Results 61 to 80 of 204
That problem applies just as well to your vision of a capitalist "libertarian" society, and may or may not be solved in a similar way. Communism has nothing to do with such appropriations of personal property.
"All that would be voted on is what gets produced, how it gets distributed, how to organise the trash collection etc."
But who are these people to vote on how my life turns out. Clearly their collective votes will directly effect my life. I have no say in this if I do not get enough people to vote my way. That sounds like a ruler to me.
That says more about your notion of what a "ruler" is than communism, to be honest. These decisions affect everyone, and require the cooperation of the entire society. Either everyone gets a voice in the decision or some people make the decision themselves because they're such special snowflakes.
And who are people to own private property, for that elite to manage the economy, which would not involve the 99% of people? It would affect all of their lives, and they could do basically nothing about it. That definitely is a ruler.
Also, you respect individual property - why do you not respect collective property, or non-property? If you do not want to be part of this, then just keep yourself out of the vote. They're voting on their property - it doesn't have to be yours too. (although you'd have the right, how nice is that?)
youre right, it absolutely applies to both. Thats why I wrote it. So even under communism theft can occur and only violence can stop it. So the communist either allows constant loss and theft of property(once word got out it would be a silly cycle) OR they can justify violence in defense of personal property.
How? Why would anyone steal a TV when they can get the same model for free?
The community could definitely accept the non-aggression principle in that case which justifies force being used to defend it. There is no way someone can collect enough personal property to damage society - private property is the danger.
Ok so I want 100 free TVs. I want to line my entire houses walls with flatscreens.
You don't live in a communist society, though. Tough luck. Though we probably have the resources to do so.
Whether you have the resources or not wouldn't matter to me. Id be taking anything and everything I wanted. You'd end up working solely to support my and many like myself taking practices. Why work when we can have others do it. Id become king.
Im saying this to make a point not to be an ass.
What point? That people are "naturally" greedy, corrupt, whatever? Right, as if "human nature" is not an ideological term that tries to mask the changes in human societies that come with different modes of production.
Why would you want a 100 TVs in socialism? To show that you're rich enough to afford them? But you're not rich, no one is.
Well id sure as heck would love a 100ft yaht I could sail around the world and go freediving in all the best locations. Thats about pleasure not status. In An-Com I can basically be certain ill never have one. In An-Cap there's a very slim chance. The entire purpose of An-Com as im starting to see is that you revoke any possibility of great personal wealth to ensure that everyone gets 3 squares and a TV.
Im comfortable risking my life for the chance to be free which is guaranteed and the potential to experience unknown things. Some of which require monetary wealth. Thats a deal i need not make because im free to do so.
Why wouldn't you have one? The productive forces have developed to the extent that we can produce tens of thousands of main battle tanks for some idiot to get killed in, but you think yachts are out of the question? The only difference is that when you're finished using it, other people will presumably want to use the yacht as well.
You ever seen how rental cars are treated? talk about wasting resources. We'd be sinking 100 yahts a day trying to jump them and shit lol. When its not yours there's no reason not to destroy it doing fun stuff. Especially when there's no risk to your personal wealth for doing so.
That must be why whenever I come into a friend's house I just sort of smash the place, set it on fire and so on. Again, you're simply transposing facts (and not true facts, either) about the current system into another mode of production.
The yacht is yours, by the way. But it's not exclusively yours.
All you guys seem to people heaving people out of capitalism and putting then directly into some sort of distant higher level of communism. The value systems would be completely different. If you asked some Eskimo tribe member what they would like if they could have anything, I seriously doubt they'd ask for a Mercedes Benz.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Well no of course you dont set your friends house on fire. That would put your personal financial situation in jeopardy. With communism that wouldn't be the case. Like you said, you couldn't do enough damage to effect the system. Something as simple as a cell phone would be required to be produced 5X more then we do today. We ALL wish to smash our phones here and there after a frustrating conversation. We just dont because WE have to buy a new one with our own labors and the wealth acquired by it. Thats just wasted resources.
So we've gone from "evil communists want to tell everyone how to live their life!" to "how dare you live your life so as to waste resources?", all in the span of one thread. But I would hazard a guess that in communism objects would be built to last, with planned obsolescence being, well, obsolete, and so on.
No I dont really care if you waste resources. You and your collective group are free to do anything you like, so long as you dont attack the life, liberty or property of another. I was just countering the point that capitalism wastes resources by not running machinery sometimes due to it being personal property etc.
It does, though, not due to personal property but the necessity of keeping the rate of profit high enough. And even if we grant that people will go through five phones a day in communism, this sort of "waste" is not the same as the waste due to insufficient automation. Here, a lot of resources were spent to make a lot of phones. In decaying capitalism, a lot of resources are spent to make a small amount of commodities, in order to drive up the rate of profit.
