Is communism opposed to expensive designer products? [Archive]

View Full Version : Is communism opposed to expensive designer products?

Zoonic

17th August 2009, 19:40

Glenn Beck

17th August 2009, 19:50

http://bugtraq.ru/library/underground/.keep/trolls.feed.jpg

Zoonic

17th August 2009, 19:52

No, I'm not a troll, something Dimentio can confirm.

I want to know how my life situation would be affected if Sweden, where I live, turned communist. What would happen to the designer clothes etc? Should I feel threatened or should I welcome communism?

I might also add I have AS and tend to value things and animals higher than human beings, but I'm working on existing in harmony with all beings. While growing up I bonded with material things and pretended little spirits lived inside of them. I treated some of my clothing as living beings. I used to bury dead bumblebees I found and and over the years I adopted two homeless kittens I found abandonded in the woods and took in another two whose owners couldn't keep them.

17th August 2009, 19:54

Heinous anus bane-on-us you are.

Muzk

17th August 2009, 19:55

Of course you can live without it

Bright Banana Beard

17th August 2009, 19:57

I can live without top quality designs. I am not sure why I do need them.

khad

17th August 2009, 19:59

You can take them with you to corrective labor.

Troll threads deserve troll responses.

Muzk

17th August 2009, 19:59

http://eatourbrains.com/EoB/wp-content/uploads/2007/05/troll.jpg

I've read his post again and I'll put it in the words of one of those internet spammers -
Obvious troll is obvious

Zoonic

17th August 2009, 19:59

I can live, as in exist/breathe etc without it but will communism FORCE me to live without it? If Sweden became communist tomorrow, what would happen to the market for designer clothes and how would these kinds of products/business be handled?

What I say is true, I know it sounds extreme but I did have 7 surgical procedures all in all and I spend all my money on designer clothing. Try to take into account that I have AS and my behaviour will make more sense.

Dimentio should also be able to confirm that this part is true and that I'm not a troll. I live like this.

mel

17th August 2009, 20:06

I need some clarification on this. One of my major interests is clothes and designer things in general. I have a wardrobe for around $60 000, and I also had cosmetic surgery for around $30 000, (I am gay but not a real life Brüno even though I know all this may sound bad).

Some of these money came from heritage, but my standing income is a swedish pre-time pension of around $1500 a month I get for having AS diagnosed. So it's tax-payer money mostly.

I think quality products make the world more fun. It gives life some extra joy. How would groups and products such as Gucci, Louis Vuitton etc be treated in a communist society? Would you still be able to get hold of these products?

In Japan, it's common for people to get designer and luxury goods as a way of improving life quality. 94% of women in Tokyo own at least one Louis Vuitton bag. That country consumes as much as Europe and America combined in terms of designer fashion and luxury products, and that with a population of just 120 million or something like that. Even more ordinary people tend to own some designer things.

How would this look in a communist society? Would ordinary people also be able to get the top quality designer products? I for one can't really live without it.

I probably shouldn't respond seriously to this, but for the benefit of anybody who may come to this thread at a later point, I feel this topic does deserve consideration.

I think you're asking all of the wrong questions, and that stems from a total misunderstanding of what it is that communism means, how it is achieved, and where the priorities lie...but without going into the gritty details, here's my answer to your qeustion.

Chances are, if sweden began a transition towards communism, there would be a dropoff of imported designer goods. In addition, production inside the country would need to be focused towards the mass-producible necessities. That said, in an eventual, world-wide communist society (which I think is the real question you are asking about) I imagine that there will be people, whose passion is designing and creating clothes and bags who would make it a point to do so either as a profession (designing lines for general manufacture) or as a hobby (only having access to smaller production lines, and by extension creating a limited number) which people would acquire in some manner or another. It honestly depends on the exact economic plan in place. Some would not allow for any "hobbyist" production, as scarcity would introduce a need for determining the distribution of scarce goods (such as designer clothing) which may or may not require markets.

Muzk

17th August 2009, 20:13

Some would not allow for any "hobbyist" production, as scarcity would introduce a need for determining the distribution of scarce goods (such as designer clothing) which may or may not require markets.

Not everyone wants such things, and, if it really is your hobby, you'd have your contacts.
You could just ask around if some person has knitting or whatever as a hobby.

...if you only want specially designed things because of the NAME like gucci or whatever, then you can't be helped.

cb9's_unity

17th August 2009, 20:13

Zoonic

17th August 2009, 20:36

Personally I believe art (which includes certain designer clothing) will flourish under communism. Quite a lot of people in the working class do like to look better and do like designer clothing and I see no reason why their wants should not be met once the become part of the ruling class.

Today higher fashion is often considered Bourgeois but there is no reason it can not be adopted by more of the proletariat post-revolution. After all when production is streamlined the cost of clothing will significantly lessened. If people want to make cloths they feel look better or are of higher quality there should be no reason to stop them.

That's what I want to hear, thanks.

I ask because many communists in Sweden, the majority of those I feel like labeling "communists" (Palestine-demonstrators from the leftist party or some extreme-leftist party) just don't seem to care that much for how they look. It's a generally non-vain community. Many don't even care that much for their personal hygiene, showering once every second/third day and sleeping collectively in sleep over parties where they play anti-capitalist songs from the 60's and 70's.

Another, related question might be, how would personal integrity/space be handled? Would I be forced to share room with others and use the same shower/bathroom facilities? (since it's me asking, there's no need for a new thread from the same author I think. Better to keep it to this one and let the title of the thread represent the first lines, like in the title of a piece of opera music).

I have AS and I feel sick, in mind and spirit, from sharing with too many people. Will communism violate my integrity? My brain is wired differently and I need to be alone. I need private zones etc.

I don't even feel good about renting an appartment because this is basically someone elses space. I need my own space, my own independance from others and this is all because of my non-neurotypical brain. I like shutting the door, make myself a cup of high antioxidant red tea and feel like "I'm here, the rest of the world is outside" and just enjoy the complete silence and absence of human smell, filth and noise.

When I go out, I protect my hands with mittens and usually wrap cashmere scarves around my neck. I always wear designer sunglasses to protect myself from the horrors of the outside/human world.

eyedrop

17th August 2009, 20:40

I think quality products make the world more fun. It gives life some extra joy. How would groups and products such as Gucci, Louis Vuitton etc be treated in a communist society? Would you still be able to get hold of these products?...

...How would this look in a communist society? Would ordinary people also be able to get the top quality designer products? I for one can't really live without it.
Aren't high fashion articles mainly so sought after because they are unaturally kept scarce? (Bear in mind that I don't know shit about fashion) In a communist society I would think we would try to mass produce more of the highly sought after clothing articles, as far as it's possible.

For clothing that are hard to manufacture a lot of I would think we would either divide up by lottery, waiting lists or friendship with the producer.

There are also a bunch of folks that have clothing making as a hobby and since it's a useful hobby I don't see why we would discourage it. (My girlfriend is making a dress as we speak.)

eyedrop

17th August 2009, 20:49

That's what I want to hear, thanks.

I ask because many communists in Sweden, the majority of those I feel like labeling "communists" (Palestine-demonstrators from the leftist party or some extreme-leftist party) just don't seem to care that much for how they look. It's a generally non-vain community. Many don't even care that much for their personal hygiene, showering once every second/third day and sleeping collectively in sleep over parties where they play anti-capitalist songs from the 60's and 70's.

Another, related question might be, how would personal integrity/space be handled? Would I be forced to share room with others and use the same shower/bathroom facilities? (since it's me asking, there's no need for a new thread from the same author I think. Better to keep it to this one and let the title of the thread represent the first lines, like in the title of a piece of opera music).

I have AS and I feel sick, in mind and spirit, from sharing with too many people. Will communism violate my integrity? My brain is wired differently and I need to be alone. I need private zones etc.

I don't even feel good about renting an appartment because this is basically someone elses space. I need my own space, my own independance from others and this is all because of my non-neurotypical brain. I like shutting the door, make myself a cup of high antioxidant red tea and feel like "I'm here, the rest of the world is outside" and just enjoy the complete silence and absence of human smell, filth and noise.

When I go out, I protect my hands with mittens and usually wrap cashmere scarves around me. I always wear designer sunglasses to protect myself from the horrors of the outside/human world.

I don't think you are alone in needing space for yourself. I would like it myself too, but at the moment I don't have the finances to pull it off.

After the first priority to house everyone is met, which I would reckon is practically already met for Sweden, I think society would work at improving living spaces and providing seperate appartments/houses for those that desire it.

Zoonic

17th August 2009, 20:50

For clothing that are hard to manufacture a lot of I would think we would either divide up by lottery, waiting lists or friendship with the producer.

Such a lottery is the growing ground for envy and hatred, since communism doesn't by default make people more spiritually noble and accepting towards each other.

Friendship with the producer = Nepotism and favorizing in social networks is the height of inequality and I don't see the difference in inequality between a CEO appointing his son as vice president and a working class hero who gets to preview products etc.

In the current capitalist society, I have a few VIP memberships with previews simply based on how much I consume. If this was to be changed so that I had to have a long history of personal relationship with the manufacturer, I wouldn't be able to get hold of the products as easily. Today, such a relationship is usually built up by spending/consuming. They respect me because I buy their things and they become more helpful, even on a personal level.

About the living spaces. In the back of my head, I have the scene from Doctor Zhivago where the revolutionaries just barge into the upper class home, divides it with drapes and tells them where to live while moving five other families into the same room (very similar to the scene in The Pianist when the jewish family is first moved into the ghetto and get their accomodations). These kinds of scenes traumatize me a bit and I feel it would be a great violation to be subject to something like that.

RotStern

17th August 2009, 20:57

Zoonic im disgusted by your spending on clothing and surgery.
Absolutely disgusting.

Zoonic

17th August 2009, 21:01

Zoonic im disgusted by your spending on clothing and surgery.
Absolutely disgusting.

Why? I let you live your life and accept you for who you are. I do what makes me happy. For some people it's traveling, they spend all they have on around the globe trips or exotic diving adventures. For others it's riding, they spend a fortune on maintaining their stable of horses etc. For me it's clothing. I don't think clothing is worse than traveling or horses.

And about the surgery. I can't do anything about my brain. How I was created on the inside. So I work on what I have any power over, such as my exterior/physical vanity.

I have AS, I'll never see the world as most normal people do even though I can logically understand why and how they see it the way they do. I can never feel it the same way they do. It's like having differently coloured emotions. You should understand it, since I usually make an anology between Soviet and American technology, movies, computers etc. They had the same function but were still designed differently and had their own unique traits. You could also see it as engines with different fuel and mechanisms but the same purpose, to be an engine.

gorillafuck

17th August 2009, 21:02

If everything that is more important than making designer clothing has been accomplished, then maybe. But when a socialist state is being built there are much, much more important things to take care of than making ridiculously nice clothing.

*Red*Alert

17th August 2009, 21:10

As I said in another thread, I've owned one designer brand product. A pair of Reebok trainers bought for me 5 years ago, prior to that I never had any and since that I've never had anything from a recognised brand.

RotStern

17th August 2009, 21:13

*Red*Alert

17th August 2009, 21:16

cb9's_unity

17th August 2009, 21:28

That's what I want to hear, thanks.

I ask because many communists in Sweden, the majority of those I feel like labeling "communists" (Palestine-demonstrators from the leftist party or some extreme-leftist party) just don't seem to care that much for how they look. It's a generally non-vain community. Many don't even care that much for their personal hygiene, showering once every second/third day and sleeping collectively in sleep over parties where they play anti-capitalist songs from the 60's and 70's.

From my knowledge these people may be lifestylists. While I don't necessarily have a giant problem with people like this don't believe you have to act like that to be a communist. Many if not most communists act completely normally while also being revolutionary socialists.

Another, related question might be, how would personal integrity/space be handled? Would I be forced to share room with others and use the same shower/bathroom facilities? (since it's me asking, there's no need for a new thread from the same author I think. Better to keep it to this one and let the title of the thread represent the first lines, like in the title of a piece of opera music).

The means of production will be collectivized, not the people. A person can live as individualistically as they want to. We want to allow workers more freedom than they have today and that includes freedom to live their lives in a way they find comfortable. You won't be able to own private property (pretty much you can't own your own business or unfairly profit off of others) but your personal property will remain safe.

I have AS and I feel sick, in mind and spirit, from sharing with too many people. Will communism violate my integrity? My brain is wired differently and I need to be alone. I need private zones etc.

I apologize but I don't know what AS is. We will certainly be respectful of medical conditions. Communists are about being pragmatic and compassionate so you will certainly not be forced into a situation in which you would be in extreme distress.

I don't even feel good about renting an appartment because this is basically someone elses space. I need my own space, my own independance from others and this is all because of my non-neurotypical brain. I like shutting the door, make myself a cup of high antioxidant red tea and feel like "I'm here, the rest of the world is outside" and just enjoy the complete silence and absence of human smell, filth and noise.

When I go out, I protect my hands with mittens and usually wrap cashmere scarves around my neck. I always wear designer sunglasses to protect myself from the horrors of the outside/human world.

Your condition sounds terrible. So while I'm neither a doctor nor a fortune teller I can't tell you exactly what would happen in your case under communism. However I can assure you that we aren't hell bent on making people live a certain life style.

eyedrop

17th August 2009, 21:34

Agreed.

Petit Bourgeoisie

There is really no reason for him to come from a petit bourgousie family. In the last generations of workers in Scandinavia it was usual for working class families to end up owning their homes debtfree before succumbing (not todays workers though). And if he inherited such a home he could easily decide to waste 90k on useless clothes.

cb9's_unity (http://www.revleft.com/vb/../member.php?u=12640): I think he means Apergers Syndrome by AS.

Zoonic

17th August 2009, 21:47

I think he means Apergers Syndrome by AS.

Yeah, I'm talking about Asperger's Syndrome, but it sounds so fugly. The term AS is becoming more and more popular. How many people actually say Attention Deficit Disorder, Body Dysmorphophobic Disorder etc? Asperger's should be AS, like "MS" or "ADD" or whatever.

About the compassion in communism, I saw none of that in my introduction thread. I saw a bunch of gloating predators waiting for the "entertainment" from the "freak" they heard about from Dimentio. And when the thread didn't develop as they wanted, they started acting like 15-year old school bullies instead throwing around the usual prejudices (usually of american origin) about social misfits etc... What I witnessed so far on here is a bunch of very crude, slightly sadistic people with the emotional depth of Jeremy Jackson.

I'm starting to think modern communism is about emotionally unrefined bully culture. Stuff your mouth with Cherios and Coke, watch some South Park, play some WoW and pick on people who don't fit the all-american social pattern and don't find Encyclopedia Dramatica the least bit entertaining.

So I got quite a bad impression so far. Vulgar, aggressive, indifferent people who expect freakshows as their entertainment. That's the absolute bottom dwellers of spiritual refinement. The garbage of emotional nobility. Are they the "new ruling class"?

cb9's_unity

17th August 2009, 21:48

eyedrop

17th August 2009, 21:54

Such a lottery is the growing ground for envy and hatred, since communism doesn't by default make people more spiritually noble and accepting towards each other. Most quality clothes would be mass produced, and I don't think people would be so obsessed with getting the clothes that mainly functions as status symbols today. I for one wouldn't care as long as I could get a variety of quality clothes.

Friendship with the producer = Nepotism and favorizing in social networks is the height of inequality and I don't see the difference in inequality between a CEO appointing his son as vice president and a working class hero who gets to preview products etc. I don't really think anyone having a scarce piece of clothing equates as any significant inequality.

In the current capitalist society, I have a few VIP memberships with previews simply based on how much I consume. If this was to be changed so that I had to have a long history of personal relationship with the manufacturer, I wouldn't be able to get hold of the products as easily. Today, such a relationship is usually built up by spending/consuming. They respect me because I buy their things and they become more helpful, even on a personal level.No, you wouldn't be able to get hold of scarce world fameous clothes so easy anymore. Why should you have any more priority for it than anyone else who also want them? Meanwhile lot's of specially designed, non-fameous pieces of clothing would be available, alongside mass produced quality clothes.

About the living spaces. In the back of my head, I have the scene from Doctor Zhivago where the revolutionaries just barge into the upper class home, divides it with drapes and tells them where to live while moving five other families into the same room (very similar to the scene in The Pianist when the jewish family is first moved into the ghetto and get their accomodations). These kinds of scenes traumatize me a bit and I feel it would be a great violation to be subject to something like that.Screw you! I'm already forced to share an apartment with 4 people today, don't you think that is emotionally taxing? Be glad that you have been so lucky now.

I reckon you do know AS folks that are forced to share apartments due to financial reasons now, I know I do. That is some of the things we would strive to improve.

Edit; Sorry, about that slight emotional outburst and ad hominem in the last part. What you need to realise is that what you fear so much is actually happening right now.

Zoonic

17th August 2009, 21:55

Oh I actually know a decent amount about aspergers syndrome. It sounds like he has a severe case of it but someone with AS should have no problem in a communist society. If you can still contribute to society people will appreciate you. Beyond that if you feel the need to seclude yourself I don't personally believe people will have a problem.

I can't contribute to society. I'm perfectly verbal and understand body language perfectly but I just don't bond/identify with people and can't function in a social environment. Machines are already doing more and more of the simple labor and there wouldn't be any need for me to do any work in solitude. So I would be unproductive and sent to the gas chamber.

I have absolutely no formal schooling. Everything I know, the english language for example, I learned on my own. I'm now studying japanese writing/language and it's also on my own, outside of any school system, but I'm still learning quite well. However,there is no field where I could put anything I know to use. So I would be completely unproductive.

In Scandinavia and the UK 75-90% of people with AS are non-productive according to some report I read a few years ago. It's less in the US, but aspies are also more depressed over there judging from what I've read on dicussion boards. Suicide also seems to be more common. It's also very common for aspies to get a four year education and max out their student debts while crashing into unemployment and social misery after they graduate. I made sure to never borrow money and I planned a bit for a safe, secluded life instead of rushing into a society I'm not fit to handle. So I have an economic advantage compared to many aspies who force themselves out and then fall helplessly.

Sarah Palin

17th August 2009, 21:58

$60,000 wardrobe? $30,000 cosmetic surgery? WTF.

Zoonic

17th August 2009, 22:54

$60,000 wardrobe? $30,000 cosmetic surgery? WTF.

It's my hobbies/special interests and as I said, I can't change my brain but I can do my utmost to look good.

Искра

17th August 2009, 22:56

If I had a 15.000$ I would buy a flat form my parents... :blink:

LOLseph Stalin

17th August 2009, 23:01

It's my hobbies/special interests and as I said, I can't change my brain but I can do my utmost to look good.

You can look good without expensive designer clothing. There are many nice clothes you can buy for a fraction of the price you pay to get designer clothes. I don't usually spend alot on clothes, but I still manage to look good.

Zoonic

17th August 2009, 23:25

You can look good without expensive designer clothing. There are many nice clothes you can buy for a fraction of the price you pay to get designer clothes. I don't usually spend alot on clothes, but I still manage to look good.

It's possible, but it's harder and lower quality clothes usually don't feel as nice as top quality clothes. I hear Uniqlo is good though for a little lower prices and still maintaining acceptable quality (unlike H&M and the likes), but unfortunately you can't get Uniqlo in Sweden where I live.

The things I always need, no matter what, is mittens and sunglasses. They protect me and shield me from the evils of the world. A scarf is also good but not absolutely necessary.

eyedrop

17th August 2009, 23:26

If I had a 15.000$ I would buy a flat form my parents... :blink:
Flats here are outrageously expensive, the cheapest non-central one-room apartments start at 900'000 kr (103'626,94 Euro's)

cb9's_unity

17th August 2009, 23:26

Zoonic

17th August 2009, 23:35

Emphasis Mine

Hold up. No one is saying anything about gas chambers here. I could not tell you exactly what would happen to you but execution is certainly not an option. I also doubt that if no way of dealing with AS is discovered you would even be punished for not being able to work.

However from my knowledge of the disease there are many people with it who go on to lead productive lives. I'm no expert but you should get a medical opinion on whether or not you have some sort of phobia (agoraphobia maybe?). I live in the states and I knew a young kid who had AS. The parents needed to work with the school to get a certain education plan set up but beyond that it was predicted he would grow up to have what is a pretty normal life. The parents will really need to help him socially but there weren't fears that he would have the same experience you do.

Also you could also be a tailor of some sort. You probably won't have to deal with more than one person at the time at most and even then your not dealing with their personality your usually just dealing with their sizes. That combines your like for fashion. If thats too much try to be a tailors assistant or something like that, they do measurements you fix the cloths. At that point you just have to deal with a boss and that sucks for everyone. Oh and I highly doubt that will ever be automated.

I had most of my childhood wrecked by special solutions for AS and it worsened the condition instead of helping it. I probably wouldn't have fallen outside of the system at such a young age if I had gotten the right attention and not just a forced education/therapy plan. It made me antisocial and agoraphobic and increased some of the oversensitivity connected with AS, such as making me dizzy and sick from being out among people for too long. I used to be able to walk around like pretty much anyone but when I reached adulthood after what they put me through, I was much more oversensitive all of a sudden.

After a day with too much social contact, I feel as if I drank too much and just wants to hide underneath the cover and shut of all sounds. My head is litteraly spinning.

Another problem is that the people who were supposed to help me instead burned my possibilities and made me unable to reestablish a real contact with society. I can't get back in so I instead create a comfortable but unproductive life with the money I have, as a recluse. There's no proper help to get me back in and even if I managed, it wouldn't pay enough to be worth it.

So I think I'm always going to be unproductive, like many people with AS.

Искра

17th August 2009, 23:44

This thread is stupider as it goes on...
Where's good old Bolshevik censure? :D

StrictlyRuddie

18th August 2009, 00:29

First off.. I'm sorry you don't feel welcomed here, the place seems to be getting more and more rude to new comers.

On to your question..

Short answer: communism creates the material basis and conditions for the full development of the individual, for the unfolding of all his/hers human powers, for his/her full independence. a society in which the free development of each is the condition for the free development of all.

So.. If your interests include clothes and fashion, you will be able to create and distribute designs and clothes to your friends and family and community using a small set of means of production which you can say your 'renting' as that property would belong to society. If you're clothing designs become popular maybe they will be mass produced for an even larger audience using an even larger set of MOPS. Communism allows for the individual to work in un alienated conditions, producing and creating what he wants.

As for your privacy question you need to understand that we won't be taking you're home and dividing it up for 8 other families to live in.(Unless you live in a mansion or a palace or something) There are 2 types of property..

Private property: This is the kind of property which we need to collectivize, which includes the means of production(Farms, land offices, machinery, factories, industry etc..) Being collectivized they will belong to society to be used to satisfy the needs of society
and eventually as we progress and totally wipe out scarcity they will provide for the WANTS of society as well.

Personal possessions: This kind of property everything else that does not generate wealth and belongs to you. (Your home, your books, television, favorite paintings, etc..) These things wont be touched as they are legitimate pieces of property.

So no need to worry about the 'evil commies' coming to take all of your stuff, I hope I cleared things up for you.

BabylonHoruv

18th August 2009, 04:33

Screw Communism. Go with Anarchism.

In an Anarchist society a designer could not become incredibly rich, as they do in our capitalist system, but that doesn't mean designer clothes would not be available, just that you would need to put in the effort to establish a relationship with those in the design community.

Admittedly this could be very difficult for someone with AS. The biggest issue i can see you facing though is not a shortage of designers, if you are not productive and are able to spend several thousand dollars on clothing you obviously have an independent source of income. This makes you not petite bourgeoisie, but full blown bourgeoisie. It is likely that the revolution would eliminate your source of income, whether it is a communist revolution or an Anarchist one. If you are unable and unwilling to take some part in society you end up living as hermits have traditionally lived, that is in the wilderness. Fortunately most people with AS and other disorders that make social interaction difficult or impossible have family who can interact with the community on their behalf.

Manifesto

18th August 2009, 06:01

90 000 on fucking clothing >.> My entire wardrobe is something lie $500 - 700 and that's being generous. There is no need to own an entire stable anyways.
90 000 on just a thrill is disgusting when there are people who can't even buy a pair of socks.
All of my clothes would be less than $500. I could not imagine besides being morally against more than $2,000 of clothes, paying that much for clothes is just so wasteful.

ckaihatsu

18th August 2009, 12:24

From a political perspective this thread of discussion is *fascinating* -- I took notes from all the posts and counted up 23 discrete political topics, which I then used as headers, in bold, below, to put the exchanges into a certain narrative order -- it's a looooong post, here...!

Asperger's Syndrome / "medicalized" socio-political situations / personalized politics

Yeah, I'm talking about Asperger's Syndrome, but it sounds so fugly. The term AS is becoming more and more popular. How many people actually say Attention Deficit Disorder, Body Dysmorphophobic Disorder etc? Asperger's should be AS, like "MS" or "ADD" or whatever.

The fact that more psychological "conditions" are receiving names in our contemporary (post-financialization / '70s-present) period is more of a testament to the disintegration of social norms more than anything else. "Now I'm not a doctor here" -- that's the disclaimer a person is *supposed* to give in order to provide some validation for the bourgeois-medical regime of excusing certain socio-political conditions by medicalizing them. (I think the hard-core communists would back me up here on this one.)

My brain is wired differently and I need to be alone. I need private zones etc.

I don't even feel good about renting an appartment because this is basically someone elses space. I need my own space, my own independance from others and this is all because of my non-neurotypical brain. I like shutting the door, make myself a cup of high antioxidant red tea and feel like "I'm here, the rest of the world is outside" and just enjoy the complete silence and absence of human smell, filth and noise.

When I go out, I protect my hands with mittens and usually wrap cashmere scarves around my neck. I always wear designer sunglasses to protect myself from the horrors of the outside/human world.

However from my knowledge of the disease there are many people with it who go on to lead productive lives. I'm no expert but you should get a medical opinion on whether or not you have some sort of phobia (agoraphobia maybe?). I live in the states and I knew a young kid who had AS. The parents needed to work with the school to get a certain education plan set up but beyond that it was predicted he would grow up to have what is a pretty normal life. The parents will really need to help him socially but there weren't fears that he would have the same experience you do.

We can add 'medicalization politics' to our contemporary liberal array of consumeristic cultures, like therapy culture, radical (petty power) feminism, gender identities, and identity politics -- these all fall into the domain of the personalization of politics, the "cultural" "political" refuge of the privileged.

Those who are scraping by in the jobs market will *not* be found to indulge in the practice of vain personalizations as a substitute for genuine class-based demands -- instead, those who are forced to flirt with poverty will be saying "What the fuck?" and "When is this shit going to get better? I don't have all life here."

In Scandinavia and the UK 75-90% of people with AS are non-productive according to some report I read a few years ago. It's less in the US, but aspies are also more depressed over there judging from what I've read on dicussion boards. Suicide also seems to be more common. It's also very common for aspies to get a four year education and max out their student debts while crashing into unemployment and social misery after they graduate. I made sure to never borrow money and I planned a bit for a safe, secluded life instead of rushing into a society I'm not fit to handle. So I have an economic advantage compared to many aspies who force themselves out and then fall helplessly.

At the same time, you, Zoonic, are pointing to a certain proletarianization of what used to be a solid bulwark of an effete, protected, middle-class sector of wage-earning society. Financialization -- including the expansion of consumer credit -- only lasts so long, and after awhile the propped-up bubbles of artificial value, in whatever sector, are widely seen to be overvalued, are divested from, and collapse, leaving behind the rude awakening of the capitalist overproduction and valuation crises.

If it requires "medicalization" to receive some relatively meager benefits for living one's life the way one wants to, then I think we should provide *conditional* political support for those reformist terms, while at the same time being aware that it is nowhere near a situation of self-empowered worker solidarity.

workerism as communist social culture

About the compassion in communism, I saw none of that in my introduction thread. I saw a bunch of gloating predators waiting for the "entertainment" from the "freak" they heard about from Dimentio. And when the thread didn't develop as they wanted, they started acting like 15-year old school bullies instead throwing around the usual prejudices (usually of american origin) about social misfits etc... What I witnessed so far on here is a bunch of very crude, slightly sadistic people with the emotional depth of Jeremy Jackson.

I'm starting to think modern communism is about emotionally unrefined bully culture. Stuff your mouth with Cherios and Coke, watch some South Park, play some WoW and pick on people who don't fit the all-american social pattern and don't find Encyclopedia Dramatica the least bit entertaining.

So I got quite a bad impression so far. Vulgar, aggressive, indifferent people who expect freakshows as their entertainment. That's the absolute bottom dwellers of spiritual refinement. The garbage of emotional nobility. Are they the "new ruling class"?

This does happen, unfortunately. Just as much as it is inappropriate for liberal and radical types to socially commodify politics into personalized identity politics -- including medicalization and therapy-ization -- into elaborate games of moralistic 'gotcha', it is inappropriate for revolutionary and militant types to push their own, personal social political circles as being the only correct way for day-to-day living. The part that *can* be objectively judged is a person's *political* responses and activities regarding *political issues*, and nothing else.

"spiritually noble"

[C]ommunism doesn't by default make people more spiritually noble and accepting towards each other.

And here, Zoonic, is your *own* phenotype of social identity -- the term 'spiritual' is basically a dodge used by privileged, liberal types that artificially abstracts human relations into a null definition. It, and abstract terms like it, serve the interests of established, elite power because whoever / whatever strata controls the *definitions* of these moralistic terms also controls the mainstream, ruling-class culture, as the clergy has traditionally done.

'Spirituality' sidesteps the materialist, class basis for human relations as they exist in our exploitative, imperialist society. It plays right into liberal social engineering -- again, holding artificially, arbitrarily constructed social identities over people's heads in order to make them fall into certain patterns of behavior.

social identity revealed through relationship to commodity-oriented culture --> bourgeois

[You are] not petite bourgeoisie, but full blown bourgeoisie. It is likely that the revolution would eliminate your source of income, whether it is a communist revolution or an Anarchist one. If you are unable and unwilling to take some part in society you end up living as hermits have traditionally lived, that is in the wilderness. Fortunately most people with AS and other disorders that make social interaction difficult or impossible have family who can interact with the community on their behalf.

I agree with BabylonHoruv's diagnosis, but not his / her prescription. I'll address the topic of existence in a post-capitalist society in a moment here....

designer?

I'd be curious to know if you, Zoonic, are something of a designer yourself, in addition to being a consumer of designer products. I would guess that you are, but I don't know for sure. If you are, then your work / hobby is a particular one, because it deals more with the aesthetically oriented faculties of emotion, creativity, and cognition. These are decidedly a-humanistic, and -- in accord with your materially privileged status -- show that your attentions are typically focused *away* from people-centric activities.

I think that this mode of living can induce a kind of hypersensitivity since your artistic practices can bring you away from the people-centered, more-social modes of living that define the social aspect of what it means to be working class.

At the same time, due to the rise of Internet mediated, individualistic modes of living we're seeing the erosion of nationalistic, mainstream herding, pop-culture, and people-centric movements as individual attention is re-oriented to hyper-individuated, and personal-commodity-centric stimuli, or cues. This makes us -- particularly *object*-oriented people like yourself, much more susceptibility to a-humanistic cues, including high-tech distractions and psy warfare.

solitude / personal space / personal property

I can't contribute to society. I'm perfectly verbal and understand body language perfectly but I just don't bond/identify with people and can't function in a social environment. Machines are already doing more and more of the simple labor and there wouldn't be any need for me to do any work in solitude. So I would be unproductive and sent to the gas chamber.

Another, related question might be, how would personal integrity/space be handled? Would I be forced to share room with others and use the same shower/bathroom facilities? (since it's me asking, there's no need for a new thread from the same author I think. Better to keep it to this one and let the title of the thread represent the first lines, like in the title of a piece of opera music).

I have AS and I feel sick, in mind and spirit, from sharing with too many people. Will communism violate my integrity?

As for your privacy question you need to understand that we won't be taking you're home and dividing it up for 8 other families to live in.(Unless you live in a mansion or a palace or something) There are 2 types of property..

Private property: This is the kind of property which we need to collectivize, which includes the means of production(Farms, land offices, machinery, factories, industry etc..) Being collectivized they will belong to society to be used to satisfy the needs of society
and eventually as we progress and totally wipe out scarcity they will provide for the WANTS of society as well.

Personal possessions: This kind of property everything else that does not generate wealth and belongs to you. (Your home, your books, television, favorite paintings, etc..) These things wont be touched as they are legitimate pieces of property.

So no need to worry about the 'evil commies' coming to take all of your stuff, I hope I cleared things up for you.

authoritarianism / cultural engineering

About the living spaces. In the back of my head, I have the scene from Doctor Zhivago where the revolutionaries just barge into the upper class home, divides it with drapes and tells them where to live while moving five other families into the same room (very similar to the scene in The Pianist when the jewish family is first moved into the ghetto and get their accomodations). These kinds of scenes traumatize me a bit and I feel it would be a great violation to be subject to something like that.

I can't contribute to society. I'm perfectly verbal and understand body language perfectly but I just don't bond/identify with people and can't function in a social environment. Machines are already doing more and more of the simple labor and there wouldn't be any need for me to do any work in solitude. So I would be unproductive and sent to the gas chamber.

We, as revolutionaries, *need* to differentiate our materialist-based approach from the *nationalist*-revolutionary movements of the 20th century that *were* *successful* in being anti-imperialist, but *were not* successful in being anti-capitalist on a global scale. We *need* to emphasize that we have *no* *cultural* interests in a revolutionary context -- that we, as political people, can only justifiably concern ourselves with issues of labor and material productivity on a mass scale, and nothing else.

post-industrial financial wealth / current valuation crisis

I can't contribute to society. I'm perfectly verbal and understand body language perfectly but I just don't bond/identify with people and can't function in a social environment. Machines are already doing more and more of the simple labor and there wouldn't be any need for me to do any work in solitude. So I would be unproductive and sent to the gas chamber.

I think that the anxieties of the more-privileged strata of our society -- including yourself -- are a bellwether for the up-and-coming material relations of our future society -- kind of like what the Dow Jones is to the financial markets.

Ever since humanity produced a material surplus this anxiety has been common, since many privileged-yet-honest common people only see their self-worth in terms of their usefulness to society as a whole. What many people forget -- due to the unforgiving grip of moralism -- is that a surplus in society *should mean* a surplus for *every single person* in that society, regardless of work input.

The fact that capitalism is *so fucked* at arriving at a reasonable system of distribution for this societal surplus is merely the underlying disease that gives rise to its regular periods of crisis of valuation.

In Scandinavia and the UK 75-90% of people with AS are non-productive according to some report I read a few years ago. It's less in the US, but aspies are also more depressed over there judging from what I've read on dicussion boards. Suicide also seems to be more common. It's also very common for aspies to get a four year education and max out their student debts while crashing into unemployment and social misery after they graduate. I made sure to never borrow money and I planned a bit for a safe, secluded life instead of rushing into a society I'm not fit to handle. So I have an economic advantage compared to many aspies who force themselves out and then fall helplessly.

The ongoing, systemic valuation crisis -- particularly in the post-dotcom period -- leaves *any* honest, rational person with an understandable trepidation towards attempting to participate in some reasonable manner in the recession-ridden economy / society, such as it is. The resulting profound confusion and anxiety can lead people to extreme states of depression and withdrawal, as you're noting.

"zero-sum" economics

One *enormous* problem with politics is the conception of "zero-sum" economics -- this is a throwback to the days of mercantilism, when newly invented paper notes actually represented gold reserves on a one-to-one basis -- (and this is ignoring the issue of whether material valuation should be in the form of gold, or anything else).

Libertarians fall right into this trap, calling for a monetization of the U.S.'s entire $8 trillion+ federal deficit, a "re-grounding" of the money supply on a gold-backed basis, etc. Essentially this zero-sum, or one-to-one basis of valuation sets up the intellectual conditions for a kind of moralism based on economics alone.

For example, if you happen to, at one meal, put more food on your plate than you are able to finish, and you throw it away, does that mean that someone else in the world who's hungry was just deprived of a light snack? Of course not, because food production, like any other commodity, is *not* a zero-sum game. There is more than enough *production* of *tangible* goods and services, to provide humanity with a comfortable existence -- what is *lacking* is the *political means of distribution* of those goods and services on an equitable basis, regardless of the economic / accounting system used.

All of my clothes would be less than $500. I could not imagine besides being morally against more than $2,000 of clothes, paying that much for clothes is just so wasteful.

90 000 on fucking clothing >.> My entire wardrobe is something lie $500 - 700 and that's being generous. There is no need to own an entire stable anyways.
90 000 on just a thrill is disgusting when there are people who can't even buy a pair of socks.

You can look good without expensive designer clothing. There are many nice clothes you can buy for a fraction of the price you pay to get designer clothes. I don't usually spend alot on clothes, but I still manage to look good.

So these three exclamations are instances of economic-based moralizing. Did you, Zoonic, travel to Honduras and force the Third World factory worker's face into the grindstone so that they would manufacture your designer wardrobe for you? Of course not. All of us were born into financial situations that we had *no* control over, and many of us find it difficult to realize any kind of upward social mobility despite our best efforts. This is the nature of the *system*, and not of this-or-that person's sum of life navigations.

I'd like to add that we, in the role of consumers, have virtually *zero* additional political power as well-endowed consumers than if we were poor. Unless you happen to be a real power broker, in the upper levels of corporate management, with lobbyists and senators in your pocket, you happen to just be more *consumer*-privileged than the rest of us, for whatever that's worth to you.

automation / consumption of surplus

I can't contribute to society. I'm perfectly verbal and understand body language perfectly but I just don't bond/identify with people and can't function in a social environment. Machines are already doing more and more of the simple labor and there wouldn't be any need for me to do any work in solitude. So I would be unproductive and sent to the gas chamber.

Hold up. No one is saying anything about gas chambers here. I could not tell you exactly what would happen to you but execution is certainly not an option. I also doubt that if no way of dealing with AS is discovered you would even be punished for not being able to work.

Screw Communism. Go with Anarchism.

In an Anarchist society a designer could not become incredibly rich, as they do in our capitalist system, but that doesn't mean designer clothes would not be available, just that you would need to put in the effort to establish a relationship with those in the design community.

The reason I'm *not* an anarchist is for this reason: If the technology of automation brought us to the point where we could design our *own* clothing designs (or download others') on a computer that we got for free, with the cloth entirely sourced by industrial automation, the final outfit assembled according to our design by robots, and shipped to us without obligating a single minute of human labor, then we wouldn't even need to be a part of a "design community".

Hell, you wouldn't even have to put in any *effort*, aside from thinking up your fucking consumer choice. Isn't *this* the point we should be at, for everyone?!

socially "productive" / definition of 'work'

So this brings us to the ultimate societal question of "What is work?" in the era of automation / computerization. Even Marx, in the _Communist Manifesto_, with the definition of "from each according to his means, to each according to his needs" now sounds archaic and outmoded. Even our *current*, exploitation- and oppression-ridden capitalist society has productively *outstripped* this definition, aside from the severe inequality of distribution.

By the yardstick of material production alone we 6-2/3 billion+ people on earth should all be living like kings by now...!

I have absolutely no formal schooling. Everything I know, the english language for example, I learned on my own. I'm now studying japanese writing/language and it's also on my own, outside of any school system, but I'm still learning quite well. However,there is no field where I could put anything I know to use. So I would be completely unproductive.

I can't contribute to society. I'm perfectly verbal and understand body language perfectly but I just don't bond/identify with people and can't function in a social environment. Machines are already doing more and more of the simple labor and there wouldn't be any need for me to do any work in solitude. So I would be unproductive and sent to the gas chamber.

Hold up. No one is saying anything about gas chambers here. I could not tell you exactly what would happen to you but execution is certainly not an option. I also doubt that if no way of dealing with AS is discovered you would even be punished for not being able to work.

Also you could also be a tailor of some sort. You probably won't have to deal with more than one person at the time at most and even then your not dealing with their personality your usually just dealing with their sizes. That combines your like for fashion. If thats too much try to be a tailors assistant or something like that, they do measurements you fix the cloths. At that point you just have to deal with a boss and that sucks for everyone. Oh and I highly doubt that will ever be automated.

In *any* industrial and post-industrial setting we have to ask the question of how to value labor input -- because as soon as we transcend the one-artisan-one-product-at-a-time ratio, by using fuel power, automation, and computerization, we've entered into an economics that *far outproduces* goods and services per unit of labor effort put in.

This issue gets even *more* complicated (arguably) when considering *white-collar* and *pink-collar* labor like design work, domestic work, cultural production, etc. -- how do we gauge some intellectual / cognitive / creative / emotional inputs as being better than others in the long run?

*quantity* manufacture over quality

Chances are, if sweden began a transition towards communism, there would be a dropoff of imported designer goods. In addition, production inside the country would need to be focused towards the mass-producible necessities.

If everything that is more important than making designer clothing has been accomplished, then maybe. But when a socialist state is being built there are much, much more important things to take care of than making ridiculously nice clothing.

I agree with this approach -- particularly in a time-critical revolutionary period in which capitalist rule is being usurped -- the working principle here is 'quantity over quality' -- please see:

Supply prioritization in a socialist transitional economy

http://tinyurl.com/5mjhhh

lottery as a method of communist distribution of custom, limited-production goods and services

[A] lottery is the growing ground for envy and hatred, since communism doesn't by default make people more spiritually noble and accepting towards each other.

A lottery could very well be the *best* method for equitably sorting out a limited supply of a custom, limited-production run of certain goods and services, like concerts, for example.

art production / refined, higher quality manufactured products / artisan (limited production) products

Personally I believe art (which includes certain designer clothing) will flourish under communism. Quite a lot of people in the working class do like to look better and do like designer clothing and I see no reason why their wants should not be met once the become part of the ruling class.

Today higher fashion is often considered Bourgeois but there is no reason it can not be adopted by more of the proletariat post-revolution. After all when production is streamlined the cost of clothing will significantly lessened. If people want to make cloths they feel look better or are of higher quality there should be no reason to stop them.

That said, in an eventual, world-wide communist society (which I think is the real question you are asking about) I imagine that there will be people, whose passion is designing and creating clothes and bags who would make it a point to do so either as a profession (designing lines for general manufacture) or as a hobby (only having access to smaller production lines, and by extension creating a limited number) which people would acquire in some manner or another. It honestly depends on the exact economic plan in place. Some would not allow for any "hobbyist" production, as scarcity would introduce a need for determining the distribution of scarce goods (such as designer clothing) which may or may not require markets.

art / self-actualization in a communistic society -- also see:
'Art in a Communistic society' -- http://www.revleft.com/vb/art-communist-society-t78626/index.html

Short answer: communism creates the material basis and conditions for the full development of the individual, for the unfolding of all his/hers human powers, for his/her full independence. a society in which the free development of each is the condition for the free development of all.

So.. If your interests include clothes and fashion, you will be able to create and distribute designs and clothes to your friends and family and community using a small set of means of production which you can say your 'renting' as that property would belong to society. If you're clothing designs become popular maybe they will be mass produced for an even larger audience using an even larger set of MOPS. Communism allows for the individual to work in un alienated conditions, producing and creating what he wants.

[I]f it really is your hobby, you'd have your contacts.
You could just ask around if some person has knitting or whatever as a hobby.

anarchist revolution = petit bourgeois / "community"-, or social-cult-status-oriented local economies around *very* limited means of *local*, not mass, production

Some would not allow for any "hobbyist" production, as scarcity would introduce a need for determining the distribution of scarce goods (such as designer clothing) which may or may not require markets.

Screw Communism. Go with Anarchism.

In an Anarchist society a designer could not become incredibly rich, as they do in our capitalist system, but that doesn't mean designer clothes would not be available, just that you would need to put in the effort to establish a relationship with those in the design community.

Another problem with the anarchist conception of a post-capitalist economics is that they -- as evidenced here -- do *not* consistently address *mass* production over a widespread area, like an entire continent. All too often I hear about "communities" which leads me to think that our current advanced industrial abilities would be left to rust if the anarchist program is adopted.

A limited base of production is equivalent to a petty-bourgeois outlook, since the producer(s) become overly dependent on a *very* local, limited nexus of production -- a small factory or agricultural commune, perhaps. If our material livelihood becomes too dependent on a handful of limited local sources of community production then we would quickly find ourselves constrained to a parochial, status-oriented politics of dependence -- patronage all over again, in short.

nepotism

Friendship with the producer = Nepotism and favorizing in social networks is the height of inequality and I don't see the difference in inequality between a CEO appointing his son as vice president and a working class hero who gets to preview products etc.

In the current capitalist society, I have a few VIP memberships with previews simply based on how much I consume. If this was to be changed so that I had to have a long history of personal relationship with the manufacturer, I wouldn't be able to get hold of the products as easily. Today, such a relationship is usually built up by spending/consuming. They respect me because I buy their things and they become more helpful, even on a personal level.

Right -- I would rather *go forward* from this point and push for greater automation and distribution of manufactured goods, including designer products. Dependence on a "personal relationship" with a manufacturer would be a *backwards* step, towards nepotism, patronage, favoritism, or -- arguably -- even an anarchist mode of production.

social fetishes / consumer cults / hobbyist interest groups

...if you only want specially designed things because of the NAME like gucci or whatever, then you can't be helped.

*Finally*, I think that a post-capitalist society would still feature the *social* landscape of fads, fashions, "in"-crowds, techno-geeks, cliques, and so on. This is the human condition, regardless of the surplus-enabled material basis. A post-capitalist society would *enable* all of these social forms, but without inflicting the pain on workers that our society currently requires to realize these cultural enjoyments. Only by replacing human wage-slavery by machine slavery can we continue to enjoy a civilized culture while improving on it.

Chris

--

--
___

RevLeft.com -- Home of the Revolutionary Left
www.revleft.com/vb/member.php?u=16162

Photoillustrations, Political Diagrams by Chris Kaihatsu
community.webshots.com/user/ckaihatsu/

3D Design Communications - Let Your Design Do Your Footwork
ckaihatsu.elance.com

MySpace:
myspace.com/ckaihatsu

CouchSurfing:
tinyurl.com/yoh74u

eyedrop

18th August 2009, 13:12

Great post btw ^^

Right -- I would rather *go forward* from this point and push for greater automation and distribution of manufactured goods, including designer products. Dependence on a "personal relationship" with a manufacturer would be a *backwards* step, towards nepotism, patronage, favoritism, or -- arguably -- even an anarchist mode of production.

I am also advocating greater automation and distribution, "in a communist society I would think we would try to mass produce more of the highly sought after clothing articles, as far as it's possible."

But I don't see how we can prevent some nepotism provided that we supply all hobby-designers with the means to continue their hobbies, which is easily doable today. Some small nepotism amongst something as unimportant as designer clothes, isn't really that important as long as there are industrially made designer clothes available for all.

Jimmie Higgins

18th August 2009, 13:14

What I witnessed so far on here is a bunch of very crude, slightly sadistic people with the emotional depth of Jeremy Jackson.

I'm starting to think modern communism is about emotionally unrefined bully culture.No, I think you are witnessing internet forum culture.

As far as people who can not be productive, I think a workers society would be much better than in capitalism where everyone from substance-abusers to people with physical handicaps are essentially considered useless and thrown to the curb (especially in the US). The goal of communism, as Marx said, is a society based on: "From each according to his ability, to each according to his need"

As for designer clothes: why would workers want to deny anything to themselves? People will want and deserve the best that our collective efforts can produce - the difference is that our goal will be to get rid of scarcity rather than artificially create scarcity in order to drive up prices to get more profit.

BabylonHoruv

19th August 2009, 05:29

In response to the quarrels given with Anarchy I have to say that i think you may be guilty of just what you are accusing me of. That is looking to the past rather than the future. With local 3d printing and fabbing there is no need for a national scale manufacturing process.

Admittedly I also wasn't thinking of this when I mentioned needing to form a relationship with the design community.

I do think localism is an important aspect of a free society because governance on any scale higher than local becomes impersonal, but I think that local production is quite possible with the same standards we currently have.

ckaihatsu

19th August 2009, 06:50

In response to the quarrels given with Anarchy

Welllllllll, let's not call them 'quarrels', but rather principled differences of conception of a post-capitalist society.

In a nutshell my *economic* concern with a lack of wide-enough centralization of administration of production would be the use of too much human labor because of the duplication of effort across many local production plants. (Ditto for use of natural resources, energy, etc.)

My *political* concern with a lack of wide-enough centralization of administration would be possibly wide-ranging differences in the treatment of 'transgressions' against the worker-co-managed society. In other words there should be some standardization of societal mores across a very broad geographic area -- ideally globally, if appropriate. The lack of consistent standards might be okay for awhile while the forces of capital are being beaten back, but I think a more-centralized administration -- or at least a bottom-up, widespread agreement over localities -- would be preferable for a mature communist / anarchist composition.

I have to say that i think you may be guilty of just what you are accusing me of. That is looking to the past rather than the future. With local 3d printing and fabbing there is no need for a national scale manufacturing process.

Sure, I'm open to anything that *works* on a local scale, like what you're mentioning here -- but what about larger-scaled projects? Would a post-capitalist society want to build planes? Move earth? Decide on a standard for pan-regional rail transport? Burrow? Explore space?

Larger projects require broader scales of social organization, something that *cannot* be accomplished by independent localities.

Admittedly I also wasn't thinking of this when I mentioned needing to form a relationship with the design community.

No biggie -- as you can see my concern is with the possible tyranny of the locality....

I do think localism is an important aspect of a free society because governance on any scale higher than local becomes impersonal, but I think that local production is quite possible with the same standards we currently have.

I would certainly want to see the process *start* with localities, in a bottom-up way, so that worker participation is maximized early on -- I'd imagine that as the post-capitalist society "settled in" certain practices would be more or less established as a matter of course over a longer period -- like how standards for data transmission over the Internet have developed.

If certain benign conventions became commonly accepted in a bottom-up way, with political channels continuously remaining for altering them, then we could *call* it anything we liked, in terms of terminology -- the point would be that it simply *worked* for people in common, like email or whatever.

Hopefully 'governance', as we're used to it in the bourgeois context, would become obsolete altogether, but the *administration* of material production could be *absolutely impersonal*, as long as it was *effective* (highly automated) and generally agreed-to over broad geographic areas.

My blog entry addresses some of this political content -- feel free to have a look...!

which doctor

19th August 2009, 07:12

I think the best idea to come out of this thread is that moving to Sweden and getting diagnosed with Asperger's Syndrome looks like a really good plan.

eyedrop

19th August 2009, 10:37

I think the best idea to come out of this thread is that moving to Sweden and getting diagnosed with Asperger's Syndrome looks like a really good plan.
And still people in Sweden work, although they can be financially secure without working.

"Ohh noez, people wont work without finacnial incentive," dispelled.

RedAnarchist

19th August 2009, 11:23

Personally, I hate wearing clothes that are basically adverts for international companies and all the clothes I own probably wouldn't be worth more than £100, if that. However, if that's how you choose to spend your money, that's how you choose to spend your money.

You said in one of your posts that you like to shut yourself away from the world. Although neurotypical, I'm quite the introvert and I can empathise with that (although I don't hate humanity at all - introversion means that you prefer to be by yourself more often than being with others, but you still need human contact).

As for Japan, most people there have very high wages, and as far as I know, the average wage for a Japanese worker is far above that of anyone elses.

OneNamedNameLess

19th August 2009, 11:53

http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2006/08/21/business/21adidas_600x376.jpg

No!

cleef

19th August 2009, 12:12

OneNamedNameLess

19th August 2009, 12:15

$90k are you serious? That's an obscene amount of money to waste.
Maybe it does make you feel 'happy' buying these clothes / having surgery but is it due to the fact that this gives you a feeling of superiority, because you can afford to buy them :confused:

http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2006/08/21/business/21adidas_600x376.jpg

Probably.

Radical

19th August 2009, 13:19

Why? I let you live your life and accept you for who you are. I do what makes me happy. For some people it's traveling, they spend all they have on around the globe trips or exotic diving adventures. For others it's riding, they spend a fortune on maintaining their stable of horses etc. For me it's clothing. I don't think clothing is worse than traveling or horses.

And about the surgery. I can't do anything about my brain. How I was created on the inside. So I work on what I have any power over, such as my exterior/physical vanity.

I have AS, I'll never see the world as most normal people do even though I can logically understand why and how they see it the way they do. I can never feel it the same way they do. It's like having differently coloured emotions. You should understand it, since I usually make an anology between Soviet and American technology, movies, computers etc. They had the same function but were still designed differently and had their own unique traits. You could also see it as engines with different fuel and mechanisms but the same purpose, to be an engine.

I'm not usually against people spending their money on high fashion clothes. However I'm against inheritance and using that inheritence money to purely better yourself, which sounds like what your doing.

I avoid buying clothes from Primark and any other clothing store that majorly exploits poverty and oppression.

Rascolnikova

19th August 2009, 13:22

I can't contribute to society. I'm perfectly verbal and understand body language perfectly but I just don't bond/identify with people and can't function in a social environment. Machines are already doing more and more of the simple labor and there wouldn't be any need for me to do any work in solitude. So I would be unproductive and sent to the gas chamber.

I have absolutely no formal schooling. Everything I know, the english language for example, I learned on my own. I'm now studying japanese writing/language and it's also on my own, outside of any school system, but I'm still learning quite well. However,there is no field where I could put anything I know to use. So I would be completely unproductive.

In Scandinavia and the UK 75-90% of people with AS are non-productive according to some report I read a few years ago. It's less in the US, but aspies are also more depressed over there judging from what I've read on dicussion boards. Suicide also seems to be more common. It's also very common for aspies to get a four year education and max out their student debts while crashing into unemployment and social misery after they graduate. I made sure to never borrow money and I planned a bit for a safe, secluded life instead of rushing into a society I'm not fit to handle. So I have an economic advantage compared to many aspies who force themselves out and then fall helplessly.

I respectfully submit that this/{what you've generally been saying} is a load of bullshit.

Item 1: Under what notion of justice is it appropriate for resources to be allocated to recreational plastic surgery when not everyone receives the medical care that they need for, say, basic mobility? I am at a loss as to how any quirk of neurology could possibly justify this.

Item 2: In what imaginary world is a hyperfluent, technologically literate, trilingual individual not capable of producing? Translation work, for example, doesn't necessarily require any more interaction than this.

Simply because our current market is not structured to recognize and make use of your abilities does not mean that no economic structure could do so. There is absolutely no reason, in a properly structured economy, you shouldn't have a job. Arguably, you should be doing productive work in this economy whether you have formal employment or not--though that would be a personal ethical choice.

On behalf of all the high functioning autistics I know who are not content to live completely masturbatory, dependent, and entitled lives--and who constantly work very hard toward that aim--PLEASE stop pretending that your AS legitimates unremitting selfishness.

If you did not have these things you simply "can't do without," you would do something. Most people with AS--and in fact, most people--go without things that they very reasonably need. . things like water, a reasonably healthy diet, shoes, and birth control.

In clothing as in everything, I delight in good design. I appreciate beautiful construction, good tailoring, and the best textiles. In general, I would like to live in a world where everything is more carefully considered and more artfully designed. This goal is not contradictory to the goal of giving most people the basic resources they need to create something with their lives.

I don't explicitly object to your owning quality, beautiful clothing--but allowing you to continue such a lifestyle doesn't show up on my priority list when I'm contemplating the sort of society I'd want to live in.

Pirate turtle the 11th

19th August 2009, 14:06

http://freekick.files.wordpress.com/2007/07/pulling-out-hair.jpg

SchrÃ¶dinger's Cat

21st August 2009, 00:54

$90k are you serious? That's an obscene amount of money to waste.
Maybe it does make you feel 'happy' buying these clothes / having surgery but is it due to the fact that this gives you a feeling of superiority, because you can afford to buy them :confused:
While it's certainly a lot, I don't think offhand criticisms are always justified. I put an obscene amount of my money towards electronics; perhaps the user just likes looking really good.

ckaihatsu

21st August 2009, 02:00

I put an obscene amount of my money towards electronics

Since we're doing confessions here, I'll admit that all of *my* spare income goes to my collection of sex-bondage Beanies Babies...!

x D

(As for you, GeneCosta, I would've guessed that *your* money goes towards *fonts*!)

x D

ckaihatsu

21st August 2009, 05:35

It's always the little stuff -- the Epsom salts for the private jet's whirlpool -- am I right here, people???

x D

JJM 777

16th September 2009, 12:03

I have a wardrobe for around $60 000, and I also had cosmetic surgery for around $30 000 (...)
Some of these money came from heritage, but my standing income is a swedish pre-time pension of around $1500 a month
In a Socialist society everyone would have the same average standard of living (possibly adjusted downwards if the person does not want to work much, and upwards if the persons agrees to work extra long hours). Basically every person could use his share (we can call it "money") as he wants, invest it all to cosmetic surgery or clothes if you want. But in that case you would have less of something else, if you waste your limited share to such purposes.

Also in a Socialist society you would not inherit sum X at age Y, and somebody else inherit sum A at age B. The society would inherit all wealth of the passing generation, sharing it equally to the citizens. You didn't mention how big your inheritance was, so it is difficult to say whether you would get less or more of indirect inheritance in a Socialist society.

How would groups and products such as Gucci, Louis Vuitton etc be treated in a communist society? Would you still be able to get hold of these products?
Women would be better to comment about fashion bags than me, but Socialist men would probably love to have some luxurious Lamborghinis and Cadillacs around in the society. The average person cannot afford them, which means that nobody in a Socialist society can afford them. But the state would probably own some of them anyway, so that people can sometimes have fun by renting a luxury car for wedding day, birthday, or otherwise for a few hours. We can easily afford luxury products for a few hours, even if we cannot afford to (or don't want to use our money to) own them full time.

94% of women in Tokyo own at least one Louis Vuitton bag.
This claim sounds crappy, very difficult to believe. I don't think that Lous Vuitton has ever produced so many bags that would be enough for "94% of women in Tokyo".

ckaihatsu

16th September 2009, 13:23

In a Socialist society everyone would have the same average standard of living (possibly adjusted downwards if the person does not want to work much, and upwards if the persons agrees to work extra long hours). Basically every person could use his share (we can call it "money") as he wants, invest it all to cosmetic surgery or clothes if you want. But in that case you would have less of something else, if you waste your limited share to such purposes.

I think this is a distortion of socialism that sounds more like Stalinism -- keep in mind that humanity's industrial productive capacities are *enormous* today compared to the startup period of worldwide industrialization and modernization in the 20th century.

We no longer have to fall victim to the caricature of a Stalinist police state watching over everyone to make sure that they're only consuming according to their quotas, and no more. In reality we should be looking to see how much we can automate, computerize, produce, and distribute, outside of the *scarcity enforcements* of capitalism's system of private property and hoarding.

Instead of saying "everyone would have the same average standard of living", how about "everyone would be guaranteed a healthy, humane livelihood regardless of work status." -- ?

I think of this as being a "baseline" so that there are no longer any remaining issues concerning human health and social support. This would be the most important step. And, as the productive capacities of the post-capitalist world increased, the baseline would also increase for everyone, since that would be the most commonly available public service.

It's the society's surplus, *beyond* the basic baseline of public support, that would be more debatable. I have my own outline of how this could be handled -- it's at my blog entry. I've also attached a couple of diagrams I've made that address this issue.

Also in a Socialist society you would not inherit sum X at age Y, and somebody else inherit sum A at age B. The society would inherit all wealth of the passing generation, sharing it equally to the citizens.

I agree with this part...

You didn't mention how big your inheritance was, so it is difficult to say whether you would get less or more of indirect inheritance in a Socialist society.

...but I don't see the relevance here -- how does an inheritance under the current system of capitalism relate to a *post-capitalist* "indirect inheritance", whatever the hell that means.... -- ?

Women would be better to comment about fashion bags than me, but Socialist men would probably love to have some luxurious Lamborghinis and Cadillacs around in the society. The average person cannot afford them, which means that nobody in a Socialist society can afford them.

Now you're going back to that caricature of Stalinism again -- (not that I support Stalinism).

But the state would probably own some of them anyway, so that people can sometimes have fun by renting a luxury car for wedding day, birthday, or otherwise for a few hours. We can easily afford luxury products for a few hours, even if we cannot afford to (or don't want to use our money to) own them full time.

Consumption, even through the fiercest consumeristic motivations, would be necessarily limited to *personal* use -- anything that could not *actively*, *ongoing-ly* be utilized or consumed by an individual / family would automatically revert back to the "commons", for potential use by someone else, by some specified time-frame.

The entire work product would be collectivized, with *no* portion of it going right back to the worker, as we're used to seeing with wages -- *but*, by the same structure, *no* portion of the collectivized surplus of society's production could be *denied* to *any* worker, for any personal use, subject to politics.

Perhaps a decent analogy here would be akin to "club membership" or "a day at the amusement park" -- where your buy-in (through labor) gives you access to a large area of benefits, without nickel-and-diming everything -- extending this analogy to the whole economics of humanity would give us a result of communism.

JJM 777

16th September 2009, 20:32

Instead of saying "everyone would have the same average standard of living", how about "everyone would be guaranteed a healthy, humane livelihood regardless of work status." -- ?
If this is ALL what you want, then welcome to Scandinavia. Choose any country here, Denmark Norway Sweden Finland. These countries have had a Capitalist welfare state with all your mentioned free benefits since 1970's. I believe that some oil-rich Persian Gulf state also gives all your mentioned benefits to all their citizens, regardless of work status.

Well a Capitalist welfare state is not enough for most Socialists, Scandinavia is a target area for Socialist missionarism, not a role model that everyone looks upon.

ckaihatsu

16th September 2009, 20:58

If this is ALL what you want, then welcome to Scandinavia.

Why, thank you! Nice place you got here...! I'll just, uh, kick my shoes off and settle in a bit....

Choose any country here, Denmark Norway Sweden Finland.

Wow! Consumer choices, too! Which brand should I pick -- hmmmmmmm, can't decide, can't decide....

These countries have had a Capitalist welfare state with all your mentioned free benefits since 1970's. I believe that some oil-rich Persian Gulf state also gives all your mentioned benefits to all their citizens, regardless of work status.

Well a Capitalist welfare state is not enough for most Socialists, Scandinavia is a target area for Socialist missionarism, not a role model that everyone looks upon.

Yeah, well, that's the point, isn't it? -- That *one* (or four or more) *individual* *countries* with some better-than-average social services does *not* a revolution make. None of these discussions are about where *my* passport has been, or is going -- it's all about the *world as a whole*, right?

mannetje

16th September 2009, 21:29

perhaps when you get older you start to think different. that's what happened to me. I used to do everything to afford designer clothes, but when I got older i started to care less. Now I buy cheap clothes most of the times. I don't feel less happy in those clothes. When I was younger i cared too much what people think of me and i believed that if I didn't wear brand clothes I would'be a target from possible bully's. fuck what people think of me. I'm free, being popular used to feel like some kind of social prison. yuck!

16th September 2009, 21:45

Yeah, well, that's the point, isn't it? -- That *one* (or four or more) *individual* *countries* with some better-than-average social services does *not* a revolution make. None of these discussions are about where *my* passport has been, or is going -- it's all about the *world as a whole*, right?

Pff, better than average for immigrants in Denmark or Sweden? Doubtful. :rolleyes:

RedAnarchist

16th September 2009, 21:47

I'm going to move this to Chit Chat. I really don't think clothes are an apt topic for Learning and it seems to be fairly removed from the OP anyway.