Communism: Can you confirm my position?

[Toothlessjoe]

Hello everyone. I've been reading bits here and there, and would like to complete my knowledge and confirm my faith in communism. This post will be pretty long, so I apoligize and thank everyone in advance. I happened to fail my finals in high school, so if you could go into a lot of detail for me, but not go overboard, that would be great.

I already understand a few concepts involved with communist (Or perhaps Marxist more os?) theory, such as Surplus labour, Surplus value and labour power. Although I don't know their workings fully, I do have a grasp of them. I understand communism to be an economic system characterized by the collective ownership of property and by the organization of labor for the common advantage of all members. I've also come to believe that it doesn't equate to a utopian society, where everyone is equal, or that everyone shares. I also think at this point in time, that communism won't meet the needs of everyone - just like capitalism doesn't, but more people would be better off (as in, everyone having a "Middle class" - "upper-middle class") lifestyle/quality of life under communism. I've come to see that not everyone would be able to have a mansion and a toilet made from gold. Or am I wrong?

A few thing on top of those above, need to be cleared up for me though, for me to really start rallying my efforts towards the implementation of communism:

1) Capitalism is the final mode of production(?), and as such most if not all developments and products would be produced under this stage, which then leads on to a socialist society, then onwards to the final society: communism?

Is the above correct?

2) I understand that goods/whatever will be distributed depending on your needs and ability? Does this mean as a doctor, I would have a greater choice of "goods" to choose from for my work? And vice versa? And what would be the motivation for other jobs? Would the tertiary (spelling?) sector still be here? Or will shops as we know them not excist?

3) There's a whole range of goods and commodities available to us now. Take all the candy bars and shampoos for example. Would there be as much choice in a communist society, or would there be the cliched "People's [Insert commodity]"? Also, what would happen to entertainment such as: Movies, video consoles and games etc? And so forth, what happens to them?

4) Wouldn't people start swapping goods among themselves, as their own form of currency? What measures would be put in, and what possible consequences and counter measures would there be for this?

Apart from those what I also want to know, is how would modern life (life as it is now) translate into communism? Would we still have the same freedom and care free attitudes now, or would we be punished for this? What about food franchises and so on? And for the people who don't work, am I right in thinking that they would not get benefits? And how would housing be allocated?

As you can see, I have a lot of questions that I hope can, and will, be answered. Thanks for the time you take to reply.

[Aurora]

I will try to answer to the best of my knowledge.


I've come to see that not everyone would be able to have a mansion and a toilet made from gold. Or am I wrong?
You are correct.These things take time to build and they also make use of limited resources.Im pretty sure there is not enough gold in the world to provide enough toilets to everyone!

1) Capitalism is the final mode of production(?), and as such most if not all developments and products would be produced under this stage, which then leads on to a socialist society, then onwards to the final society: communism?
I dont really know what you mean by "mode of production"? I disagree I think capitalism is only the start of production and development.In orthodox marxist theory,society moves in stages from Capitalism->Socialism->Communism
In Anarchist theory,society moves from Capitalism->Communism
we dont really know if communism will be the final stage of history.

2) I understand that goods/whatever will be distributed depending on your needs and ability? Does this mean as a doctor, I would have a greater choice of "goods" to choose from for my work? And vice versa? And what would be the motivation for other jobs? Would the tertiary (spelling?) sector still be here? Or will shops as we know them not excist?This depend on who you are talking to,I personaly believe that goods should be given to people who need them.Communism is all about having an equal opportunity to get goods.I dont believe a tertiary sector is needed because there will be no point in having one if goods are given according to need.You would just go down to a warehouse a pick up the goods you need.

3) There's a whole range of goods and commodities available to us now. Take all the candy bars and shampoos for example. Would there be as much choice in a communist society, or would there be the cliched "People's [Insert commodity]"? Also, what would happen to entertainment such as: Movies, video consoles and games etc? And so forth, what happens to them?I honestly have no idea. The reason different types of candies exist is because companies are competing with each other for profit.I would like to say yes they would exist,but.......

4) Wouldn't people start swapping goods among themselves, as their own form of currency? What measures would be put in, and what possible consequences and counter measures would there be for this?
There would be no need to swap goods with each other,they could simply go down the road and go to the store and pick up the goods they want.

Apart from those what I also want to know, is how would modern life (life as it is now) translate into communism? Would we still have the same freedom and care free attitudes now, or would we be punished for this? What about food franchises and so on? And for the people who don't work, am I right in thinking that they would not get benefits? And how would housing be allocated?If anything we would have more freedom in all aspects of life.There would be no state to punish us.There would be no franchises because these are just ways of controling idea's.I think the people who dont work they would still get the same as everybody else.I dont think you should punish people for there choices in life.If they choose not to work that is their loss.People would look down on those who dont work.Others here think diferently though.
I dont know how housing would be allocated.sorry


I hope this has been helpful comrade,some of it may be inacurate because i dont know everything and I am very tired. If you are unsure of anything just ask ;)

Simon

[BobKKKindle$]

Capitalism is the final mode of production(?), and as such most if not all developments and products would be produced under this stage, which then leads on to a socialist society, then onwards to the final society: communism?

A Mode of Production is composed of 2 Components - The Forces of Production (The Apparatus used to produce commodities) and the Relations of Production (How Production is organised in terms of who does and owns what, e.g Workkers and Capitalists), Capitalism allows for great development of the Forces of Production, and as Socialists, we believe that the Forces of Production are now so great that there is the potential to provide for everybody's needs without further development under Capitalism, so we call for a revolutionary transformaiton of the relations of production, which we believe to be unfair.


I understand that goods/whatever will be distributed depending on your needs and ability? Does this mean as a doctor, I would have a greater choice of "goods" to choose from for my work? And vice versa? And what would be the motivation for other jobs? Would the tertiary (spelling?) sector still be here? Or will shops as we know them not excist

There are probably some sectors of the economy that will simply collapse under Socialism because they serve no other purpose than to generate profit, and Socialism is a system that places Humanity and Human needs above Profits. Investement Banking springs to mind. To Tell the truth, I am not quite sure how goods would be distributed - perhaps through 'labour vouchers', maybe rationing, maybe equal distribution. As for the 'other jobs' that no one would want to do, such as Menial labour, Science under Socialism would be geared towards mechanisation of these jobs, or alternatively, they could be shared out equally so everyone can spend the majority of their time doing what they like.


There's a whole range of goods and commodities available to us now. Take all the candy bars and shampoos for example. Would there be as much choice in a communist society, or would there be the cliched "People's [Insert commodity]"? Also, what would happen to entertainment such as: Movies, video consoles and games etc? And so forth, what happens to them?

Many People feel that Noone Would want so many goods under Socialism, because they are wants that are imposed upon us in Capitalist Society through the influence of the media. However, if people continued to demand them, workers councils in charge of the means of production would choose to do produce them. As for Entertainement, One would hope that all forms of culture would revert to forms of self expression instead of a means of making a profit. Socialism could involve a dramatic new flowering of Human Culture and Expression.


Apart from those what I also want to know, is how would modern life (life as it is now) translate into communism? Would we still have the same freedom and care free attitudes now, or would we be punished for this? What about food franchises and so on? And for the people who don't work, am I right in thinking that they would not get benefits? And how would housing be allocated?

Well, I personally believe that we certainly do not live in a 'carefree' society right now. The Wage labour system means that Workers are forced to sell their labour as a commodity in order to survive, and the work we perform is fundamentally alienating and repetitive, as it is simply a means to live and produce, and we do not have ownership of the commodities that we produce (See Marx's Stuff on alienation) Under Socialism, Work would not simply be something we are forced to do to survive. Rather, we could freely choose the type of work we performed, and work would not be a means to live, but rather an end unto itself - the highest end unto itself. When one can freely choose the type of work one performs, work will cease to be boring and alienaitng, but will instead become an act of expression.

As for people not working...again, if Work were not the boring and depressing process that it is today, then I think people would want to work, because they can do what they want. Today's Janitor could be an architect under Socialism.

Housing would be allocated according to need. No one would get a mansion, but noone would live in a hovel.

[bloody_capitalist_sham]

1) Capitalism is the final mode of production(?), and as such most if not all developments and products would be produced under this stage, which then leads on to a socialist society, then onwards to the final society: communism?

Capitalism is the most recent mode of production. The capitalist class has political and economic power.

It provides the material basis for the working class to take power.

Once workers have taken power, and gradually production becomes more effiecnt, organised and automated the products would be made free as soon as possible. eventually, when all products are provided freely there will be no need for money.

Similarly, the state would whither away and the people would form a classless society. communism.



2) I understand that goods/whatever will be distributed depending on your needs and ability? Does this mean as a doctor, I would have a greater choice of "goods" to choose from for my work? And vice versa? And what would be the motivation for other jobs? Would the tertiary (spelling?) sector still be here? Or will shops as we know them not excist?

I think "shops" would still exists, mainly because there needs to be some place to distribute products. But who really knows?

Under socialism, there would be better wages for worse/hard jobs that need to be done. or maybe longer periods of time off or less working hours a week. or maybe a rota system. It depends really.

Specialised jobs such as doctors/surgens im sure would be well thought of and appreciated in society. Friends to all, almost. maybe thats reward enough?


3) There's a whole range of goods and commodities available to us now. Take all the candy bars and shampoos for example. Would there be as much choice in a communist society, or would there be the cliched "People's [Insert commodity]"? Also, what would happen to entertainment such as: Movies, video consoles and games etc? And so forth, what happens to them?

Imagine you are living in a socialist/communist society.

You know that you can create a really good shampoo and it does the job. Maybe a few different perfumes, but essentially the same. Now, in order to create more types you will have to give up more free time. As this would be voluntary, its not likely.

If loads of people really wanted a particular type of shampoo. then they will be the ones who work to create it. they will choose. Production will be democratic.


As for Movies and games etc. Well even under capitalism people have worked out its much more fun to play with others. In your living room on a PS2 with friends or over the internet with hundreds.

So long as people want to play games, they will have desire to create them. Now many people might want to and become very good at programming. If people find better stuff to do, then they might not exist, again who knows?



4) Wouldn't people start swapping goods among themselves, as their own form of currency? What measures would be put in, and what possible consequences and counter measures would there be for this?

Well there would be nothing wrong with sharing, its part of communism after all.

But people would own things collectively. So swapping somthing implies you own it, which wouldnt be the case for most things.



Would we still have the same freedom and care free attitudes now, or would we be punished for this?

There would be much more freedom since work would take far less of your week up. and you wouldnt risk poverty, and other financial worries.

And there would be no body to punish you at all. no police.

the only thing you will really get in trouble with your community for is murder/rape/slavery etc.


What about food franchises and so on?

I can see buffet style restaurants etc. No waiters though.


And for the people who don't work, am I right in thinking that they would not get benefits?

well since much of communist democracy is through production, a person who doesnt work wont have much of a say and will likely be not too well liked by others. But they wont live in poverty or anything. the people un able to work, old and young for example would be taken care of.


And how would housing be allocated?

High quality. but really why do people stay in one place for lots of time? mainly cos they have a mortgage and financial issues.

as this would not be the case under communism. then people would be free to move to all over the world and live/work when and where they want to.

[Don't Change Your Name]

Originally posted by [email protected] 6 2006, 01:43 PM
and confirm my faith in communism.
You should be kicked between your legs for typing this.

[bezdomni]

Originally posted by El Infiltr(A)do+Jun 7 2006, 05:48 PM--> (El Infiltr(A)do @ Jun 7 2006, 05:48 PM)
[email protected] 6 2006, 01:43 PM
and confirm my faith in communism.
You should be kicked between your legs for typing this. [/b]
:lol:

You'll have to ask RedStar for your confirmation into the first holy church of communism. ;)

[bloody_capitalist_sham]

Its just a word you know.

No reason to bust his balls.

People say stuff all the time that sounds wrong, but if you know what they mean it doesnt matter.

It would have been much more helpful to briefly explain why using 'faith' or 'belief' isnt approapriate, after all were all comrades here.

[Toothlessjoe]

Confirm:
1. To support or establish the certainty or validity of; verify.
2. To make firmer; strengthen.

Faith:
1. Confident belief in the truth, value, or trustworthiness of a person, idea, or thing.
2. Belief that does not rest on logical proof or material evidence.
3. Loyalty to a person or thing; allegiance.
4. often Faith Christianity. The theological virtue defined as secure belief in God and a trusting acceptance of God's will.
5. The body of dogma of a religion: the Muslim faith.
6. A set of principles or beliefs.


Next time before busting my chops over the use of a couple of terms, perhaps you should go learn what they actually mean? Eh comrade?

:).

[Dyst]

It was using the word 'Faith'.

As it says there, in a dictionary it is basicly supporting a belief not based on material evidence or logical proof/assumptions.

Also, it implies sort of "strict loyalty" which is reactionary.

[Toothlessjoe]

It also says:

"Confident belief in the truth, value, or trustworthiness of a person, idea, or thing."

:rolleyes:.

[Dyst]

Sure, but it is not the definition in a textbook which matters. It is how people think of the word.

Capitalists are eager to use silly things like that in their favour, to "win" an argument. Calling communism some sort of religion.

Anyways, this is off-topic.

[Don't Change Your Name]

Originally posted by Toothlessjoe+Jun 8 2006, 08:51 AM--> (Toothlessjoe @ Jun 8 2006, 08:51 AM) Confirm:
1. To support or establish the certainty or validity of; verify.
2. To make firmer; strengthen.

Faith:
1. Confident belief in the truth, value, or trustworthiness of a person, idea, or thing.
2. Belief that does not rest on logical proof or material evidence.
3. Loyalty to a person or thing; allegiance.
4. often Faith Christianity. The theological virtue defined as secure belief in God and a trusting acceptance of God's will.
5. The body of dogma of a religion: the Muslim faith.
6. A set of principles or beliefs.


Next time before busting my chops over the use of a couple of terms, perhaps you should go learn what they actually mean? Eh comrade?

:). [/b]
Let's see the possibilities of the meaning of "and confirm my faith in communism", without including the "religious" definitions of "faith":

1. "and support or establish the certainty or validity of my confident belief in the truth/value/trustworthiness in communism"
2. "and support or establish the certainty or validity of my belief that does not rest on logical proof or material evidence in communism"
3. "and support or establish the certainty or validity of my loyalty/alliegance in communism"
4. "and support or establish the certainty or validity of my set of principles/beliefs in communism"
5. "and strengthen my confident belief in the truth, value, or trustworthiness in communism"
6. "and strengthen my belief that does not rest on logical proof or material evidence in communism"
7. "and strengthen my loyalty/allegiance in communism"
8. "and strengthen my set of principles/beliefs in communism"

#1 and #5 make no sense: why do you have a "confident belief" in something but you still must find a way to "strengthen" or "establish the validity of" it? You sound like some religious person who desperately tries to keep believing.
#2 is self-contradictory and #6 is ridiculous crap.
#3 makes some sense but it suffers of the same problem of #1 and #5, the "religious person that wants to believe". You have assumed beforehand that "communism" is "cool" even when it's possible that the "communist point of view" is false, and then you try to prove it, or in other words, you don't derive your support of communism from reality but try to find evidence supporting your ideas after you accepted them. #7 also sounds as if you were "reaffirming your faith", which would make me think you are trying to adopt "communism" as a "secular religion".
#4 doesn't seem to make sense and #8 is like #3 but with the "i want to believe" syndrome.


Dyst
Capitalists are eager to use silly things like that in their favour, to "win" an argument. Calling communism some sort of religion.

Indeed. But my problem is that it's pretty usual for people who are getting interested in revolutionary ideas to make it look like an almost faith-based worldview whose basis in objective reality is irrelevant to them: they might even start "believing in communism" even if communism is an economic system which might contradict reality. This makes this kids look like irrational idiots and it makes me wonder why are they attracted to such ideas in first place. They also don't leave a good image of "revolutionaries".

However, I assume he is not that stupid, since his questions are pretty smart (at least, when compared to most people who come here). I suppose #3 above is the correct meaning of what he said.