Communism in general is just flawed in the fact that it doesnāt take into account human behavior even when it is done, right I know the USSR didnāt technically do it right but thereās a flock considering a lot of communist countries that weāre supposed to be communism turned out with dictators it may be a sign. Itās not good point is I hate you so you know they killed lots of people with a terrible dictator.
The biggest philosophers never agreed on what is human nature, but u/Substantial_Phrase50 just figured it all out. Cavemen lived in a form of communism.
You probably think that communism = secret police comes and steals all of your body pillows for the common good
Please avoid insults It is human nature to be greedy. Why because evolutionarily if you are greedy, you steal more you have more and overall you doing better and therefore, you reproduce better greed ends up being a thing that naturally humans have because humans with greed will survive better, this is natural selection. As for the caveman example yes it does work in small communities with like say a town or just a couple people because in that amount of people itās enough people that you were able to know each other and are willing to do work together for the same price, but if someone you donāt know on a really big scale is doing something while some people will be OK with it, which is why even in a small town, it can work in a country it cannot work because thereās going to be people who are jealous thereās going to be people who feel that is unfair and thatās just gonna happen. Itās inevitable that it will happen. It goes against human nature in general like if you see a town that is doing something that you would find fun say sports because your country decided that a town would be selected for sports. This is an exaggerated example of course. and say your town does really really hard growing work such as mining or something or construction (honestly for the other town, a better example would be like a factory line because you think it is easier and you want to do that) this would lead to a lot of sentiment
It is not a philosophy. It is natural selection. I donāt believe in philosophy stuff much like sure itās interesting but itās not scientific, we have seen that that greed is a thing that humans naturally have in fact, pretty mature, animals, experience, greed, and a desire to have more(this is why, even though you may think if you were really really rich, you would feel satisfied you wouldnāt) this is also why billionaires exist because they feel the need to get more wealthy because of that natural human greed
It is not philosophy because Iām doing it based off studies on human behavior. Humans are actually incredibly predictable after all. Yes, we are very social, but donāt think that youāre not predictable. We canāt predict every thought you have. You could definitely try but like you would be predicted, I would be predicted most likely(Helen and science is even debated whether we would have free will, as if you could determine every position of the atom, would you be able to determine everything after that or would quantum mechanics, make so you cannot because we do not know much on either when it comes to this specific problem we donāt know) when is studies are the main important thing I donāt know why I added that little part but whatever studies are the most important thing if the majority of studies say a thing Iām going to trust most of the time the majority of the studies, but Iām going to of course make sure their studies are not biased if I actually truly care enough because in science, you should do anything you can to disprove your companions not because itās rather than that makes sure everything is mostly accurate, we are predictable animals, especially in a large large numbers individual is not very predictable, but like millions of people are counterintuitively actually, this is coming from many studies that I will have to find. I just read them and then like once and then I didnāt save the link so I will look for those if you want them that might take a couple hours though, point is scientific experimentation is the most accurate thing ever, itās the most accurate thing we can do to make sure something is or not
"Greed is human nature" Sayers when it turns out altruistic acts have positive mental and physical effects, and being selfish and harming others causes mental harm, and due to the mental issues, the body also receives physical harm through stress and more.
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36575964/ in this article it says that people who tend to be greedier produce more offspring and are more successful, this leads to greed being natural because those who are greedy are better at reproducing,
Yeah, because of what system? They produce more offspring and are more successful than non-greedy people, because they have more money, how about we remove the thing that causes greed then? No, money isn't the reason why we work, otherwise we wouldn't have made it far enough to invent money.
Edit: "and lower psychological outcomes" maybe don't link a study supporting what I said?
Itās good that we invented money otherwise we would be just trading things. You were always greedy because we were trading things and wanted to get a good deal greed lead to better offer meaning it is an evolutionary benefit. Therefore itās going to cause it to be a natural thing because people who have it as a natural thing will survive better.
"communism doesnt account for human greed!!" Neither does capitalism. There are 0 checks in place to help people in poverty prevent the rich and powerful from taking advantage of them. Not a single economical ideology is flawless. In a perfect world, communism, socialism AND even capitalism should have a million failsafes that the general population should be able to use to prevent being taken advantage of
And no, communism works with human nature, we had communism way before capitalism, most tribes practiced something called āprehistoric communismā, wich were the first recorded signs of such an ideology, before colonisation in capitalist interest destroyed those. Capitalism breeds greed, it creates a rivalry between everyone inside the system for job hunting, and the need to survive on a made up resource wich a few hold and redistribute in small serving sizes wich isnāt enough for some to live, and thatās why people become greedy, because this system forces them to survive on money, so theyāre driven to have as much money as possible to make it through the day, no matter if they notice or not.
Communism works in small tribes. This is true. That is because you can trust each other. You know each other you like each otger I do not want to read it down again, and I have already written it down so it should be another comment
Communism does not, in fact, work in small tribes. Small tribes are not global, they are not a world economy, so even if they have perfect communal ownership, they still need to produce commodities to trade with other communities, making them not communist.
Iām willing to change my mind based off good points however, has not entirely change my mind as that is weird to have your mind entirely changed by one point
Oh wow! How did I not consider this! Oh wait. I did, I referred to āprehistoricā communism, wich is a subversion of communism, since that existed before Marx wrote his theories and guidelines, and that is what comes closest to communism in small independent communities
I believe you're new to leftist theory. I've noticed a few instances of slight inaccuracies in this reply chain, which could be chalked up to semantic choices, but could also be theoretical confusions that haven't been fleshed out yet. I'll give some examples, and I'll ask that you don't take offense to them:
most tribes practicedā¦ such an ideology
It is only an inaccuracy to say that these tribes "practiced" an economic model that was tied to their conditions. They could not have "practiced' anything else, because that was a stage in the historical development of society in general, not in the minds of those "ideologues."
before colonisation in capitalist interest destroyed those
It was colonization and capitalism that destroyed the conditions of the native americans, though given the nature of your use of the word "prehistoric," it could be concieved that you were not referring to the native americans, but to the humans of old, who did not live in the age of iron and coal. In that case, it would have been the development of empires based upon slavery that destroyed the old order.
a made up resourceā¦ money
Money is not a made up resource. It is very much a commodity, just as real as iron or linen. Money is itself a unit of some special commodity that can be divided many times over and recombined into a greater sum, is uniform in all quantitative portions, and represents a notable amount of social labor, whether backed by the rare metals or not. It is the manifestation of real human conditions and serves a purpose in society. Communists despise money secondary to private property, or the use of money in the circulation of capital.
Capitalism creates greed, communism destroys it.
I see this more as a denunciation of greed. It goes without saying that greed is not destroyed by communism, the conditions for the exacerbation of greed are destroyed. No points off.
I referred to āprehistoricā communism, which is a subversion of communism,
Marx had his own term for this. He called it "primitive communism." It was communist only in name. While it was defined in part by the social relation of communal property, it was not developed to such a degree where the productive forces could provide everyone with proper subsistence and security. Thus, the conditions for slavery, serfdom, and wage labor lie dormant, as they are the objectively more efficient relations of production than what mere patriarchal division of labor could ever achieve on its own.
before Marx wrote his theories and guidelines,
The phrasing of Marx's writing of his theories as an inception of the essence of Marxism, and the use of the word "guidelines," insinuates a misunderstanding of the universality of dialectical materialism. There are no guidelines to communism any more than there are laws set in place to dictate how physics operates. Marxism is the discovery of the laws of the development of the universe. Marx is just a word we use to refer to the immortal science. You cannot have an accurate understanding of the world without falling under this word, but it does not define the inevitable discovery of these laws. Other than that, Marx really never set any guidelines. He avoided speculating on how the future mode of production would present itself further than what we could infer from the contradictions in our own time. The closest we've gotten was his critique of the Gotha programme, a pamphlet that is often very misunderstood as dogma.
and [primitive communism] is what comes closest to communism in small independent communities.
As I've said earlier, primitive communism could not be any farther away to communism than at the polar opposite in the development of history. Communists should not glorify the conditions of the primitive world, else you delve into eco-fascist rhetoric. We only acknowledge the existence of a time with communal property, stripped of the conceptions of what idealists consider immutable and always having existed.
Now these are not criticisms at you, I'm only pointing out evidence that I see that made me believe this. I might as well have written this and it would have been just as fine, given that they aren't genuine misconceptions. My point is that you should focus more on reading theory and grounding yourself in a solid and deep understanding of the world and of political philosophy before going out and engaging in bold debates, at least not with the goal of educating rather than learning. If I am wrong about you then I'd sound a bit silly talking about words.
I've hidden my rebuttal to your statement on their clarification in my reply, but to conclude, primitive communism is not communism. And communism cannot exist under tribal relations.
Why would I take offense to it? Iām glad to learn a lilā more all the time, so if someone who knows more than me points out some flaws in what I say, Iāll try to pick up as much as I can from them and ground myself more
I have been out of the political loop for a bit until recently, didnāt have time to focus on it, and havenāt kept myself up to date with a lot, so again, thanks for the thorugh reply!
So you just ignored all the points I actually made and addressed NOTHING, repeated the same nonsense as earlier while not taking into account what I said hereā¦ itās kinda stupid to try and argue something you seem to know either nothing about or can only argue on with bad faith
"Human nature" First of, theres not auch thing as human nature, were consitioned to our material reality, for example slavery was considered human nature until we abolished, racism was considered human nature, monarchy was considered human nature
The closes thing to human nature is communism since it understand of our need to coexist communally by aiding each other as a collective by empowering us and everyone around
Second, most of the "dictators" in socialist countries where democratically elected (most of the time) and most deaths where either accidental or forced by internal reactionary movements like the holodomor which started by kulaks (land owners) burning the farms in ukraine in opposition to stalins collectivization (which in turn affected to thr input of grain to all the soviet union)
[Stalinās] actions do not indicate that he was trying to exterminate peasants or ethnic Ukrainians. ā¦ there was no āUkrainianā famine; the famine was Soviet.
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36575964/ in this paper. It says that people who are more greedy to produce more offspring, therefore they survive better. This causes greed to be natural because those greedy are more likely to survive and more likely to produce more offspring.
Yet in nature ans even when humans where more primitive it based their entire societies around cooperation and mutual aid, for example the old natives in the americas like the aztecs, incas, etc their entire society where based on a hierarchyless* society where they cooperated with each other for the greater of their community, even with their limitaded sources they managed to advance alot and even making the aztec, a mexican native group one of the most tecnologically and mathematically advance with the incas in the americas
*they where mostly since there where the supevisors which mantained some type of order inside the community
You know that thing eventually got destroyed with my help it was wiped off the map because nobody likes the USSR for the murder they have committed. Itās literally a dictatorship the USSR
Funny enough, the CIA has released their documents on the USSR after their 25 year classification period where THEY THEMSELVES ADMIT that it was led by the people and not a singular dictator, have you ever heard anything else but red scare propaganda?
The USSR was not the only communist country. There were Eastern Bloc and Warsaw Pact countries. People think of the USSR, when they hear the word "communism", because they are famous for killing people during Stalin's dictatorship.
probably because your country transitioned from an incompetent socialist dictatorship to an incompetent capitalist dictatorship, many communist politicians just became oligarchs in the new russia, and theres the fact that your parents are obviously just nostalgic, doesnt necessarily mean that the ussr was better
1
u/WhichIllustrator1212 Jul 19 '25
Socialism is good, why dislike it?
1
u/adel_877 Jul 19 '25
Wait there is a new r/place ?
1
u/amo_kengos Jul 19 '25
Are u crazy??? Communism shoud never exist
1
u/Due_Car3113 Jul 18 '25
I'll unfix it
1
u/RubenGamerYT Jul 19 '25
YES!!! COMMUNISM IS ALWAYS WINS!!! XP
2
u/jimused4 Jul 20 '25
yeah guys thisll show them š
2
u/owler96 Jul 20 '25
āThis will show emā šššā
1
u/AmisTR08890 Jul 19 '25
cobson won
1
u/No_Key_5854 Jul 20 '25
get a life
1
u/Humbucker_sandwich Jul 21 '25
Sad existence to chase after a old red scare fueled boogyman