Free enterprise, the individual, and the American dream

Anthropology, Economics, History, Sociology etc.

Moderators: Calilasseia, ADParker

Re: Free enterprise, the individual, and the American dream

#21  Postby Boyle » Aug 28, 2013 2:05 am

jamest wrote:
theropod wrote:jamest,

Not in an ideal communist state where each person is equal to another. Trouble is there's always some scum sucking asshole that takes power by any means possible all the while claiming the dictatorship he/she creates is the will of the people. Glorious leader kills everybody that even sneezes wrong. To compare the ideal with the examples to date is sortta silly. Human nature. Some people just are megalomaniacs, and every once in a while they attain ultimate power. It just happens that some have cloaked their insanity with the moniker of "communism", while having none of the qualities that would qualify their freedom stifling actions as even close to communism.

RS

I'm not sure I understand. How can communism work without comprehensive governmental involvement?


In a fully communistic world, information is shared more or less perfectly and extremely quickly. As such, there is no government/people distinction, the people ARE the government; i.e., Not represented as we have in the US, UK, Canada etc. It's a perfect democracy, and decisions are made by consensus, not by pluralities or majorities. It reminds me of the anarcho-libertarian paradise due to that (NAP version). In both worlds, there is no coercion because all information is known. Currently, aside from capital inequalities, that biggest thing holding back people from fair deals is a dearth of information.

This is why communism is an ideal. It's abundantly clear that perfect information isn't possible, or advisable, with the current crop of humanity.
Boyle
 
Posts: 1632

United States (us)
Print view this post

Ads by Google


Re: Free enterprise, the individual, and the American dream

#22  Postby Loren Michael » Aug 28, 2013 2:49 am

Boyle wrote:
jamest wrote:
theropod wrote:jamest,

Not in an ideal communist state where each person is equal to another. Trouble is there's always some scum sucking asshole that takes power by any means possible all the while claiming the dictatorship he/she creates is the will of the people. Glorious leader kills everybody that even sneezes wrong. To compare the ideal with the examples to date is sortta silly. Human nature. Some people just are megalomaniacs, and every once in a while they attain ultimate power. It just happens that some have cloaked their insanity with the moniker of "communism", while having none of the qualities that would qualify their freedom stifling actions as even close to communism.

RS

I'm not sure I understand. How can communism work without comprehensive governmental involvement?


In a fully communistic world, information is shared more or less perfectly and extremely quickly. As such, there is no government/people distinction, the people ARE the government; i.e., Not represented as we have in the US, UK, Canada etc. It's a perfect democracy, and decisions are made by consensus, not by pluralities or majorities. It reminds me of the anarcho-libertarian paradise due to that (NAP version). In both worlds, there is no coercion because all information is known. Currently, aside from capital inequalities, that biggest thing holding back people from fair deals is a dearth of information.

This is why communism is an ideal. It's abundantly clear that perfect information isn't possible, or advisable, with the current crop of humanity.


...how is information shared perfectly and quickly, and how is consensus reached? How is all information known?

Are you being facetious? I'm not sure which way to interpret your last statement about humanity.

Certainly, if we're assuming telepathy and/or some kind of Borg-like hive mind, it's reasonable to assume that a largely market-based economy might be less worthwhile than something enabled by that magic or technology.
Image
User avatar
Loren Michael
 
Name: Loren Michael
Posts: 7411

Country: China
China (cn)
Print view this post

Re: Free enterprise, the individual, and the American dream

#23  Postby Boyle » Aug 28, 2013 3:07 am

Loren Michael wrote:
Boyle wrote:
In a fully communistic world, information is shared more or less perfectly and extremely quickly. As such, there is no government/people distinction, the people ARE the government; i.e., Not represented as we have in the US, UK, Canada etc. It's a perfect democracy, and decisions are made by consensus, not by pluralities or majorities. It reminds me of the anarcho-libertarian paradise due to that (NAP version). In both worlds, there is no coercion because all information is known. Currently, aside from capital inequalities, that biggest thing holding back people from fair deals is a dearth of information.

This is why communism is an ideal. It's abundantly clear that perfect information isn't possible, or advisable, with the current crop of humanity.


...how is information shared perfectly and quickly, and how is consensus reached? How is all information known?

Are you being facetious? I'm not sure which way to interpret your last statement about humanity.

Certainly, if we're assuming telepathy and/or some kind of Borg-like hive mind, it's reasonable to assume that a largely market-based economy might be less worthwhile than something enabled by that magic or technology.


I was being facetious with that last bit. The point of it all is that communism of the sort in which everyone is actual equal requires something we can never create: Perfect information sharing.

If you want a more contemporary example, the Geth in Mass Effect 2 would be one. Being able to share experiences directly, with everyone, results in a gestalt consciousness and IS communism. Just not one we can not achieve.

As to how information would be shared, how consensus is reached, and how information is known, well, those are the big problems. I have no idea how any of that would work with people.
Boyle
 
Posts: 1632

United States (us)
Print view this post

Re: Free enterprise, the individual, and the American dream

#24  Postby Loren Michael » Aug 28, 2013 3:35 am

Okay, I think we're on the same page, then.
Image
User avatar
Loren Michael
 
Name: Loren Michael
Posts: 7411

Country: China
China (cn)
Print view this post

Re: Free enterprise, the individual, and the American dream

#25  Postby lobawad » Aug 28, 2013 5:04 am

Regina wrote:
lobawad wrote:
Arthur Methoxy wrote:Your financial demise and what you tried to do to prevent it. Would be good. Unless you wish to continue to promote a duplicitous, sycophantic, "I'm all right Jack" co-conspiratorial ethic, which I doubt entirely.


Campermom is in financial demise? That's bad news- I was just thinking how groovy it woud be to meet the guy for drink next time I'm in England, especially as his son is the same age as mine.

Campy is a teacher. His financial demise is a given. :shifty:


:lol:
"Never give succor to the mentally ill; it is a bottomless pit."
- William Burroughs
lobawad
 
Name: Cameron Bobro
Posts: 2545

Country: Slovenia
Georgia (ge)
Print view this post

Re: Free enterprise, the individual, and the American dream

#26  Postby jamest » Aug 28, 2013 10:35 am

Boyle wrote:
jamest wrote:
I'm not sure I understand. How can communism work without comprehensive governmental involvement?


In a fully communistic world, information is shared more or less perfectly and extremely quickly. As such, there is no government/people distinction, the people ARE the government; i.e., Not represented as we have in the US, UK, Canada etc. It's a perfect democracy, and decisions are made by consensus, not by pluralities or majorities.

Information is not opinion; so for people to respond to information en masse, with one voice, could only be achievable via debate and referendum. Given the dynamics and complexities of human affairs (the number of decisions required for any given society to make), communism of the sort you mention would be impossible. Ultimately, it seems inevitable that the populace of any society must trust a select specialist-minority to make many of their decisions for them and to implement policies in-line with those decisions: a government.

Hence, If there's a communist 'ideal' of a society without government, then my response is that it's an utterly irrational ideal. Of course, governments must be held accountable for their actions, which is what elections are for. And the sharing of information (free press) is important insofar as the populace can make informed decisions when they vote. But what we have here, as an ideal, is uncorrupted democracy - not communism.

As I said earlier, I don't see how communism can work without comprehensive governmental involvement. By that, I mean a body of people who police societal equality at every level of human affairs, because it is not in the nature of man to be absolutely selfless in all of his actions. Hence, the Police states which arose from Marxist philosophy were an inevitable outcome thereof.

So, Communists cannot seek the dissolution of government and Republicans do not (they seek minimalistic governmental involvement). Therefore, I cannot lend any merit to Arthur's claims.
Il messaggero non e importante.
Ora non e importante.
Il resultato futuro e importante.
Quindi, persisto.
jamest
 
Posts: 18549
Male

Country: England
Jolly Roger (arr)
Print view this post

Previous

Return to Social Sciences & Humanities

Who is online

Users viewing this topic: No registered users and 1 guest

cron