Appa,
- Locked due to inactivity on Aug 4, '16 4:27pm
Thread Topic: Appa,
-
I feel I have a lot of misconceptions about communism.
Here are some things I think are correct.
So no matter how smart or skilled you are, you get the same.
No money, people just take what they want.
Or is it everyone gets x oranges, etc? -
Some good FAQ Communism answers
also the whole forum is fairly good to read, there are people there with more experience than I and a range of different ideas on communism.
As for my idea, it works kind of the way a commune does. Or maybe other small-scale forms of "communism."
First of all, there actually isn't "perfect equality," in the sense that someone who needs more will get more. It's based on need.
This is in regard to things like food though. For things like tools, they're owned in common, or for lack of a better term shared. Need is the higher priority here as well.
Also:
You can't just decide "I'm taking this bowl of oranges" and leave none for those who also need oranges, because then you would be making the oranges your private property. -
Thanks, I'll read that over.
-
There be Stalinists, so I don't agree with all of the views expressed there, but most of them I agree with.
-
I have a few questions...
1. What's with the no private property thing? Just...what the hell?
2. Would people still be running businesses and stuff? Like, if they don't make profit off of it, why would they run it? How would the items be distributed?
3. What about companies like Apple? Would everyone just like....get an "equal" share of iPhones? XD
4. I saw this quote on Wikipedia....
"The private and individual is altogether banished from life and things which are by nature private, such as eyes and ears and hands, have become common, and in some way see and hear and act in common, and all men express praise and feel joy and sorrow on the same occasions"
My question is.....what the hell? -
I'm not going to answer those right now, since I'm about to go, but
I've never heard anything like that quote. From anywhere, not even communists. -
Look up "Communism" go to Wikipedia, scroll down to "History" and you'll find it in the first few paragraphs
-
That's Plato's idea of a classless society. Possibly proto-communism, but not exactly Marxism- Plato also said share wives, while Marx thought that was a terrible idea (and misconception of communism) because it implies women are property.
Even then, the quote actually does confuse me a bit. -
Hmm okay. So do you support Marxism then?
-
I'd say I do. Not an expert on theory, but I certainly know more than most people, and have yet to see anything I disagree with.
-
Okay. I'm still reading stuffs about that
-
"a communist society is moneyless ("a classless, moneyless, and stateless social order" -- Wikipedia), so there are no prices of goods. instead, there are just free stores, free cafes, etc, without money ever changing hands. might be helpful for you to read the descriptions here. without private property, there is no incentive to horde or take more than you need, since there is no artificial scarcity and no ability to resell items. there is marginal incentive not to (specifically, social pressure and rational social interest). thus, this tends to create a weak preference toward frugality, which is how free stores function."
-
So...a company such as Apple...
People wouldn't be allowed to claim an iPhone as their property?
Or would everyone just get an equal amount of phones? -
Most communists still believe in personal property to an extent, since property is a relation. Personal property doesn't necessarily involve exploitation. But even if that were not true...
First of all, companies like Apple wouldn't exist. Apple purposefully makes its products so that you have to buy a bunch of stupid things to go with your phone, and then you have to constantly add stupid upgrades because they don't make new upgrades compatible with the old ones.
But technology and phones certainly will. Just not the stupid consumer culture. In fact I'd wager that under communism you'll have a better phone than an iPhone, simply because it's made for quality and not profit.
First priority is making sure everyone can get one. Of course once everyone got a phone then questions of want could be answered. But there's really no reason to hoard, as the paragraph stated.
Even so, it's an iffy area that's debated. I know what I mean, but there's no good way to say it.
-
Hmm okay. Thanks.
Pages:
- 1
- 2
This thread is locked, therefore no new posts can be made.
