Since communism fails due to human nature...

Since communism fails due to human nature, wouldn't the logical solution be to genetically modify the next generation of humans to have brain structures that better comply with communist society? You could study OCD brains and find out a way to make new children feel a compulsive need to do a good job regardless of reward for example.

Other urls found in this thread:

nytimes.com/2008/05/29/science/29brain.html
engadget.com/2017/05/09/neural-network-recreates-brain-images/
twitter.com/AnonBabble

The logical solution would be to never ever attempt to try communism again

>Since my ideology is pants on head retarded, and cant even produce food to feed itself...how about we use the tools the free enterprise system has provided to us and manipulate human beings so my pants on head retarded system can work.

All commies should be killed in the most horrific torturous ways possible. I can't fully express my disdain for you people.

It fails because it's fucking retarded.

It works with ants.

>Since communism fails due to human nature

But so does capitalism. We are an oligarchy now. Capitalism collapsed in the 1980s

Ants have a queen, try again fag.

This.

We stab communists™

Let's just make everyone ants and the world will be great.

"Queen" doesn't mean what you think in that context. Queen ants don't actually control their colonies. Their role is to birth all of them. It's communism where all the population comes from the same one mother.

But this is what antidepressants and other similar jewery does already user.

Hint: It tanks your dopamine. Antidepressants are a huge enemy in your country yet you do not acknowledge it.

Do you have an argument for why that wouldn't be true that isn't "muh creativity" or "muh free will?"

>Comparing ants with humans

Are you being a faggot daily or is it just an 1 day thing?

Without the queen and the worker ants constantly doing everything they can for her the colony would die out. They have a natural drive to protect and provide for her.

Communism isn't the ideal state of society, therefore it should not be our end and the desperate means to get there shouldn't be genetic engineering.

None of that makes the "queen" ant an actual monarch. She's the reproductive engine, not an authority figure. You protect it for the same reason you protect your food or your children.

I wish it was a 1 day thing but now we are nearly going on five days with these shills. I haven't seen Sup Forums this chaotic since that cluck incident

It's like he doesn't know the more cognizant an animal becomes, the more complicated their behavior and desires becomes. But shit let's just strip all that away and become braindead workers, because it sounds so much better than to develop a culture, and everything that comes with it. I seriously cant wait to see these retards burned alive.

Communism has literally never been tried, only socialism.

>shills
How is a hypothetical about genetic modification shilling? Do you think I work for Monsanto?

And if I didn't have children, or no ability to have any then I would become much less driven as a living breathing organism.

Really, really bad bait my friend.

>Since communism fails due to human nature, wouldn't the logical solution be to kill all communists

Fixed

>if my horse is dead why dont we just beat it again?

Fuck off back to you containment chamber leftycuck

>You could study OCD brains and find out a way to make new children feel a compulsive need to do a good job regardless of reward for example.

There was once this thing that was built to lift humanity toward greater heights, to align society toward transcendent goals, and compel people to do good works even without material reward. It was called Christianity.

...

>the more cognizant an animal becomes, the more complicated their behavior and desires becomes
Biological complexity is the root cause of physical disease, that doesn't mean you're cheapening our species by coming up with ways to modify our biology to eliminate physical diseases. Modifying our biology to eliminate behavioral diseases is the same basic idea.

The real question is WHY do you think communism is desirable in the first place?

How do you genetically hardwire someone to put ideology before selfinterest?

The desperate means to get there is judaism. Communalism is a judaic concept that pre-dates Marx. Hasidism is communalist. The Alexandrian jews and Essenes were communalist.

Communism is judeo-messianic communalism; World government is simply a modern evolution of the jewish temple. Even David Ben-Gurion envisioned a communist world ruled from Jerusalem. Communism is embedded in jewish culture and DNA at this point

...

Some communes fit that description and they always collapse from infighting.

I already mentioned the OCD example. You could make children that feel extremely intense guilt and discomfort over minor lapses in the fulfillment of responsibilities.

steps to achieve underlined pic related in the traditional communist method
>revolution by working class
check
>dictatorship of the working class
check
>slow dissolution of that government to achieve the "ultimate goal" in your definition
hasn't happened yet. Communism has been tried, and it's failed every single time.

>So ineffective you literally have to make abhumans for it to work.

>My idea for fixing capitalism don't work!?
>I got it guys! We will just turn people into mindless automatons so it does!
T. Marxist thinking he had a good idea.

Yeah, let's just casually discard the idea of creativity. Who needs that shit?

I want to touch those nipples

Creativity, and free will are two of the most important things the human being has in his possession.
That's like saying "Give me one good argument for having a job that doesn't involve getting a paycheck at the end of the week"

God I hope you're just a bad troll.

DEMOCRACY FAILS DUE TO HUMAN NATURE

>Acknowledge system is broken
>Fix anything other than the system
You could spend your time making humans more physically capable, instead of making them more compliant. That would increase the total number of resources available, decreasing overall poverty.

Communism has always been an attempt, on the surface, of improving the lives of the poor worker. Making the poor worker stronger and more independent is a path to an improved life. Making the poor worker weak-willed and insectlike only makes them easier to manipulate and abuse.

They already do that it's called being lobotomized by Television and the school system to accept "equality for all"

The whole purpose of communism was to facilitate Zionism.

TYRONE WON'T ASK FOR YOU VOTE WHILE FUCKING YOUR DAUGHTER
TYRONE IS WINNING
LEARN A THING OR TWO FROM TYRONE

It fails because it's fucking retarded.

That's why I said (((on the surface))), although I suspect the zionists and the bolsheviks are actually competitors, not conspirators.

THE ROMAN REPUBLIC EVOLVED INTO THE ROMAN EMPIRE, AND IT WAS SUPERIOR
LEARN A THING OR TWO FROM THE ROMANS!!!!!!!!!!

You mean create a generation of mindless slave workers that do nothing but follow orders?
They already did that. That's how chinks were created. Look how they turned out.

This appear to be the truth. To quote David Ben-Gurion, first PM of Israel in a 1962 protocols-like prediction of the world in 1987:

"The image of the world in 1987 as traced in my imagination: The Cold War will be a thing of the past. Internal pressure of the constantly growing intelligentsia in Russia for more freedom and the pressure of the masses for raising their living standards may lead to a gradual democratization of the Soviet Union.
On the other hand, the increasing influence of the workers and farmers, and the rising political importance of men of science, may transform the United States into a welfare state with a planned economy.

"Western and Eastern Europe will become a federation of autonomous states having a Socialist and democratic regime. With the exception of the USSR as a federated Eurasian state, all other continents will become united in a world alliance, at whose disposal will be an international police force. All armies will be abolished, and there will be no more wars.

"In Jerusalem, the United Nations (a truly United Nations) will build a Shrine of the Prophets to serve the federated union of all continents; this will be the seat of the Supreme Court of Mankind, to settle all controversies among the federated continents, as prophesied by Isaiah. Higher education will be the right of every person in the world. A pill to prevent pregnancy will slow down the explosive natural increase in China and India, And by 1987, the average life-span of man will reach 100 years." - LOOK MAGAZINE, January, 1962

THE MORE BLUE IT GETS THE MORE KEKED IT GETS
LEARN A THING OR TWO FROM MODERN HISTORY!!!!!!!

if something can only be successful through genetic engineering, that is only a testament to how destined to failure it is you mongel. slide thread sage in all fields

You could have something better than individualistic creativity. If you hook up all your modded humans to exchange information directly with brain to brain networks you'd probably come up with better innovations than what today's society churns out. It's basic game theory that cooperation is the superior strategy for everyone involved as long as you can guarantee cooperation in the first place.

He is right, nigga

Communism/Socialism has actually a history that is thousands of years old, you'll find philosophers like Plato describing a perfect societal system that very strongly looks like a Communist authoritarian society.
So you can't actually ever disprove it finally, it will just be renamed and slightly changed before attempted again.
What needs to be fought is negative traits in human beings that predispose them to subscribing to such an ideology, like envy, but of course also fear and lack of self worth, which is a strong motivator.
The reason why I believe Communism is more popular than ever since the industrial revolution is that before it our ancestors lived in amazingly stable societies for hundreds of years.
Feudalism had everyone (except very few at the top) being relatively equal, with similar living conditions and life outcomes.
No big struggle was necessary (competition is struggle), the lives for most people were mapped out for them and there were few factors that could introduce insecurity for you and the viability of you and your family.
Communism in practice actually brings back this kind of Feudalism where everyone is relatively equal, but only it's much worse and unstable than classical Feudalism, therefore it fails more quickly.
Capitalism/Meritocracy brings much more wealth to everyone but we are also all thrown into a world of eternal struggle and competition, it's like Darwinistic Evolution on steroids, and increases legitimate fears in many people, since not everybody is biologically viable to begin with.
Many people will fail through Meritocracy, that's a certainty. And these people are not going to simply lay down and die without a fight.

It's not a coincidence that this AI & Automation of jobs bullshit is heavily propagated by the left these days. It heavily plays into the fears that many people have about their own viability and their value to society.
That's how they recruit new followers and strengthen their ranks.

>if something can only be successful through genetic engineering, that is only a testament to how destined to failure it is
So agriculture was destined to failure?

>why don't we just poison human embryos so that the develop retarded and submissive so that they're useful idiots

Communism everyone.

This

It'd be easier to come up with a different solution than redesign the whole human race

So no, my prediction is that if we were able to significantly increase the capabilities of every human being through genetics, it would yield the result that you'd create a people that is 0 predisposed to fall for Communism and all its variants.
Why should they after all? Everyone would be viable and capable to support oneself, there'd be no insecurity about it anymore. Therefore Communism would finally die off.

Except you couldn't because we aren't computers.

Why stop there, comrade? We can all agree that crime is bad, and you can only commit crime if you can think, so let's just lobotomize everyone at birth! :)

>you'll find philosophers like Plato describing a perfect societal system that very strongly looks like a Communist authoritarian society
Nope. I realize the wikikepedia article says that and it's probably where you got it from but that's wrong.

Plato describes his ideal STATE. Communism is stateless. In this ideal states are different CLASSES including an aristocracy of philosopher kings, a military class, and an everybody else class. Communism has no class. The ruling and military classes cannot own property but everybody else can. But everybody else needs to maintain the state. It's sort of a meritocracy. Also children are held and raised in common and eugenics is practiced. Plato's ideal republic is actually very similar to NatSoc and fascism which is why the jews have always mocked Plato.

But it is a fundamental fact of iterative development of both ideas and genes that competition and natural selection are also needed to find efficient solutions in some context.

>Except you couldn't because we aren't computers.
???
A brain interface was already developed to let monkeys control an artificial arm and ANN has been trained to successfully produce images matching dreams associated with the dreaming person's brain activity.
nytimes.com/2008/05/29/science/29brain.html
engadget.com/2017/05/09/neural-network-recreates-brain-images/

Actually capitalism affects well-being whereas darwinian evolution affects your life. It would be more appropriate to say that Darwinian evolution is capitalism on steroids. They both utilize selection as a causal mechanism, but only in Darwinian selection do you lose your life and legacy.

>Communism has no class
Since when? Have you ever seen a Communist society without "classes"?
Platos description of his ideal state closely matches what the Communist Manifesto called for.
It's policies are against the nuclear family, with all wives being shared, children being raised by the state, strict censorship and propaganda and of course everything should be submitted to communal interests.
Everything that exists in Platos society should serve only the community and nothing else, with a class of wise philosphers (bureaucrats) determining what this community interest is.

I guess you're right. But that doesn't mean the 1% should be allowed to exist and continue to deplete resources into expensive bullshit and keep on destroying the planet and enslaving the people.

Corporatism should be heavily separated from capitalism. One company or two, owning the entire world, that's a fucked up world.

>Capitalism/Meritocracy
There is no meritocracy under capitalism

The Company just needs to be Good.

But you will still need ground-breaking strides in a couple fields:

Biochemistry and gene editing. The mechanism for editing genes is being increasingly refined, but how an organism develops from DNA is not completely understood. There's a lot of DNA we frankly don't know anything about. To untangle this problem of developmental biology will require at least several decades of focused mathematical and biochemical research.

Secondly, there's the problem of understanding the machine on top of the machine: the brain which develops from DNA. We have just recently adequately conceptualized and implemented artificial rationality. But when it comes to the subconscious and conscious minds - everything that makes up the brain aside from pure reason - we have little if any idea of how that works. We can't even conceptualize the consciousness or subconsciousness in any way that makes sense, or yields to rational analysis.

But then we will run into one more problem. Our developmental direction was decided throughout our history in terms of natural selection. The human then took control of his environment to some extent, and this further guided his evolution. But not anywhere near total control of it. Selection processes operated according to the need of the group and society as well as the individual's traits.

When we can totally pick our own selection processes, what will we pick? Towards what end? The conscious mind could say, "survival", but the fact that the conscious mind can state this end, suggests that that conscious mind is already surviving, and likely surviving in leisure. So to what end will we modify ourselves if not survival? What answer could we provide to this question that could possibly be the "optimal" or "correct" one? And without a correct, clear direction of movement, previously provided by survival, is the human species worth improving? Are we ready to be the masters of our own destiny?

I agree mostly, but with both Darwinian and Capitalist selection you do not necessarily lose your life.
Your legacy, certainly. You shouldn't force other people to mate with you just like you shouldn't force others to cooperate with you.
What we are engaging in today through redistribution of wealth is to actually make legacy viable where it otherwise wouldn't.
We see this very strongly in Europe, where Muslims (and other minority immigrants) have 4, 5 or 6 children that they only support through welfare, but not through work, for they realistically can't.

I think you suffer from cognitive dissonance

All commies must be smashed

Communism doesnt fail due to the human nature of the peasants that live in a communist society. Communism is designed to turn the masses into serfs and keep a handleful of jews extremely rich and powerful. Communism fails when the serfs get fed up and realize they were sold a pack of lies.

Currently we are in the lie selling phase of communism and the leftists eat up the promises of an unreality where effort is not required to produce the sustainment of life. These are the type of people who believe in the physical impossibility of perpetual motion

...

yes i know its bait, i just love this pic.

I did not argue in favour of Communism. I just gave my views on why some people are more likely to subscribe to this ideology.
They are biologically or psychologically not viable, for them the only way to secure survival and legacy is through such a system that takes away most elements of struggle and competition.

>self worth
Self worth is an empty and petty thing to value. It's what we do collectively that really matters, not how a given random individual eats, shits, and goes about his personal routines and chores.

I'm pretty sure that's the premise of STALKER and it backfired spectacularly

Whatever you say, faggot

It's easier to say something's worthless than to put in the work required to get it.

...

Self worth is something that will actually have a strong impact on life outcomes.
Someone who has it will engage in struggle to achieve and create his own life, someone who lacks it will follow and long for a system where everybody is equal and everyones life is safely mapped out for everyone.
A culture that values and reinforces self worth will certainly have a better economic outcome than a society that values submission.

Evolution necessitates variation.

You could try your idea, just don't come crying to the rest of the world when your entire society gets wiped out by one bad flu season, assuming the populace hasn't already committed mass-suicide after facing the prospect of living in a literal human ant farm.

Adding to and fixing my former post: ...

>genetically modify the next generation of humans

What? Nice bait. I actually thought you were complying to the reality that communism goes against human nature, therefore capitalism is the better alternative. Still, capitalism as it currently exists is not that much better, that's why I made those suggestions.

The pic is wrong, the Khmer Rouge mostly killed using shovels and axes for most of their population wasn't worth a bullet to them.

You shouldn't force others to mate with you, but it is moral then to simply "cause" them to? If I act according to the principle, "higher status means more female mates", what differentiates this from "force"? I'm not raping anybody, but I am changing my environment through conscious and unconscious actions to cause something pretty definite, even visualizable. And the same question for cooperation. What if I simply change my environment to make cooperation with ideal? My question is at what point does this become "force"?

Yes, if your world view contradicts with reality, change the fucking reality.

#FuckDrumpf #ImWithHer2020 #BernieBro #Impeach45 #RacistSexistKKKFacistUSA

This is my former post(), not OP's. I seem to be rather confused today.

>our system is shitty
>should we improve it, or admit it's shitty?
>no no no
>the most logical solution we have at hand is to genetically modify humans using technology so that our plan will work

Are you listening to yourself?

Daily reminder:
"The US not only helped to create conditions that brought Cambodia's Khmer Rouge to power in 1975, but actively supported the genocidal force, politically and financially. By January 1980, the US was secretly funding Pol Pot's exiled forces on the Thai border. The extent of this support -- $85 million from 1980-86 -- was revealed 6 years later in correspondence between congressional lawyer Jonathan Winer, then counsel to Sen. John Kerry (D-MA) of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and the Vietnam Veterans of America Foundation."
- John Pilger

Unlikely. The power that emanates from it is what attracts those greedy sociopaths.

>gommunism fails at every turn
>still can't just admit gommunism is a failure
>keeps trying to find new ways to fail
I think the best thing to do is find a piece of land, make it a commie country, and funnel every communist there. No ins or outs after they get the last person in. No airport, no nothing. You faggots can just live in harmony and eat each other when the food runs out

I am thinking that is becomes immoral when the force is done to put those who are being forced at a disadvantage relative to what they could get with independence. When a group acts in such a way to disadvantage their members relative to what the members could get with freedom, then this becomes "force". In all other cases it is mere "cooperation".

Or, and this crazy, just stop trying to make communism work.

Honestly just come up with something new because communism has failed every time.

It's not the system that's flawed, it's the people. The weight of the perfect system is too great for flawed people as they are today to shoulder. We should uplift the people so they can become strong enough to make use of it, not degrade the system to bring it down to the level of people as they are today.

The left is immune to irony.

Im telling you this as a leftist.

Communist China has a suicide rate of 23 per 100k. In a country with 1.3 Billion people; it really doesn't matter, and the act is considered "Patriotic" by Chinese rule. This tally definitely doesn't matter to rulers who have a different Chinese person 'literally' wiping their asses for them.

Marx was an economist; and he outlines those steps necessary, not to create a Communist country, but to create a Communist global order; which uses Socialism as a financial tool to move money/treasury from point A to point B. They love having godlike powers. all decent sociopaths and psychopaths must fed their narcissistic appetites.

This has got to be a troll. The system is nothing without the people. Keep banging your head against the wall kid.

Creative thinking on your part but it is well established what "force" means.
If the women can't say no or I can't refuse to cooperate someone is using force.
Regardless of how you are achieving that, be it through legislation, propaganda or violent threats - you'd hardly find a Western moral system that would unapologetically support such standards.

>The system is nothing without the people
Which is exactly why you need to work on giving the people the best possible behavioral traits to facilitate the best possible system. If people didn't matter you wouldn't need to care about modifying them in the first place.

You get communism when ants kill the queen and seize the means of production

They already did seize the means of production. Ant queens don't have authority over ant colonies. Ant colonies use ant queens for making new ant babies, they don't take orders from ant queens.