Gommunist here. I feel like if I explain my position I might have the sympathy of some Sup Forumslacks...

Gommunist here. I feel like if I explain my position I might have the sympathy of some Sup Forumslacks. I feel like some of us think in similar terms, though we've reached some different conclusions.

Firstly, I was drawn toward communism through philosophic/scientific determinism. According to this, our material success is determined by
>nurture (education, parenting etc.)
>nature (neurological/biological makeup)

The symbiotic relationship between the two means that there is little to no space for free-will. I do not believe we can, in a strict sense, lay claim to our own achievements. They are always an accident of all the contingent factors. This is why I believe in wealth-redistribution.

Capitalism is the best method of wealth generation, but it is also self-immolating and cannot go on indefinitely. I'm not for old-school communism as a solution because it has proven fallible. We cannot say that Stalin "ruined things" because the fact that he could shows a flaw in the system.

I think our best chance is a post-scarcity form of communism with technology playing a strong facilitating role in this. I cannot abide primitivist-communists or people who think the industrial revolution was a mistake. Also against PC culture because I think a healthy bit of banter between races is what keeps the peace instead of repression turning into resentment. Liberals a shit who just perpetuate capitalism and inertia

Tell me brothers, do we have some common ground?

Why should all people be considered equal and therefore be deserving of the property of others?

We can just as easily say that these people are inferior and let them die. In fact it is humane that they die so that they can't bring any more suffering to the world than themselves.

Fascism is the only way user, it tackles the self serving nature of capitalism while retaining the efficiency.

>industrialization wasn't a mistake
>collectivize the farms, my overreaching economic ideology works the same in every industry

No we have no common ground you commie jew fuck

>philosophic/scientific determinism
I think we agree here, but you're deluded if you think you know where we'll end up philosophically and scientifically.

>wealth-redistribution
You're missing the point here. If all of our wealth is given to us, we have no motivation to work and innovate. That's one of the primary reasons why capitalism has worked so well - it feeds off of our evolutionary desire to thrive. Communism works counter to that. How that will work in a post-scarcity world is anyone's guess, but I don't think it's guaranteed that capitalism will self-immolate. It mimics nature, so it's cyclical, but there's no indication that capitalism will just blow up at some point.

I agree for the most part with Marx's policies, but I reject dialectical materialism. I am closer to Hegel than I am to Marx.

You can't build socialism, moreover communism, in the societal system that gravitate to enthropy due to racial/national/culture tensions. To stabilize such system would requre steel tyranny with large losses of life, like we saught through out history.
Not to mention natural or artificial outside influences. Even China was forced to rearrange itself from nat-com to, de-facto, nat-soc due to globalization.

>I think our best chance is a post-scarcity form of communism with technology playing a strong facilitating role in this.
Yes, but even then to make just and long-term commie system you would need to erase from human nature such traits as jealosy, hoarding, power-hunger etc, not to mention dangerous mental conditions, which would requre dozens of generations of positive and/or negative(purges) eugenics...

>USSR
>Venuzuela
>Cuba
>North Korea

KYS Commiefag

I feel that you underestimate capitalism
I fear it will go on till the end of time
Technology is our only hope though I will give you that
Whether it will bring about communism or something else is still to be determined

>I do not believe we can, in a strict sense, lay claim to our own achievements. They are always an accident of all the contingent factors.

If there is any room for free will, couldn't that justify at least some inequality?

I recognize that many factors beyond my control have determined my level of material success. But I have had control over some of those factors. There have been many times in my life when I could have expended more effort to yield greater results, but instead I knowingly chose to take the easier route. Those accumulated decisions play a large role in how much success I've had.

I'm not a commie, but I do think increasing technology will lead to a more egalitarian society.

What basic means do you propose for redistribution? Should the redistribution be decided through a central authority?

Too bad you need capitalism to get to your post scarcity utopia comrade.

>Gommunist here

Oh jeez, this shit again?

I CAN'T READ THIS IN DONALD DUCK VOICE REEEEEEEEEEE

Tell me, have education standards increased or decreased since the government started getting involved in it in the 60's?

Capitalism is swarm optimisation - great for optimising any high dimensional fitness function.
Communism is random search at worst and gradient descent at best - terrible for optimising any high dimensional fitness function.

just came into the thread to say I read your post in my head with Zizek's voice

>I was drawn toward communism through philosophic/scientific determinism
You make the same mistake as all leftists do; you try to intellectualize human behavior into some semblance of a "fair" system of egalitarianism. It doesn't work and it will never work.

How old are you and are you an academic? Have you ever worked manual labor or service jobs? How many women have you fucked?

Go back to cripplechan and stop your autistic attempts at subverting and colonization.

>Firstly, I was drawn toward communism through philosophic/scientific determinism.

Communists in power make shit up and say it was scientific because they say so. Do not back down after being wrong over and over and having no predictive utility.

What do you think of commies like that?

I was drawn to communism at one point because I was a stupid teenager. How any sane, self respecting person can stay near the self-loathing and endless mental gymnastics and drivel that commies spew forth is beyond me.

>I need a wall of text to rationalize my mental gymnastics
Kys faggot

>post-scarcity
Cool, when you figure out how to produce infinite resources, let me know.

I agree that some type of communism is inevitable since capitalism cannot go on indefinitely.

WHEN WE LOOK AT THE FACT THE PUPPY IS CHASCHING LE BALL; THE BALL ISCH AN OBJECKT OF THE PUPPY'SCH SUBCONSCHIOUS DESCHIRE, AND *sniff* NOTISCH AT THE MOMENT THE PUPPY HITSCH LE BALL, THISCH MOMENT *sniff* *shirt tug* IS A MOMENT OF VIOLENSCHE, A PERFEKT METAPHORR FOR THE EVRRY DAY ANGUISCH FACED IN *sniff* LE HUMAN CONDISCHION, A SCHYCLE OF BRRIEF FULFILLEMENT AND *sniff* EMPTYNESCH

dude, just get an army of robots to do it dude
the robot army is just around the corners, in the next 20 years if you ask me

No, we don't. Fuck you and fuck your "guys I have a new idea about a system that is based on physical violence and theft and it's totally gonna work this time"
FUCK YOU
and good night.

Dude yeah it's totally that simple.

it is in the eyes of anyone who says "post scarcity"

94 million dead

>If there is any room for free will, couldn't that justify at least some inequality?

There is philosophical compatibilism, but personally I don't buy it. As long as you are a materialist I think you must concede that nothing is determined by mind. I think there has been scientific evidence that neurological reactions happen prior to decision making too, so we also have hard evidence for the theory on a molecular level.

Nevertheless, we must live as if we have free will, and I don't believe that you can convince the populace to hand over their money on the basis of determinism.

I have no proposals for how redistribution would happen myself. It could be a central authority or through collective ownership These are questions I think leftist theorists have failed to answer sufficiently.

Well, duh. Capitalism is supposed to lay the foundations for communism. That's a central idea of Marx's

...

>1 post by this ID

Liberal democratic politics is *sniffs* cancer

You mean idiots?

see There are deep mathematical reasons why communism, socialism and any other system with any large amount of central panning will fail whenever there exists any competition - they are summarised in the no free lunch theorem.

yes

So in your idea of communism does a restaurant manager, chef and waiter get paid the same?

>Communist here
What do you plan on doing when you finish university?

communism and similar systems will only be sustainable when we're truly post- scarcity, which is not coming this decade and very likely not the next.

I only fear for capitalism when the workforce automates >80% of labor or so

only if governments have nothing to do with it and is the people organizing it or themselves so it doesnt end in stolen money and gulags like every other time

I also think the same way, although socialism is probably a better outcome than full blown communism, in that it still lets people have some agency for themselves.

The world is not ready for either yet, due to our society still being a bit far away from true post-scarcity, and I do think capitalism is the best and fastest way to get there, at least at the moment. There is just no better system to generate wealth and innovation.

>our material success is determined by

>nurture (education, parenting etc.)
yes

>nature (neurological/biological makeup)
yes

> I do not believe we can, in a strict sense, lay claim to our own achievements. They are always an accident of all the contingent factors.
ok

>This is why I believe in wealth-redistribution.
non sequitur

you seem to believe all people have the right to life and such, which is somethin subjective i do not share and is necessary to draw that conclusion