Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    FOR THE WORKERS OF THE WORLD! I shall join.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Proletariat)
    FOR THE WORKERS OF THE WORLD! I shall join.
    Good!
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by AnarchistNutter)
    You ignore 90% of my post. "Human nature" adapts according to extraneous material circumstances.



    Yeah...that's what they want you to believe.
    Nope, I answered all of it


    Rigghhhttt. It may have escaped your notice, but we don't live in a repressive totally Facist regime. The government doesn't have free reign and domminion in this country and it never will :rolleyes:
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Steevee)
    Nope, I answered all of it


    Rigghhhttt. It may have escaped your notice, but we don't live in a repressive totally Facist regime. The government doesn't have free reign and domminion in this country and it never will :rolleyes:
    It may have escaped your notice, but this is the internet and not the government. Facism is at the other end of the spectrum, and everyone is free to create societies and parties if they like
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jarlsberg)
    It may have escaped your notice, but this is the internet and not the government. Facism is at the other end of the spectrum, and everyone is free to create societies and parties if they like
    And that has absoloutley nothing to do with any of the points I've made :congrats:
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Steevee)
    Nope, I answered all of it
    Right.

    (Original post by Steevee)
    I disagree. Human nature does exist, and that can be seen from everyday life. No matter what you give some people they will not be happy. These people that make up the underclass now will not take up the pickaxe and hoe after the revolution. They do as they always do and scrounge, and steal and take from a hardworking man. Their nature will not change under communism.
    Just as there are those that honestly seek to be better than others, to rise higher and earn more. Communism allows only for those happy with 1 place in society, a worker. You will state that Capatalism leads to the opression of the working class, but under such a system at least there is oppurtunity for betterment. For success and life beyond the hammer and sickle. Communism confines you all to the same level, and that is not something people will accept.
    You ignore the post about the structure of free associations that I provided a link to, the fact that mind is not seperate from matter nor are ideas and concepts, the idea of positive liberty (that man's condition will improve provided with the material circumstances), the idea of negative liberty (the concept of self-management free from external influence) all for the sake of talking about some airy-fairy concept of "human nature" that has been debunked about a thousand times. The most intelligent right-wing scholars would not waste their time throwing around futile arguments about "human nature" that have no scientific ground. Consequently, you cannot use the argument of greed and selfishness in order to justify greed and selfishness - it makes no sense. Also, the "humans are greedy" argument is normally used to mean that "under communism people will take whatever they want" - guess what? You can't just "take what you want" under communism - its not some tea and biscuits game of "everyone just do as they feel".

    Every able bodied person must do their fair share of manual labour but it is not the case that there is no "success and life beyond the hammer and sickle". The rota of labour will include more enjoyable labour as well as "sucky" labour. With everyone doing their fair share of manual labour, the manual labour that an individual person will need to do for society to progress will be significantly reduced. Everyone will have more opportunities to explore arts, culture, literature, etc.

    As for betterment, the working class is oppressed and has no real chance at betterment. Your principles only apply to the top dogs of society. Rightist "libertarianism" is just about more freedom for the rich, so not real freedom.

    We govern the Government :rolleyes:
    Democracy isn't total, but it is better than no government. You ned only take a look at the countries that have periods without govenment to see that.
    Time to bring up that old Rocker quote again:

    Political rights do not originate in parliaments; they are rather forced upon them from without. And even their enactment into; law has for a long time been no guarantee of their security. They do not exist because they have been legally set down on a piece of paper, but only when they have become the ingrown habit of a people, and when any attempt to impair them will meet with the violent resistance of the populace. Where this is not the case, there is no help in any parliamentary opposition or any Platonic appeals to the constitution. One compels respect from others when one knows how to defend one's dignity as a human being. This is not only true in private life; it has always been the same in political life as well.

    All political rights and liberties which people enjoy to-day, they do not owe to the good will of their governments, but to their own strength. Governments have always employed every means in their power to prevent the attainment of these rights or render them illusory. Great mass movements and whole revolutions have been necessary to wrest them from the ruling classes, who would never have consented to them voluntarily. The whole history of the last three hundred years is proof of that. What is important is not that governments have decided to concede certain rights to the people, but the reason why they had to do this.
    We may have a semi-democratic system but we are far from free.

    What societies without government are you banging on about? Somalia? Not an anarchy - it is run by feudal warlords and pirates. Not a good example at all.

    On the other hand, we have Shinmin, the Ukraine Free Territories, Catalonia - all historical examples of societies that were actually built on anarchist principles and went right (before hostile military intervention).

    Just because government has degenerated and society has gone into chaos does not mean we have anarchy. There needs to be a revolutionary mindset and the right infrastructures for a post-government society before we can overthrow the establishment and create anarchy.

    Best for everyone. No other system allows for the such social mobility. Despite what you say Communism would confine us all to one class, and whilst this may stop the 'class war' you all seem so convinced is happening, it certainley doesn't alow mobility.
    Most social mobility is the result of society demanding for socialist principles - minimum wage and so forth.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by AnarchistNutter)
    Right.



    You ignore the post about the structure of free associations that I provided a link to, the fact that mind is not seperate from matter nor are ideas and concepts, the idea of positive liberty (that man's condition will improve provided with the material circumstances), the idea of negative liberty (the concept of self-management free from external influence) all for the sake of talking about some airy-fairy concept of "human nature" that has been debunked about a thousand times. The most intelligent right-wing scholars would not waste their time throwing around futile arguments about "human nature" that have no scientific ground. Consequently, you cannot use the argument of greed and selfishness in order to justify greed and selfishness - it makes no sense. Also, the "humans are greedy" argument is normally used to mean that "under communism people will take whatever they want" - guess what? You can't just "take what you want" under communism - its not some tea and biscuits game of "everyone just do as they feel".

    Every able bodied person must do their fair share of manual labour but it is not the case that there is no "success and life beyond the hammer and sickle". The rota of labour will include more enjoyable labour as well as "sucky" labour. With everyone doing their fair share of manual labour, the manual labour that an individual person will need to do for society to progress will be significantly reduced. Everyone will have more opportunities to explore arts, culture, literature, etc.

    So you say, but what will you do to those that do not work? Without central government, law or legislation? Allow them to wallow and die? To live in poverty? I mean, that's what happens under our mean and horrible Capatalistic society right? But in Communism there is no wealth, so you can't keep them afloat with other people's work. So you comedown to forced labour, which requires coercion, which I believe is against true left sentiment.
    I see you take issue with the idea of human nature. Well, I'll try to find a different way to phrase it. Equlity would not make people equal. We are all different, and no matter what you do, there will be people that will steal, lie and cheat.

    And what of skilled labour? Will everyone be taught everything? Such a system will not work. People need a place, your system assumes that every job will include unskilled labour. There are millions of jobs that have to be learnt, and many of them are 'sucky'. Is it efficient to teach 1000 people to do a sucky job that could be done by 1 person? Why not simpley make that job pay better, so that person doesn't have such a raw deal? :rolleyes:

    (Original post by AnarchistNutter)
    As for betterment, the working class is oppressed and has no real chance at betterment. Your principles only apply to the top dogs of society. Rightist "libertarianism" is just about more freedom for the rich, so not real freedom.
    Well, quite frankly, you're wrong. You only have to take my parents as an example. Their parents were working class, they both came from large families that hardly had a thing, and yet now they are middle class, in almost every sense of the word. Proles to Borgiousse, it's not so much of a jump. Communism allows for no moility, it confines everyone to the lowest common denominator. I'm not saying no good can com of left policies, but to hold them as a real solution to societies problems is shortd sighted and idealistic to say the least.

    (Original post by AnarchistNutter)

    Time to bring up that old Rocker quote again:



    We may have a semi-democratic system but we are far from free.

    What societies without government are you banging on about? Somalia? Not an anarchy - it is run by feudal warlords and pirates. Not a good example at all.

    On the other hand, we have Shinmin, the Ukraine Free Territories, Catalonia - all historical examples of societies build on historical examples of anarchy gone right.

    Just because government has degenerated and society has gone into chaos does not mean we have anarchy. There needs to be a revolutionary mindset and the right infrastructures for a post-government society before we can overthrow the establishment and create anarchy.



    Most social mobility is the result of society demanding for socialist principles - minimum wage and so forth.
    What you've said there is that we are free :cool:

    The goverment has only the power we give them, that's no shocker. You seem to miss the point, we give them power so that power can be meated out in an efficient an somewhat fair way. A communal pool of power to look after the people. That's what a government is, in essence.

    There are no functioning countries without governments, because they don't work. And those that did weren't exactly an example of high standards. Cenralised government allows for advancement and progress far more than any Anarchy ever could.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Steevee)
    I see you take issue with the idea of human nature. Well, I'll try to find a different way to phrase it. Equlity would not make people equal. We are all different, and no matter what you do, there will be people that will steal, lie and cheat.


    This is logically naive in the extreme and a naturalistic fallacy.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Aeolus)
    This is logically naive in the extreme and a naturalistic fallacy.
    No my dear, it's truth.

    People's entire personalitys don't make a sudden U-turn because of a change of government, or lack there-of. To assume they would is niave to the extreme :cool:
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Steevee)
    No my dear, it's truth.
    Could you please explain to me what truth is?

    The we can get on to how your asinine generalisations apply to it.

    People's entire personalitys don't make a sudden U-turn because of a change of government, or lack there-of. To assume they would is niave to the extreme :cool:

    But that is exactly what you are doing. If I was an intellectual infant like you. I would point to the fact that for the vast majority of human existence we have lived in small communal societies based around common ownership and the general will. The capitalist concepts you are attributing to human nature have only been around for a few centuries.

    But then I wouldn't base my entire argument around that premise.. Because I like to be taken seriously.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    You're ideals are all but dead because it's a tried and tested theory...one which never worked. Communism is dead, let it rest in peace.

    Capitalism has it's flaws but I'd rather have the chance to dream and become a success than just be a cog in a machine with no real chances in life. Visit Communist countries and you'll realise why the intelligent person doesn't want it in their society.

    Equality is over-hyped; people will not always put in the same effort as others...why the hell should they deserve an equal share of rewards? I know I'd like to see me finish my degree knowing that I'll get more out of life than someone who never cared.

    Finally, you say that everyone are slaves under Capitalism; in a Communist society you're all slaves to the Government...creating a new ruling class. How blind must you all be not to realise this?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Barksy)
    Capitalism has it's flaws but I'd rather have the chance to dream and become a success than just be a cog in a machine
    :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Steevee)
    So you say, but what will you do to those that do not work? Without central government, law or legislation? Allow them to wallow and die? To live in poverty? I mean, that's what happens under our mean and horrible Capatalistic society right? But in Communism there is no wealth, so you can't keep them afloat with other people's work. So you comedown to forced labour, which requires coercion, which I believe is against true left sentiment.
    I see you take issue with the idea of human nature. Well, I'll try to find a different way to phrase it. Equlity would not make people equal. We are all different, and no matter what you do, there will be people that will steal, lie and cheat.
    Again you have misunderstanding about libertarian communism. My problem with capitalism is not that lazy people don't get to leech (in fact that's exactly my problem - employers get to leech off of their labourers) but that the fact that there is a system of private property and wage-labour and that capital is not communally owned. People may be hard workers but don't get what they deserve because reward is based upon accumulation of capital these days. So yeah, we're not going to overthrow one bunch of leeches (capitalists) just so we can provide for another (those who refuse work). Communism is not about "just take what you want" - anyone who studies the ideology in depth knows that it is about worker democracy, both in the workplace and in the political realm.

    I find it amusing that people literally spend hours of their time voluntarily frequenting political websites to add to the intellectual resources of society trying to prove that everyone would rather sit back and laze around than contribute to society when given the choice - why? Because it is self-fulfilling labour. Not that we purely rely upon labour to be self-fulfilling - rather we would just minimise the amount of work everyone has to do so they have loads of time to be able to contribute voluntarily to culture and intellect. This time can be saved by (a) sharing hard, dirty labour around the commune and (b) collectivising machinery. If machinery is owned by society and not owned by a few then everyone can have free access to it, thus reducing the amount of labour everyone has to do rather than selling it off for a product. For instance a collectivised factory of solar pannels would provide everyone with free energy, thus saving labour having to dig up oil, transport it and burn it.

    Again, you have not read my post about free associations otherwise you would
    know all this.

    Also, see what Aeoleus said in regards to your comment regarding human nature - a flimsy argument indeed that is easily disproved with any basic research into dialectics, how capitalism evolved (the system of wage labour and private property was enforced by the state and now they have the cheek to tell us "we should just let the market make its own natural course") and so forth.

    And what of skilled labour? Will everyone be taught everything? Such a system will not work. People need a place, your system assumes that every job will include unskilled labour. There are millions of jobs that have to be learnt, and many of them are 'sucky'. Is it efficient to teach 1000 people to do a sucky job that could be done by 1 person? Why not simpley make that job pay better, so that person doesn't have such a raw deal? :rolleyes:
    People will have a certain degree of choice over their rota - doesn't mean they get to avoid hard, dirty work (as I imagine there would be a pool of such professions meaning everyone would have to choose at least a couple out of this pool) but it means they get to choose labour they're good at. Then they will have plenty of free time (because other labour would have been shared) to learn to do enjoyable jobs that require skill, etc. Yeah, there would be a voluntary education system for people who wanted it.

    Well, quite frankly, you're wrong. You only have to take my parents as an example. Their parents were working class, they both came from large families that hardly had a thing, and yet now they are middle class, in almost every sense of the word. Proles to Borgiousse, it's not so much of a jump. Communism allows for no moility, it confines everyone to the lowest common denominator. I'm not saying no good can com of left policies, but to hold them as a real solution to societies problems is shortd sighted and idealistic to say the least.
    Yeah, I said the working class have a limited opportunity to become successful. Basically, you either get to "voluntarily" choose your master or, if you are very lucky, you get to climb up the ladder and become a master - how brilliant! Also, any increased opportunity for the working classes was thanks to socialism.

    What you've said there is that we are free :cool:
    Nah, mate. I said that we've had to fight a long, bloody battle for basic human rights and democracy: historically the bourgeois have been unwilling to budge. Yeah, we get rights and things today but we still have to submit ourselves to the same old capitalist hierarchy, ****ty pay, ****ty jobs, etc., etc.

    The goverment has only the power we give them, that's no shocker. You seem to miss the point, we give them power so that power can be meated out in an efficient an somewhat fair way. A communal pool of power to look after the people. That's what a government is, in essence.

    There are no functioning countries without governments, because they don't work. And those that did weren't exactly an example of high standards. Cenralised government allows for advancement and progress far more than any Anarchy ever could.
    You give no mention to those previous anarchist societies I referred to: Catalonia, etc. Yeah, government only has the power we give them but first we must make people realise this: this is what anarchists are here for. Once we stop submitting ourselves to the same old hierarchical system, only then will we achieve freedom - but to do this requires a revolutionary mindset which won't be easy to achieve in such a hierarchical system as capitalism.

    (Original post by Steevee)
    No my dear, it's truth.

    People's entire personalitys don't make a sudden U-turn because of a change of government, or lack there-of. To assume they would is niave to the extreme :cool:
    No anarchist supposes humans are perfect. It makes more sense therefore to abolish a system where men have the power to exert dominance over others: the best way to abolish evil is to take away the power from men to comit evil in the first place.

    In fact it is authoritarians such as yourself who are naive for believing that we can elevate men to high positions in society and they will have the good will to be nice and treat everyone fairly.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    I am not going to read any of the nonsense in this thread, nor argue with you. I merely want to point out that, had communism been introduced to Britain for example, you would NOT have had the privilege to openly discuss the current political status quo and propose radical changes.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by tenhornedbeast)
    I am not going to read any of the nonsense in this thread, nor argue with you. I merely want to point out that, had communism been introduced to Britain for example, you would NOT have had the privilege to openly discuss the current political status quo and propose radical changes.
    Bull. You don't know your left from your right. Stop basing your definition of communism on the state capitalist practices of the USSR and China.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Can everyone use smaller words please?
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by MarkRennie)
    Can everyone use smaller words please?
    This isn't always possible when having a mature debate.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Gerd Loki)
    This isn't always possible when having a mature debate.
    Yes that's true but when people use words that are basically jargon, some people who are not as clued up on the topic may be left behind and to me, that isn't fair as everyone should be allowed to understand the arguments, and be able to reply without using 15+ letter words.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by MarkRennie)
    Yes that's true but when people use words that are basically jargon, some people who are not as clued up on the topic may be left behind and to me, that isn't fair as everyone should be allowed to understand the arguments, and be able to reply without using 15+ letter words.
    I like big words and I shall not prevaricate.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Gerd Loki)
    I like big words and I shall not prevaricate.
    Lol, that's not very fair of you :cry:

    Lucky I am just about to goggle it
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    What's your favourite Christmas sweets?
    Useful resources
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.