it" and i was so uncomfy
(@ Pickles) and everyone else ig.
Interesting statement. But I think unless we find a way to make utopia. Which will be never imo. We will be selfish creatures (or working to overcome that). Capitalism sucks. But it's not like it's the root of what's wrong with society. That would be the twisted form of human nature. We're jerks a lot of the time, even when we don't want to be. We are formed by a world full of legitimate evil. It forces us to go to our more primal instinct which baseline animal are "survive at any cost". To get rid of that we'd need a perfectly safe world like what communism offers. Until we reach such perfection like communimsm we will never be safe enough to begin. Thus I think we will never reach it.
Poor choice of words I admit. Perhaps, we are by education self centered then. rather, what I was trying to say is Communism is extremely Idealistic, and pretty difficult if not impossible to execute.
In this lifetime, it can't be executed. I'm not saying we can make such a drastic change. But if we can work towards it isn't that a good thing?
Depending on what you think to be a good thing yeah. I have reservations about it because it's a very easily corrupted system. In theory, it's great, but I don't see any way of it working long term, I don't have that much faith in humanity.
I agree with Dom
Capitalism sucks. But it's not like it's the root of what's wrong with society.
Name one thing that we can all agree is an issue with society that isn't either directly caused or exacerbated and upheld by capitalism
Poor choice of words I admit. Perhaps, we are by education self centered then. rather, what I was trying to say is Communism is extremely Idealistic, and pretty difficult if not impossible to execute.
In this lifetime, it can't be executed. I'm not saying we can make such a drastic change. But if we can work towards it isn't that a good thing?
Depending on what you think to be a good thing yeah. I have reservations about it because it's a very easily corrupted system. In theory, it's great, but I don't see any way of it working long term, I don't have that much faith in humanity.
I agree with Dom
I do have a lot of faith in humanity and I'm a pessimist! My faith in humanity is the one thing I refuse to give up, and you should get yours back,
I don't have faith in people's ability to not associate the left with totalitarianism.
Anyways I'm going to bed because my mom is having surgery tomorrow and I need to help her with stuff after that.
An anthropologist on Coursera mentioned that what is usually called Communism is too authoritarian in practice to be considered "true Communism" (that is, how the term is used in an anthropological context.)
The main issue I find with it is—maybe a bit meta—how the best idea (like, "maybe don't brutally and ruthlessly exploit people") or change in system will develop a sort of corrupting programme of its own—this doesn't mean "so don't do anything to change anything because nothing will change", but rather that I think we should be able to examine the mission drift in what became of Communism so as to avoid similar corruption of ideals.
Angie Speaks on YouTube I believe coined the phrase "social capital" to describe the liberal appropriation of social justice that depends on elite intersections of privilege to raise awareness and represent…which is great, I've learned plenty from those conversations, but by the nature of how those are set up (needs be popular) and the limits of them (concerned mostly with awareness, thought, and microaggression) it does not enact improvement on the lives of marginalized people in a material systematic sense.
This isn't directly about Communism in the 101 Basics sense, but I think something like that is what happened to the worst examples of Communism: Maybe it started out being for the empowerment of the people, but the need to accrue and then reserve power to get anything done became very attractive to harmful agents…whether that's social capital or capital capital, it was the attractiveness of power that everyone has but some people can't care if they wield harmfully as long as it keeps them on top.
So, I think the real 101 Basic is Eric Liu's lectures about civic power.
The TEDed version: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c_Eutci7ack
The pre-pandemic lecture version: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cd0JH1AreDw
I hope this helps!
Fairly certain what we think of as Communism is actually Socialism, but feel free to correct me
I'm by no means an authority on this topic
Capitalism sucks. But it's not like it's the root of what's wrong with society.
Name one thing that we can all agree is an issue with society that isn't either directly caused or exacerbated and upheld by capitalism
Lack of understanding/tolerance between people maybe
Fairly certain what we think of as Communism is actually Socialism, but feel free to correct me
I'm by no means an authority on this topic
They're very similar, and used to be used interchangeably in the past. Communism is a type of Socialism in some cases, I believe. Most Communism can be categorized as Socialism but not all Socialism can be called Communism. I am also not an expert, but in my experience and limited education, that's what I believe it is.
Capitalism sucks. But it's not like it's the root of what's wrong with society.
Name one thing that we can all agree is an issue with society that isn't either directly caused or exacerbated and upheld by capitalism
Lack of understanding/tolerance between people maybe
Actually, Capitalism is biased against the success of entire demographics (Capitalism has a lot of racist, sexist, homophobic, ableist, etc history and could be considered inherently all those things aqs it comes mainly from greed, and we know who in society is considered greediest-) and often pushes harmful propaganda as such. Now, that's clearly not all of it, but Capitalism is inherently manipulative so… eesh yeesh.
Yup. Capitalism benefits from inequality, and inequality leads to hatred and intolerance
Capitalism is an economic system. It's cruel, sure. But how can an economic system can be racist? Granted people that support capitalism can be racist, but putting that to the actual system seems inaccurate.
Babes u realize capitalism is the reason we have racism, right?
Babes u realize capitalism is the reason we have racism, right?
I believe this is true because I watched a video citing a historical farmer's(?) uprising/revolt after which the landowners decided that they'd split up the working classes by race to pit them against each other—but if you have a link to that event or other that I can pull up for future "saucepls" that would be awesomesauce. I can't find the video anymore and I don't remember what this event was called or when it happened.
But if it's not what I'm thinking, that there came to be a rationalization to racialize slavery rather than keep it to general xenophobia/imperialism or insular religious supremacy (like oppressing the Other on the basis of being "heathens" more than for what they look like) because there's was a systemic monetary benefit… I'd believe it too but understand the need to elaborate.
I’d say capitalism helped justify slavery. But starting racism? Tell me more.
