Human nature doesn't exist, but....

[Rafiq]

If it doesn't, how the hell are we supposed to change the way people act, say, right now...

So you say: What the hell are you talking about Rafiq?

I'll explain.

Say somehow, magically, the means of production are in the hands of the workers, and we are going to live in communism. Human nature is not going to be an issue, because babies adapt and imitate the beings in their surroundings (Feral Children).

But we can't change how people act today therefore their children will imitate them, and those children's children will imitate them and so on...

So we are left with two options:


1. Confiscate all of the newborns and put them in the care of some kind of "Vanguard party" (This is a really fucked up Idea)

2. Wait until a certain number of newborns are born and then kill everyone on Earth (Again, extremely, extremely screwed up Idea).

If I'm wrong, then we have to come to the conclusion human nature exists, hopefully in favor of communism.

This theory will basically tell us that the worker's today do have a communist nature inside them that capitalism is suppressing.

To make this short, we have two theory's:

We can't end class society because everyone on Earth is imitating their parent's ways, which are in favor of capitalism because their parents, and their parent's parents(And so on) have to do so to survive. (Also, people today aren't ready for Communism and such cannot be achieved)

or

We can end class society because the worker's have a communist nature inside of them and as soon as the means of production are rightfully given to them, they will quickly adapt with it....

[Broletariat]

Have you ever changed your mind about something?

Bingo

[Rafiq]

Have you ever changed your mind about something?

Bingo

Yeah, but isn't that Idealism?

Plus, how do you expect to change EVERYONE'S mind?

[Luisrah]

Yeah, but isn't that Idealism?

Plus, how do you expect to change EVERYONE'S mind?

You change the minds of a few first, those few go on a strike, they inspire others. Those others go on a protest, they gain something and inspire others even.

If minds didn't change, no change would have happened to society. The bad living conditions will make the proletariat angry and sooner or later it will blow. It's up to the communists to make sure the blast goes in the bourgeoisie's direction.
It isn't idealism, it's quite the contrary actually. Capitalism digs it's own grave, in the sense that it worsens the conditions of the proletariat. The proletariat will rise looking for a better life, food, water, homes, clothes, etc.

[Broletariat]

Yeah, but isn't that Idealism?

Plus, how do you expect to change EVERYONE'S mind?

Idealism would be expecting everyone's minds to change just via argument. Some people's minds will change that way sure, but materialism dictates that it will take certain material conditions before people's minds change.

It could be argued that the mere presence of leftists ideas or their argument is a certain material condition that could lead to mind changing so my first sentence could be wrong depending on your interpretation.

[StoneFrog]

Reading the OP i got a good chuckle, just thinking of how you came up those to options.
Human Consciousness exists, and this can be influenced by everything and anything around people. Plus, im not one to say there is no human nature; but maybe to say that something cannot be done due to human nature is absurd. Human nature in my opinion is just that, to overcome boundaries in our lives. So it is our nature to develop.

[Goatpie]

Give me four years to teach the children and the seed I have sown will never be uprooted.
Vladimir Lenin

If Socialism can only be realized when the intellectual development of all the people permits it, then we shall not see Socialism for at least five hundred years.
Vladimir Lenin

[DaComm]

The rash of riots around North Africa seems to be an example of how attitudes can shift and how quickly they can do so. Luisrah's got the idea.

[Sixiang]

If it doesn't, how the hell are we supposed to change the way people act, say, right now...

So you say: What the hell are you talking about Rafiq?

I'll explain.

Say somehow, magically, the means of production are in the hands of the workers, and we are going to live in communism. Human nature is not going to be an issue, because babies adapt and imitate the beings in their surroundings (Feral Children).

But we can't change how people act today therefore their children will imitate them, and those children's children will imitate them and so on...
Yes, but that is not natural at all. Quite simply, what you are suggesting is not natural at all, that is brought about by nurture. You only need to study evolutionary biology on a very basic level to know this. I am not born with the natural tendency towards my parents' political leanings. I am raised upon that. The person that I am today is a result of the countless social variables in my life that have affected me in both large and small ways. That isn't "human nature." That is the result of things that happen to you throughout your life, particularly at the influential time of childhood, not the result of genetically inherited traits from parents.


So we are left with two options:


1. Confiscate all of the newborns and put them in the care of some kind of "Vanguard party" (This is a really fucked up Idea)

2. Wait until a certain number of newborns are born and then kill everyone on Earth (Again, extremely, extremely screwed up Idea).
And neither of those are good ideas.


If I'm wrong, then we have to come to the conclusion human nature exists, hopefully in favor of communism.
Not necessarily. I would agree that "human nature" exists in a certain sense, but I don't think that humans are necessarily naturally disposed from birth to a particular political leaning. That sort of thing comes about from (as I said before) the many different social variables that affect you throughout life, not genetic traits.

[¿Que?]

But we can't change how people act today therefore their children will imitate them, and those children's children will imitate them and so on...
If this were true, then nothing would have ever changed. So your premise is faulty and therefore so are your conclusions.

[Ocean Seal]

If it doesn't, how the hell are we supposed to change the way people act, say, right now...

So you say: What the hell are you talking about Rafiq?

I'll explain.

Say somehow, magically, the means of production are in the hands of the workers, and we are going to live in communism. Human nature is not going to be an issue, because babies adapt and imitate the beings in their surroundings (Feral Children).

But we can't change how people act today therefore their children will imitate them, and those children's children will imitate them and so on...

So we are left with two options:


1. Confiscate all of the newborns and put them in the care of some kind of "Vanguard party" (This is a really fucked up Idea)

2. Wait until a certain number of newborns are born and then kill everyone on Earth (Again, extremely, extremely screwed up Idea).

If I'm wrong, then we have to come to the conclusion human nature exists, hopefully in favor of communism.

This theory will basically tell us that the worker's today do have a communist nature inside them that capitalism is suppressing.

To make this short, we have two theory's:

We can't end class society because everyone on Earth is imitating their parent's ways, which are in favor of capitalism because their parents, and their parent's parents(And so on) have to do so to survive. (Also, people today aren't ready for Communism and such cannot be achieved)

or

We can end class society because the worker's have a communist nature inside of them and as soon as the means of production are rightfully given to them, they will quickly adapt with it....

In the sense that you hope to believe that it exists, I would strongly deny this idea of human nature. And I also would like to state that we don't need human nature on our side nor do we have to resort to your two draconian solutions. We reach socialism because materialist science will in fact cause us to reach this conclusion.

But I also see a pressure building because only an elite minority owns the majority of the wealth.

Approximately 1/2 of the world lives on less than $2 a day.
Bill Gates made 50 billion in one year.


2x365=730

50,000,000,000
----------------- = 68,493,150
730

I have effectively taken around 68,000,000 average earning people (as about 50% is below $2) and compared their yearly earnings to that of one man. Common sense says something is wrong. Especially if you use the capitalist argument that you get paid based on how hard you work. Because given that if any of these people completed one whole work day it would denote some kind of unfairness.

Capitalism is nonsensical. We don't need to steal everybody's children or massacre the human population, in fact it is they who will liberate themselves. Capitalism progressively gets more exploitative as it requires growth to survive. It can only grow so much, and when it stops growing the people will rise up and crush it once and for all.

Remember it is the people who make the revolution. And to your point that values are always being passed down through families, I would argue that I don't think in the same manner that my ancestors who lived 500 years ago did. People change, and generations change.

[ChrisK]

Yeah, but isn't that Idealism?


Idealism is a metaphysical term that means that everything is made up of ideas and that nothing is material. So no, it is not idealism.

[Sosa]

you don't need to change EVERYONES mind, just the majority. To think that EVERY single person on the planet is going to change their mind is too idealistic