Communism and human nature (Bolshie Mod sez, Arise ye kittens of the earth!)

Many argue that communism will never be possible because of "human nature". The essence of this false argument is the belief that a communist society would consist of an all-powerful central government that would tell everybody what to do--and would therefore undermine the creative initiative of individuals and the search for happiness.

(1) It assumes that a communist society will look like the former Soviet Union, or the current China, North Korea, etc (ie: corrupt police states with a feudal-style ruling class) (2) It assumes that people will only work in order to own bigger and bigger piles of commodities.

• The truth is that: (1) There will be no government in communist society--people will do what they want without being pushed around by anyone. The development of a corrupt police state or a new ruling class will be prevented by the struggles of the masses who will be armed with the weapon of transparency. (2) In a world of abundance for all no one will have to struggle (or even work) for the necessities of life (which will be a birthright--just like the air we all breathe). People will work on projects of their own choosing because (a) they find the work fun and interesting; (b) they enjoy the work relationships with talented and dedicated co-workers; (c) they want to make the world a better place; or (d) they want social status and recognition. A world of abundance for all where work is fun (and voluntary) will be made possible by a much higher productivity of human labor.

• An example of communist work relationships is provided by the Linux computer operating system--the core of which was created by many thousands of people--all working for free. A 2nd example is the "work" involved when people post to this forum. No one gets paid to post here--but people do so--because it is an expression of their principles and convictions.

• Who is in control? Under capitalism (and previous economic systems such as feudalism and slavery) only a small fraction of the population has control over their conditions of work--and the life of society as a whole. Only under genuine communism will the masses control their conditions of work--and the culture, economy and politics of society.

People will always work for their own good.

Precicely. This is the main reason communism fails. The idea of a "collective" society is nice on paper but in truth it is completely unrealistic due to the fact that it breeds laziness and apathy. There is no sense in hard work because no matter how hard one may work there is only so far up the ladder one may go under the communist system - thus - eventual apathy and resentment.

Oppression will undoubtedly come into play as there are those who cannot be stifled by the system and will eventually try to gain more and the need to put them "in their place" will arise. Who will do this but the government? Someone will always be in "control", like it or not. It is a fact. This is not to say that government should be in control of all aspects of life. Obviously this is not the case. A system such as that if the USA is indeed the ideal, although not perfect, but then NOTHING in this world is perfect when one is dealing with fallible human beings.

Anyone who truly believes that a communist system is workable and a good idea most certainly deserves the ZOT.

So, ZOT to you, Sammy Sam! ;)

"• An example of communist work relationships is provided by the Linux computer operating system--the core of which was created by many thousands of people--all working for free. A 2nd example is the "work" involved when people post to this forum. No one gets paid to post here--but people do so--because it is an expression of their principles and convictions."

Neither of these are valid examples that support your argument because neither of the endeavors is undertaken as primary work. No person could live by performing these tasks as described without some outside subsistence support.

"Who is in control? Under capitalism (and previous economic systems such as feudalism and slavery) only a small fraction of the population has control over their conditions of work--and the life of society as a whole. Only under genuine communism will the masses control their conditions of work--and the culture, economy and politics of society."

Wrong again. In a free market system people all along the chain have influence. Supply & demand has influence. Workers & producers have influence and consumers have influence. You really aren't very good at this are you.

This is such a preposterous argument on so many levels that it doesn't really deserve a response. Nevertheless, here is mine.

While there are people whom considered it "fun" to assist in programming an operating system, your Utopian society will be hard pressed to find people who consider it fun to wake up before dawn to milk the cows or cultivate the land. Who will whistle while they work in your never-land coal mines? Who will dedicate their lives to the steel mills while you hippies are out "having fun"?

The reality is that without incentives and rewards, no one "chooses" hard work for their hobby. And no economic system offers greater rewards to hard work than the true capitalist system.

But without a strong government to protect it, even a great system would fall to invaders. A pacifist commune wouldn't even survive it's own malcontents.

I could expound about the immorality of enslaving a population to rise no higher than it's lowest, but the practical reasons for communism to be reserved for heaven and hippies are enough to suffice.

In a world of abundance for all no one will have to struggle (or even work) for the necessities of life (which will be a birthright--just like the air we all breathe). People will work on projects of their own choosing because (a) they find the work fun and interesting; (b) they enjoy the work relationships with talented and dedicated co-workers; (c) they want to make the world a better place; or (d) they want social status and recognition. A world of abundance for all where work is fun (and voluntary) will be made possible by a much higher productivity of human labor.

Uh huh.

So, out of a population of 300 million, you've got 70 million who want to "make the world a better place" by being rock musicians, 60 million who want to play in major league sports, 50 million want to dance/act/sculpt, 40 million who want to be astronauts, 20 million who want to write the Great American Novel...

Who the -hell- is going to get up at 4 o'clock in the morning every single day in order to collect the neighbor's trash because they find it "fun and interesting" and want to spend time with "talented and dedicated co-workers"? How many people working for the sanitation department are doing it for the "social status and recognition"? How many people want to shovel crap all day for the pure altruism of "making the world a better place"?

The vast stupidity of the Left never ceases to amaze me.

Qwinn

The truth is that: (1) There will be no government in communist society--people will do what they want without being pushed around by anyone.

Including starting a corporation?

The development of a corrupt police state or a new ruling class will be prevented by the struggles of the masses who will be armed with the weapon of transparency.

Never bring a weapon of transparency to a gunfight.

(2) In a world of abundance for all no one will have to struggle (or even work) for the necessities of life (which will be a birthright--just like the air we all breathe). People will work on projects of their own choosing because (a) they find the work fun and interesting; (b) they enjoy the work relationships with talented and dedicated co-workers; (c) they want to make the world a better place; or (d) they want social status and recognition. A world of abundance for all where work is fun (and voluntary) will be made possible by a much higher productivity of human labor.

Let me guess, your'e a Trekkie who believes replicators are just around the corner and you wear your "Spock" ears around the house.

Nice assumption, but nope. I called it interesting because the whole thread is just fodder based on weak arguments and is wrong for more reasons than it is worth going into. The interesting part was to see a) who would bother going into this b) how badly this was going to be flamed and c) whether or not it was just going to be outright zotted.

Don't you know?, The weapon of transparency is that new Utopian weapon. The one where everyone tells the truth, there are no secrets, There is no fear of reprisal for telling the truth, and anything you every wanted to know was posted in an easy, convenient place where everyone who ever wanted it could have easy access to it. Oh yeah, and there is no need for reporters because everyone voluntarily coughs up everything they know. But we have to remember, according to the author of this article, none of this goes against human nature at all.

Sheesh, I really didn't want to comment on this absurd article.

Well thanks for joining...now I know and well, care even less about what this frickin idiot was trying to say. I really think we need to have an island like Australia used to be (sorry to any Australians!) where we can just send criminals and people with INSANE ideas like this! Then they can work on their Utopia away from the capitalist scum!

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.