ask Santa.
Since this is interesting…
-
I must agree with mini phreek. Besides, it isn’t often that those who work the hardest are rewarded greatest; do you think a company owner sitting in his office day dreaming about what he could do with his millions since daddy died leaving him the company makes more than say a member of the lowly prolitariat? Communism can work because it takes those that do know how to work (the prolitariat) and puts them in charge of running things.
-
make any excuse you want…greed is acquired, in any kind of society…communism would be NO different.
And that person who inherits “daddy’s” money will not keep that money forever…complacency eventually leads to losing all of your money. money runs out you know.
and people who become very rich weren’t exactly born with it…it is a combination of greed, hard work and luck at times.
-
Well written mini phreek. However, your answer does leave a few holes that Horten was able to attack upon. So I will provide the necessary information to cover the two major topics in this forum: “Greed” and “Laziness”
But communism motivates the people to become lazy and motivates the productive to seek their fortunes elsewhere!
As for ‘lazy,’ it is a contention that everybody is somewhat of a procrastinator. When we are born, we usually want to do our own thing whenever we want to. But, as an essential part of indoctrination (condition was phreek said), that we begin to love work. Yes but work without any rewards?
"It’s an article of faith for most of us that rewards promote better performance.
But a growing body of research suggests that this law is not nearly as ironclad as was once thought. Psychologists have been finding that rewards can lower performance levels, especially when the performance involves creativity. A related series of studies shows that intrinsic interest in a task - the sense that something is worth doing for its own sake - typically declines when someone is rewarded for doing it.If a reward - money, awards, or winning a contest - comes to be seen as the reason one is engaging in an activity, that activity will be viewed as less enjoyable in its own right.
With the exception of some behaviorists who doubt the very existence of intrinsic motivation, these conclusions are now widely accepted among psychologists. Taken together, they suggest we may unwittingly be squelching interest and discouraging innovation among workers, students and artists.
The recognition that rewards can have counter-productive effects is based on a variety of studies, which have come up with such findings as these: Young children who are rewarded for drawing are less likely to draw on their own that are children who draw just for the fun of it. Teenagers offered rewards for playing word games enjoy the games less and do not do as well as those who play with no rewards. Employees who are praised for meeting a manager’s expectations suffer a drop in motivation." - Boston Globe
It’s not that socialism and communism offer no motivation to be productive; it’s a combination of two factors – we still need a lot of stuff done by people, that virtually nobody would want to do (i.e. toilet cleaning), and our society is configured to discourage human self-actualization in Maslowian sense. However, if you look at one large subculture – Free Software – you will see an example of culture that works on just those principles. Such a structure cannot be universalized yet, but it may very well be a glimpse of things to come in a communist society.
Never before have we had so little time in which to do so much
[ This Message was edited by: TG Moses VI on 2002-04-11 00:16 ]
-
I believe that greed comes more naturally than generosity. Even in these tribes cooperation is born out of a sense of self. If it is in a person’s best interest to cooperate he will do so. If he benefits more by lies and deceit this is the path he will follow unless he has been taught as a child the value of honesty and helping people if for no other reason than it’s “the right thing to do”.
-
It’s all very clear to the objective observer - we live also in a society in which the best interests of the existing members are served by perpetuating the ‘work ethic’ of production. However, is this much production really needed? Time for the next counteroffensive…
Exactly what am I supposed to be producing, and for whom?
The only reason in the world that we need so much production is that we have so much consumption. Most of the work done in today’s society is unecessary, pointless, and serves only the vanity or greed of others. We are obsessed with our perfect homes, cars, furniture, restaurants, electronic gadgets, vacations, and all that other needless consumer goods. Why shouldn’t we? After all aren’t we brought up to embrace those principles in a capitalist society? If everyone followed the old Marxist slogan “from each according to their abilities, to each according to their needs,” meaning that people will have reached discipline enough to work for the good of society, we will take what we need, but not so much as there could be someone else who needs it more. Most of the ‘production’ that good capitalists want us to accomplish would be suddenly rendered moot. If what tal said is correct, that we aquire greed naturally, then it is capitalism that accelerates and magnifies these vanities? Absoultely.
"If he benefits more by lies and deceit this is the path he will follow unless he has been taught as a child the value of honesty and helping people if for no other reason than it’s “the right thing to do.”
Exactly. That is exactly why it is up to Communists to educated the next generation that will live in a world true of communism. That is why education is one of the top priorities. “Education is a fundamental right, and must be provided free of charge to all who are interested and able. Teaching is a critical skill in any society; let us return teaching to its proper place of honor and respect…” Another problem we see today is a clear disrespect for teachers in general. Though teachers teach merely for the sake of teaching (read my previous post on rewards), a teacher’s income is often laughed upon by students and adults alike. It is often precieved teaching as being a ‘waste.’ However in communism this certainly wouldn’t be the case.
“Even in these tribes cooperation is born out of a sense of self. If it is in a person’s best interest to cooperate he will do so.”
This may be true (I’ll get in tribes later). However, isn’t this more of an argument more in favor of communism? In Capitalism you try and get ahead of other people, under Socialism and later Communism we all get ahead together. Now shouldn’t the later be more acceptable by a tribe to cooperate one another? What provides more of the inspiration: for only one to benefit or for all to do so?
This is the problem of clear capitalistic brainwashing. People are becoming too concerned with their own selves to care about anybody else.
Never before have we had so little time in which to do so much
[ This Message was edited by: TG Moses VI on 2002-04-09 22:43 ]
-
"I will now try to deal with a few objections people generally bring against communism. Some people have a terror of being loafed upon. I don’t see why this should be considered a great obstacle; if sufficient care be exercised in formation, loafers could be excluded.
Nordhoff Hind’s Histories of American Communities states, ‘How do you manage with lazy people? But there are no idlers in a commune; I conclude that men are not naturally idle. Even the winter shakers, - the shiftless fellows who, as cold weather approaches, take refuge in shaker and other communities, professing a desire to become members, who come at the beginning of winter, as a shaker elder said to me, with empty stomachs and empty trunks, and go off with both full as soon as the roses begin to bloom, - even these poor succumb to the systematic and orderly rules of the place, and do their share of work without shrinking, until the mild spring sun tempts them to a freer life.’
I am inclined to suspect that it is the fear of not being able to loaf on others that deters many from even contemplating the communistic question. From what I myself have been able to observe of life amongst the North American Indian, the Maories, and even the Australian aborigines, I find loafing is seldom a source of trouble. Of course, these people have only adopted a very crude form of communism; yet I do not hesitate to say, that these people enjoy more of the privileges of life than do one fourth of the civilised world: they never had to (before the advent of the whites) depend on charity." - Voluntary Communism,
Robert Beattie -
still, you are side-stepping your way around the point that the existance of laziness itself kills any “ideal” system. everything is acquired, besides desire. desire keeps you alive, desire to eat…to sleep. how about desire to eat more? greed is born, and even selfishness (since you were a baby crying for everything you want.)
Communism will not kill that. instead, communism will be affected by this acquired greed and selfishness, and will serve no one but the ones in power.
that you cannot debate…or can you?
-
your missing the point Horton.
there is no one in complete control the system is called the soviet were you have one rep. from each work place in a community to make a council, this council acts as the managment for the entire community.
the reps are elected by the workers of there workplace and subject to recal at ANY TIME.
the council is run by a rep that is elected by the council and subject to recal at any time. this exsecutive rep is in contact with the other ex reps from all the other communitys this makes up the goverment.this idea is to have every one have a say in the way the nation is run.
in words of Vladamir Lennin “if everyones a buerocrat then nobody is a buerocrat”all the problems of our world could be soved so vary simply.
you could eliminate unimployment and poverty in one move
you rase the wages by 4 and cut the workweek in half this creats a labour shortage providing imployment for the unimployed. and with more people working and spending. it stimulats the economy.
we can eliminate homelessness simple by building houses just like weve allways done only now it’s a priorty not an after thought
and with people working only half the amount they have the time to learn on there own.
you will begin to see an influx of culture.this would probably take time but it is very posible to do.
now i just want you to open your mind to the consept that there might is a beter system out there then what we got
-
Want to eat more? Well this is true. However it’s more of a double edged sword against Capitalism. Did you know if America really wanted to feed the world, it could? The American breadbasket by far has enough fertile soil and the means to produce foodstuffs and more for the whole world. So why don’t we? Easy, capitalism. You see by over producing, American gain prices would drop due to low prices and overproduction.
This was widely apparent during the Great Depression. Did you know that several million squealing pigs were purchased and slaughtered by the Agricultural Adjustment Administration to set up artificial scarcity and establish parity prices? Farmers were forced to plow under young plants, reduce crop acreage, and destroy their own crops. All of this during the depression when people were straving? As you can see, this is capitalism at its worse.
Besides, you always heard of the expression that we’re spoiling kids, right? That kids nowadays have it much better off than their parents did blah blah blah… This is also a byproduct of capitalism. By expecting children to achieve more and to have this “perfect lifestyle,” it inevitably makes children desire more.
Remember in communism we have, “Do more with less.” If everyone followed the old Marxist slogan “from each according to their abilities, to each according to their needs,” meaning that people will have reached discipline enough to work for the good of society, we will take only what we need.
Now it’s not to say communism is perfect. There are still some kinks to be worked out. The Communist Manifesto was written over 100 years ago! However, communism offers a better solution than capitalism. Case in point?
Supposing you don’t buy the argument that a person’s environment determines his nature. Well whats to say greed in communism is bad? In some Native American cultures an extremely greedy and self-centered act would be to give all of his belongings away. In a different case among the tribes of the South Pacific Islands like Oceania (sp) there is not word for “I” in their language; there is only “We.”
Never before have we had so little time in which to do so much
[ This Message was edited by: TG Moses VI on 2002-04-11 00:14 ]
-
Now that me and Mini Phreek have defended our principles regarding Communism (though not everybody will buy these explanations…), I feel it is time to instead go on the offensive. Yes, in a great counteroffensive not unseen since Stalingrad, the true Communists will rise again.
First on the list is capitalism and it’s economic system.
"Capitalism is presently in crisis. Western economies have been in slump since March 2001. Everywhere we see layoffs, closures, cutbacks and shortage, and yet only 1 year ago all the pundits were praising the virtues of the economy. A thinking member of the working class can be left with only one conclusion - the capitalists do not understand their own system.
Since its very birth capitalism has gone through booms and catastrophic slumps, and yet in not one university economics textbook will you find an explanation for this phenomenon. Every slump is seen to be the result of certain “special” conditions, a failure of the stock exchange, not enough credit, too much debt, inflation, deflation, lack of oil, lack of “confidence”, etc., etc., etc., and the current slump will undoubtedly be blamed on terrorism. None of these excuses get to the root of the problem - the capitalist mode of production.
The basic contradiction within capitalism is that it produces more goods than can be sold at a profit. This is the famous crisis of overproduction. To use capitalist language, supply outstrips demand. Of course this is a very narrow definition of the word “demand”. There still exists a huge demand for houses for the homeless, or food for the hungry, or medicine for the sick - but for a capitalist, demand only means anything if it is backed up with hard cash. Capitalism gets itself in this mess because it produces for profit and not for need." - YIS
How do you defend these claims?
-
I understand I am hammering away at Communism that glorifying capitalism…It is just that capitalism is the current working system. now let’s get to that quote of yours.
""Capitalism is presently in crisis. Western economies have been in slump since March 2001. Everywhere we see layoffs, closures, cutbacks and shortage, and yet only 1 year ago all the pundits were praising the virtues of the economy. A thinking member of the working class can be left with only one conclusion - the capitalists do not understand their own system.
Since its very birth capitalism has gone through booms and catastrophic slumps, and yet in not one university economics textbook will you find an explanation for this phenomenon. Every slump is seen to be the result of certain “special” conditions, a failure of the stock exchange, not enough credit, too much debt, inflation, deflation, lack of oil, lack of “confidence”, etc., etc., etc., and the current slump will undoubtedly be blamed on terrorism. None of these excuses get to the root of the problem - the capitalist mode of production.
The basic contradiction within capitalism is that it produces more goods than can be sold at a profit. This is the famous crisis of overproduction. To use capitalist language, supply outstrips demand. Of course this is a very narrow definition of the word “demand”. There still exists a huge demand for houses for the homeless, or food for the hungry, or medicine for the sick - but for a capitalist, demand only means anything if it is backed up with hard cash. Capitalism gets itself in this mess because it produces for profit and not for need." - YIS "
"Capitalism is presently in crisis. Western economies have been in slump since March 2001. Everywhere we see layoffs, closures, cutbacks and shortage, and yet only 1 year ago all the pundits were praising the virtues of the economy. A thinking member of the working class can be left with only one conclusion - the capitalists do not understand their own system. "
ahhh, human imperfection…that’s the problem. IMO, you can make a capitalist system that isn’t corrupt as easily as a communist one. the problem is NO (“N”+“O”) system will even be free from corruption. Do you understand that? Doesn’t matter how your organize it, corruption and special interests always run the show. the best you can do is TRY to govern the part of your life you have control over. I oppose a communistic system, because after one slashes social mobility, and gives the selfish people no incentive to work, it will screw everyone. We can agree that if the world was governed for the greater good, communism would work. I like communism’s theory…i’m sure i would pull my own weight. But you have to be realistic. What are we going to do? Kill all the powerful people on earth? Then won’t the killers gain that sort of power? People will eventually advance themselves through abilities they acquire, people with leadership qualities. Communes are a great idea…the co-exist with a system that won’t go away.
“Since its very birth capitalism has gone through booms and catastrophic slumps, and yet in not one university economics textbook will you find an explanation for this phenomenon. Every slump is seen to be the result of certain “special” conditions, a failure of the stock exchange, not enough credit, too much debt, inflation, deflation, lack of oil, lack of “confidence”, etc., etc., etc., and the current slump will undoubtedly be blamed on terrorism. None of these excuses get to the root of the problem - the capitalist mode of production.”
And communism would be any diufferent? Eventually (unless the proper steps are taking) the world will run out of fuel, pollute their world, overpopulate, harvest failures…whatever. The economic system is not the problem, the conditions are.
“The basic contradiction within capitalism is that it produces more goods than can be sold at a profit. This is the famous crisis of overproduction. To use capitalist language, supply outstrips demand. Of course this is a very narrow definition of the word “demand”. There still exists a huge demand for houses for the homeless, or food for the hungry, or medicine for the sick - but for a capitalist, demand only means anything if it is backed up with hard cash. Capitalism gets itself in this mess because it produces for profit and not for need.” - YIS "
This i agree with very much, but not totally. I think it’s theory is a little off. In a perfect world, the population won’t change, everyone can have equal everything, and their is no excess to profit off of. Demand is always growing, with population. Technology is always changing.
-
“Capitalism is presently in crisis. Western economies have been in slump since March 2001.”
not true…stop trying to blame bush for the economic failure. it started during the april of 2000, 11 months before!
sorry about my previous posts mispellings and tone. i was in a major rush.
-
Economic Crisis had nothing to do with the Government of any country. It had to do with the Internet.
-
yes, especially DELL.
BTW Yanny, did you see IMC? lately you have posted a lot of pro-palestinian things, and i’m wondeirng if you saw the IMC.
-
good post…
-
Awww… another shot in the dark against communism. Well, I’ll be eager to give a reponse. Just give me a moment to gather my resources.
-
On 2002-04-05 19:12, Yanny wrote:
There is no such thing as Evil or Good, its all perspective.
Dangerous thinking. So is killing a baby not evil? Or saving a life not good?
-
@ (1): It’s funny how most of the americans here say “america is the best” and most of the non-americans say “americans are big mouthed whatevers”. I agree with the second (being non-american). Can the US of A please think over this, and maybe sey “we like us, but all others have the same rights as we do?” Then most of the problems would solve itself, like the US would stick to treaties it once signed, accept and support the UN, not claim all resources (which includes everything environmental) for themselves, but share it, and have a view that there are global porblems, which need a global solution, even if that endangers some precious jobs (and would create others, but those others don’t have such a big lobby).
@(2) If we can get down from our racist point of view against muslims, then most of the problems there would not exist. They were advanced in the Middle Ages, now we are. Does that give us any right to force them into our way of thinking? I think not. For the Israelis… they are pretty much the same, you can’t accuse say Iran not being democratic, but call Israel that.
@(3) Dangerous, but i hope that their leaders are as smart as Chrushev (sp?), and not drop the big one…
@(4) 14 … i wouldn’t have thought you were such young :smile:… man, you are doing a good job here, respect!
@(5) read @(1) :smile:
-
To Yanny
Who’s fault was it for the internet bubble bursting? Simply put, overproduction. By creating artificially high stock market prices with Internet websites, we have a classic case of over production (supply and demand). As I said before, none of these excuses get to the root of the problem - the capitalist mode of production.
-
To Horten
Over consumption? Where have we heard that before? Yes, over consumption is a constant plague of the capitalistic society. For example, did you know that America waste more and disposes more garbage than any other country in the world? That’s right, 1.3 billion Chinese can’t even match less than 300 million US citizens. With capitalism we have depletion at an accelerated pace.
Suggested Topics
