Isn't communism too idealistic?

[Tim Cornelis]

I didn't eat almost all of it. I ate more than I needed, though.


Taking any coffee is technically taking more than I need. But if I have some left over (which has happened before) then I took more than I "needed".





I can turn on every faucet in my house and leave them running 24/7 now. So I could do that under communism?

You cannot take more than you need, that's oxymoronic! Apparently you determined you wanted it, i.e. your needs.

Yes, you can--just like now--except, only if there is enough left for everyone else.

[#FF0000]

What Ideology is not Idealistic Communism is the wave of the future it is the only Ideology that can move humanity forward to a bright and radiant future.

PLEASE STOP POSTING thanks

[Blake's Baby]

I'm quoting this entire post because despite the fact it answers all the questions you have clearly and succinctly, you don't seem to have paid any attention to it.

okay here is how it is decided:

can you work (yes) (no)
If yes here's a bunch of jobs, please pick one

do you need anything (yes)(no)
If yes list here:

There are tons of ways this could be organized with different positive and negative aspects. Ultimately it'll be up to the members of a communist society what work needs to be done, how to get it done, how to distribute things, etc. etc. etc.

Just in case it's not so clear:

We, the members of the communes, decide what we can do. We, the members of the communes, make sure we do it. This is 'from each according to their ability'.

We, the members of the communes, decide what we need. We, the members of the communes make sure those needs are communicated, and if we, the members of the communes, are not capable of fulfilling those needs, we make sure that some people who are, are made aware of the needs. The other members of the other communes will supply those needs, just as we can and will supply certain needs of others that they are unable to supply themselves. This is 'to each according to their needs'.

[#FF0000]

Taking any coffee is technically taking more than I need. But if I have some left over (which has happened before) then I took more than I "needed".

this is what I am talking about when I said you are looking way too hard at a slogan.

but then again, you're ignoring every decent post in here so I kinda don't think you're serious about this question.

[spens]

You cannot take more than you need, that's oxymoronic! Apparently you determined you wanted it, i.e. your needs.

Yes, you can--just like now--except, only if there is enough left for everyone else.

You can easily take more than you need. Need and want are two different things.

[spens]

this is what I am talking about when I said you are looking way too hard at a slogan.

but then again, you're ignoring every decent post in here so I kinda don't think you're serious about this question.

I'm not ignoring the decent posts, they have answered my questions, such as this post:

okay here is how it is decided:

can you work (yes) (no)
If yes here's a bunch of jobs, please pick one

do you need anything (yes)(no)
If yes list here:

There are tons of ways this could be organized with different positive and negative aspects. Ultimately it'll be up to the members of a communist society what work needs to be done, how to get it done, how to distribute things, etc. etc. etc.

This shows me that communism is too idealistic, i.e. you have answered my question. No real need to reply.

[Ele'ill]

So we're on a 30 day period of clean up on the forum- to remove trolls, nasty posting, sexism, etc.. and you're all about to lose a really good mod (me) because if this thread continues on this course (ignoring obvious points/answers to questions) I'm going to jump out this second story window of a barnes and noble to my gleeful death on the sidewalk below. So just stop if you have nothing left to ask/give.

Thanks

[#FF0000]

I'm not ignoring the decent posts, they have answered my questions, such as this post:

This shows me that communism is too idealistic, i.e. you have answered my question. No real need to reply.

Need and ability is decided by the people of the commune. What's wrong with that answer?

[spens]

I'm quoting this entire post because despite the fact it answers all the questions you have clearly and succinctly, you don't seem to have paid any attention to it.



Just in case it's not so clear:

We, the members of the communes, decide what we can do. We, the members of the communes, make sure we do it. This is 'from each according to their ability'.

We, the members of the communes, decide what we need. We, the members of the communes make sure those needs are communicated, and if we, the members of the communes, are not capable of fulfilling those needs, we make sure that some people who are, are made aware of the needs. The other members of the other communes will supply those needs, just as we can and will supply certain needs of others that they are unable to supply themselves. This is 'to each according to their needs'.

I understand. Everyone decides on everything. I am hoping for more details that aren't as idealistic as "everyone decides on everything."

How do you ensure that all jobs are filled by qualified people? Or that less desirable jobs are all provided for? If it is through a reward system, who decides on the the relative value of a job? It seems as though the slogan should be "to each according to his needs, plus certain incentives based on his job selection."

[#FF0000]

How do you ensure that all jobs are filled by qualified people? If it is through a reward system, who decides on the the relative value of a job? It seems as though the slogan should be "to each according to his needs, plus certain incentives based on his job selection."

Except that isn't near as catchy, defeating the purpose of a slogan.

And how to ensure jobs are filled by qualified people isn't some we can answer in any useful way. We could sit here all day and put together a basic blueprint for how a community would run under communism, by it'd be entirely hypothetical and thus entirely useless.

EDIT: So, instead of going ahead and seeking hypotheticals, how about you go and read some history, and look at how things worked in the early USSR, or maybe Anarchist Spain, or maybe the Paris Commune, or, shit, even one of those old Utopian experiments that were so popular in the U.S.?

[Ele'ill]

The issue of 'how will jobs be filled by qualified people' isn't a challenge unique to communism.

[spens]

Except that isn't near as catchy, defeating the purpose of a slogan.

And how to ensure jobs are filled by qualified people isn't some we can answer in any useful way. We could sit here all day and put together a basic blueprint for how a community would run under communism, by it'd be entirely hypothetical and thus entirely useless.

EDIT: So, instead of going ahead and seeking hypotheticals, how about you go and read some history, and look at how things worked in the early USSR, or maybe Anarchist Spain, or maybe the Paris Commune, or, shit, even one of those old Utopian experiments that were so popular in the U.S.?

Thanks for answering my question, communism is too idealistic. Everyone should decide everything, but we don't have any of the details worked out yet. Though I'm not here to learn about the failures of past systems, I wanted to know how the people here think communism should work and how it would succeed in the real world, instead of how it would ideally work.

[Ele'ill]

Thanks for answering my question, communism is too idealistic. Everyone should decide everything, but we don't have any of the details worked out yet. Though I'm not here to learn about the failures of past systems, I wanted to know how the people here think communism should work and how it would succeed in the real world, instead of how it would ideally work.

Have you ever worked in a group before?

[Thirsty Crow]

Thanks for answering my question, communism is too idealistic. Everyone should decide everything, but we don't have any of the details worked out yet. Though I'm not here to learn about the failures of past systems, I wanted to know how the people here think communism should work and how it would succeed in the real world, instead of how it would ideally work.

How would you decide the qualifications for a job? Easily, by means of fusing the institutions of education with the institutions of production, resulting in a gradual breakdown in the division of labour (mental vs. physical) and the integration of labour processes. Also, there could be ways to certificate that someone passed the necessary requirements for being qualified for the job. What has that got to do with "incentives"?

Next, you'll ask "but who will decide what this educational requirements are", and people will respond (the already qualified workforce, maybe also by contacting other production units diong the same thing, will decide it in a democratic manner, by means of a general assembly of all of those working there).

Next. (but yeah, we all know that communism is "idealistic" herp derp)

[#FF0000]

Everyone should decide everything, but we don't have any of the details worked out yet.

The details you're asking for are kind of impossible to honestly give because they depend entirely on the decisions people we don't know in a society that doesn't exist under circumstances we can only speculate about.

Though I'm not here to learn about the failures of past systems

Of course not. What's there to learn from history anyway?

I wanted to know how the people here think communism should work and how it would succeed in the real world, instead of how it would ideally work.

Except all we can tell you is how it would ideally work, because a communist society doesn't exist yet.

But alright, if you're looking for something strictly practical, then maybe you'd be interested in looking up Parecon. Maybe that's something like what you're looking for.

[Tim Cornelis]

You can easily take more than you need. Need and want are two different things.

Needs are self-determined, they are whatever you say they are. So no, if you drink 3 liters of coffee you determined you needed it.

And consumption according to need is very much possible, the UK has 'free' healthcare and every citizen can use the healthcare as needed.

Answer this question: you want to lend "Communism for dummies" from the library, you can lend up to ten books. How many books are you going to lend?

[Dzerzhinsky's Ghost]

I don't think Marxism/Communism is idealistic at all, seems pretty solid, rational, etc. to me.

Common sense really.

[Rafiq]

Because people (not myself) overuse medicare?

No. Because you think other people over use it. Tell me now, why would someone 'over use' medicare? For what? Do you think people like being sick?

I didn't eat almost all of it. I ate more than I needed, though.

So? You think communism is 'only' giving people what they need?

Communism is giving people what they need + anything possible for them (sometimes based on how hard they work)

Taking any coffee is technically taking more than I need. But if I have some left over (which has happened before) then I took more than I "needed".

Shut up about 'needs'. You don't know what you're talking about. Communists don't have any morals against people taking more than they need if they don't get it by exploiting others or causing famine.

I can turn on every faucet in my house and leave them running 24/7 now. So I could do that under communism?

Yes but we can count on the fact that their aren't that much douchebags such as yourself who'd do such a thing just to piss us all off, to the point where it is a major problem.

[Rafiq]

Thanks for answering my question, communism is too idealistic. Everyone should decide everything, but we don't have any of the details worked out yet. Though I'm not here to learn about the failures of past systems, I wanted to know how the people here think communism should work and how it would succeed in the real world, instead of how it would ideally work.

We don't make blueprints for the future, planning on what society should be like now will end up as a failure.

Because we are not fortune tellers, certain conditions may prevent our ideas from working. We believe that the workers, once acheiving class dictatorship will rationalize a society that best fits their needs. We don't have a set of ideas put forth for how society should be run, if that's why you came than you came to the wrong place. We are here to win the class war, and abolish capitalism.

[spens]

The details you're asking for are kind of impossible to honestly give because they depend entirely on the decisions people we don't know in a society that doesn't exist under circumstances we can only speculate about.



Of course not. What's there to learn from history anyway?



Except all we can tell you is how it would ideally work, because a communist society doesn't exist yet.

But alright, if you're looking for something strictly practical, then maybe you'd be interested in looking up Parecon. Maybe that's something like what you're looking for.

So the answer is yes, communism is too idealistic. Thank you for answering my question.