Message from @styles
Discord ID: 364210398720950275
because 1: it is a primary human instinct to put themselves above everything else
and 2: most of them are smart enough to get in such economic power in the first place they know it wouldnt work
you cant just 'equally' give the wealth of the economy to everyone
I disagree. Read the article, it's actually very interesting.
there is too much exploitation involved
You realize for most of human history, wages didn't exist?
if a wage didnt exist it was either slavery or they were in a family
The point isn't to "give" it to them, it's to make a system where that wealth can be distributed on the society's own terms, or even where wealth is not a primary factor in many life decisions.
Like I said
Ownership
Communism is basically like mutual aid societies
But instead the input is the work provided by everyone, and the output is what is derived from their work
so what happens if one person doesnt work
and another person sees that person not working, getting free benefits, and then everyone stops working?
You'd be pretty fucking bored out of your mind not doing anything with your life
This depends. Is the society automated?
You can't automate everything
the society is a normal society with the concept of communism applied
if it is automation then it isnt communism because the people arent in control
So basically the level of automation we have now?
yea that would work the same
our current state of automation still requires people to work
the machines just wont handle things correctly if they dont have ppl working
Wrong. Automation would still be communist. It just wouldn't be people in the factories.
I don't mean automation as in "machines make some of the decisions"
I mean automated production.
ye then thats the same situation
someones still gotta flip the switches
and whoever does that is whoever can control the production
if it requires effort, then ppl will just choose 'not to do it'
if it doesnt require effort, people will just choose to 'take more for themselves'
plus as the other guy said someone will probably just start killing people out of boredom
The point of production will be use though.
You're not producing for the sake of possibly selling some of the products like in capitalism.
It's hard to talk about because detailing exactly how a socialist society will organize itself is like predicting the future.
but at a point of the second definition i put then it would have to be socialistic economy with no choice
because capitalism wont work in a society where there is no way to make money
its just the fact that it would be inherently more chaotic because people would have no work and no purpose
Marx proposed labor vouchers. Non-transferable, tied to the amount of time you worked (job dependent I believe), and directly tied to you.