Is Communism/Socialism tenable or plausible at all, /his/?
Humans are too greedy in nature
Socialist structures have been in practice for the past 150 years and current socialist-leaning countries are still holding their own today.
But eventually something like true socialism/communism will have to take hold as resources become more scarce. Capitalism banks on a plethora of major resources to accumulate, produce, and sell in a market, but that market goes into a full panic mode when the product becomes scarce.
Take whale blubber for example, as whales died, blubber for lanterns became extremely hard, forcing people to ration it and divide it among people so that it could still be used, until it was replaced with the rise of fossil fuels and oil.
Once major resources become depleted, rationing and dividing what's left among the people for common use becomes a necessity until a plentiful substitute is found.
but Capitalist markets have always survived because a substitute was always found to replace the depleted resource, I don't think we've come into a situation yet where a resource became scarce with no alternative methods to replace it. should be interesting to see when it happens.
>>685347
Your argument makes sense but I feel like in modern times except for something really really hard to make like oil gasoline society will find a new source of resources.
Iron, copper, silicon, uranium and coal are all plenty abundant.
>>685355
This is an argument that I hear a lot from students of economics. Is it an axiom or something?
>>685309
that means you make checks and balances for them not put the most greedy in power
>>685360
Nope, Engineering student. As far as I'm concerned many of the materials I work with are hugely abundant. What's an example of something you believe will become scarce soon?
>>685347
Something interesting to point out would be the tremendous waste endemic to the capitalist mode of production. Things are produced based on the law of value. Consumer base in the United States can demand a 400% increase in the production of cat calendars and they'll be produced despite not being valuable to society. Conversely, demand can go down 400% suddenly and then you have a bunch of shit that can't even be used - take the recent oil glut as an example.
One of the arguments for Socialism is that eliminating competition and eliminating production strictly for those with enough resources to purchase them is a saner form of economics. In a world where resources are becoming scarcer it's arguable socialism might be a way to avert crisis rather than function as a last resort.
>>685347
Countries that are economically isolated or in war could have this problem. In North Korea, a lot of stuff is scarce so there is a blackmarket among everyone who is not the absolute elite. This shows that even people who are in comfy positions for life are willing to work with the lower class even if their needs are as trivial as razor blades.
>>685355
There's already fuels like ethanol that could replace gas soon after the cost of making ethanol is cheaper than the cost of making gas.
>>685307
Nope.
It's utopian idealism.
Even the nordic model is currently being proven as unsustainable.
>>685482
>Even the nordic model is currently being proven as unsustainable.
How so?
>>685488
Few thousand migrants crashing their safety net.
Unskilled labor is naturally attracted to the gibs but their benefits are too cushy to support a large influx.
>>685381
But the bureaucrats at the head of whichever communist party in charge would be just as likely to make the mistake of ordering a 400% increase in, well maybe not cat calendars, but something else.
>>685482
I live in a Nordic country. Most of the economists and politicians around here agree that the model is perfectly sustainable if:
a: people work longer (in years) as they live longer lives
b: immigrants are educated and properly added to the work force
Essentially, it cannot work if too many people are on some degree of welfare. but that goes for every country in the West
>>685509
an influx amounting to 0,1 % of the population, at working age on top of that, should hardly crash the system.
>>685307
China is communist right now and it's doing pretty well.
>>685535
Pretty sure they're Communist in name only at this point, no?
>>685535
China is not communist
>>685381
>Consumer base in the United States can demand a 400% increase in the production of cat calendars and they'll be produced despite not being valuable to society.
You've contradicted yourself.
>>685360
It's the substitution effect.
>>685482
The nordic model is social democratic and as such capitalist. The fact that it is unable to mend the problems of capitalism long-term is an argument for, not against socialism.
Also socialism or at least Marxism is the opposite of idealist. Marx wrote Das Kapital to turn socialism into a science and develop it past the early so called "utopian socialist" ideas prevalent andd France and elsewhere. Historical materialism, ho!
>>685815
in France*
>>685368
Isn't there a problem with oil?
>>685307
not really because you can't dictate or predict market behavior efficiently due to the market's inherent unpredictability, hence you will always fall behind.
Huertas de Soto explains it perfectly
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V14c1nnzfeA
BTW, that teacher is redpilled as fuck, shame most of his classes aren't translated to english is truly joy to listen to those classes.
>>685307
I live in a former soviet republic. As someone said, greed and corruption and human nature in general prevent this utopia from happening. Also alot of socialists are hipocrites. TLDR Look up Orwell's Animal Farm, he's right.
>>685822
> a lot of socialists are hipocrites
For example Soviet Union comes with pretended to be retarded meme ages ago. Common joke of socialist times is that party pretends to pay you, while you pretending to work.
>>685307
There is no economic calculation in socialism. Any "price" is set up or governed by things different than personal choices.
>>685347
There is a discrete, limited, known quantity of Rembrandt paintings and they still sell on the market.
Few countries now really have socialists in power and they are atrocious.
>>685309
People are conscious selves with their own circumstances. This is what socialism goes against. It is pointless to invoke the loaded word greed.
>>685482
Capitalism + parasitism is not the same as socialism. One could argue it is theoretically an opposite (though often called for by the same politicians) since it explicitly recognizes the superiority of capitalism but just extracts some gibsmedat instead of actually transforming the structure of production.
Nordic countries are noticeably easier on doing business, owning property, drafting work contracts, control of government expenditure and even in fiscal policies than my country (France). Welfarism is undesirable but is a distant offshot of socialism.
depends, both authoritarian socialism have their problems, stemming primarily from ideology.
>>685307
in a less typo filled version of my previous post. Communism is an advanced ideology, like national socialism, as such it faces large problems in that legislation is unable to solve the problems.
>>685828
I live in a former warsaw pact country(bulgaria). Today's "democrats" are actually the children of the communist party's higher echelon and most political leaders have had history with State security/secret police. Also if you oppose commies you're labeled a fascist or nazi until you show them some old party slogan for the molotov-ribentropp pact. The thing about the joke is that in order to have these "we do work for 5 years in 4 yet we steal and we're sloppy" 1st you have to have connections in order to allow yourself to "pretend" to work. 2nd its artificial. Bulgaria had to send all its gold reserves to Moscow in order to sustain this carefree way of life. TLDR: What's mine's mine, what's ours is mine too.
>>685828
desu that is a bloody good joke.
>>685847
nah. I just love the image of an entire building of workers doing nothing in cubicles but then over zealously pretending to work when the boss comes round, and then the boss over zealously and with grand sweeping gestures pretends to put pay checks in their pigeon holes.
>>685513
Why are nordic countries so damn sensible?
>>685309
T. Greedy egoist
>>685526
The influx is over 10% of the population. In Sweden they now have a ratio of men to women of 124 : 100 which is worse than China.
>>685509
> Few thousand migrants crashing their safety net.
It's more than "a few thousand" and it's far from "crashing the safety net", if you're talking about Sweden.
>>685920
>and it's far from "crashing the safety net"
http://www.upi.com/Top_News/World-News/2015/11/02/Sweden-facing-collapse-because-of-refugees-foreign-minister-says/6781446474063/
>Sweden's refugee crisis could lead to the country's collapse without European Union support, Swedish Foreign Minister Margot Wallstrom said.
>"I think most people feel that we cannot maintain a system where perhaps 190,000 people will arrive every year. In the long run, our system will collapse. And that welcome is not going to receive popular support. I have to admit that there have been moments recently of very great disappointment. I have heard statements from [EU] member states that have been completely astonishing and very discouraging," she told the newspaper Dagens Nyheter.
>>685925
If a huge numbers of immigrants are expected to arrive to Sweden year after year there will be problem. I don't know what your native language is nut that's not the same as you claimed. It doesn't even mention anything about the welfare being the problem where it's a bigger chance it's about housing.
But this is getting into current politics and your own article didn't support your claim.
>>685307
no, turns out capital isn't the root of all evil and proletariats aren't necessarily morally inclined, diligent and intelligent people just because they have been to the university of life
>>685535
Collectivist, market-based dictatorship is not socialism.
>>685945
I am not the same person as you were speaking to. I was specifically replying to your claim that Sweden was not struggling.
>>685815
The claim of communism being a science is honestly, a joke. It's as much of a science as atlantian armchair thinkers who find their "Inner Truths" and even Marx himself hated the "Bourgeoisie Sciences".
>>685969
> claim of communism being a science
Marx tried to be more scientific than his predecessors and some of his ideas were adopted by branches of humanitarian science. Doesn't mean that communism is science itself. Close situation to that one of Sigmund Freud and his influence on psychology for example.
>ITT: Idiots that don't understand anything about Socialism
Do you fucktards really think that Marx and Engels, the founding fathers of SOCIAL SCIENCE didn't understand how humans work? Think there is a reason Socialist thought is popular in the HUMANITIES?
The reason Socialism works is because it's based on building a rational system that itself manipulates peoples self-interest. It is in the self-interest of workers to get the best deal for themselves, it is in the best interest for the Bourgeoisie to get the best deal for themselves, so over time, because the Porkies have all the power, wealth and power will eventually centralize in the ruling classes along with other inherent issues in Capital, causing the workers to unite and rise against that class.
Socialism is grounded on the idea that the people then will make the rational decision to build a society that tries to do away with these contradictions in both society and econo
Of course it doesn't have too, humanity might just implode on in itself and everyone might kill each other and resort to feudalism, but that is where the saying comes from "Socialism or barbarism" Capitalism's end is inevitable, Socialism may it come in whatever form, is the next step for humanity.
"Muh greed" Why would you be greedy in a society where greed doesn't benefit you?
"Muh centralization of power" already happening in Capital, many schools of Socialist thought make power centralization literally impossible (Syndicalism, Council Communism, Anarcho-Communism)
Seriously the "LOL HUMAN NATURE" argument is so retarded and a-historical.
>>685854
Low population, have to make the best of scarce resources + there isn't virtually an endless amount of rich, or even poor people, so no fundamental social divide between different classes has had a chance to take place (that would outlast the early 1900's).
Basically, no desensitivization to people in general due to oversaturation in sheer numbers.
>>685990
> Think there is a reason Socialist thought is popular in the HUMANITIES?
Because it is a potent mix of semi-rationalism and slave-morality, infinitely appealing for an objectively best way of doing things, and the fact that it "just happens" to coincide with western morality sweetens the deal.
>The reason Socialism works is because it's based on building a rational system that itself manipulates peoples self-interest.
Socialism is not rational, no ideology is, it is simply materialistic and appeals to the lowest common denominator of people, i.e those motivated solely by material goods. It is a mistake to think that appealing to the lowest common denominator is the same thing as rationalism.
>Socialism is grounded on the idea that the people then will make the rational decision to build a society that tries to do away with these contradictions in both society and econo
Any such society would collapse in upon itself, not because of any structural failings, but because the people will revolt from the status quo under a new banner, for grievances that socialism will be unable to fix. Even if you gave the people a "perfect system" they would find something they didnt like and react against it.
>"Muh centralization of power" already happening in Capital, many schools of Socialist thought make power centralization literally impossible (Syndicalism, Council Communism, Anarcho-Communism)
Such ideologies are for those too stupid to realize that marx was originally right in the need for an authoritarian state. The ideologies rely on what is essentially a hive mind of no individual thought due to the "libertarian" aspects making the system so incredibly unstable.
>>685990
>Socialism works
>>685990
> the founding fathers of SOCIAL SCIENCE didn't understand how humans work
Yes. Human brain is most complicated object in known world. Newton couldn't even figure more simple stuff about movement of matter by himself in all important details. Can you name one of original Carl Marx prediction that comes to be true in the end? I don't see communist future from my window for example. Checkmate.
>>686032
>I don't see communist future from my window for example. Checkmate.
Soon, Tovarishch Anon, history hasn't ended yet.
>>685990
Socialism fails when brought into the reality of the capitalist system. How do you exactly predict cost, and then there's the fact of the socialist calculation problem. How would you calculate the value of something without the private exchange of goods to facilitate the marking of said cost?
>>686039
we are hurtling towards global capitalist hegemony, islamism, african warlords and the last few communist holdouts are not significant in the greater scheme of things and will fold soon
>>685990
>Socialism is grounded on the idea that the people then will make the rational decision to build a society that tries to do away with these contradictions in both society and econo
Transferring control of the economy to a "people's republic"? How is that rational?
>>685990
>Do you fucktards really think that Marx and Engels, the founding fathers of SOCIAL SCIENCE didn't understand how humans work?
No.
>The reason Socialism works is because it's based on building a rational system that itself manipulates peoples self-interest.
Such is also the claim of capitalism.
>It is in the self-interest of workers to get the best deal for themselves,
>Socialism is grounded on the idea that the people then will make the rational decision to build a society that tries to do away with these contradictions in both society and economics
You are making the mistake that humans are homo economicus.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homo_economicus
> "Socialism or barbarism"
Heh, so that's where that old faggot took the paradise or oblivion title.
>"Muh greed" Why would you be greedy in a society where greed doesn't benefit you?
Because it's an evolutionary constant.
>"Muh centralization of power" already happening in Capital
Tu quoque.
>many schools of Socialist thought make power centralization literally impossible (Syndicalism, Council Communism, Anarcho-Communism)
And those schools got swiftly eliminated by people like the Red Army and Franco, so it's proven they cannot defend themselves from outside threats. That's the problem with communism, it exists in a state of unstable equilibrium.
>>686060
*No, they didn't.
>>685990
>social """""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""science"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
- contradictory, vague, and unfalsifiable claims
- reliance on confirmation instead of refutation
- jargon that mimics scientific language but lacks the rigor and consensus which characterizes natural science
- interest in promotion of personal beliefs rather than the acquisition of knowledge
- reliance on assumed moral truths and ad hominem attacks
- total lack of universal consensus on almost all major theories
- refusal to allow other fields to comment on said theories
What's the difference between socialism and ufology again?
>>685979
Not entirely. Freud based his ideas at least, off trial and error. Marx based his "Scientific" ideals purely off whatever came to his head, and maybe a few observations here and there if he really gave a shit.
>>686063
>muh science
not a commie but you might be on the wrong board
>>686079
>le STEM vs Humanities meme xD
It's time to grow up. I'm sorry that physics was too hard for you but this resentment is hurting your argument; both fields have value but when morons start pretending that socialism is a science, somebody has to point out that it meets almost every single requirement for a pseudoscience. If you're not concerned that social science theories and ideologies are being treated as FACTS rather than rational arguments, maybe you're on the wrong board.
>>685307
What does that mean? It isn't designed to "work" in the first place. The point is that the Communists get to have a country of slaves.
>>685309
Fuck off.
>>686068
>Freud based his ideas at least, off trial and error.
Sure.
>Marx based his "Scientific" ideals purely off whatever came to his head,
Probably more like the opposite of what he thought would "work."
