How a communist regime should work

There are a few things in what you said that can be completely eliminated through communism. First of all, degrees. There is no need for a degree, so your correct, you having a degree means you are just as worthy as a garbage man. If your a good cook, be a chef, no need for culinary school. If you are goign to be a doctor, learn from the doctors, no need for 7 years of medical school, or atleast no need for the 'degree' you receive from it. If people stopped hireing according to degree, we would have people that are much better at there professions, and with much more diverse skills instead of the standards that they teach you in school. So everybody with a particular degree, knows the same exact thing. I don't want all the people that i exist with to have a mirror image of the next.

You stating that 'Working hard to live comfortably' is how it should be, is correct. Except that isn't really how it works right now. Although many people do work very hard, and live 'comfortably' for the FEW hours a week that they are home, there are those that work very very VERY little, and live comfortably inside, outside, and around there homes. Why? because they are head CEO or representatives who do nothing except attend a meeting every once in a while and pay everybody else to do their work. We think the amount of time that we work is normal and necessary in order for us to function and live. NOT TRUE. We work EXCESSIVE hours over the time that is truely needed to operate our society. They make us think that these hours we work are standard and not at all inhumane or out of the norm. When we work all these hours we produce enough product for the entire world plus 1/3 (133% of the worlds population). Yet over half the world is hungry and in poverty,(+50%) so atleast 73% of what we produce ends up... well who knows where. So if we could produce 1/3 less, while still working 30-40 hours a week within just europe and the americas' working class, then in theory, we could work just 2/3s the amount that we do now, and still produce enough for the entire world. Now take that, and divide those hours throughout the entire world population. what could our hours possibly be? an hour and a half a week? Even if we just broke it down to a level where each community worked equally to support only itself, hours would still be WAY down.

And about the "bigger more intrusive government".

No government is bigger and more intrusive than the united states'. im not going into detail on that one either. And if you are speaking of communism as cuba, russia, or china, then you have the wrong idea of a real communist lifestyle. there is NO government or authority figure in a communist society. communism is somewhat like a product of anarchy. which you probably have the wrong idea of also.

Anyway, sorry to bash on your post directly. Nothing personal, just trying to get some wide spread misunderstandings across to everybody else as well.

 

If people were all good natured and truly cared for each other we wouldn't need a government. However we don't live in a Utopian society my friend, nor will we ever (humans are too flawed). The ideal of working hard to obtain the things you want is indeed a good ideal too, however there's only so much that can be "obtained" and when a minority of the people start to horde due to greed then that naturally leaves less for others. Granted, there's more than enough to go around (natural resources that is), but people willingly choose not to share with each other. If every one had an equal share of "things" who would be more powerful? And as history has proven time and time again people love power. There is no perfect government for people, as people are simply too driven by their own personal will. So, while I hate the ideal of government there has to be some way to maintain equality, because people simply won't maintain it on their own.

Exactly....I just had a similar conversation with an individual on a train ride I took across the country. The ideal of paying the actual value of a product goes right along with the ideal of paying the full value of labor, because the selling of the product obviously helps to pay for the cost of the labor. Our current government tries to compensate for this with subsidies. Big corporations make more money based almost entirely off what we are talking about. They can charge less for their products, because they can pay less for the labor needed to produce them.

Amen! Colleges are first and foremost a business anyways. In a way they actually take away from the ideal of opportunity and equality. Most people are under the impression that you can go to school, get a degree and "make something of yourself" (ie. make money). College is VERY expensive, hence most people cannot afford it. Most people will argue that it is affordable due to student loans, however those loans have to be paid with interest, this discourages many people from attending college. In addition to that, just because one has a degree does not mean they will be getting a "well paying" job right out of college...how will they pay the debts of now? So, essentially those who can afford college attend college, creating even more of an imbalance in terms of equality, because those who cannot afford it are left without degrees and as we all know many better paying jobs require them.

The exploitation of the masses.....yet no one seems to care, because it's the "norm". Ignorance really is the "elites" best weapon.

 

Flawed in comparison to what? What is a Utopian society? Isn't that more of an opinion then a real objective state? For someone who generally hates all of man kind, a Utopian state might be a world with out ANY people.

People are the way they are, to say that they are flawed makes about as much sense as saying that cows or birds or dogs are flawed. They have their features, sure, and to deny these features would be an error.. But to say that people are "flawed" because they don't fit into some system we make in our heads after the fact should mean that the system just doesn't consider human characteristics properly.

I know who would be more powerful. The institution or body of people that has the power to other people to share, even when it goes against their will.

I don't understand the logic behind arguing for a government on the grounds that it will maintain equality or make everyone equal. Sure everyone under the government might be equal, but if that is the case, the government will be "more equal" then everyone else. This is contradictory.

What is actual value? How is it determined? If you are suggesting that labor determines price, I would disagree with you.

 

A Utopian society is basically a society that maintains equality amongst all people through justice, rights, property, work etc...It's slowly taken on more of a "dream society" definition, as it's something that is virtually impossible. You're right though, just as most words are up for interpretation so is Utopian....it's very subjective as you've stated.

You make a VERY good point. You see, that's why I enjoy posting in conversations such as this one, because I get to hear other opinions and often learn much from them. I suppose by flawed I mean that we're not perfect in a sense that we often take more than we need, which leads to others not having enough. Greed, anger, slothfulness, etc...etc...The 7 deadly sins does a good job at summing up our "flaws", if they can even be labeled that, as you pointed out.

I'm not necessarily arguing for one, just stating that it'd be nice if the government could help to create more of it, as "unregulated" humans don't really have much of a concept of equality. I do realize that those who control politics are then "more equal" that's obvious, there's essentially no way around this as man will always crave power. If things were the way I wished they were I'd have no government, but that's being very unrealistic....I suppose that'd be my ideal of a Utopian society.

Not at all, labor does not entirely determine price, for the most part supply and demand determines that. Actual value now is determined by the distributors for the most part, as they make the prices. That is influenced by supply/demand and labor costs. Actual value in a true sense would be paying the actual cost of labor and materials. Tacking on an additional value would only increase profit, which can still be included in "actual value" as there must be a profit made or the product will cease to be produced, especially in a Capitalist economy.

 

Certainly some people might appear to be greedy or overly materialistic by some standards, but I don't think we can criticize these people anymore then we can criticize other people for choosing to live simple lives. People in communes, people who live with nothing but "the clothes on their backs", people who refuse to work for others and prefer to acquire all of their belongings for themselves.

These are all life choices, and to say one is more legitimate then the other seems sort of shallow.

Now I'm not saying all life choices are legitimate, at least in an anarchists view point. As long as one avoids theft, murder, fraud, and other such activities (unlike the present fat cats on wall street-US government conglomerate who is robbing taxpayers of billions), I think these actions should be considered legitimate, as they do no directly harm anyone else.

I understand. I don't offer a Utopian society. I offer a stateless society.

What do you mean "actual value". Prices and value are not the same, I assume?

 

now you forget that americans are generally more greedy than most other peoples in the world, other morals do exist at other places. please don't forget that you grew up in a greedy society. in other places all pver the world extended family connections are more important and to keep them together every single bit of material wealth is shared, everyone supports each other till the and, because its your family. how do I know americans are greedy? I've seen americans everyday of my life, on tv and I grew up in a totally different setting that unfortunately is bound to change into something similar to your own greedy fat ugly and empty culture, all because of the lovely globalization process we're stuck in.

 

binding refferendems
let the people vote and let there votes count!

Communisim is the last step of the revolution,
in communisim there will be no goverment
in the transition socialisim there will be goverment,
the question is will socialisim be corrupted like china and
a new elite class will be born,
if that happens we will be at tiannamen square again
singing the international,
and the hard work of the revolution will have to start again.

Let the people decide how we do,
power to the people.

Comrade Stalin Guevara.

 

if it were meant to work, it would have worked. but it hasn't, it's ALWAYS led to dictatorship.

 

capitalisim is not evil neither is communisim what is,
is the way the ruling elite inturpret it,
neither ideology is ment to have a ruling class its just the victorious revolutionarys
of both ideologys chose to make themselves a ruling class this is where both systems fail

only the anarchist led libertarian/communist revolution in spain of 1936-37 has ever been able to achive a elite less society without goverment.