What can socialism achieve? - Depressing conversation sowing

[mentalbunny]

Today I had a really depressing conversation with my french conversation teacher (she's french, incidentally!). We started talking about Socialism and how it is basically an impossible dream due to innate human characteristics, etc.

Please can someone reassure me that we can achieve something positive for the world while we are here, we are not just idealistic teenagers who grow up and realise there is nothing we can do so we join the ranks of the capitalists and cynics.

[komsomol]

Human characteristics change, you are not thinking dialectically, believe it or not, Communism has existed, before slave owning society came into being, Primitive Communism(that is also known as communal living). These were tribes which shared everything (of course they had thier own petty posessions, but only for sentimental value), hunted together and raised thier children together. On arrival of some of the settlers to America, who quickly set up fences a clan chief asked "How can man own land?". So as human characteristics have made the step from classless society to class society it is not impossble that a classless society could emerge, the negation of the classless society by the class society shall be negated by the re-emergence of classless society. Now, unlike Anarchists we Marxists believe that the conditions of a re-emergence of this sort of society cannot exist unless the Society is itself conditioned for it, this is why Marx refered to two periods, initially Society would be run "...from each according to his ability, to each according to his ability", ten after some time...society would be run "...from each according to his ability, to each according to his needs". The fact that many Russians thought that Privatisation was theft can show to you the change of human characteristics in a Nationalised Economy.

[redstar2000]

Mentalbunny, it seems to me there are two questions here.

Are there "innate" human characteristics and, if so, do they make socialism impossible?

Can one demonstrate the "inevitability" of communism, either through "dialectics" or any other method?

To the first question: the currently fashionable "science" of "evolutionary biology" pretty much rules OUT any possibility of socialism or communism. As far as they are concerned, humans are the products of "selfish genes" and human behavior is always shitty...the product of genetic determinism.

A few radical biologists have already begun to examine the rather shoddy "evidence" for these assertions and I think it is only a matter of time (a decade or two) before they discredit the "science" behind "evolutionary biology". As in past cases of this kind, it will turn out that "evolutionary biology" is yet ANOTHER pseudo-scientific effort to "justify" class society.

The real answer to the first question is: WE DON'T KNOW because we don't know IF there's any such thing as "innate human characteristics" and, if there is, what they actually ARE.

To the second question: as you know, I have no faith in the power of "dialectics" to demonstrate anything (see the thread "On Dialectics"). I think it CAN be shown that the ways in which capitalism actually functions in the real world rather strongly imply a bad end for this system...stagnation, depression, war and fascism seem to be indeed "inevitable" consequences of the NORMAL operations of capitalism.

Does this mean that humans will "inevitably" choose communism? If it does, it will only happen, I think, when workers see it not as a distant goal to aspire to but rather as an IMMEDIATE PRACTICAL NECESSITY. The factory occupations in Argentina may be an early step in this direction (see Larissa's thread on this in Politics).

Meanwhile, I can offer you this: when we speak of HISTORY in uppercase letters, we are really talking about the words and deeds of BILLIONS of individual human beings. Each word said or not said, each deed done or not done weighs in the balance...exerts a tiny but measurable effect in one direction or another. Everything we do (or fail to do) advances or retards the progress of humanity by a little bit...but that little bit counts.

I don't know if this is really a useful analogy or not: but individuals in history are like neutrinos in particle physics. By themselves, they have a mass too small to measure directly; but there are so many of them that together they may well determine the large-scale structure of the universe!





(Edited by redstar2000 at 11:41 pm on Jan. 10, 2003)

[Blackberry]

To conclude part of what Redstar said: Human nature is unknown. It cannot be defined.

Using human nature as an argument to justify capitalism and to dismiss socialism is an extremely weak argument.

A person's nature, thinking and beliefs are a product of the environment in which they are born and raised. If a person is born and brought up in a world of greed, then they will most likely be greedy. If they are brought up in a cannibalistic world, then they will more than likely be cannibals.

If peace and harmony is the norm, then they will be peaceful.

[Kashmir]

I totally agree with Neutral Nation. The problem is that there are way to many people in the world who don't dick peace and harmony.
We just have to start a Love Revolution that will overwhelm humanity.

[Kashmir]

Did I say dick? I meant DIG peace and harmony. Sorry folks, I can't spell.

[Ian]

RedStar, Evolution is considered a law already, Evolution through Natural Selection has not. I think you are talking about natural selection being questioned. Just trying to get some clarity....

[Iepilei]

well if you look at it in such a manner, you may also state that capitalism will not work - for the same reason.

Capitalism is a system which promotes an economic heirarchy, a dictatorship, if you will, of a minority population. To believe truly that mankind is capable of self-regulation to the extent that they will undoubtedly look after the interests of those whom they employ (which we have seen in history as being false), is to believe that mankind is not greedy.

How so? Well think of it this way. You are granted the power to be invisible whenever you desire. With this new found power that noone else controls - will you act for good or evil? It's the invisible man scenario, and you'd be suprised (or not) to find that the vast majority of people would go out and do something that normally they would be restricted from doing. Something Illegal.

If mankind is given the ability to hold power over some other group, it will be exploited. Therefor, it is impossible that mankind - an individual - is capable of making decisions that best serve the interests of the bulk of the population. This is the reason absolute monarchies and dictatorships are frowned upon my modern societies.

[Rebelde para Siempre]

No political system works.

Each comes with it's own set of problems.

Complete content amongst all the entire peoples of the world will never come about.

[mentalbunny]

Quote: from Rebelde para Siempre on 3:15 am on Jan. 12, 2003
No political system works.

Each comes with it's own set of problems.

Complete content amongst all the entire peoples of the world will never come about.

Is that supposed to make me feel better?!

Thanks for your responses everyone, don't worry, my doubts have passed.