Communism

[Malchik]

There is nothing wrong with Communism as an ideology. All the posts above, mine included, point out that it is impractical for a variety of reasons but they all boil down to the fact that human beings are not altruistic. 'Why should I work to help you, if you do not work to help me?'

 

This is nothing to do with the Communist ideals where people do behave like that without envy, jealousy etc. etc. Of course it cannot work but on a scale of evils which attitude is worse?

 

Except in circumstances where people have no choice, no one does any action that is not motivated by themselves - for whatever reason. Even saints only do what they want to do. This is inevitable and cannot be changed. What could be changed is the perception that measurement of one person against another is a valid way of looking at the benefit of either to scoiety as a whole.

 

The idea is that everyone would become equally poor under communism is equally nonsense because it also ignores human nature. Those who are better off will want to be better off no matter that others are riding on their coat tails. Which is worse, sharing your cake with wastrels or having nothing to eat at all?

 

In a nutshell:-

 

Communism = selflessness. Impractical but certainly not evil.

 

Capitalism = selfishness. Ultimately self-destructive and at least unintentionally evil.

 

Something between the two is the ONLY way forward.

[draighox]

There is nothing wrong with Communism as an ideology.

But there is. Communism takes goods from the more efficient and gives it to the less efficient, as I said. That way, the more efficient must work to support themselves and the less efficient. That's exploitation.

 

The idea is that everyone would become equally poor under communism is equally nonsense because it also ignores human nature. Those who are better off will want to be better off no matter that others are riding on their coat tails. Which is worse, sharing your cake with wastrels or having nothing to eat at all?

You get the same whether you work or not.

 

Imagine, there is a communist community of 1,000,000 members. All of them produce food. The average ammount of food, each member produces, is 100 food units. Imagine, there is a person, who produces 200 food units. When the food is grown, his food is taken (as everyone's else) and everything is devided equally. The farmer would get 100 food, because it is the average.

 

So, the farmer had produced 200 food, and 100 was taken from him. Next time, he produces only 50 food. Everyone else produces the same ammount. Last time the complete production was 100 * 1,000,000 = 100,000,000 food. This time it is 100 * 1,000,000 - 150 = 99999850. The average is 99.99985. So the farmer didn't lose anything.

[Abramul]

So, draighox's point is this: Communism protects from local production shortcomings by spreading surplusses around.

 

While one person (or more likely, region) may overproduce one year, and underproduce the next, the shortage or surplus is made up for or makes up for the surplus or shortage of the rest of the community.

[draighox]

The farmer won't produce 200 anymore. And more and more people will act like him. The community will degrade, but everyone will be equal.

[Malchik]

Under the communist ideology everyone puts in as much effort as they are able to do. Those who are less efficient are like it because they are inexperienced, old, ill or disabled not because they are lazy or unwilling to work.

 

Your arguments against the operation of communism are the same as mine. It cannot work because human beings are not altruistic enough to let it work. The ideology itself is not evil.

[draighox]

Even if humans were altruistic, it would be the same, because there's tiredness. OK, say, you work as hard as you can, but without motivation you'll lose your work pace unintentionally. One evening you'll think - oh, what a heck, I need a rest. Then you'll get tired again someday, and again later, and eventually you'll stop working as you were. Motivation is essential.

 

And another thing - even if person gives in to the exploitation willingly, it's still exploitation.

[Abramul]

One big mistake Russia made was the abolition of religion. Religion is able to provide motivation with only a small investment (personnel, facilities) from the rest of society.

 

Even if it was determined to be a threat to society, they would have done better to gradually phase it out, as is being done in the US.

[Malchik]

Of course motivation is essential. In communist ideology the motivation is for the good of mankind at large. It supposes that you care to help everyone, as they are equally helping you.

 

I don't dispute much of what you are saying but your argumants are arguments against the inevitable frailty of human beings not the communist ideology as it is envisioned by idealists. The same basis of helping others no matter the cost to yourself also underpins most world religions but that is not a debate we can have on these forums. By all means PM me on it if you wish.

 

Theta's point, if I do not misinterpret her, is that external circumstances may force a change in attitude of human beings for the sake of survival.

[draighox]

OK, if we are talking about humans who don't adjust to living conditions, my argument about losing working pace doesn't work.

 

But the exploitation remains and it proves that communism is evil even on paper with ideal humans (though these aren't humans).

[Abramul]

No, it doesn't prove it is evil, unless any other system (such as capitalism) is also evil.