vladykins @ 28/3/2018 21:39

Eguisheim @ 28/3/2018 16:31 vladykins @ 27/2/2018 13:47 Nah, pure communism, like pure capitalism, fails because of human greed. this makes zero sense unless you have a personal definition for 'communism' Nah, the whole Communist Manifesto bit. Try building a bunch of communes on a large scale and see how long before someone in one commune gets jealous of the stuff available in another commune.

so... communes aren't communism and the manifesto is hardly the core text for understanding communism.

i think the key thing missing here for you is marx's theory of gattungswesen. your argument to emotions like "greed" and "jealousy" is already preempted.

Eguisheim @ 28/3/2018 16:49

vladykins @ 28/3/2018 21:39 Eguisheim @ 28/3/2018 16:31 vladykins @ 27/2/2018 13:47 Nah, pure communism, like pure capitalism, fails because of human greed. this makes zero sense unless you have a personal definition for 'communism' Nah, the whole Communist Manifesto bit. Try building a bunch of communes on a large scale and see how long before someone in one commune gets jealous of the stuff available in another commune. so... communes aren't communism and the manifesto is hardly the core text for understanding communism. i think the key thing missing here for you is marx's theory of gattungswesen. your argument to emotions like "greed" and "jealousy" is already preempted.

Except I think that Marx's basic philosophy of human nature is wrong at its core. The fact that so few people climb to self-actualization shows that Marx's concepts are a unachievable utopia. Hell, we can barely get people to acknowledge UBI as a concept, because too much of society (especially American society) is rooted in Hobbesian beliefs.

vladykins @ 29/3/2018 13:32

Except I think that Marx's basic philosophy of human nature is wrong at its core.

Please don't be offended when I say how confident I am that you fundamentally misunderstand Marx's theory of human nature.

vladykins @ 29/3/2018 13:32

The fact that so few people climb to self-actualization shows

This is irrelevant.

vladykins @ 29/3/2018 13:32

that Marx's concepts are a unachievable utopia.

This does not follow. It's also quite the strawman. Marx was not a utopian and, in fact, was expressly anti-utopian. Hell, half the point of 'Das Kapital' was to offer an analytic basis for socialism to keep it from being so watered down by utopians (and mutualists and certain anarchists).

vladykins @ 29/3/2018 13:32

Hell, we can barely get people to acknowledge UBI as a concept, because too much of society (especially American society)

Acknowledge? That's such a low bar that I'll dismiss most of this as hyperbole. But as for the rest, please don't be offended when I say how confident I am that you simply aren't aware of the long, long, long history of American socialism.

vladykins @ 29/3/2018 13:32

is rooted in Hobbesian beliefs.

I've often wondered how fast the ol' Monster of Malmesbury is spinning in his grave to have his entire life's work reduced to a mere seven words that largely misrepresent him.


I'll take your point, though. American has a long tradition of individualism that is, of course, orthogonal to forms of collectivism like socialism. But if you understand Marx at all, his argument is that cultures change (duh) because human nature evolves (wow!) which is precisely why any arguments about the current state of human nature are more than missing the point.

Further, it's best to understand the manifesto as a product of its moment, especially in contrast to the towering pile of his later works. When the 1848 revolutions were crushed, it cemented for Marx (who was never much of a revolutionary to begin with) that certain things simply couldn't be forced. Two decades later, when 'Das Kapital' is published, Marx has settled on the argument that the contradictions of capitalism would eventually (and necessarily) produce socialism -- but it was as a prediction of the distant future, not a call to arms.

And now note some of the steps required to get all the way to pure communism. For starters, pure communism is stateless, so an obvious prerequisite is the so-called 'withering of the state'. You think people are ready right now for anarchy? Well congrats, Marx didn't think so either. First the state has to adopt socialism to address the contradictions of capitalism (and to prevent it from grinding against democracy) and then those social institutions water out of the state so we can have the 'withering of the state'. This process can only happen as people (i.e. voters) increase their social consciousness -- meaning that their nature changes and the polity along with it.

So, how does one go about disproving Marx? It's rather tough. You can attack the validity of his arguments (and by "validity", I mean validity) but you can't adjudge the truth of his conclusion because it's a prediction of the unspecified future. If you want an analogue, consider the axiomatic nature of Austrian economics and witness how Hayek attempted to create formalism for his economics just as Marx did for his. Both systems are overly deductive, weak on empirical evidence, and generally lacking falsifiable conclusions -- in short: not that scientific. So that is the main problem, not some Reader's Digest claptrap about "greed" or "jealousy" or "utopia".

Of course it is a simplification, since we're on an internet forum and not writing a doctoral dissertation. Additionally, there is little point in pointing out the issues in your argument, because it boils down to "prove Marx is wrong about human nature" which you know can't be done, since it falls back to a stupid "prove which philosopher of human nature is correct". Outside of that, it's like trying to prove religion wrong- but like religion, I can say it's not all that useful in application here.

So I will posit only real world experience: The only real application of communism that has been successful is on very small-scale, usually where the group of folks were decently well-off to begin with and thus could afford to participate in the "experiment".

And yes, We can talk all day about the dictatorship of the proletariat and the eventual withering away of the state. But again I'll posit that human greed won't let the state wither away and, more so, Leninism had it more right that as long as there was someone else to subjugate, you could keep your own people too happy to ever "change", forcibly or otherwise.

And it was *very* utopian and pretending it wasn't is silly. From the technology aspect allowing mankind more time for leisure and art to the entire concept of being able to focus on what you are good at and love is entirely utopian.

Much as I would love to pretend that America is ready for a socialist switch over, there are too many elements directly inimical to it in the US right now that even minor pushes like the ACA get so watered down as to lose most of the socialist elements. But maybe I'll be surprised in my lifetime, because I never thought the Xian stranglehold on politics would allow gay marriage. But then again, Trump is a backlash on that as well (and hopefully a temporary one).

Edward K-Spel said it best for me:

Legendary Pink Dots

I want to believe in the nobility of the human spirit. I want to believe that mankind is essentially good and that the horror I see and the horrors I hear about are simply the last cries of a dying spectre that haunted our fragile globe for just to long. I want to believe that we are about to peel off the mask with which this spiteful god has been frightening us. I want to believe that we will not dance on his defeated rotting body for that would grant him victory in death. I want to believe that we will peel away the masks with which we frighten each other. I want to believe that no new spectre will replace the one that died and that we can stand alone and respect one another love one another respect and cherish life in all its shapes and sizes while continuing to evolve. I want to believe that mankind will never be too arrogant to abandon its quest for an ultimate answer. I want to believe that this ultimate answer remains a simple question. I want to believe that even I could answer this question. I want to believe all of these things. I want to believe all of these things and more. But you've caught me at a bad moment and I can't.

wtf

well this thread has just reached a milestone. It finally went off-topic.

Christian @ 30/3/2018 10:48

well this thread has just reached a milestone. It finally went off-topic.

Vlady @ pretty much anytime

Hold my beer

You can't claim a concept preempts an argument when that concept has been repeatedly disproven in real life application.

10,963!

Josh @ 1/3/2018 9:21

I just won't log into my Maddie or Zach accounts today. That should make it easier.

I thought Maddie had Josh and Zach accounts, not Josh having Maddie or Zach accounts

thisisbad @ 30/3/2018 18:06

Josh @ 1/3/2018 9:21 I just won't log into my Maddie or Zach accounts today. That should make it easier. I thought Maddie had Josh and Zach accounts, not Josh having Maddie or Zach accounts

I have risen to power recently.

At least 50

Josh @ 30/3/2018 19:15

thisisbad @ 30/3/2018 18:06 Josh @ 1/3/2018 9:21 I just won't log into my Maddie or Zach accounts today. That should make it easier. I thought Maddie had Josh and Zach accounts, not Josh having Maddie or Zach accounts I have risen to power recently.

So that's what all those signs were about this weekend

3000

How far am i