Log in

View Full Version : Communism and Altruism



drain.you
24th November 2005, 21:27
Altruism can refer to:

* being helpful to other people with little or no interest in being rewarded for one's efforts (the colloquial definition). This is distinct from merely helping others.

* actions that benefit others with a net detrimental or neutral effect on the actor, regardless of the actor's own psychology, motivation, or the cause of her actions. This type of altruistic behavior is referred to in ecology as Commensalism.

* an ethical doctrine that holds that individuals have a moral obligation to help others, if necessary to the exclusion of one's own interest or benefit. One who holds such a doctrine is known as an "altruist."


I have raised this issue with a couple of people in the revleft chat and they argue that communism is not altruistic but I believe it is.
I want communism for a better world for people, I've never really thought of how it would help me, only about others.
People have argued against me, saying that people are selfish, have been and always will be but here is a quote which I think goes against this,


"We civilised men, on the other hand, do our utmost to check the process of elimination; we build asylums for the imbecile, the maimed, and the sick; we institute poor-laws; and our medical men exert their utmost skill to save the life of every one to the last moment. There is reason to believe that vaccination has preserved thousands, who from a weak constitution would formerly have succumbed to small-pox. Thus the weak members of civilised societies propagate their kind. No one who has attended to the breeding of domestic animals will doubt that this must be highly injurious to the race of man. It is surprising how soon a want of care, or care wrongly directed, leads to the degeneration of a domestic race; but excepting in the case of man itself, hardly any one is so ignorant as to allow his worst animals to breed."
That was from Darwin, btw.
Also there is evidence of altruism in other animals,

Examples of animal altruism

* Dolphins support sick or injured animals, swimming under them for hours at a time and pushing them to the surface so they can breathe,

* Wolves and wild dogs bring meat back to members of the pack not present at the kill,

* Male baboons threaten predators and cover the rear as the troop retreats,

* Gibbons and chimpanzees with food will, in response to a gesture, share their food with others of the group.

* Bonobos have been observed aiding other injured or handicapped bonobos.[1]

* Vampire bats regularly regurgitate blood and donate it to other members of their group who have failed to feed that night, ensuring they do not starve,

* In numerous bird species, a breeding pair receives help in raising its young from other “helper” birds, who protect the nest from predators and help to feed the fledglings,

* Most mammal carnivores like wolves or dogs have a habit of not harming pack members below certain age, of opposite sex or in surrendering position (in case of some animals, the behavior exists within entire species rather than one pack),

* Vervet monkeys give alarm calls to warn fellow monkeys of the presence of predators, even though in doing so they attract attention to themselves, increasing their personal chance of being attacked.


I believe capitalist society is not as altruistic as communism as the economy promotes 'survival of the fittest' ideology and not helping one another.

Anyhow, what do you guys think?

enigma2517
24th November 2005, 22:08
Altruism CAN be a part of it. For some people, it is a very significant and large part. However, I would not base it all on that.

One reason why I pay a lot of attention to Situationist material is because of thier concept of "revolution in everyday life". Sure, for people in third world countries, simply getting enough food would already be a god send. Unfortunately, spoiled capitalist workers in 1st world countries (such as myself) have a higher demand than that.

Simply put, I want the full product of my labor. While that goal itself might be impossible to acheive, communism surely puts me one step closer. Because we are wage slaves we suffer from alienation (important, refer to Marx about more of this). If all means of production were democratically owned and controlled, there would be a significant reduction of this alienation. Thus, it is in my own PERSONAL interest to do this.

However, it just so happens that it is also my CLASS's interest as well. We all act in unison because our goals are the same. Communism can never come into existance through a monolithic existance. Even though it is a "movement of the masses" those masses are still made up of people. The movement itself is actually just a free association of socially and class conscious INDIVIDUALS.

As mentioned before, it will be a revolution of everyday life. Since we don't have to worry about money or our jobs as much anymore, we will concentrate instead on more interesting things. A society that moves away from consumerism will find that it will begin growing in other ways. The entire social experiment, to me, always seemed like a great chance for personal growth.

So to answer your question, yes, communism involves altruism, if you want to intrepret a gift economy in that sense. I would say that the CAUSE is more individual based, but the vehicle for this change is cooperation.

That is how I see it at least.

Edit: Check out the Right to Be Greedy by Bob Black, I think it explains things fairly well.

kurt
24th November 2005, 22:09
I believe many young communists are drawn by altruistic feelings, and this may be the core reason for their activity early on. However, over time I believe people that rest their beliefs on altruism are the most likely to become "frustrated" with the proletariat. They can't understand why they won't help themselves, even with all these "good" people urging them to do so.

The ones that stay revolutionary for a life-time I believe are the ones who adopt a firm materialist outlook, and think that communism will come about through material conditions, and not by "good" people with altruistic or charitable feelings.

enigma2517
24th November 2005, 23:17
The ones that stay revolutionary for a life-time I believe are the ones who adopt a firm materialist outlook, and think that communism will come about through material conditions, and not by "good" people with altruistic or charitable feelings.

Definitely

anomaly
25th November 2005, 05:49
Certainly, as kurt said, altruism is probably the reason many young communists get involved, so I don't view altruism itself as a 'bad' thing.

Communism can serve some 'altruistic' purposes, of course, redistribution of relative welath being one of them, but we do not seek communism simply for its good 'altruistic' qualities, and communism does not happen simply because of 'good, altruistic' people. In the end, I think, the proletariat will have revolution for themselves, and communism will be done for this same reason. When one is proletarian, altruism always comes second, self interest comes first. Communism is, for example, in my self interest.

And so, certainly, communism will come about primarily for material reasons. But we should not oppose altruism, simply because it is a powerful reason that many youths become communists.

black magick hustla
25th November 2005, 08:09
A system cannot just "depend" on altruism to work.

It would just fucking collapse.

We communists should strive for our own self intrest. Self interest doesn't means disgusting commodity fetishism, it also means our ability to engage in real pleasures, instead of just spectacular passivity. when sacrifice is the sole reason someone is a communist, he will surely not feel the real pleasures of a life without constrainsts.

that is why i feel that even the middle class or the bourgeosie can have a reason to become communist. long hours of boring jobs, alienation, and slavery to the commodity can be very painful, even to the high bourgeois.

pleasure isnt just meant to be isolated. thats why there needs to be real communication between comrades.

so yeah, anyone who equates pleasure to commodity abundance is just following the disgusting capitalist psyche.

kurt
25th November 2005, 09:19
Originally posted by [email protected] 25 2005, 08:14 AM
that is why i feel that even the middle class or the bourgeosie can have a reason to become communist. long hours of boring jobs, alienation, and slavery to the commodity can be very painful, even to the high bourgeois.
I think the problem is most petty-bourgeois who become communist do so based on altruism in order to "help" out the "less fortunate". It's simply not in their material interests to push for communism. I'm not saying this applies to ALL petty-bourgeois revolutionaries. Regardless, any petty-bourgeois who labels himself a communist should definately be looked upon critically to make sure they are are indeed serious about revolution.

black magick hustla
26th November 2005, 04:07
Originally posted by comradekurt+Nov 25 2005, 09:24 AM--> (comradekurt @ Nov 25 2005, 09:24 AM)
[email protected] 25 2005, 08:14 AM
that is why i feel that even the middle class or the bourgeosie can have a reason to become communist. long hours of boring jobs, alienation, and slavery to the commodity can be very painful, even to the high bourgeois.
I think the problem is most petty-bourgeois who become communist do so based on altruism in order to "help" out the "less fortunate". It's simply not in their material interests to push for communism. I'm not saying this applies to ALL petty-bourgeois revolutionaries. Regardless, any petty-bourgeois who labels himself a communist should definately be looked upon critically to make sure they are are indeed serious about revolution. [/b]
Of course, you are right.

However, my point was that there could be true petty bourgeosie revolutionaries, and that, abundance of commodities may not be the ultimate satisfaction of people.

Punk Rocker
26th November 2005, 06:03
A system cannot just "depend" on altruism to work.

It would just fucking collapse.

We communists should strive for our own self intrest. Self interest doesn't means disgusting commodity fetishism, it also means our ability to engage in real pleasures, instead of just spectacular passivity. when sacrifice is the sole reason someone is a communist, he will surely not feel the real pleasures of a life without constrainsts.

that is why i feel that even the middle class or the bourgeosie can have a reason to become communist. long hours of boring jobs, alienation, and slavery to the commodity can be very painful, even to the high bourgeois.

pleasure isnt just meant to be isolated. thats why there needs to be real communication between comrades.

so yeah, anyone who equates pleasure to commodity abundance is just following the disgusting capitalist psyche.

Beautifully put my friend. "Indulgence instead of abstinence" -Anton Szandor LaVey.

In communism, communes will need to trade with each other for themselves, not out of altruism.

Still, without altruism, communes could start attacking and taking over each other, and then we'd by back to feudalism, which could suck ass.

Ouroboros
28th November 2005, 19:47
"From each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs."

It is completely altruistic society. Only increasing altruism can leed us to that point. Society based on best self interest would be unspeakably cruel society. In such society, it would be allowed to parents of the retarted childrens to kill them - because only our limited altruism is the reason we are disgusted with such idea.