Are people to greedy?

[thinkerOFthoughts]

What do you think about that argument? that because humans are greedy they will exploit the system and, Communism will never work?

[mikelepore]

If that's the case, how could a new system that tries systematically to remove opportunities for abuse, but may not be able to do so perfectly, be any worse than the present system that says abuses of the worst kinds are allowed, encouraged and rewarded?

[ernie]

What do you think about that argument? that because humans are greedy they will exploit the system and, Communism will never work?
It's crap. People are not "greedy". People may seem greedy now, but that's only because capitalism encourages you to accumulate wealth.

Even if humans were greedy, communism would still be more adequate, as mikelepore points out.

[rednordman]

nope, that is a bad and lazy arguement. People have only become greedy because they have no choice to do otherwise. This is capitalism personified. Its all about making money and no matter how much you earn...its never enough. Its funny as all capitalists will laugh at this, saying its rubbish, but what is their answer/solution? Because what has happened recently, is not good. Plain fact is that not everyone wants to be rich, alot want simply to get by or just do something positive in their communities. Why should they be punished for having good intentions? A lot of these people are actually more productive and positive for the local community. Why should they get paid f-all for that when someone is activly damaging the local community, and getting paid alot for it, even if they do not know the area.
The only people who would abuse a communist system would be people who are extremely capitalist anyway, and they would be sussed out quickly due to the experience of the past hundred years.

[Tatarin]

People aren't greedy. Everyone has helped another person at least once before, and not getting anything back for it. In fact, sometimes, helping another person also poses risks to the supposed selfishness of a person. It consumes your time and can result in physical or mental damage (like helping a dying man on the streets). Yet people continue to do it.

[spice756]

Well communism tries to remove greed and capitalism promotes greed .And capitalism teaches us that rich man of $1,000,000,000 and poor person of $5 on the street is okay.

The capitalism teaches us homeless and poverty is okay and very rich is okay.

It teaches us to be greedy and want and want more and more to be happy.

And communism explain this flawed and greed and wanting more and more does not make the person happy and this is injust system of class struggle.

[thinkerOFthoughts]

Hmm I said people are not naturally greedy and someone said "well you obviously haven't dealt with kids" would I be correct in assuming that its just their immaturity?

[RebelDog]

If that's the case, how could a new system that tries systematically to remove opportunities for abuse, but may not be able to do so perfectly, be any worse than the present system that says abuses of the worst kinds are allowed, encouraged and rewarded?

The answer in a nutshell. I agree wholeheartedly. Given that capitalism encourages greed and anti-social behavior why should it be given precedence over alternatives that keep such behavior in check?

[Plagueround]

Hmm I said people are not naturally greedy and someone said "well you obviously haven't dealt with kids" would I be correct in assuming that its just their immaturity?

Children have been proven to be naturally altruistic. If anything, greedy children are simply learning exactly what they are taught, which as previously mentioned is not inherent human behavior but the manifestation self-interest takes in a capitalist mode of production/society.

[thinkerOFthoughts]

You know I have been talking about having a monyless society and I was just told that people that dont want money are greedy.:confused:

[Incendiarism]

I've always thought that human nature, if it were to exist, is subordinate to external factors. If greed, accumulation of wealth, and the stomping on of others was encouraged(and indeed in a capitalist society these traits are treated as paramount), then it is only logical to assume these are the reasons for such ideas taking root and giving off the impression of such stringent notions of human behavior.

Now, if humans were intrinsically hostile towards one another, there would be nothing peculiar about us at all. There would be no primitive communistic societies, no individualism running parallel to that, nothing when taken to its most extreme conclusion.

[thinkerOFthoughts]

"Explain dictators and despots. Explain wars over land, oil, women, food, etc. Explain thieves, robbers, murders, and all manner of criminals.

Is everything a product of capitalism? It can't be because these things exist outside of the borders of capitalism. Small native tribes, which share resources, still have thieves and murders.

Therefore, another cause of these things must exist. I submit that cause is human nature."


uhhh what do I say to something like that?^

[Hiero]

If everyone was inherently greedy capitalism wouldn't work. Everyone can be greedy and do greedy things. But greed isn't a motivating factor in all human action, the way anti-communist talk about greed is false. If they were true, people would be too inefficient and unreliable to be able to work independently and obey the law. Capitalism requires a strong work ethic to function. Greed is a part of the system, but it is only one part, usual on the consumption and profit side, which is more on the side of oppressors and exploiters. And socialism revolution negates such people and things.


uhhh what do I say to something like that?^

Someones attempt to reduce complex things to a small naive notion called human nature. It is really contradictory what he said anyone. A small portion of people are murders, yet this is human nature we all share? Only a small portion of people do some significant stealing. How does that person explain a consistant human nature inherent in all of us if only a few of us acted upon it?

Like I said, if there was a human nature, and it was to be greedy, it would be chaos. We wouldn't function as a society, there wouldn't be society, we would just be solitary animals. This human nature concept does not play out in the real world, human activity is so diverse that it can't be reduced to a concept like human nature. We need to look elsewhere, and that leads us to look at external structures outside the individual rather than internal mechanism.

[The Feral Underclass]

Hmm I said people are not naturally greedy and someone said "well you obviously haven't dealt with kids" would I be correct in assuming that its just their immaturity?

What did he/she mean by that? As a statement it doesn't really clarify anything or make very much sense.

[apathy maybe]

Imagine this:
One day all bread (and nothing else) is magically free (say the government is paying for it or something, it doesn't matter).

What happens? Well, I guess that many people would rush down and get as much bread as they could, stick it in the freezer and so on, because, heck, it might not be free tomorrow.

A lot of that bread will go off, be thrown out, not eaten. What a waste.

Over time though, as bread continues to be free, people will stop doing this. They'll only get the amount of bread they need (kinda like now), safe in the knowledge that they can always get some more (for free).

---

In a communist system, everything is free. People won't stock pile stuff though, because that's just fucking stupid. Why eat frozen bread when you can just go and get a fresh loaf?

People aren't greedy, they just want to have enough to be safe. They just want to know that they aren't going to starve.

[#FF0000]

People are naturally self-interested, sure. That doesn't mean, however, that they have the in-born desire to actively look to screw other people for their own personal gain. I bring it up a lot, but hunter-gatherer societies are an excellent argument against bullshit "human nature" arguments. Societies and cultures were so varied, with many being completely egalitarian, while others were strictly hierarchical, that it obliterates the idea of human nature without effort. After all, human nature is in-born, why were pre-agricultural societies so egalitarian?

[ZeroNowhere]

Enlightened self-interest is something that we promote. It would be in the self-interest of the majority to revolt. Ayn Rand was pretty much a complete dolt.
Human nature is a silly idea, it's not something to fear, nor should we make assumptions about it being generous, it's still an assumption, and basing arguments on it is hopeless.
"Explain dictators and despots." Who, Pinochet? "Explain wars over land, oil, women, food, etc." Capitalism (imperialism and poverty), and horrible education are to blame. Education is something that must be changed, its current form is hierarchal and deranged. In fact, most of it isn't very educational at all. Capitalists don't care, they just want a bunch of robotic workers, to respect authority no matter how stupid. It's simply brainwashing, to make workers accept their fate and be estranged. Ergo, it's time for regime change.
Thieves? Capitalism. In fact, they are the ones who rule it. Robbers? Capitalism. Except that we never call them that. Murders? Capitalism, with its poverty, greed, and hopelessness. It installs an exaggerated sense of competition into us at our youngest.

"Small native tribes, which share resources, still have thieves and murders."
What are these tribes like? Of course we shall have a few even after capitalism, especially those who are insane (like the Austrian School), but they will grow far, far less in number. If I don't kill you, is it due to human nature? If I don't wish to rule over others, is that human nature? It's quite simple, there is no 'human nature'. Some people can be easy to anger, and instinctive, but how do you know this isn't due to their upbringing? Perhaps it's a problem with the system? Perhaps it's not just hormones that lead to teenage rebellion? In free skools, it's never seemed to be much of a problem. :)

[thinkerOFthoughts]

Great posts guys!! thanks :)