Serious On Communism.

[bird]

The claim that human nature is determined by material conditions? The industrial revolution didn't come about by chance. It came about because of the need of automation for growing populations and trade routes.

The beginning and end of every socioeconomic system has come about this way. And in a post-scarcity society, I can assure you people won't feel the need to be greedy as there is no need to hoard.



Pierre Joseph Proudhon and Josip Broz Tito are two names that come to mind when allowing the growth of wealth for workers in such a system (Market Socialism and Mutualism respectfully).

Though if we don't take wealth at face value and instead use it to refer to land, commodities and etcetera then it is still communism (So long as the workers still control their means of production). Again, communism isn't the belief in a completely equal society (That'd just be stupid).

You're starting to sound more like an anarchist or a socialist and less an advocate of traditional Marxism, really. I'm aware communism isn't a 'completely equal society' however it balances on the belief of classless society, which is not what you've just described. If certain individuals or groups are able to climb to higher points of wealth in any capacity than other individuals within a state (or in Proudhon's position lack thereof) then you will, by nature, be thrown back into a society with classes and uneven 'wealth' distribution. Additionally, you didn't address the concern of innovation.

 

[GenericPlayer]

You're starting to sound more like an anarchist or a socialist and less an advocate of traditional Marxism, really. I'm aware communism isn't a 'completely equal society' however it balances on the belief of classless society, which is not what you've just described. If certain individuals or groups are able to climb to higher points of wealth in any capacity than other individuals within a state (or in Proudhon's position lack thereof) then you will, by nature, be thrown back into a society with classes and uneven 'wealth' distribution. Additionally, you didn't address the concern of innovation.

I prefer to stick to the works of Daniel DeLeon, Marx and Engels.

As for individuals gaining more wealth, perhaps they could create yet another class system. I personally don't advocate Mutualism or Market Socialism for that reason.

As for innovation, our current system incentivices profits, not innovation. I mean for god sake, fidget spinners exist. Under Socialism, workers would have more free time in order to pursue more sought for hobbies.

Though that's not really an argument. The argument I'd bring up is the need for innovation. Material necessity. That's been the only reason for innovation throughout the history of humanity.

 

[bird]

Material necessity. That's been the only reason for innovation throughout the history of humanity.

I mean for god sake, fidget spinners exist.

You defeated your own statement. Fidget spinners were not devised out of material necessity, innovation progresses us as a society in every facet. Entertainment, industry, communication, etc. Everything isn't reliant on capacity. You still didn't relay to me how a society can progress via innovation through a communal system.

 

[Dallas]

thread: on communism and fidget spinners

 

[cns - he/him/his]

stalin would spin

 

[GenericPlayer]

You defeated your own statement. Fidget spinners were not devised out of material necessity, innovation progresses us as a society in every facet.

You've missed the point, they aren't an innovation. The whole point of that whole fad was profits.
[doublepost=1499993170][/doublepost]

You still didn't relay to me how a society can progress via innovation through a communal system.

Because people have necessities that need to be met. Efficiency is key.

 

[bird]

You've missed the point, they aren't an innovation. The whole point of that whole fad was profits.

They were an innovation.

They were a source of entertainment, albeit an over-marketed and simple one. Like it or not fidget spinners did in some way progress society, and so did the Poop Scoop, the Pet Rock, and everything else, even if the incentive was profit.

 

[GenericPlayer]

They were an innovation.

They were a source of entertainment, albeit an over-marketed and simple one. Like it or not fidget spinners did in some way progress society, and so did the Poop Scoop, the Pet Rock, and everything else, even if the incentive was profit.

They were made to provide children with autism a way of concentrating. The idea wasn't an innovation when it came to marketing it, that was purely for profits.

 

[bird]

They were made to provide children with autism a way of concentrating. The idea wasn't an innovation when it came to marketing it, that was purely for profits.

As I stated before, an innovation is any new product or idea, unless you're looking at some Hegelian dictionary that I haven't seen yet. They did help children with autism and also provided a source of entertainment for the easily entertained goldfish-esque modern youth, and ultimately progressed society by a small degree. The incentive was profit. This further proves my point, if you can't profit you lack incentive. You lack reason to innovate, to expand our horizon. Egalitarian 'efficient' society sucks the proverbial 'marrow' out of existence because of the soulless grind to expand and grow with no change. Efficiency is not always beneficial, especially not by today's standard.

Look at it this way. In today's society, a factory burns coal in order to produce a product. More products need to be produced to fit material cost, so more coal needs to be used. Now, you probably thought, 'just produce more coal' when innovators would reason 'find a way to use less coal.' Now the innovator's reason seems more beneficial, even if it may not be as necessarily 'efficient.'

Essentially, the last thing we need is expansion, 'efficiency.'

 

[Deleted member 374]

Flagellate all the Reds until they're covered in that sweet sweet Ruskie jam.

 

[GenericPlayer]

As I stated before, an innovation is any new product or idea, unless you're looking at some Hegelian dictionary that I haven't seen yet. They did help children with autism and also provided a source of entertainment for the easily entertained goldfish-esque modern youth, and ultimately progressed society by a small degree. The incentive was profit. This further proves my point, if you can't profit you lack incentive. You lack reason to innovate, to expand our horizon. Egalitarian 'efficient' society sucks the proverbial 'marrow' out of existence because of the soulless grind to expand and grow with no change. Efficiency is not always beneficial, especially not by today's standard.

Look at it this way. In today's society, a factory burns coal in order to produce a product. More products need to be produced to fit material cost, so more coal needs to be used. Now, you probably thought, 'just produce more coal' when innovators would reason 'find a way to use less coal.' Now the innovators reason seems more beneficial, even if it may not be as necessarily 'efficient.'

Essentially, the last thing we need is expansion, 'efficiency.'

The argument of society being egalitarian and utopian in order to innovate without profits is a childish Rothbardian notion.

Like I have said before, if it is necessary to innovate, then humanity will do so. Such examples can be seen as early as the formation of civilisation to begin with. Due to the need for a more strady food supply in order to feed larger populations, humans settled down and took up agriculture.

The same principle applies here.

 

[bird]

The argument of society being egalitarian and utopian in order to innovate without profits is a childish Rothbardian notion.

Like I have said before, if it is necessary to innovate, then humanity will do so. Such examples can be seen as early as the formation of civilisation to begin with. Due to the need for a more strady food supply in order to feed larger populations, humans settled down and took up agriculture.

The same principle applies here.

So your argument is that we should revert to a system in which we simply wait for innovation to be absolutely necessary? This is called adaptation, and while innovative it isn't exactly preferable. Also, like I said, innovation isn't always about 'need.'

 

[A_cRaZeD_hObO]

never ceases to amaze me how people think they have any right whatsoever in sharing their opinions on such huge topics and be expected to be taken seriously. people have spent decades discussing, dissecting, dying and killing for ideas this big so i really really really really find it hard to take seriously any "debate" about communism over the internet, because more than likely the people arguing over this massive idea don't have a fucking clue what they're talking about (relative to the people before them). it's like asking a 12 year old how to build a bridge. SURE he might have some ideas and they might be good ones, but why the fuck would you listen to a child as anything but a child, when you know there are people who have spent 50+ years building real world designs for bridges? just fucking go talk to them, unless you like wasting your own time.

putting it more succinctly:

TO ME the opinion of young roleplaying nerds on communism, is as valid as a communist's opinion on roleplaying

 

[bird]

never ceases to amaze me how people think they have any right whatsoever in sharing their opinions on such huge topics and be expected to be taken seriously. people have spent decades discussing, dissecting, dying and killing for ideas this big so i really really really really find it hard to take seriously any "debate" about communism over the internet, because more than likely the people arguing over this massive idea don't have a fucking clue what they're talking about (relative to the people before them). it's like asking a 12 year old how to build a bridge. SURE he might have some ideas and they might be good ones, but why the fuck would you listen to a child as anything but a child, when you know there are people who have spent 50+ years building real world designs for bridges? just fucking go talk to them, unless you like wasting your own time.

putting it more succinctly:

TO ME the opinion of young roleplaying nerds on communism, is as valid as a communist's opinion on roleplaying

Did you ever consider the fact that most people playing here are still in a very developmental phase of thought and that their opinions and ideas will one day be put into action through their lives? Or perhaps that some people find calm debate fun? It isn't about whether or not we can change anything right now today, or whether or not our ideas are valid, it's about forming ideas for the future and having a relaxed and fun discussion on the state of human beings and alternative ways of life. It's the same reason high schools and colleges have debate clubs, man. Just let us be armchair politicians for once.

 

[A_cRaZeD_hObO]

Did you ever consider the fact that most people playing here are still in a very developmental phase of thought and that their opinions and ideas will one day be put into action through their lives?

that's what concerns me- that people read this thread and walk away more misinformed and with an uneducated view on whatever topic they're discussing (right now it's communism). my whole point is, DON'T get your sources on topics like this from some random shitty rp board, go find it in somewhere that actually has a valid opinion.

Or perhaps that some people find calm debate fun?

oh sure i love arguing as much as the next guy, but not when i know my position is inherently faulty or not built on solid reasoning, like, say, my lack of actual knowledge on practical negatives/positives of communism. and again, there are more informed people you should listen to if you want to gain that knowledge.

It isn't about whether or not we can change anything right now today, or whether or not our ideas are valid, it's about forming ideas for the future and having a relaxed and fun discussion on the state of human beings and alternative ways of life.

i believe you when you say this, honestly, but for a lot of people it isn't like that. people come away from these threads with strange ideas, maybe even dangerous ones. (although i can't see that happening on neb). my point still stands that uniformed discussion on topics like this is never good, unless you keep it purely factual or you make it known that you don't know wtf ur talking about.


a good example for how discussion on a large topic by a bunch of people who really shouldn't be influencing anyone on their ideas is 4chan. a lot of it is trolling and a lot of it no one in their right mind would believe, but there have been people who walk away from there with completely fucked worldviews, all because they're in this bubble of opinions, and don't seem to realize that none of these people should be listened to. some communities on tumblr are the same, from what i've seen.

 

[bird]

that's what concerns me- that people read this thread and walk away more misinformed and with an uneducated view on whatever topic they're discussing (right now it's communism). my whole point is, DON'T get your sources on topics like this from some random shitty rp board, go find it in somewhere that actually has a valid opinion.


oh sure i love arguing as much as the next guy, but not when i know my position is inherently faulty or not built on solid reasoning, like, say, my lack of actual knowledge on practical negatives/positives of communism. and again, there are more informed people you should listen to if you want to gain that knowledge.


i believe you when you say this, honestly, but for a lot of people it isn't like that. people come away from these threads with strange ideas, maybe even dangerous ones. (although i can't see that happening on neb). my point still stands that uniformed discussion on topics like this is never good, unless you keep it purely factual or you make it known that you don't know wtf ur talking about.


a good example for how discussion on a large topic by a bunch of people who really shouldn't be influencing anyone on their ideas is 4chan. a lot of it is trolling and a lot of it no one in their right mind would believe, but there have been people who walk away from there with completely fucked worldviews, all because they're in this bubble of opinions, and don't seem to realize that none of these people should be listened to. some communities on tumblr are the same, from what i've seen.

I doubt anyone is reading this thread outside of 'with a grain of salt' boundaries, and as far as I can see no real dangerous or misleading information is being spread. No offense but I think you're concerned over something that in the long run will have very little effect. If they actually take interest in one of the topics they will do independent research and find out which party identifies more with their own personal belief, and if they don't do that then they'll join the horde of ignorant morons that currently say stupid shit everywhere if they haven't already, and trust me they would join somewhere else if it wasn't neb forums if they're gullible enough to do that.

 

[Deleted member 61]

thread: on communism and fidget spinners

If only...

 

[A_cRaZeD_hObO]

I doubt anyone is reading this thread outside of 'with a grain of salt' boundaries

you yourself said many people here are very young and in a developmental mindset- you can't say that, whilst still telling me they'll be keenly skeptical of new ideas. i'll admit that no one's going to get a "I LOVE COMMUNISM" tattoo, but people still do absorb new ideas and sort of fit them into their view of how the world should be, not matter how unfounded the idea,

and as far as I can see no real dangerous or misleading information is being spread. No offense but I think you're concerned over something that in the long run will have very little effect.

how would you know? honestly, that's my point- odds are pretty good that you don't know what you're talking about. how can you reasonably say what is misleading? i don't mean that in a way to say you're dumb or that you don't actually know what you're talking about btw, i'm saying statistically it's unlikely you have studied communism heavily and come close to what would be considered an expert, and therefore can't really say what is or isn't misleading

the long run is where it is most seen. you have a normal concept or idea being discussed, then someone sort of misconstrues what it really means or how it really should be looked at, then someone does it again and since none of them know wtf they're talking about and an actual informed person isn't there to step in and say "woah woah woah you're all fucking wrong", next thing you know, they've all began looking at it in a completely unhealthy way. you can find this in all sorts of weird pockets on the internet, where these radical and extreme ideas only gain traction because they're in a bubble of agreeing opinions

If they actually take interest in one of the topics they will do independent research and find out which party identifies more with their own personal belief

i'm sorry, but this doesn't happen. no one's gonna go "hrmm, just read a seven page thread on nebulous.net about communism, boy does that interest me! i'm off to do independent and cited research". no, they'll probably come back to this thread or not at all, because people like the same thing and are pretty lazy. that's half the problem, that people just go to where they think they'll get their ideas validated once more (or, "Why I Keep Posting In The HL2RP Meme Thread")

join the horde of ignorant morons that currently say stupid shit everywhere if they haven't already, and trust me they would join somewhere else if it wasn't neb forums if they're gullible enough to do that.

right, and they should stay ignorant rather than delve into some half-baked debate. half of a topic kind of understood is worse than not knowing about it, because it further muddies the water. also people are gullible

them going somewhere else also doesn't justify this thread, or why people share their opinions

i will reiterate that the thrust of my argument: i find it very hard to see how people justify sharing their uninformed opinion on topics. at best it's a minor diversion and a waste of time to others, at worst it sends people into worrying trains of thoughts of completely misinforms people about the topic.

moral of the sturry: don't listen to random uninformed internet threads, it is a waste of your time and can only do harm.

also my point still stands that if you're gonna debate whilst knowing you don't know enough about the topic to actually talk about it properly, that's pretty heckin pointless and i don't see the appeal.

 

[Deerjohn]

man it sure refreshes my view as an Asian on the world when I see some of you who are Americans try to defend communism

 

[Humblebumbled]

From what I've read, this discussion boiled into a 'my opinion is better than your opinion!' thread in about 5 minutes, and to some extent each argument is both wrong and right in it's own way.

Get this: If the scientific method is applied to find the most efficient system, the only thing you would find is that there are way too many variables to accurately determine this and too few examples. For example: Location, tax rates, available natural resources, available imports, current allies, current opposition, who's currently in power, what changes has the person in power made, who was the last person in power, what changes has the last person in power made, is there any current resistance/how is that resistance effecting everything else.

And those are only the ones I could think off the top of my head, let alone observable effects.

tl;dr: Economics, and especially economics that have to take politics and sociology into account are about the least 'black and white' an issue can be.

edit: Before anyone asspulls some fucking example about why X system does or doesn't work, just remember that there are also examples of X system working fine, there are also examples of X system working okay, and there are examples of X system flopping completely as well.