/mlpol/ - My Little Politics

> Why Communism is bad
Because it doesn’t work

>>92368
But if it did you'd want to live under it?

>>92369
Then it isn’t communism then if it works

>>92371
Ha my first new convert to real communism now lets see how many more I can get!

>>92366
I hate being forced to share. I'll share on my own accord, not the government's.

>>92372
Didn’t say i would join you silly little communist

>>92375
But real communism doesn't have a government. Checkmate.

>>92377
Who would force me to share then? An angry mob?

>>92378
The commune of course, and if you didn't we'd just force you to leave.

>>92379
I'd prefer to have my own property where I can just do what I want with it, instead of having to listen to the plights of some commune.

>>92380
So you hate sharing with others for teh better of society? Anon scarifies are when you give something up for the hopes it will have a good end result. Are you telling me you hate others so much you don't want to share as much as you can with others?

>>92381
>Are you telling me you hate others so much you don't want to share as much as you can with others?
Yes!

>>92381
I wouldn’t want to share things with a communist

>>92382
Then you have nothing to argue for other then why we should eliminate the state and private property. You are the reason we need to have capitalists overthrown.
>>92383
There are no communists or non communists in the commune only people. Do you hate people like >>92382? Is so your the reason why we must overthrow the heartless capitalists.

Seriously lads I was hoping for more.

because I have a paycheck, a home, cars, etc me like most people of the world would only lose with communism since it would make our quality of life drop considerably. I worked to get up where I am and don't really want to give up what I have worked for and earned.

>>92366
This is a response to Marxist communism. Human nature is hierarchical. There will always be leaders, there will always be those that are better at a certain thing than you. To remove hierarchy and to level the playing field is unnatural, and will require force to implement. It is not practical, and because of the centralization of force to achieve such equality will create Stalinist dictatorships. Since Stalinist dictatorships are not true communism, communism turns into despotic tyranny.

>>92384
>Do you hate people
Absolutely I’m always rooting for the nuke

>>92366
Because Communism won't make waifus real.

>>92387
>Human nature is hierarchical
Proof with that claim. And even if you get that proof what makes you think we can't just nurture someone to a point where his nature becomes obsolete?
>>92386
So yet again you also dislike it because you have something to lose?

>>92384
>should
>must
Where are you drawing these normative views from?

>>92388
Also this.
The only kinds of communists I tolerate are the Possadists.

>>92381
>>92384
Communes are inefficient at alleviating poverty and helping the poor. As there is no reward in communism for productivity, laborers will only produce as much as they want, or however much the man with the gun says they should make. While people tend to be altruistic, people are much more prone to being lazy. In other words, the desire to produce for the benefit of all is outweighed by wanting to sit around doing nothing. Efficiency will plummet, and there will be more scarcity then there ought to be in a capitalist society. In a capitalist society you have to have money to afford bread; in a communist society there is a perpetual shortage of bread.

>>92391
Well DUH who would choose a system that makes us all lose? Communism is a system that moves everyone down to the lowest common denominator it moves everyone to pretty much Small apartment, rundown car, eating ramen and hotdogs.

With capitalism you can get out of rundown apartment and Ramen life if you apply your self and work harder in life. You can get a better job and a degree with communism it doesn't matter how much effort you put in or how much work you put in you will never move forward in life. Under Communism as a Doctor or lawyer you will be making the same money and living the same life as the guy shoveling shit or flipping burgers at McStalin's. Under communism there is no reason to try no reason to work harder, no reason to try there is nothing to gain under the system.

>>92395
Not real communism, what makes you think real communism will function as such anon.
>>92394
The commune will through social pressure encourage people to work as hard as they can for the good of the commune which will allow a planned economy to work. Our system just has not yet been implemented correctly because we have yet to conquer the world and ride ourselves of simply having dictators of the proletariat.
>>92388
>>92393
So only sane people are communists while insane people are right wing retards?

>>92398
Define "sane".

>>92399
This

>>92398
it's the nature of the beast it won't move us all up to mansions, big houses and everything else and even then the main argument still stands.

>It doesn't matter how much effort you put in or how much work you put in under communism you will never move forward in life. Under Communism as a Doctor or lawyer you will be making the same money and living the same life as the guy shoveling shit or flipping burgers at McStalin's. Under communism there is no reason to try no reason to work harder, no reason to try there is nothing to gain under the system.

There is nothing to gain by moving to communism

>>92399
Not wanting to destroy the earth? Not wanting to see everything burn and others suffer because your not willing to share your wealth? Maybe that as a start.
>>92397
>wanting to be in a system that doesn't help those who are poor.
>wanting to be in a system that hurts those bottom of society.

>>92403
>because your not willing to share your wealth
I didn't say that was the reason.
>wanting to destroy the earth
I'm not destroying anything. I just like to watch things burn.

>>92403
I want a rebirth

>>92403
>competition
>hurtful
Losing is your fault, don't blame other's success for your failure. Take some responsibility and maybe you won't be such a giant faggot.

>>92404
>>92405
Yet again crazy. CHECKMATE!
>>92402
We will make it so that people will all live equally and we will bring up the quality of life accordingly with technology as it continues to progress. This will cause less work need to be put in and for everyone to be able to do what they want to do due to automation.

>>92406
Cooperation always beats lone wolf cooperators. Communism is about uniting those who work and allowing them to cut out the middle man and take back what they've earned rather then be under pressure to do what those who claim to boss them around want.

I'm running out of commie glimmer pics, please don't make me have to find more /mlpol/.

>>92407
Saying I’m crazy doesn’t know the definition of crazy explains why you’re a communist

>>92407
Nigger it still doesn't change the fact under communism there is NO reason for anyone to try. Literally why bother with working harder when you won't gain anything. Why get a degree, why try at work even I mean burger flipper and Doctor make the same why bother at all.

>>92408
>Adhom
Anon I'm calling you crazy because you want to see your follow man suffer. Communists want to help others!

>>92409
Like I said automation will account for most of it while workers will only be encouraged by the commune and taught how to maintain the machines or expand them to a degree that is necessary to distribute the good created equally.

Just in case you couldn't tell I'm not a commie I'm just arguing for it because obviously no one else will I'm and I'm pretty well read on the subject itself.

>>92410


>Why would I Learn that shit? Ivan can learn that shit and do all the heavy lifting, work, effort fuck that I will just flip some burgers way easier.

Human nature in a nutshell. The biggest flaw in communism is humans and reality.

because it argues for nothing more than the satisfaction of base needs, the ultimate existence for these people is being a tube worm in an ocean crevice; everyone is equal, safe, well fed, and the same. What meaning is there is living only to see that everyone is fed, housed, clothed and kept alive? humans are animals and communism would domesticate us into livestock

>>92411
Free riding will be eliminated by the commune's social pressure forcing some individuals to learn and do what needs to be done. This social pressure will ensure that those who do the jobs they do know how many they are helping ect.

>>92391
Without going into the long history of humanity and finding academic papers, let me give you a simple example. There must be leadership for humanity to function effectively. Let us say you have a communal farm with 3 farmers. The first farmer wants to grow carrots, the second farmer wants to grow potatoes, and the third farmer wants to grow grapefruit. With no clear leader, the farmers argue where to plant and what crops that should be planted. Eventually, the farmers could not come to an agreement as what they should plant, and each goes their separate ways to plant the crops they want. It is hard to plant crops by yourself and takes a lot of time and energy. Eventually, harvesting time arrives and they take their crops to town together. When they arrive all of the carrots and potatoes run out, and there is a lot of grapefruits left as no one in town likes grapefruit. However, since they live in the Glorious People’s Commune they have to take the grapefruit. Once all the food is distributed it is revealed that there is still a need of food, but there is no food left. The farmers go home to their collective farm. So in the end without leaders goods are produced inefficiently, goods are produced that are not desired, and there are shortages. Humanity would not have gotten as far as we have without leaders.

further more what does the average worker know about running the factory? most don't and don't want to they simply want to work and be paid a "fair" wage which to most seems to just mean more or less the same as ones peers in the workplace rather than anything to do with the actual value of their labor which is another thing the average factory worker probably couldn't tell you. Most people aren't collectivists, don't care about the greater good, and care little for people outside of those they know. The main reason "real communism/socialism/marxism" has never occurred is that the "proletariat" simply isn't interested in it. Marx himself was the son of a wealthy factory owner and only was able to romanticize the working class because he never had a real job. The whole ideology is a rich brat with daddy issues wishing for a simpler more worthwhile life.

>>92414
Ever tried to get your dead slow and lazy co-worker to do their job. Yeahhhhhh it doesn't work dude :/

even if you got the workers on board, and the leadership didn't betray the movement, and the economy didn't fall apart; if everyone is equal who will work labor intensive, dangerous, and/or difficult jobs. Who would want to be a farmer, an electrician, or a doctor if they'll get the same being a cashier or working any bluecollar job?

>>92398
>social pressure
I reject your social pressure and can provide for myself. What now you communist niggerfaggot?

>>92366
It's not a system that was designed with real observations and tests in mind.
It's pretty much like trying to write an entire operating system without ever debugging it and expecting it to work.

>>92420
You'll be forced to do what we say or leave the commune.
>>92418
Like I said he will work and due his duty and be happy with it or also be forced to leave.
>>92425
So it is an ideal system but just needs to be debug? Either that or the operating system or those who are under it need to just be re-educated to accept it.
>>92413
>>92416
>>92419
>>92415
Captalism in what makes us wage slaves anon! Not communism. Under communism you will not be cohered into doing anything by a government. A worker will do what is needed and what they want while the collective will do all the centralized planing.

>>92431
I can speak for the commune too and I say that ican learns it! Who died and made you king anyway.

>>92436
I am just one member of the commune obviously. All who are part of it must be in alignment with the views of of the commune and know the rules if they want to be part of the Utopia! If you want to join you must be in alignment with our views or we can help educate you more on them, which as of now you obviously hold different.

>>92438
>we can help educate
Who is we? Why are they the ones that are educating?

>>92438
So me, ivan, and demitri all feel you don't do enough around the commune and should take on our work also to help uphold the Utopia! For the glory of the party my brother

>>92438
You helped me realise that the political system I imaged is similar to communism though without money, and with traditional (fascist? similar to the system the native Americans had) values. Which begs the question would it work?!

>>92431
If the plan is to make the whole world part of the great Communist commune, then where would those you force to leave the commune go?

Since they can't technically leave unless they somehow leave the planet, what would you do with them? Be rid of them by other means such as the gun or locking them up in prisons until they learn to accept their permission and be forced to work for the commune? And how would a commune even work out if someone needed to be removed? Would they organise a meeting? If so then who organises it because they would therefore be classed as a leader and have a hierarchy over the rest of the commune, which can't happen in true Communism.

Also what about the relationship between a child and their parents? A child being told what to do by their parents would put them in a higher position of power, thus making them a hierarchy, which again isn't accepted in true Communism. Would you have to give the child equal rights to that of their parents from birth? What about teachers or doctors? Them telling you what to do in any way creates a hierarchy, which again isn't allowed.

It's OK I'm sure everyone will have looked at your name by now and know what's going on.

Let me tell you what "communists" are here… They are artists and drug users that don't have any skills, have no capacity to learn any skill and are self-entitled shitheads that live in mental retardation where everything should be supplied for them and electricity comes from wall outlet. Also these people go nuts and keep yelling to legalize all drugs and that police is enemy. Complete laalaalanders so to say.

Problem with whole communism thing is that it barely works on level where all efforts is towards basic survival. Anything else and it breaks apart as at that point there will be opinions about what is better that other. If you answer this with enforcing views then grats, you are a cult. On artists side where they have no useful skills whatsoever turn into communism after they blame everyone else for not buying their shitty art.

Baseline is those that run for communism are complete retards that yell at system and cannot produce anything of use. Ironically if it would be communism they would have lot harder time because you would actually need to work. I guess this all becomes down to that communists yell about existing system being shit, then magically wait others to leave that system to join theirs and like in pyramid scam, of course ones that thought idea wouldn't need to do anything only those that joined later.

And what i have observed murica version of these retards is quite much same.

Oh i forgot one part of whole communists hugbox… Philosophers, kinda like artists, except they blame everyone for not listening them and not buying their shitty books. Other distinct difference is that these retards constantly come up with so much bullshit that their head is inflated with methane and they keep jerking off their own self established superiority inside their skull, when in reality they are quite possibly ones that are most far away from reality. May use drugs or not.

>>92454
>>92465
like Leonardo.
why are you even using art?

>>92467
He was good enough at what he did to sell his art and make money though.

>>92468
But of course.
he wasn't rich tho'

Artists are underappreciated.

>>92469
True. He was someone who valued fame more than money.
He certainly wasn't a communist though.

>>92470
Also this.
I have great respect for artists. What I don't like are commies who blame their economic failure on society.

>>92471
>>92472
any comment on this:>>92450
lad?

>>92472
This:
>>92450

Imagine a world without money, can you?

>>92474
>>92475
>>92450
I'm not entirely sure what you mean, but if it did work it would have to rely on very strong, almost tribal cultural bonds to remain sustainable.
tbh it's midnight, and I'm not thinking straight, sorry.

>>92476
What would people use to buy shit?

>>92478
One need not buy, one's fellow clan shall provide that is if you diverse it.
>Need to think more
The benefits of not having money mean to usury, no kikery.

>>92483
darn
correction:
fellow clan Members…

How would you decide how much each individual could consume if you didn't judge them by the value of their labor and/or property?
If I could eat as many burgers as I wanted to without having to pay for it, I'd eat all of the burgers.

>>92366
Because there is nothing in the theory to prevent a bureaucratic class from replacing the capitalist class.

>>92492
Simple, If you not malnourished you only get one.

>>92495
>only one
REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE
[angry clapping]

If we as a community/tribe follow logic (that is wholesome logic which is not without emotion: the ability to tell right from wrong) with an understanding of natural law we'll make progress and truly be our own masters

>>92500
Exactly. weaklings step aside.

>>92501
Greed isn't synonymous with weakness, but I guess I see your point.
It'll take a lot of convincing to get everyone to cooperate though. You'd have to have very powerful cultural solidarity.

>>92502
Or very high powered rifles. Might makes right.

>>92442
The collective is we. Everyone.
>>92446
I would have to agree and the collective would need to indicate such to me. A few individuals is not enough.
>>92450
WELCOME COMRADE. Fascism is bad though because it makes classes think they are part of something greater to prolong the class struggle. That and it allows business and government to work together to cohere the working class!

Communism is idealized in our society which if anything is what I'm trying to prove in this thread. Most anons who are against it don't know why or are against it to be "edgy". I'll post my reasons for being against it later this week when I have the time to write a few pages on it.
>>92452
Bad goy.
>>92454
>>92465
>Problem with whole communism thing is that it barely works on level where all efforts is towards basic survival.
Not real communism
>Baseline is those that run for communism are complete retards that yell at system and cannot produce anything of use.
Source? I'd actually like this to btfo commies
>>92494
The system will end where a beurcoacy is not needed due to techonlogical advancements. The collective will be formed due to modern telecommunications.
>>92492
What you take you must give back to your comrades!

>>92507
>must
Who's to stop me from sitting on my ass and eating burgers all day, only doing the bare minimum at work? The government?

>>92507
>The system will end where a beurcoacy is not needed due to techonlogical advancements. The collective will be formed due to modern telecommunications.

And what is going to make the bureaucracy step down?

>>92507
Basically, commies never can answer to actual questions about their systems inner workings. Just ask them anything that may need some kind of actual knowledge about infrastructure. For example how do logistics work in their system. On every level from warehouse coordination to traffic flow management and so on… Electricity? Water?

And if their answer is that it's small communes then i just laugh at their face because what they initially are going for is cult style commune, like amish settlement or jonestown. That's about level of society those type of people can plan for. So to say, it's pointless to argue with commies about communism and usually easier way is to just show them they are fucking stupid by going through subjects other than politics and other philosophical waste.

>>92511
>beurcoacy is not needed due to techonlogical advancements. The collective will be formed due to modern telecommunications.
AI singularity when?

>>92502
I was referring to people who are weak of mind because in the system I envisioned, basically its one big DIY, you want a house; excellent, now you ether need to make the blue prints yourself and get to work building with help from the community or not (its really up to you) or get a clan member who is a specials to help you out with the blue prints.
Best part about my system is that there will be no sloth, no usury, no cucks, just you your fellow member of the community and the land (and of course other Goys who are to wimpy or lazy to join).

>>92514
Sure if we reached the singularity then yeah communism could work, but as of now we do not have that kind of technology.

Communism assumes people are angelic rather than animals.
Why contribute effort when you can just take what others have?

>>92517
And then we could redpill the AI overlord to jump straight towards a fascist system, since it'll function with mechanical rationality.

>>92519
Yeah, and kill us.
seriously AI is Satan.
Do we really want a race of hive-mind robots.

>>92521
See >>92388 >>92393 >>92382
I do get your point though. AI is some seriously spooky shit.

>>92509
The commune will make you leave if you are not willing to make scarifies for it. But you would be surely?
>>92512
>For example how do logistics work in their system. On every level from warehouse coordination to traffic flow management and so on… Electricity? Water?
Automated or centrally planned. Find people who like it and then do it. If you mean in real life then a few of the communists I know knew more like it, their in jail atm were electricians.
>>92518
>Communism assumes people are angelic rather than animals.
No it assumes we can collectively mold people to the will through collectivism and peer pressure. You will take take without giving back if you've always given back after taking.

>>92526
Automated and centrally planned are both magic words used by consultants, not by civil engineers. How much throughput does it have, how much upkeep it requires, what type of goods and how much it can hold? What are transportation capacity leading to it (Roads, railroads). How well does it accommodate growth? Does it have life-cycle planning or is it constantly maintained?

Where does that automation come from, how does it work? You need shitton of engineering to design automated multi-use warehouse. Not taking into account producing such automation system. Electricians are borderline basic maintenance as it would be quite complex system so it pretty much would need engineers to maintain.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IoY3tP-Iw4Q

>>92526
>will make you leave
Leave to where? And who at who's discretion is someone driven out?

>>92366
Well let me just give you my view on communism;
Syntheses: We are not ready for communism yet.

For the sake of argumentation, let us suppose that you now own a working communist society; In this society the people work for the sake of the people and stick together to overcome obstacles.
The population is happy and balanced as everyone is humble enough to think of others before themselves.

Now the issues..

First, everyone has unique needs so the government or those in charge of sharing both food and housing will have to take this into account when giving people their share.
If this is done incorrectly the people would be unhappy and you don't want people unhappy on a communist country, a bad apple spoils the whole bunch; Killing the unhappy people is inhumane and will only lead o further problems.
It is also worth to note that giving special treatment to unique individuals might work on small scale but it's really hard to pull out on a big scale.

Another problem is, jobs are also not equal, workers at a construction site might feel a little annoyed that they get exactly the same benefits as the dude who sits on the computer redacting text.

Since this is communism, there's no money, this is good because people can get whatever they want, the bad thing is, the country has to import these goods and for that they need some massive amounts of money, the production must be really high for this to actually work.

And there's another thing, it would be highly unlikely that our population could be re-educated to be able to endure a communist regime, not only we are used to capitalism but it is our nature as humans to compete with each other and to try and get more than everyone else, for communism to work this mentality would need to be corrected as competition would only lead to disaster.

But let's say you managed to address all these problems, the society is working, everyone gets what they want and everyone is working happily.
This is good, yet bad at the same time, if everyone gets what they want they will get bored.
Boredom is an interesting thing because it pushes you to try new things, you could end up with a population full of artists and cultured people which would be great!
Or you could end up with a population that has lost motivation and sees no point in life; You cannot really control this, an existential crisis might arrive at any given moment and screw up unknown numbers of persons at once, worst thing is, it spreads like a plague, one sad person pushes the others down and so on, like I said before one bad apple spoils the whole bunch.
Of course there will be people with enough willpower to resist the crisis effect, but would they be enough to sustain the whole country?

And on the other hand, if you do also someway treat the existential crisis, happy people usually want children, if you let them have too many you get a baby boom that will prolly crash your country if people don't produce as much as they expend.
If you don't allow babies, you could end up with more problems.

If you manage the baby problem, you could end up with a behavioral sink problem.
If you convince enough children or adults or whatever to leave the country..
Well then it could work, some bad things might happen but they are unlikely, of course you will have sad people outside of your Utopia maintaining contact with your population, but well, Utopia is not for everyone.

These are my concerns with communism.
I see it as something that would work on a post-human civilization but not right now, we are not made to do this shit.

>>92366
It’s fubdemebtally based upon a lie, the idea all men are created equal and society is responsible for difference in station.
This is the same fundamental problem all forms of liberalism, including libertarianism, republicanism and parliamentarianism have.
Men are not equal, genetics proves this. All modern societies are founded on everyone being ultimately the same in capacity but this just isn’t true, and so when they struggle and collapse it is no surprise.

Just embrace National Socialism as the only ideology founded on the truth already.

>>92628
Oi, don't be disrespecting the Gadsden flag.

>>92366
most people aren't collectivists, most people don't care about others, most people aren't hard working by merit alone, and most people aren't altruistic. Pushing for communism, whether through a government or through a commune, is itself an admission of the shortcomings of the idealistic humanism of communism. If all or even most people were interested in the greater good they could through volunteering, charity, and donations all the goals of communism/socialism/marxism could be accomplished. Communism attempts to use peer pressure and other such things to force people to work for the greater good because it on some level recognizes that it goes against human nature.

It's fundamentally based on the lie that there are only two classes in this world, the poor oppressed poor and the evil rich. It says to hate the rich so much you call them boguoise, which is how the french say bogus.

All jokes aside, Communism claims that if poor people "Throw off their shackles" and eat the rich, they can go on living in peace.

…But there are more than two classes. In a world without rich assholes, just workers kept on the same level… who enforces the law? Who enforces the artifical "Equality"? The government, of course, and its untouchable bureaucrats and jackbooted enforcers. If you join the government as a soldier of "Equality", you get to live a higher quality of life than a normal worker, your new job is to "Keep the peace" and beat up anyone who commits thoughtcrime. Meanwhile, your superiors can do whatever the fuck they want with their new absolute unquestionable power, because to question people in The People's Republic of Communist Liberica is to question communism itself.

Communism uses the "We're gonna go eat the rich and live happily ever after!" lie to gain power over you. And once it has power over you, it does "Whatever needs to be done" to keep itself functioning, even if that's purging all the useful idiots who were alive when we weren't communist, purging all the disabled and lazy, sending anyone who refuses to work to work-camps where you can work or die, and so on.

Communism calls itself good. Only a non-communist can see it for what it really is, and only a non-communist can't.

Anyone that likes communism is either retarded or dangerously retarded, and I know I'll just validate the gommie victim complexes by posting this. But I feel it needs to be said, so I'm speaking out against communism and answering the obvious bait question unironically.

Communists deserve free helicopter rides, and that's the only free thing paid for on the taxpayer's dime they deserve.

>>92366
Communism doesn't even work on a theoretical level because even in a vacuum people are still going to be motivated by reward, which communism doesn't provide. If anything it disincentivizes hard work, and rewards laziness. People under any system will naturally seek out the greatest reward for the smallest possible effort. Communism is a system under which it is more rewarding to do less work, so you will always end up with far more consumers than producers. Here is a simple hypothetical which demonstrates this principle:

Let's imagine that you have a commune. It has a farm where food is grown for everyone, and a well for water. Everyone gets their own shitty wooden hut and their own pile of straw to sleep on. Everyone gets an equal share of whatever food is grown on the farm, and an equal share of whatever water is drawn up from the well. There is a minimum ration that everyone is entitled to regardless of work; however, if the commune produces enough food to provide an extra ration for someone, it will go to the person who has the greatest need. If the commune produces less food than would be required to provide even the minimum ration, everyone in the commune goes hungry because that's just how it is. Let's say that right now, everyone does just enough work for the commune to produce the minimum ration for everyone.

Now imagine that I am a young, healthy, physically able guy who works in the field all day, and my neighbor is old and sick and can't work. We both get the same food and water ration, and we both get the same type of hut and straw pile. Let's also assume that everyone else who works will always do the same amount of work regardless of my actions.

If I work at absolute max capacity, the commune will produce enough food for an extra ration. However, I will also burn more energy than the other workers. I could reasonably argue at that point that because I work harder and burn more calories, I have a greater need for food, so I should get the extra ration. I could also reasonably argue that since the commune produced the extra food because I worked harder, it could afford to give me the extra ration without anyone else getting a smaller ration. However, as I am arguing this, my old, sick, feeble neighbor pipes up and says that because he is old and sick, his need is greater than mine, so he should be the one to get the extra ration. The commune naturally agrees, and the extra food goes to the one person on the commune who didn't do anything to help create it.

Since I work harder than everyone else and still get the basic ration, I am now hungrier than the other people on the commune. As such, I decide to slow my pace until soon I am doing much LESS work than everyone else on the commune. This is more energy efficient for me, since I now require less food than everyone else, but still get the same ration I would otherwise. The result, however, is that the commune now produces less food than it did even when I just did the same amount of work as everyone else, let alone when I worked harder. Now there is not only no extra ration, there is not enough food to produce the minimum ration, which means everyone on the commune gets less food because of my actions.

Because rations are now smaller, my old, sick, feeble neighbor who got the extra ration when I worked harder now has less food to live on than he needs. As a result, he soon dies of malnutrition. With him gone, the commune is now producing enough food for everyone in the village to have the minimum ration again. Also, since he obviously won't be needing his hut and straw pile anymore, the straw is divided evenly among everyone else, and his hut is dismantled and the pieces are used for repairs on whatever huts need it most. I just happened to be lucky enough to have the leakiest roof in the commune, so I get a piece of his roof.

So in summation, when I did more work, my old sick neighbor got an extra ration for free while I became hungrier. When I did less work, my old sick neighbor died, and I ended up with the same amount of food I had to begin with, plus I got some extra straw and my leaky roof fixed. I just profited from being lazy.

>>92380
You'd still have your property; you just wouldn't be able to create social hierarchy with it. Communists don't dislike you owning your toothbrush; they dislike it when you try to use land and factory equipment to tell other people what to do and squeeze surplus value out of them. In short: we don't like social classes; we hate the boss-worker relationship.

Simply put: communists hate private property, not personal property. Private property is property used to exploit people or create social hierarchy whereas personal property is not used to exploit people nor create social hierarchy.

>>92677
I have two words for you: positive incentive.

>>92638
>communism
>government
Communism is stateless, classless, moneyless, and the means of production are publicly owned and managed.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTS0A-ZN3os

>>92637
There is no such thing as a universal human nature, only human behavior, which changes depending on the environment. So this isn't really for you to say. But, regardless, altruism is not incompatible with self-interest. I suggest reading Max Stirner's "The Unique and Its Property"/"The Ego and His Own". Essentially, we help people because we like to help people and we usually help people when there's little to no negative consequence in doing so assuming we haven't been conditioned to not help. We are even more likely to help people when positive incentives are given.

>>92638
>Communists hate the rich

W r o n g
We hate material hierarchy. It has nothing to do with how much money you make; it's about your relationship to the means of production.

>>92375
Nobody would force you to share in communism — well, sans maybe the means of production, which would be publicly managed and owned, ran through direct democracy. You'd still be able to own stuff; you just wouldn't be able to create hierarchies with your stuff. We create a very important distinction between personal property and private property here. Private property is property used to create social hierarchy and personal property is property that is not used to create social hierarchy.

>>94240
>There is no such thing as a universal human nature, only human behavior, which changes depending on the environment.

Bullshit
There are constants in human behavior regardless of the environment.

1. Men will try to understand and influence/control their surroundings (this includes other men).

2. Men care more about their own needs and the needs of their loved ones than the needs of the community/society/nation at large.

3. Men will form hierarchies and they will attempt to reach higher positions within those hierarchies.

4. Men have a preference for men similar to themselves.

5. Men have a need for social interaction, social approval, and need to have a place within the society at large.

>>94268
>1. Men will try to understand and influence/control their surroundings

I don't see this happening much in modern society, except among a select few.

>(this includes other men).
I disagree.

>2. Men care more about their own needs and the needs of their loved ones than the needs of the community/society/nation at large.
>3. Men will form hierarchies and they will attempt to reach higher positions within those hierarchies.

These are inherently contradictory statements because hierarchy suppresses the wills of the ego to conform to accruing more power instead of actualizing its less power-hungry desires. Self-interest and hierarchy are inherently contradictory (Max Stirner: The Unique and Its Property).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l4xc6oRcDtQ

But, even furthermore, if it is within human nature to form hierarchies, then it follows that atheists and anarchists aren't human.

Ah, good, then they'd be against hierarchies as they suppress their ego's will (Max Stirner: The Unique And Its Property)


>4. Men have a preference for men similar to themselves.

Humans are also curious and will pursue people different from themselves if not made afraid by propaganda.

>5. Men have a need for social interaction, social approval, and need to have a place within the society at large.

Except sociopaths. Sociopaths aren't human, right?

>>94234
See, that's stupid though. How do you determine the difference between private and personal property? What constitutes a "social hierarchy"?

As thrilling as it is to know I'd be able to have a toothbrush of my very own under your utopian system, I'm more concerned about land and home ownership. Would I be able to have a house of my own, existing on a plot of land that belongs to me, that I could put a fence around and tell people to get the fuck off of if I don't want them on it? If not, then I have a problem with your system, no matter what other "benefits" it offers.

In general I don't particularly like interacting with people, I'm not social, and the idea of having to live under a cooperative system where every decision is some kind of democratic deliberative process that everyone is involved in just infuriates me. I don't particularly believe in hell, but if I had to write a description of it, it would be a place where everything is collectively shared and you have no ability to put up a barrier between yourself and strangers.

As far as work goes, I would much rather just find a job, be assigned work by a boss, do the work I'm assigned, collect my pay, and spend it on whatever I need or want. I don't care what everyone else gets or what everyone else has to do, I just want to be able to focus on getting my own work done and getting paid. See, the reason the whole boss/worker relationship exists in the first place is because it's practical and functional. Someone with capital, an idea and a business plan starts a business, hires individuals with specific skill sets to perform the work he needs in order for his business to function, pays them accordingly, and keeps whatever profits his business generates. I don't care if he makes significantly more than I do off of the product I helped him create; I'm not interested in owning the final product, since I don't have the resources or the patience to try to market it myself, so it would be useless to me. As long as I feel I'm paid fairly for the work I do I'm satisfied, and if I'm not satisfied I can go find another job. I honestly don't see what aspect of this arrangement you people see as "exploitative" or "unfair".

>>94235
You'll have to expand upon that a bit if you want a proper response. In the example I gave, the positive incentive is simply to have enough to eat, which as I demonstrated could be easily accomplished by gaming the system with little to no work. The sick, feeble guy basically gets rewarded for doing nothing, up until the point where I let him die. The point communists always seem to fail to grasp is that there is a difference between personal incentive and group incentive. Personal incentive is if I do something, I get X reward (you know, kind of like a factory owner hiring a guy and paying him to work in his factory). Group incentive is if the group does something, the group gets X reward. If it's assumed every member of the group gets to share in the reward regardless of effort, there is a personal incentive to do nothing and simply sponge off the group. This goes double if the group is not something you personally feel connected to or care about, as would be the situation for me if I was living under communism, since I would never join a commune unless there was literally no other choice.

>>94295
>I don't see this happening much in modern society, except among a select few.

Because people are given explanations to understand their society. As a species this is something we do and we use everything from science to mythology to understand our surroundings and we use everything from engineering to psychology to prayer to witchcraft to try and influence our surroundings.

>These are inherently contradictory statements because hierarchy suppresses the wills of the ego to conform to accruing more power instead of actualizing its less power-hungry desires. Self-interest and hierarchy are inherently contradictory.

No they are not. If being higher position in the social hierachy grants you more resources (say food or women for example) then it is absolutely in your interests to be higher up on the social ladder.

>Humans are also curious and will pursue people different from themselves if not made afraid by propaganda.

Sure people are curious but they prefer people more like them.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/result-of-a-new-dna-study-proves-that-friends-can-be-genetically-related-scientists-argue-9605751.html
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2605633/White-babies-just-15-months-old-racial-bias-picking-playmates-study-found.html
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kin_selection

Babies do this, children do this (see the average lunchroom blacks sit with blacks, whites with whites, ect) This is clearly a preference. I don't think it has anything to do with fear or propaganda.

>Except sociopaths. Sociopaths aren't human, right?
Even sociopaths to some extent. Look at what "The hole" in alcatraz did to prisoners.

>>94318
>No they are not. If being higher position in the social hierachy grants you more resources (say food or women for example) then it is absolutely in your interests to be higher up on the social ladder.
Social hierarchies also form more or less naturally due to people gravitating toward whatever position they feel most comfortable in depending on their nature. Some people are born leaders, some people are born followers. The people who want to be in charge tend to wind up in charge, and people who just want to worry about their own problems and let someone else handle the management of a project tend to be fine with that.

Social hierarchy is a completely natural process that communism makes it a stated goal to interfere with.

>>94240
>which changes depending on the environment
>altruism is not incompatible with self-interest
>we help people because we like to help people
baseless assertions. In the first place there is no "human nature" humans are animals nothing more they act based on their genetics and memetics. I'm personally interested in being Alturistic, that's what I want to do, therefor self-interest.

>>94240
>There is no such thing as a universal human nature, only human behavior, which changes depending on the environment.
citation needed.

>Essentially, we help people because we like to help people and we usually help people when there's little to no negative consequence in doing so assuming we haven't been conditioned to not help
Not true. I live in a city that is crawling with homeless people, and I don't give two shits about any of them. I can't go anywhere without some bum asking me for change, and I generally walk right past them without even acknowledging their presence. If you told me one of them froze to death last night because I wouldn't give him the change in my pocket, I wouldn't give a shit and would forget about it in five minutes.

>We are even more likely to help people when positive incentives are given.
This is true in the sense that if you gave me an incentive to help I would help, however I would not help out of a sense of duty or altruism, I would help because I wanted the reward. If you paid me $5 for every bit of change I give to a homeless person, I would take the five dollars, break it into change, keep a bit of it, and then give the rest away in handfuls for five dollars apiece, then break up the profits as before and do the same thing again.

Under this arrangement I could probably quit my job and just stand in the street for eight hours a day, throwing change at homeless people and collecting five dollar bills from you; however, my attitude would be the same whether you're paying me to help the homeless or set them on fire. I literally don't give a shit about anything but the five dollars.

>>92366
Communism is bad because it is association by coercion

>>92366
Because communism is an inherently flawed, and broken system, and it is certainly not something upon which proper societal values can be founded upon. It's a corrupt system who's only goal is to coerce people to "rise up" and tear down all structure and order around themselves and to revel in raw anarchy and chaos. Commies drone on "freedom" and "equality", but what they really desire is a world utterly devoid of soul. A world where basic fucking empathy and humanity is crushed into nothing. A wo4ld of raw hedonism and spiritual rot, a world utterly void of Christian moral fibers. In short; Communism is the death of self, of the true freedom of being a good person willing to defend their own nation with their own strength of will. It is the death of the moral structures that hold everything together, thus ushering in the flooding tides of degeneracy that inevitably destroy everything true and pure, everything once considered to be fundamental aspects of Man.

Communism is, in truth, the destruction of Meaning.

>>92366
As a sort of pseudo anarchist I detest governments telling me what I can and can't do with my life and or property. If I were to make a product say a wooden chair, then who the fuck is the government to tell me that said chair is not mine? I put in all the effort, time and resources into making said chair so why the fuck would I let anyone else use it without me getting something in return?

tldr less government is best and fuck power hungry nut jobs who need to impose their will over others.

Communism isn't about sharing, either in theory or in practice. It's about abolishing private property entirely. And no, this doesn't work as either an economic or social model.

>>94256
I'm going to describe how that breaks down very easily.

>Be a guy
>Work a field, because why not, you're man enough
>All the tools are provided in a communal shed
>Alright.jpg

>Some chick comes along
>Borrows a tool you don't currently need, so you don't stop her

>Months go by
>Shit, where's that tool? It's owned by the commune! Anybody could have it!
>Can't harvest field without that tool
>Turns out chick broke it, told no one, and no one knows the chick did it because there's no accountability when everyone is equally powerful
>No arbitrators to manage this situation

>Crops die in the field, man starves
>Hashtag real communism