Timothy
Men of Steel
He's a Crafty-Sort of Fellow
Posts: 8,716
|
Post by Timothy on May 27, 2008 16:26:04 GMT -5
Personally, I think that communism can work within small groups; I discovered this personally in high school during lunches when everyone at our long table would chip in money for the communal meal. However, where communism breaks down is in its organization; it may have worked for our small group of roughly 8 or so people, but how would it work for an entire nation? So, with that in mind, let's begin our discussion regarding politics of the far-left
|
|
|
Post by Papa Smurf on May 28, 2008 16:32:57 GMT -5
I dont think it can work for a large country for 2 reasons.
first, as any communist group gets larger, more and more time resources have to be used in the process of divvying up supplies between individuals. Eventually a group has to take charge of the divvying and that group has a power that no other group has. That leading group can easily become currupt and the communism quickly becomes an oppressive regime.
Second, Although there will be many willing to work hard in support of the country, there are also going to be many who won't have motivation. If it's a true communism and all resources are devided evenly, than a garbage man should get the same rewards as a Teacher. why work and go to school to become a teacher when dropping out of highschool will reap the same rewards?
|
|
Timothy
Men of Steel
He's a Crafty-Sort of Fellow
Posts: 8,716
|
Post by Timothy on May 29, 2008 8:25:14 GMT -5
I dont think it can work for a large country for 2 reasons. first, as any communist group gets larger, more and more time resources have to be used in the process of divvying up supplies between individuals. Eventually a group has to take charge of the divvying and that group has a power that no other group has. That leading group can easily become currupt and the communism quickly becomes an oppressive regime. I've recently come to the realization that Communism, like Libertarianism, is founded on one huge assumption; that if everyone thinks the same way, there will be no corruption. If you look at communism's track-record, we can see that this has happened with every major movement. (An excellent hypothetical example for Libertarianism would be OCP from RoboCop *Please fork this thread if you wish for me to elaborate*) I hadn't really thought of it like that before. Most of the time I just thought of what you said in terms of wages, but yeah, there really wouldn't be an incentive to work hard for years trying to become a teacher if a garbage man could do what he does and get the same pay.
|
|
|
Post by Papa Smurf on Jun 6, 2008 2:59:30 GMT -5
I dont think it can work for a large country for 2 reasons. first, as any communist group gets larger, more and more time resources have to be used in the process of divvying up supplies between individuals. Eventually a group has to take charge of the divvying and that group has a power that no other group has. That leading group can easily become currupt and the communism quickly becomes an oppressive regime. I've recently come to the realization that Communism, like Libertarianism, is founded on one huge assumption; that if everyone thinks the same way, there will be no corruption. If you look at communism's track-record, we can see that this has happened with every major movement. (An excellent hypothetical example for Libertarianism would be OCP from RoboCop *Please fork this thread if you wish for me to elaborate*) I think i get the part about the assumption. the problem is that most revolutionaries think any sane person thinks like they do. But in truth, people are greedy little [censored]s who just want to live in homeostasis, so the next leaders of revolution eventually become like those that were rebelleled against. or as Rincewind would have said but didnt cause i cant find the quote "that's why they call it a revolution! it goes full circle" ... just like my face! ooh
|
|
Timothy
Men of Steel
He's a Crafty-Sort of Fellow
Posts: 8,716
|
Post by Timothy on Jun 6, 2008 10:24:37 GMT -5
I've recently come to the realization that Communism, like Libertarianism, is founded on one huge assumption; that if everyone thinks the same way, there will be no corruption. If you look at communism's track-record, we can see that this has happened with every major movement. (An excellent hypothetical example for Libertarianism would be OCP from RoboCop *Please fork this thread if you wish for me to elaborate*) I think i get the part about the assumption. the problem is that most revolutionaries think any sane person thinks like they do. But in truth, people are greedy little [censored]s who just want to live in homeostasis, so the next leaders of revolution eventually become like those that were rebelleled against. or as Rincewind would have said but didnt cause i cant find the quote "that's why they call it a revolution! it goes full circle" ... just like my face! ooh You hit the nail on the head regarding what I was talking about with assumption. So, in the context of, say, RoboCop, Libertarians win the ability for the free-market to provide for civilians. There will be good people who adhere to the LP's ethical principles, but for the most part, the wolves will come out to take advantage of loosened restrictions.
|
|
|
Post by Papa Smurf on Jun 8, 2008 23:34:19 GMT -5
almost makes me wish we could just have an oppressive computer controlled government. At least then we'd all be truly equal.
|
|
Timothy
Men of Steel
He's a Crafty-Sort of Fellow
Posts: 8,716
|
Post by Timothy on Jun 9, 2008 15:49:43 GMT -5
almost makes me wish we could just have an oppressive computer controlled government. At least then we'd all be truly equal. At least until we're viewed as illogical, dangerous and obsolete; see, "SKYNET" ;D
|
|
|
Post by Papa Smurf on Jun 9, 2008 19:02:34 GMT -5
lol, that's the problem. Well, we are dangerous, illogical, and obsolete so you have to give Skynet props for being efficient.
In the real world, however, The three laws of robotics would be hard wired into any sentient robot we build to avoid the whole wiping-out-humanity-and-creating-a-robotic-world thing. Huzzah for Asimov.
|
|
Timothy
Men of Steel
He's a Crafty-Sort of Fellow
Posts: 8,716
|
Post by Timothy on Jun 9, 2008 21:20:42 GMT -5
lol, that's the problem. Well, we are dangerous, illogical, and obsolete so you have to give Skynet props for being efficient. In the real world, however, The three laws of robotics would be hard wired into any sentient robot we build to avoid the whole wiping-out-humanity-and-creating-a-robotic-world thing. Huzzah for Asimov. The problem with the three laws, however, is that they were made by humans. And, humans being imperfect and anarchic, so, too, would our idealized version of perfection become prone to chaos.
|
|
|
Post by Papa Smurf on Jun 12, 2008 12:59:31 GMT -5
of course they're flawed, that's why the Zeroth law has to be created by R. Daneel Olivaw, but that wont happen for about 50,000 years, so we have a bit of a wait.
|
|