Labor provides disutility; therefore, communism cannot work. What say you?
Could you expand on that? That could apply equally well to capitalism, or any form of economy, and so I don't quite get your point. At any rate, I certainly don't think people are going to just lay down and die because they hate their job, no matter what the system.
I was just reading the Communist Manifesto the other day. Forget any single argument against Communism. The entire theory is based on erroneous assumptions. Most basically, they assumed that a classless society is the natural state. In fact, classes exist because men naturally create classes BY THEMSELVES, not because of labor, management, government etc. People naturally seek out other people who are like themselves, and classes are formed.
Furthermore, they seem to think that government can enforce a class-less society, but government itself IS A CLASS. Duh!
Of course it applies to capitalism or anything else. That labor provides disutility is proven by the fact that you have to pay people to do it. Egalitarian wages, therefore, create a disincentive for hard work.
Case in point:
Communism cannot work, hasn't worked and never will. It denies the very fiber of human nature. It flatly required altruism which nobody to my knowledge, is. Are you going to work you ass off on the farm only to dump it into the community bin? Nope. Are you going to work hard for anything when the benefit you reap is merely survival? Hell no. There is a reason there was a wall in Berlin. There is a reason people would risk life and limb to get the fuck out of there. My family being one of those. If you have valuable, knowledge or education, you aren't allowed to leave, wanna know why? Because you would not come back.
Look at the body count as a result of people simply trying to leave.
Communism has failed every where it has been tried. That empirical fact alone should be convincing enough.
Carl Marx is the most famous idiot in the world. Everything he said was wrong, and that's what he's famous for. Once you try something many times over resulting in failure, there is no need to beat that dead horse any further.
I agree, and it is for this reason that I do support equal pay. I support better pay for more or better work, and more pay for higher skilled work. I simply do not support the extraction of rent by owners of physical capital.
Also, Marx wrote quite a bit on alienation and the pleasure/displeasure of work that might be interesting for you to read.
I like the part of the original communicst manifesto that states that ALL of the people should be armed . . . why is it that modern socialists don't follow marx on this one?
the biggest fault of the Communist Manifesto was forgetting what drives the individual and also that competition makes society better, otherwise it stagnates.
No one is trying to replace capitalism with communism, some just want to see elements added to one or the other.
I think it's hilarious when people talk about "Marx's ideas," "Marx's system," or say they have "read Marx," and then quote the Communist Manifesto. That document was a polemic, essentially propaganda. It is not a theoretical work, and it does not reveal any significant part of Marx's thought, especially considering that many of his ideas were only developed later. The Communist Manifesto, published in 1848, is very early Marx (he would have been about 30 years old at the time).
correct me if I am wrong, but I believe Ryan outlined his arguments many times on here, and this seems like a rather fruitless endeavor of talking past people instead of discussing things in a logical manner. What sort of straw man are you trying to create out of Mr McCarter. Why dont you instead ask him why he thinks the way he does and try to understand where he is coming from whether or not you agree with him. Who knows, you may learn something.
I pretty much disagree with him on most everything, but he is a fairly intelligent fellow. I just cant stand this posturing by either the right or the left is some sort of mental masturbatory fashion.
You are correct. The solution is simple. Robots motherfucker. They can be completely altruistic and will happily work their asses off for nothing.
Better than communism, me thinks.
Yep, robots. Just need to come up with a clean way to reduce the population of the planet by an order of magnitude or two and we'd all be able to live the good life till kingdom come. Sounds sweet.
People do not want to work just for the sake of having a job.
They will only work until the marginal utility of their labor diminishes beneath that of the marginal utility they receive by leisure time. People do not keep working to produce goods without consuming them.
Leisure time is an economic good that can only comes about by one of two ways:
1) real savings (underconsumption)
2) slavery -- that is, creating a class of people who will always have to work and never get leisure time so that others may have it in their place.
They do at present, and that is capitalism's greatest flaw.
What? Obviously, you cannot earn any income, earn being the key word here. You do consume though.
Premise: Human nature exists. Human's are naturally self interested.
Premise 2: Communism depends entirely on human nature being entirely different than what has been shown through out history to be true.
Premise 3: If you look at his history Marx was quite clearly an arrogant nutter.
Conclusion: Communism cannot work.
...What? In what way? Where are these people working for the sake of working you speak of? I'd like to meet them and offer them a job or two...
People living in Communist countries had a nice saying: "It does not matter how little they pay us, we can always work less".
Moronic....and shows your complete lack of understanding of human nature.
Everyone must consume to survive. Moron.