My personal problems with Communism

[Voice_of_Reason]

I am taking what I have gathered to what communism is by reading the Communist Manifesto, Reading forums and research

I am not trying to spark arguments please tell me if anything I said goes against communism I am here to learn.

My Personal Problems with Communism: (Note: I am a Anarcho-Communist, and yet still lean toward Anarcho-Capitalist at times)

Laziness: My personal thought would be that if white-collar job employees get paid the same amount as pink or blue collar people than most people would go for the laziest job possible. If you got paid $10 an hour to work as an assembly line worker and the same amount to go to years of extra schooling to become a doctor who works harder, than most of the population would tend to lean toward assembly line worker. Now I do realize that this would theoretically eliminate greedy people and the only the people who liked their job would stay and therefore better workers. At the same time though people such as doctors are demanded by society and if there are few left working then many people will not be treated. The word Freedom makes me think of not following societies norms but rather earning your right to Think, Speak, Gain, Live, Lose, Give, and Die.

Greed: Most people (I’m not going to use the word “Human Nature”) have the desire to want more than others. If communism were applied people would cheat the system just like they have cheated the constitution for the same reasons.

Government: I am all for a group of people representing the people “quote and quote running the population” But people like that should not completely control the economy. When certain people are given power they tend to overuse their power, now an easy solution to this would be a 2 year term for every single person that sets foot in the government (Hopefully this would solve the problem).

[GeistDerRevolution]

That is why a socialist system is a requirement before a society can truly achieve communism.

[LudicrousCommunistDancer]

I don't know what sources you have been looking at, but either they are wrong, or you misinterpreted them. In communism there are no wages. The state does not run the economy, in fact there is no state at all. Communism is a stateless, classless moneyless society. You can learn all that just by going to wikipedia.

[Voice_of_Reason]

Yes on the very base of communism would be considered a commune a group of people with no government but when you apply it to a nation it has to have a government, and that is what most people refer to when they think of communism. I guess I didn't make myself completely clear because there are multiple forms of communism (P.S, never trust Wikipedia)

[#FF0000]

Yes on the very base of communism would be considered a commune a group of people with no government but when you apply it to a nation it has to have a government, and that is what most people refer to when they think of communism. I guess I didn't make myself completely clear because there are multiple forms of communism (P.S, never trust Wikipedia)

No... Communism is stateless and classless regardless... You're thinking of Socialism...

As for greed, it won't be a problem. People simply won't be able to take control of the means of production. They can be as greedy as they like. Doesn't mean they'll get anything out of it.

[RedHal]

I think you're confused because socialist states have been called communist states but they have only been at the transitional socialists state. Communism has never been reached because communism means a stateless society.

and I think your 3 issues are common issues when ppl struggle with how realistic a communist future is, there are previous threads devoted to these 3 issues. But briefly I believe that laziness and greed are the norm of "human nature" are manifistations of the capitalist system. The ruling class controls the media and it plays a huge part in creating this "human nature", just turn on the TV.

[Schrödinger's Cat]

Doubters, all be welcome! ;)


My personal thought would be that if white-collar job employees get paid the same amount as pink or blue collar people than most people would go for the laziest job possible.I'll assume you can already distinguish between socialism and communism. Is that fair?

Realize that, under communism, the price system no longer exists. It is not a matter of receiving income but rather satisfying your needs.


assembly line worker and the same amount to go to years of extra schooling to become a doctor who works harder,Job complexes will be handled by alleviating stress. Assembly line workers would likely work more than a doctor. I wouldn't overstate the draw medicine has on particular people, though.

I also think it's worth mentioning that many communists propose extending education for the populace. Whereas now education is quite literally a financial burden, under communism someone studying medicine and surgery would not be hassled by money. Indeed his or her education can be viewed as just part of the job.


Most people (I’m not going to use the word “Human Nature”) have the desire to want more than others. I would argue most people have the desire to satisfy their needs, not outconsume other individuals. We don't see billionaires spending all of their liquidated wealth, for example.


If communism were applied people would cheat the system just like they have cheated the constitution for the same reasons.Nobody claims communism is perfect other than critics. On this point I don't see a large problem. Cheating is more likely to occur in a hierarchal structure with no collective organization.


But people like that should not completely control the economy. When certain people are given power they tend to overuse their power, now an easy solution to this would be a 2 year term for every single person that sets foot in the governmentI think you're mistaking communism with the Western preconception. Under communism there wouldn't be representatives, only recallable delegates. Most of the decision-making would be done by the workers at large, who can transfer any duties they find too "hard" to skilled individuals.


Anarcho-Capitalist at timesI don't mean to tickle any nerves, but this is an interesting sentiment. I'm quite open with anarcho-capitalists when I ask how services will be handled. Roads, observatories, dams, and other forms of infrastructure all seem damning to Rothbard-types; there's also the matter of the Gini Coefficient. Although right-libertarians like to argue that wealth discrepancy is irrelevant, there is observable evidence that social relations sour whenever the Gini Coefficient reaches .5.

[Voice_of_Reason]

Ya some of the issues I was talking about do refer to Socialism I guess

And as for greed People can find ways to take control of means of production no matter the situation Communist China for example (not a good example but one) There are some people that are born just naturally evil "I guess would be the right word or crazy". All that people have to do to get their way is spark fear and most of the blind people of the world will give in

[Schrödinger's Cat]

Ya some of the issues I was talking about do refer to Socialism I guess

And as for greed People can find ways to take control of means of production no matter the situation Communist China for example (not a good example but one) There are some people that are born just naturally evil "I guess would be the right word or crazy". All that people have to do to get their way is spark fear and most of the blind people of the world will give in

Exactly why we fight for class consciousness. Unlike other movements, socialism is concerned with the awakening of the masses - not control by a particular leadership. Education is a plus.

Eugene Debs spoke to this issue:“I am not a labor leader. I don't want you to follow me or anyone else. If you are looking for a Moses to lead you out of the capitalist wilderness you will stay right where you are. I would not lead you into this promised land if I could, because if I could lead you in, someone else could lead you out.”

As for your comment about China, I recommend browsing around for threads concerning the subject. Much has been written about countries with large peasant populations and pre-industrial production.

[Voice_of_Reason]

I would argue most people have the desire to satisfy their needs, not outconsume other individuals. We don't see billionaires spending all of their liquidated wealth, for example.

Most people I have seen have the strive to have more the better car the fancier phone, whatever it may be.



Job complexes will be handled by alleviating stress. Assembly line workers would likely work more than a doctor. I wouldn't overstate the draw medicine has on particular people, though.


Assembly line workers don't need to work more than doctors because material goods will not be as important. Doctors (in one form or another) on the other hand are very important no matter the society.


I don't mean to tickle any nerves, but this is an interesting sentiment. I'm quite open with anarcho-capitalists when I ask how services will be handled. Roads, observatories, dams, and other forms of infrastructure all seem damning to Rothbard-types; there's also the matter of the Gini Coefficient. Although right-libertarians like to argue wealth discrepancy is irrelevant, there is observable evidence that social relations sour whenever the Gini Coefficient reaches .5.

I'm not an Anarcho-Capitalist I just agree with some of the things that they believe but I am far from.


Nobody claims communism is perfect other than critics. On this point I don't see a large problem. Cheating is more likely to occur in a hierarchal structure with no collective organization.

This is true.


Realize that, under communism, the price system no longer exists. It is not a matter of receiving income but rather satisfying your needs.

I used the word pay basically to say receiving something in return for work I realize that there would be no income

[Voice_of_Reason]

As for your comment about China, I recommend browsing around for threads concerning the subject. Much has been written about countries with large peasant populations and pre-industrial production.

Hehe ya I know it was a bad example

[Voice_of_Reason]

Note I am a anarcho-communist just trying to learn the solutions to these problems, which I'm sure there are some (My bad for the triple post)

[RebelDog]

GeneCosta:

Assembly line workers would likely work more than a doctor.

Can I ask why you think this should be the case?

[trivas7]

My Personal Problems with Communism: (Note: I am a Anarcho-Communist, and yet still lean toward Anarcho-Capitalist at times)

Laziness: My personal thought would be that if white-collar job employees get paid the same amount as pink or blue collar people than most people would go for the laziest job possible. If you got paid $10 an hour to work as an assembly line worker and the same amount to go to years of extra schooling to become a doctor who works harder, than most of the population would tend to lean toward assembly line worker.


What empirical evidence do you have that people are inherently lazy? Even if this were the case, there are ways to incentive that everyone gets a portion of the shit jobs in a participatory economy.



Greed: Most people have the desire to want more than others.
Again, what empirical evidence do you have of this? Do you think there's a gene that makes people want material status over others? Or is this merely a generalization from your experience of class-based society?



Government: I am all for a group of people representing the people “quote and quote running the population” But this is the antithesis of classless communist society.

[Voice_of_Reason]

Again, what empirical evidence do you have of this? Do you think there's a gene that makes people want material status over others? Or is this merely a generalization from your experience of class-based society?I don't need empirical evidence, evidence is all around you look at the way people in society act. It might be my experience of a class-based society, but its largely due to the fact that almost all people have the urge to want more than others to feel better about themselves, Humans and Animals are competitive. Some civilizations have formed around peacefulness but in a small scale. With a entire country there is always going to be a large group of people that want more than others and will do things that others will not to gain this.


Can I ask why you think this should be the case?Assembly Line workers mostly make material goods and doctors (supposedly) heal and better our society. If you have a choice over a new phone and someones life than you choose the persons life and people will always be sick. Doctors have to have years of medical school and with the same gain as an Assembly worker there will be a shortage resulting in more hours.

Even if this were the case, there are ways to incentive that everyone gets a portion of the shit jobs in a participatory economy.Are you speaking of switching jobs every so often or are you speaking of giving very smart people some blue-collar jobs and less intelligent people some white-collar jobs?

I see the points you are getting at but there are many loop holes, My only thought on the way jobs are done is everyone must have the same amount of education regardless of there occupation, and I think that the corruption problem can be solved by a lower population, Basically what I'm getting at is how communist believe these problems should be fixed.

[cenv]

How did you conclude that people would rather have blue collar than white collar jobs? I realize this is what we're taught our entire lives, that people would rather do easy, rote work when given the chance -- but what's the justification? Would you really rather work on an assembly line than be a doctor? I'd take the challenge of being a doctor and the opportunity to help people over the repetitive life of an assembly line worker any day! Not to mention the fact that blue collar jobs will become fewer and fewer with technological advances.

And there's no reason people can't compete under communism -- they can compete to do a better job at whatever, for instance. The only difference is that you won't have people competing with each other deluded into believing that if they do a better job they'll get more money, while the people who aren't actually doing any work are getting all the money. The idea that competing for new cars/phones/whatever makes the world go round is a nice little abstraction that has no basis in reality.

[Voice_of_Reason]

How did you conclude that people would rather have blue collar than white collar jobs? I realize this is what we're taught our entire lives, that people would rather do easy, rote work when given the chance -- but what's the justification? Would you really rather work on an assembly line than be a doctor? I'd take the challenge of being a doctor and the opportunity to help people over the repetitive life of an assembly line worker any day!You might want to better yourself, but you must realize that we aren't talking about you we are talking about the majority of the population.The majority of the population already work the easiest jobs possible, and a bunch of the white-collar people work white collar for money, not because they want to be challenged.


Not to mention the fact that blue collar jobs will become fewer and fewer with technological advances.
This is where we get to the good subject now within future times robots have a chance of completely taking over assembly lines and robots building robots, but saying that would make white-collar jobs blue-collar jobs due to the facts doctors who used to only know how to work on patients by hand would be replaced by blue-collar workers who just sit and push buttons all day to control robots so that would also imply laziness.


And there's no reason people can't compete under communism -- they can compete to do a better job at whatever, for instance. The only difference is that you won't have people competing with each other deluded into believing that if they do a better job they'll get more money, while the people who aren't actually doing any work are getting all the money. The idea that competing for new cars/phones/whatever makes the world go round is a nice little abstraction that has no basis in reality.I understand this and If society was filled with people that think that sounds reasonable like you and I then I see your point, but currently I would guarantee more people care about a new game system coming out than and political man getting elected into office.

[Schrödinger's Cat]

You might want to better yourself, but you must realize that we aren't talking about you we are talking about the majority of the population.The majority of the population already work the easiest jobs possible, and a bunch of the white-collar people work white collar for money, not because they want to be challenged.

"Blue-collar" jobs will continuously become automated. I might add that users have suggested we respond to any labor shortage with temporary material rewards. For example, if there is a need for automobile workers (highly unlikely), the factory and/or firm of choice can take two approaches. It can either 1.) allow for material rewards within the organization (employees get first dibs on new cars after working X months/years) and/or 2.) approach the community and other firms with requests for exterior rewards, like allowing individuals a trip to the SuperBowl.

Obviously these are only temporary resolutions; scientists will work towards eliminating all labor humans aren't naturally compelled towards.


This is where we get to the good subject now within future times robots have a chance of completely taking over assembly lines and robots building robots, but saying that would make white-collar jobs blue-collar jobs due to the facts doctors who used to only know how to work on patients by hand would be replaced by blue-collar workers who just sit and push buttons all day to control robots so that would also imply laziness.


While certainly not everyone can become a doctor, I think the dystopia you're trying to paint won't come true. Remember, peasants barely knew how to use the iron plow only a few hundred years ago. With better education and a lack of need for blue collar jobs, these individuals will move into services (which itself is becoming automated), arts, and intellectual crafts.


but currently I would guarantee more people care about a new game system coming out than and political man getting elected into office.

Of course. Marx indicated such events would occur. Commodity fetishism.

[Voice_of_Reason]

these individuals will move into services (which itself is becoming automated), arts, and intellectual crafts.

Why I do agree that art and intellectual crafts are important there will always be a need for human labor no-matter how advanced robots get communities will not let them completely take control of the work force, due to the fact that arts and intellectual crafts don't have room for most of the people in society.


I might add that users have suggested we respond to any labor shortage with temporary material rewards. For example, if there is a need for automobile workers (highly unlikely), the factory and/or firm of choice can take two approaches. It can either 1.) allow for material rewards within the organization (employees get first dibs on new cars after working X months/years) and/or 2.) approach the community and other firms with requests for exterior rewards, like allowing individuals a trip to the SuperBowl.

Now this solution I haven't heard of and it does solve a temporary problem, thank you for enlightening me with this information. This actually is a very good temporary solution

[Kropotesta]

I

[Kropotesta]

Am I the only when thinking it's weird to have these faults pointed out by an anarchist, a anarchist-communist at that. Who doesn't think that communism could work cos of people would take over the means of production because they born "evil".

[Schrödinger's Cat]

Am I the only when thinking it's weird to have these faults pointed out by an anarchist, a anarchist-communist at that. Who doesn't think that communism could work cos of people would take over the means of production because they born "evil".
S/he's new to the movement. Socialism isn't a microwavable ideology; it expands into all social affairs. I was once very critical of communism myself even after I adopted the label 'socialist.' Sometimes it's a matter of thought.

[Voice_of_Reason]

Sorry was gone yesterday for a concert no time to log on.


Am I the only when thinking it's weird to have these faults pointed out by an anarchist, a anarchist-communist at that. Who doesn't think that communism could work cos of people would take over the means of production because they born "evil".

That was my bad I guess I stated that in a weird way I meant evil as being born mental, there are people that are born mental and quote and quote "evil" and even though this is a small group of people if they are willing to do things to get into power that your normal person isn't than this can spark problems.



S/he's new to the movement. Socialism isn't a microwavable ideology; it expands into all social affairs. I was once very critical of communism myself even after I adopted the label 'socialist.' Sometimes it's a matter of thought.

This is exactly right, It is a mind-set and I think that communism makes more sense than any other ideas, but I am just pointing out some faults I see and I'm trying to find out the solutions. For communism to be adopted by some very smart people (not that all political ideas don't have smart people),decently far spread and the least corrupt people seem to adopt communism, There has to be a solution to these problems, I am just trying to discover what they are, and I might just be adopting the wrong-mindset, but I am open to all suggestions, ideas ext.

[RebelDog]

Assembly Line workers mostly make material goods and doctors (supposedly) heal and better our society. If you have a choice over a new phone and someones life than you choose the persons life and people will always be sick. Doctors have to have years of medical school and with the same gain as an Assembly worker there will be a shortage resulting in more hours.So your argument is that 'assembly line' workers are producing something that is inferior to that of the doctor? How can this be possible? I do not understand how, say a doctor, produces a more socially valuable product than a food worker or someone who works at a sewage treatment plant?

To analyse the second part of your reactionary drivel is to observe that you think being in learning, warmth, comfort and empowering labour is to work harder than those that complete the rote, mundane, horrible tasks for society? How does such ruling class crap invade our minds?

[Plagueround]

Assembly Line workers mostly make material goods and doctors (supposedly) heal and better our society. If you have a choice over a new phone and someones life than you choose the persons life and people will always be sick. Doctors have to have years of medical school and with the same gain as an Assembly worker there will be a shortage resulting in more hours.


Allow me to sum up why this holds no weight in a somewhat humorous manner:

"Hey doc, my appendix is about to burst."

"Hold on, I"ll have that out in a jiffy! Wait...I can't. All the tools I need to perform the operation were made in factories that were deemed less important than my job!"

"What? Arrrrrrrrrrrrrrgghblargleblahack... * "

The production of the things we need is just as important as the doctor that attends to us when we are sick or injured. As far as people not wanting to become doctors...right now, there are plenty of professions that pay much more than being a doctor that require less schooling, yet when it comes to career choice we don't see each and every person entering college choosing these career paths...we see a wide variety of majors that are not solely motivated by pay scale and benefits.

On a side note, don't think I'm mocking you, it's just my style. I would rather have people come and criticize/question and learn rather than blindly follow because revleft has a cool logo and t-shirt. :D

[Voice_of_Reason]

Assembly Line workers mostly make material goodsMostly is in bold because I do realize a bunch of factory workers do make useful goods but the majority make cellphones, games, dvds ext.

[Kwisatz Haderach]

I will answer the original objections point by point:


Laziness: My personal thought would be that if white-collar job employees get paid the same amount as pink or blue collar people than most people would go for the laziest job possible.
Yes... and which job is that, exactly? I bet my "laziest job" isn't the same as your "laziest job." In fact, "laziest job" isn't the right term at all. What we are talking about is the job that each person likes best - the job you would love to do if only you could make a living out of it. If all jobs were paid the same, each person would choose to do the job he or she likes best. In communism, people get to do the jobs they love. That's a good thing.


If you got paid $10 an hour to work as an assembly line worker and the same amount to go to years of extra schooling to become a doctor who works harder, than most of the population would tend to lean toward assembly line worker.
What? You have got to be kidding. Assembly line work is boring and hard. It's certainly not easier than going to college (which, by the way, is lots of fun) and becoming a doctor. If I had a choice between becoming a doctor and becoming an assembly line worker, for the same amount of money, I'd choose the doctor's job in a heartbeat. Not because I like medicine - I don't. I'd choose the doctor's job because, for me, it is easier than being an assembly line worker. I am very clumsy and I don't have strong arms at all. I suck at serious physical labour.


Now I do realize that this would theoretically eliminate greedy people and the only the people who liked their job would stay and therefore better workers. At the same time though people such as doctors are demanded by society and if there are few left working then many people will not be treated.
Come on, how many children dream of growing up to be doctors? Far more than those who dream of growing up to be assembly line workers, that's for sure. Being a doctor is prestigious and rewarding.


Greed: Most people (I’m not going to use the word “Human Nature”) have the desire to want more than others. If communism were applied people would cheat the system just like they have cheated the constitution for the same reasons.
Wait, you just contradicted yourself. In the previous paragraph you said people are lazy. Now you're saying they are driven to achieve and are willing to make great efforts - even cheat the system - to fulfill their dreams. Those two things can't both be true. People can't be both lazy and competitive at the same time. First you say that communism will run into trouble because people are underachievers, now you say it will run into trouble because people are overachievers. Make up your mind...

In any case, of course people will try to cheat the system. People will try to cheat any system. That's one of the reasons why we have crime. There is no such thing as a system without cheaters, and it's unreasonable to hold communism to such high standards. The best we can do is make an effort to ensure most cheaters are caught and punished.


Government: I am all for a group of people representing the people “quote and quote running the population” But people like that should not completely control the economy. When certain people are given power they tend to overuse their power, now an easy solution to this would be a 2 year term for every single person that sets foot in the government (Hopefully this would solve the problem).
Well, no communist thinks that a group of people should be given absolute power over the economy. We want as much democracy and democratic accountability as possible. There will also be checks and balances to ensure that no single person or group has ultimate authority over all economic decisions.

[Voice_of_Reason]

Yes... and which job is that, exactly? I bet my "laziest job" isn't the same as your "laziest job."

Yes, this may be so but find me someone who think being a doctor or an architect is a lazy job.


What? You have got to be kidding. Assembly line work is boring and hard. It's certainly not easier than going to college (which, by the way, is lots of fun) and becoming a doctor. If I had a choice between becoming a doctor and becoming an assembly line worker, for the same amount of money, I'd choose the doctor's job in a heartbeat. Not because I like medicine - I don't. I'd choose the doctor's job because, for me, it is easier than being an assembly line worker. I am very clumsy and I don't have strong arms at all. I suck at serious physical labour.

Assembly line work is easier than you think especially with upcoming technology and a doctor has longer shifts (usually) than an assembly line worker and risk is involved with being a doctor you can kill someone being an assembly line worker there is little or no chance of injuries to other happening. And many people will want to become doctors lawyers ext.. but many many more will become blue-collar jobs and this will leave longer hours with doctors because their will be very very few.



Wait, you just contradicted yourself. In the previous paragraph you said people are lazy. Now you're saying they are driven to achieve and are willing to make great efforts - even cheat the system - to fulfill their dreams.

You can be lazy and achieve more than others. Scammers, cheats, and thieves for example.


Well, no communist thinks that a group of people should be given absolute power over the economy. We want as much democracy and democratic accountability as possible. There will also be checks and balances to ensure that no single person or group has ultimate authority over all economic decisions.


This part was my bad I think I fell into socialism there :blushing:

[trivas7]

My Personal Problems with Communism: (Note: I am a Anarcho-Communist, and yet still lean toward Anarcho-Capitalist at times)


Anarcho-capitalism -- now there's an incoherent idea!

[Kwisatz Haderach]

Yes, this may be so but find me someone who think being a doctor or an architect is a lazy job.
I can find you people for whom being a doctor or an architect is a dream job...


Assembly line work is easier than you think especially with upcoming technology and a doctor has longer shifts (usually) than an assembly line worker and risk is involved with being a doctor you can kill someone being an assembly line worker there is little or no chance of injuries to other happening.
Have you tried doing assembly line work? It still requires physical strength and some degree of dexterity, and it is still boring. Also, not all doctors deal with life-threatening conditions. Those who do deal with such conditions may run the risk of killing someone, but they also have a chance to save lives.


And many people will want to become doctors lawyers ext.. but many many more will become blue-collar jobs and this will leave longer hours with doctors because their will be very very few.
I think you're wrong about doctors, but we can generalize your argument: Basically, what you are saying is that there is no reason to expect that the jobs people want to do will be the exact same jobs that society needs. Some job is likely to get fewer people than are needed - which means that another job will get more people than are needed.

There are several ways to deal with this. One solution is to say that it's not a problem at all - that the goal should be to enable people to do something they enjoy, and if this results in a low number of textile workers for example, we will just have to live with fewer textiles; and this is a small price to pay for the freedom to do what you enjoy.

Another solution is to limit the number of jobs available in any particular field based on how many workers are needed by society in that field. If society needs 1000 textile workers and 100 doctors, then that is the number of jobs available. And if 1001 people want to become textile workers, then one of them (presumably one that is pretty bad at the job - perhaps the single worst textile worker, if we can accurately determine who that is) will have to find something else to do. He will still get paid the same amount, but he will not be allowed to become a textile worker and will have to train to become a doctor - or take any one of the jobs that currently have fewer workers than available spots.

A third solution is to use such discrepancies between the jobs that are needed and the jobs people want to do as signals for places to invest in research. If there is a job that people do not want to do, despite it being needed by society, then we should focus scientific research efforts to find a way to replace human labour with machines in this job. In other words, we should constantly seek to eliminate the most unpleasant jobs.

In a real communist or socialist society, I expect to see a combination of the three solutions above.


This part was my bad I think I fell into socialism there :blushing:
Even socialism would still have a democratic planning authority with various checks and balances to prevent abuse.

[Dean]

I am taking what I have gathered to what communism is by reading the Communist Manifesto, Reading forums and research

I am not trying to spark arguments please tell me if anything I said goes against communism I am here to learn.

My Personal Problems with Communism: (Note: I am a Anarcho-Communist, and yet still lean toward Anarcho-Capitalist at times)

Laziness: My personal thought would be that if white-collar job employees get paid the same amount as pink or blue collar people than most people would go for the laziest job possible. If you got paid $10 an hour to work as an assembly line worker and the same amount to go to years of extra schooling to become a doctor who works harder, than most of the population would tend to lean toward assembly line worker. Now I do realize that this would theoretically eliminate greedy people and the only the people who liked their job would stay and therefore better workers. At the same time though people such as doctors are demanded by society and if there are few left working then many people will not be treated. The word Freedom makes me think of not following societies norms but rather earning your right to Think, Speak, Gain, Live, Lose, Give, and Die.


Greed: Most people (I’m not going to use the word “Human Nature”) have the desire to want more than others. If communism were applied people would cheat the system just like they have cheated the constitution for the same reasons.
The theory is that if people are given the freedom to really actuate themselves and mature fully, they will not only want to help their fellow man by making food, becoming a doctor, etc., but also do the more menial tasks - like clean up after themselves instead of having a janitor - because they would understand the ramifications of their actions. If peopel judge the moral issues caused by their actions on a social scale, they will act int eh interests of people in general, not just themselves.


Government: I am all for a group of people representing the people “quote and quote running the population” But people like that should not completely control the economy. When certain people are given power they tend to overuse their power, now an easy solution to this would be a 2 year term for every single person that sets foot in the government (Hopefully this would solve the problem).

I disagree. There should be very little representation, and what you are describing as a threat is actually a pretty dangerous, and somewhat new phenomenon in the communist movement, called technocracy (ignoring vanguardism, which is just opportunism). I fervently oppose the concept that the economy should be run by a group of elites, or really that they should hold more power at all over the economy. Communism is about associating the people with the institutions which control them, which means that decentralization of power is desired, not centralization.

[Voice_of_Reason]

I think you're wrong about doctors, but we can generalize your argument: Basically, what you are saying is that there is no reason to expect that the jobs people want to do will be the exact same jobs that society needs. Some job is likely to get fewer people than are needed - which means that another job will get more people than are needed.

There are several ways to deal with this. One solution is to say that it's not a problem at all - that the goal should be to enable people to do something they enjoy, and if this results in a low number of textile workers for example, we will just have to live with fewer textiles; and this is a small price to pay for the freedom to do what you enjoy.

Another solution is to limit the number of jobs available in any particular field based on how many workers are needed by society in that field. If society needs 1000 textile workers and 100 doctors, then that is the number of jobs available. And if 1001 people want to become textile workers, then one of them (presumably one that is pretty bad at the job - perhaps the single worst textile worker, if we can accurately determine who that is) will have to find something else to do. He will still get paid the same amount, but he will not be allowed to become a textile worker and will have to train to become a doctor - or take any one of the jobs that currently have fewer workers than available spots.

A third solution is to use such discrepancies between the jobs that are needed and the jobs people want to do as signals for places to invest in research. If there is a job that people do not want to do, despite it being needed by society, then we should focus scientific research efforts to find a way to replace human labour with machines in this job. In other words, we should constantly seek to eliminate the most unpleasant jobs.

In a real communist or socialist society, I expect to see a combination of the three solutions above.Ah, thank you that is what I was looking for, That sounds like some good solutions temporary if not permanently.


I fervently oppose the concept that the economy should be run by a group of elitesHehe, Unfortunately it it already is.



Communism is about associating the people with the institutions which control them, which means that decentralization of power is desired, not centralization.I have a problem with the government quote ever since this thread arose so I'm guessing I fell somewhere in between communism and socialism as I say I haven't actually been around a large group of communists before I have just studied all types of ideas and communism and anarchism seem the most sensible,

[Q]

I have a problem with the government quote ever since this thread arose so I'm guessing I fell somewhere in between communism and socialism as I say I haven't actually been around a large group of communists before I have just studied all types of ideas and communism and anarchism seem the most sensible,
Most groups of genuine communists are rather small. This, for a large account, has to do with the fact that the class struggle was on an all time low in the past 20 years for several reasons. So the question isn't "how big are they?" but more "what are the ideas of this group and can I identify myself with them?".

For my organisation, the Committee for a Workers' International (http://socialistworld.net), you could read some articles, theories and contact a group in your neighbourhood (http://socialistworld.net/area/areas.html).

[Voice_of_Reason]

So the question isn't "how big are they?" but more "what are the ideas of this group and can I identify myself with them?".

Definitely, but of course by big I mean larger than what I was normally around.


For my organisation, the Commitee for a Wokers' International, you could read some articles, theories and contact a group in your neighborhood.

Sounds good I'll go check into it later on today.

[Svante]

No... Communism is stateless and classless regardless... You're thinking of Socialism...

As for greed, it won't be a problem. People simply won't be able to take control of the means of production. They can be as greedy as they like. Doesn't mean they'll get anything out of it.

who will stop the greedy persons?

[Voice_of_Reason]

who will stop the greedy persons?

I was wondering that myself, but I'm Guessing he is saying that people will naturally stop the greedy person, but truthfully I'm not sure. I'm not a huge fan of "Human Nature" because this word can be argued from one half of the world to the other, but I think that people can be born sick in the head and have the obsession to have more than the next person, and I'm going to start ***** by saying this but I think most people are born naturally competitive.

[Schrödinger's Cat]

As you said yourself, these people are deserving of medical attention. Few people actually obsess over having more than others past childhood; they just want their own needs met.

I actually took a poll a few months ago with a reasonable amount of people (~200) to determine whether people were primarily interested in 1.) getting more than others or 2.) satisfying their material desires; surprisingly, only 6 people chose the first option. Remember, this was mostly young adults and teenagers.

[Svante]

somebody i n different post say blue collar worker and white collar worker. i dont heare abaout this befojr.they are both the working class but have different kind of job. there separete fromeach other b professiionnel and not professionnel. if averybody get same money,why separete these people? dont have blue collar and white collar. allso somebody say who will protect the société. i sthis the militaire? who will lead the militaire?:confused:

[Voice_of_Reason]

somebody i n different post say blue collar worker and white collar worker. i dont heare abaout this befojr.they are both the working class but have different kind of job. there separete fromeach other b professiionnel and not professionnel. if averybody get same money,why separete these people? dont have blue collar and white collar. allso somebody say who will protect the société. i sthis the militaire? who will lead the militaire?http://www.revleft.com/vb/../revleft/smilies/confused1.gif

I'm not trying to be rude but I have no idea what you just said....... try using spell check.