do u ever get annoyed when someone says

[wasteman]

"communism looks great on paper but is harder to apply due to human nature"

:rolleyes:

[#FF0000]

Yes. Especially as someone with a keen interest in all things people. Humans are not in-born with the desire to screw people over. That's conditioned behavior!

I actually think I once physically hit someone when they said it to me. I may have dreamed it but I'm pretty sure it happened.

[chegitz guevara]

"communism looks great on paper but is harder to apply due to human nature"

:rolleyes:

I said that, then someone explained to me why I was wrong, and I become a communist.

[Sankofa]

Yes, and unfortunately you'll hear that often. It's the usually the first thing out of the mouth people use in order to justify Capitalism.

[gorillafuck]

I used to think that. Then I started thinking for myself as opposed to listening to what mainstream media told me.

[thinkerOFthoughts]

haha Every time someone tries to appose me they start off with that statement! lol

[RedScare]

I said that, then someone explained to me why I was wrong, and I become a communist.Then you're a lot more rational then lots of people I've met.

[Kukulofori]

My favourite is when they act like nobody would innovate ever again without capitalism and the free market.

[UndergroundConnexion]

that sentence , is a sentence you'd get thrown to your face over and over again. It is a typical sentence that people get pumped in their head, however 98% of the time if you ask "why" no logical arguemtns would come out of it.

[#FF0000]

My favourite is when they act like nobody would innovate ever again without capitalism and the free market.

Yeah. When they say that, I usually respond by telling them that most innovation and invention is to meet some need people have, and not by profit. Innovation and invention out of need gave us the plow, written language, the wheel...etc. Invention for profit gave us the Shamwow and Pedegg.

[Chislev]

I said that, then someone explained to me why I was wrong, and I become a communist.
lol. If only everyone had the ability to be as logical as you.

I think even worse then that, is the assumption that people need to be forced, by law, to be good people. Or not even that, the assumption that everyone would just kill anyone who ever upset them.

[Saullos]

Even if humans are naturally greedy, then why should we accept that? Should we just accept that humans are violent too?

Especially if humans are naturally greedy, then we should support some sort of economic system that limits or prohibits that. Why merely let it run free? We should always achieve for better, and change human nature.

[KurtFF8]

I generally have a two-fold response. First is that I think that notion of human nature is simply flawed: Greed/Envy are indeed part of "human nature" but they are just emotions, just as compassion/love/caring/etc. are. None of those emotions are the "essential aspect" to human nature.

I then go on to say that "even if humans are essentially 'self interested' " then socialism is best for them as it would be in the best interests of the individual if the collective owns the means of production. The overwhelming majority of humans are the proletariat (and peasant) classes where their labor is exploited, so wouldn't it be in their direct self interest to acquire ownership over the means of production??

[Drace]

"communism looks great on paper but is harder to apply due to human nature"

Wow! Thats of a mix of the

"Communism looks good on paper, but does not work in practice"
and
"Communism contradicts human nature"

Funny how you always get the statement said in the same exact words.

[which doctor]

"communism looks great on paper but is harder to apply due to human nature"

:rolleyes:

This is just one of those sayings that sticks because people keep repeating it, a forced meme of sorts. I remember my human geography teacher freshman year of high school said this, and I've heard it from other teachers and other people as well.

You should ask people why they think this, they probably won't be able to answer. If they do, they'll spout something about how humans are naturally greedy and motivated by their own self-interest which they claim is opposed to the collectivist nature of communism. You can counter-argue with the point that, for the majority of the worlds inhabitants, communism is in their self-interest.

[ZeroNowhere]

Two of my teachers said that to the class (History and English). Well, they said it about 'communism', because they seem to believe that 'socialism' is welfare capitalism, but...
Yeah, I'm sure anybody who's ever studied 'Soviet' Russia would know the kind of propaganda that goes on in there, along with associating capitalism with 'democracy', etc.

[rouchambeau]

Not really. If anyone says anything like that, I ask them to explain what they mean by "human nature" and how they came to believe that there is such a thing. I find that people have a lot of trouble justifying their assertion.

[politics student]

Two of my teachers said that to the class (History and English). Well, they said it about 'communism', because they seem to believe that 'socialism' is welfare capitalism, but...
Yeah, I'm sure anybody who's ever studied 'Soviet' Russia would know the kind of propaganda that goes on in there, along with associating capitalism with 'democracy', etc.

Animal farm was taught like that. The idea looked good on paper but in pratice. (I wonder if that is why Animal Farm is pushed in schools?)

[cop an Attitude]

When I argue with others (capitalist or middle ground libritarians) they normally apply that to post revolutionary situations, which oddly is always to topic of discussion. I would much rather talk about current issues, history or protests actions but they always try to attack communism by focusing on a futuristic communist world that nobody is certain about. They say that in a need basied society people would hord more and then with those items make themselves more powerful then others. I normally counter with "Why would people stand for that, If people are educated about classes then they would know to avoid or attack anyone else with power over them (in a class sense)". Then they normally talk about great leaders, how some are followers and all that bull. I still think that the end all argument is "why do we have to fight to make a living". Some people just think that people are naturally "bad", I dont. I mean how many other animals are naturally "bad", none, plus its all a matter of opninon. At one point they though that nobles and slaves were part of human nature too. I even doubt that human nature exists.

[Incendiarism]

It gets on my nerves, but I think my response to it is reasonable.

[Organic Revolution]

No, why would you let that annoy you? Why wouldn't you just talk to those folks, and help them understand that it is in there best interests?

[Drace]

I even thought of gathering my ideas on human nature on text and hopefully someday publishing it.

I have some works...

[PostAnarchy]

Yea tell me about it, it's the ultimate cliche.

[FlamingChainsaws]

I personally think the reason behind this statement is that people raised in a capitalist society are taught to love it and taught that it is the only thing that can work. People say ridiculous things like "OMG DOOD LIEK COMONIZM MAKES PEOPEL NOT REECH THERE FUL POTENCHAL BECOZ THEY IS NOT CAN GET REWARD WIF MOR MONIE!1!1!". They simply don't understand fundamentals of it, but repeat what they have been told. In this case, it's particularly idiotic. If you think about it, when people are doing things they like and getting all they need, they have no choice but to go further and do better things.

[Drace]

"OMG DOOD LIEK COMONIZM MAKES PEOPEL NOT REECH THERE FUL POTENCHAL BECOZ THEY IS NOT CAN GET REWARD WIF MOR MONIE!1!1!"

LOLOL.
why do we always make capitalists talk like this when referring to their ideas? :laugh::laugh:

[Drace]

I love when this say "Communism is a great idea but people are too greedy for it to work" LOLOLOL.
As in, they would have no problem living under communism, but PEOPLE are greedy lawlz.

Edit: Dam, didn't realize I had a post before this. Oh well first time for everything.

[Kukulofori]

lately there's been an increase in "well communsim isn't really BAD it's bettter in meeting everyone's needs but capitalism is better in terms of getting ahead etc"

really gives me hope, a little. :3

[#FF0000]

lately there's been an increase in "well communsim isn't really BAD it's bettter in meeting everyone's needs but capitalism is better in terms of getting ahead etc"

really gives me hope, a little. :3

It's a start. Counter that shit argument with "Which is more important? People needs getting met or a few billionaires being able to afford a fleet of helicopters?"

It's funny. Ever since Obama was elected, I've been getting more people asking me in earnest to explain socialism to them. I'm sure it's to quell their fears of their president-elect being one of them, but once I'm done with my explanation, they're more often than not "converted". :lol: The next day I see them wandering around the break room and campus with faces buried in the Communist Manifesto.

[FlamingChainsaws]

It's a start. Counter that shit argument with "Which is more important? People needs getting met or a few billionaires being able to afford a fleet of helicopters?"

It's funny. Ever since Obama was elected, I've been getting more people asking me in earnest to explain socialism to them. I'm sure it's to quell their fears of their president-elect being one of them, but once I'm done with my explanation, they're more often than not "converted". :lol: The next day I see them wandering around the break room and campus with faces buried in the Communist Manifesto.
I wish I was that good.

[LOLseph Stalin]

"communism looks great on paper but is harder to apply due to human nature"

I get that alot. It's annoying. -_-

I argue it by saying Capitalism creates greed.

[PostAnarchy]

I sometimes willl say:

I guess the government decided to nationalize AIG because...

the free market was good in paper but not in practice! :tt1:

[Drace]

Heres my piece on it
___

The human nature is a brain and nothing more. The actions one takes are only results of reasoning. This is perhaps where the argument arises. That all reasoning is built around things like money and power. I have no doubt that people act in self interest, that is, they act in ways that it benefits them. The argument views greedy things such as power as self interest, while completely ignoring the good deeds of men.

If viewing self interest as anything but having one men ignore his needs and act with the will of anothers men, then human nature is not greedy. That is, unless, we say that a men wants nothing more then his beloved money. This is the core of the counter-argument.

Men's actions are done in favor of what they value, in the direction of whats they believe to be the best. While one will value the act of charity, another will not. The one who does, still is acting in self interest, since he receives pleasure from it. What separates the other is that he does not value such things, and it is not of his interests. These two are both people I tell you. They are made of the same nature, the ability to reason what is the best of things, but they will arrive at different conclusions. Thus, to have people cooperate, we would not have to change their genetic makeup, but their values which they reason upon.

-Drace

[redSHARP]

i use it to manupulate people...get them warm to the idea and curious to leftism and BAM!! we got a new sympathetic person t the cause

[Foldered]

I sometimes willl say:

I guess the government decided to nationalize AIG because...

the free market was good in paper but not in practice! :tt1:
Nice.

A lot of westerns say something along those lines because we have been taught that what is natural is greed/individualism/struggle for existence. It's Darwin's fault. (Not really, but he did popularize the theories of evolution that support the "naturalistic" aspects of capitalism.)

[Drace]

My other writings...

I have come to understand that the answer to whther we are born greedy or not is not a simple matter of yes or no.

Men are self interested. In simple terms, we do not give ourselves into slaves. Our interactions are done in a form of trade. Things must be fair. Respect for respect, labour for labour. This is a simple nature of us which enables us to exist as civilized humans.

However, to say that we are born with lust for more is a completly another thing. For one, selfishness to this extent interferes with the human emotion guilt.
I would say the reason of this very nature is to regulate this "trade". For those who do not feel guilt, do not understand their doings.

A buisnessman is the ultimate example. His job is exploitation. This is how he makes his profit. Now for a buisness owner, his life is a game in which the objective is to beat the competitor. His buisness is his hobby. When he wins big, his happy, when he loses, his sad. His reactions to the buisness are the same as of ours to a sport. A buisnessman does not think of his riches. Sure, at the enterance he is excited to enter a new world. As he adjusts, his happiness is of always. When he wins, only numbers change, if its significant enough, it causes his happiness because he has done well.

Its no lust for wealth. If so, why does a buisness men have millions in the bank he does not use? His actions are comparable to us with our hobbies. Do we call it greed that allows us to continue playing a sport to enchance our skills?

A buisness is another hobby, but is large enough to have a control of others lives. Once ones hobby becomes a buisness men, it can be compared to a willing basketball player. Always practicing aang practicing. This is greed. The statisfaction of being better. But remeber a buisness men's life has an impact over others lives. So imagine us as re ball that a buisness owns and hits the ground in every attempt of becoming better. Their tactics of profit. In a negative matter I'd say, thus it can be eliminated.

Buisness is just another hobby. Thus, its not crime against humanity to eliminate it since many exist. Its rather a system which exploits men's fair esuring system of self interest into monsters.

Moreover on the "we are born with lust" propaganda. Its clearly evident in our lives that this is not the case. What is there to explain, just look at your own life. Most never picture ourselves




but he did popularize the theories of evolution that support the "naturalistic" aspects of capitalism.)

What would this naturalistic aspect of capitalism be?

[Robespierre2.0]

When I'm discussing politics with a capitalist, what REALLY pisses me off- I mean, fills me with murderous rage- is when they claim they understand every facet of Marxism because they read the Manifesto, and believe socialism nothing more than envy of the successful.

I swear, next person who says this to me is getting a fist in their jaw. Fuck reaching out to people who have already made up their mind and won't listen to any information that contradicts their views.