All of what we have

[MoscowFarewell]

Lets say, a revolution does occuer. That what we want comes to be, a communist society. What would happen to the things we have now, the entertainment industry, the internet, music, all of these things, does anyone have an answer to how they would ideally change? Its been on me as of late, with the idea, "Why support something that could possibly take everything that makes me smile? Books, music, art, where would it go, how would it be handled? "


I'm sorry if this post seems stupid, but I figured it would be best asked in the learning area since I am still new to the ideologies of the left.

[redstar2000]

Originally posted by MoscowFarewell
Why support something that could possibly take everything that makes me smile? Books, music, art, where would it go, how would it be handled?

Do you imagine that humans will "lose the desire to smile" after the revolution?

Don't you think that's pretty unlikely?

We really don't know, of course, the details of life 50 or 100 years from now; all we can do is speculate as realistically as possible.

One principle is highly probable if not certain, in my opinion. The whole idea of "intellectual property" will be dead as the dinosaurs.

People will write books, record music, etc. for the innate pleasure of those activities. They will give away what they've made and, if people like it, then they can take pleasure in that as well.

The idea that people will "stop creating" because "there's no money in it" will sound ridiculous.

In a communist society, there's no money in anything.

http://www.websmileys.com/sm/cool/123.gif

[anomaly]

A communist revolution in the West will probably not be for a long time, but even so, it is simply not likely that people will 'lose the desire to smile'. In fact, with the freedom communism gives, if people want to do something that 'makes them smile', they will actually be able to do it, and not have the restrictions on them that we see today.

If a communist revolution happens soon, it will not be in the West but rather in the global south. Most of the proletariat there does not even have the things you describe now, so I'm sure they'll be able to smile quite easily without them after the revolution. If multiple communes spring up, trade between them will certainly give them atleast some of what you describe.

[MoscowFarewell]

Thanks, I'm having comfort in this now. I understand what you mean by the idea of people will stop creating because no money will come of it. I argued this with my brother on a few fronts.

[Seeker]

You might not see the Hollywood movies with astronomical production costs, but there are already lots of independent film makers that do it for the joy of creating. Those types will likely have more opportunities and resources than they do today.


It will only do good things for music. No more Hansen. No more Britney Spears. No more NSYNC. Everyone who wants one will have a computer they could use to swap music, so "market forces" will do their thing - bad music doesn't go very far, while good music gets spread across the globe and the musician(s) become(s) famous. Without arguments about money to break them apart, friends who play in the garage for fun won't go the way of Smashing Pumpkins. Being a rock star would still get you chicks/dudes, if not cash, so most of the motivation is still there :lol:

[OleMarxco]

Alot of the thing's you want are what you get for money, not the money itself - they're just a "transistional" material before you can get what you fuckin' desire, your shit! Not literally, o'course, but you get it, right?; We don't NEEDit - It's obsolote. Why cling to old system's when it's obviously that hoarding of money has never made us happy, and it's still not the purpose of money just to "unlock" item's for us to take, so it's just a pointless way around, if you ask me. When ther's nothin' between us and the material's, there's no more need to be greedy. You'll see ;)

[MoscowFarewell]

This has really helped, it answered a few more questions beyond what I intended.

[adreamofequality]

i am a giant hip hop fan and i look at most of my favorite artists and yea most of them love music and thats why they rap but many of them also rap to free themselves from the ghettoes they live in. Money is a huge motivation for many musicians. I dont think the same quality of music would be here if it wasnt for that motivation but who knows maybe it would

[Redvolution]

I think if artists are in it more for the money than for the art, then they're probably douchebags, no offense.
In a communist society there will be no more poor ghettos where one has to deal drugs to get by, or feel the need to join a gang because of the lack of connections at home and community. Ergo, more people would have the opportunity to rap because of the inequalities becoming re-distributed, and there would be no ghetto to escape.
By the way, how many super famous athletes, rap-stars, etc. actually give back to the communities that put them in such a shitty situation to make things better for the kids currently there?
Just a thought.

[Defyman]

I think that the big bet after a succesful communist revolution in the west is whether we will be still doubtful about what we achieved or not. All the arts drain energy from the interaction between humans. If we could keep this interaction in good shape in a hypothetic situation like this, then i think we shouldnt afraid of a destruction of the arts.

All in all communism is a theory which points a way to produce and distribute goods in a society. There will still be rock festivals,cinemas (no Holywood please!) and soccer games..


GLOBALIZE THE RESISTANCE
:ph34r::hammer: :ph34r: