The theoretical basis for the triumph of communism

[Heraclitus]

Originally posted by Jon Miller
They don't in authoritarian systems. Well, until they rebel. It is true that the 'masters' have done a good job for all of history keeping the people down or fooled. However, at times there have been rebellions. One thing is that with greater information, there might be more opportunities... (although so far it seems to be easily controlled)

JM

Do not assume change is possible only because it is desirable.


If I where to argue that Democracy is less the result of people rebelling angainst the system and more of the interests of the elites I would have a strong case.

Also technology could change the people to make them more servile.





I rather put my hopes into a freer system also being more productive and thus desirable because of that.

[Heraclitus]

Originally posted by Kidicious


I think the difference is the level of population that we have now, compared to then. There's no way anarcho-communism can work with population like this.

Why? Create millions of micro communities and viola anarchocommunist Earth.



All you have to do is ensure none of the communities mutates into classical government and goes about conquering the others. All that is needed is a mechanism to isolate "cancerous" communities.

Unfortunately the only way to make such micro communities is to limit freedom of movement kind of defeating the purpose of anarcho communism.

[Darius871]

Originally posted by Kidicious


The're talking about anarcho-communism which is something that hasn't been tried.

Hasn't happened onaccounta it ain't gonna happen, at least not without some intermediate phase wherein the state actually uses its coercive mechanisms to distribute the means of production in such a manner that anarcho-communism might subsequently begin and survive.

Oh who are we kidding, in the absence of a state some group will eventually start taking whatever they can from others, no matter how the system started out. It's with some sort of state or not at all. Unless you seriously think 100.00% of all citizens will stick to the program out of the goodness of their hearts. Well who knows, maybe you do think that.

[Chemical Ollie]

The reason it hasn't been tried is because it would not work. Or perhaps it has, west of Pecos in the mid 1800's? The wild west, every man for himself. Because that's what it would turn into. Human nature is egoistic, you promote yourself and your family over collective good. There are many exceptions, but a majority of the population would turn an anarchist society into the wild west.

[Heraclitus]

That is why I have been asking for opinions on planned economy assisted by information technology.

[Darius871]

Originally posted by Heraclitus
That is why I have been asking for opinions on planned economy assisted by information technology.

Why wouldn't it work with enough information-age automation? Instead of just going to the grocery and complaining that the command economy's managers didn't produce enough X consumer good to meet demand, you could just go to the computer and enter in your basic needs of X for the month, which are automatically submitted to a central database that uses relatively simple algorithms to determine how much of X needs to be manufactured and to where it needs to be shipped. The database then sends that exact information to the relevant factories and shippers.

All it really takes is the combination of basic production/shipping infrastructure, proactive planning, and ubiquitous internet connections to handle the logistics. The real problem is dealing with all the jerks who won't get with the program (e.g. not going to work because they don't have to, wanting types of jobs other than the ones they're assigned to, demanding more than basic needs, succumbing to basic human nature, etc.), but that can be easily solved with some equivalent of Soma, or barring that just some good old-fashioned gulags.

I don't think I'm missing anything, am I?

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Darius871
Hasn't happened onaccounta it ain't gonna happen, at least not without some intermediate phase wherein the state actually uses its coercive mechanisms to distribute the means of production in such a manner that anarcho-communism might subsequently begin and survive.

Oh who are we kidding, in the absence of a state some group will eventually start taking whatever they can from others, no matter how the system started out. It's with some sort of state or not at all. Unless you seriously think 100.00% of all citizens will stick to the program out of the goodness of their hearts. Well who knows, maybe you do think that.

I don't propose anarcho-communism because I don't believe it would work with such a large population. But assuming populations were small enough, like native american populations before europeans came, it should be able to work. I don't think it's as much people having good hearts (native americans don't have better hearts than anyone else) as it is a problem to exploit people without some institutions in place that promote that.

[Japher]

The best thing about communism is it's success on a theoretical basis. After that, it's all down hill. Especially the part when the Hoff shows up.

[Darius871]

Originally posted by Kidicious
I don't propose anarcho-communism because I don't believe it would work with such a large population. But assuming populations were small enough, like native american populations before europeans came, it should be able to work. I don't think it's as much people having good hearts (native americans don't have better hearts than anyone else) as it is a problem to exploit people without some institutions in place that promote that.

So how do you propose we make it happen? Nuclear war or plague are about all I can think of. Unless of course the discussion is purely academic. Oh wait, it is.

[Jon Miller]

Basically, we need a new serving class... robots.

JM

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Darius871


So how do you propose we make it happen? Nuclear war or plague are about all I can think of. Unless the discussion is just entirely academic of course.

I just said I don't propose it.

[Darius871]

Meh, when typing "propose" I was really thinking "suppose." How do you suppose that initially comes about, in a purely academic sense?

[onodera]

As I've said in one of my previous posts, planned economy has to scale up to meet the varied demands of modern people (100 chumbawambas cannot manufacture PCs) and large-scale planned economy needs sufficient computing power.
I doubt you could support the economy of EU with a modern supercomputer. You need something more powerful.
And yeah, obliterating the concepts of fashion and luxury will help.

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Darius871
Meh, when typing "propose" I was really thinking "suppose." How do you suppose that initially comes about, in a purely academic sense?

At first you said "make it happen" and now you are saying "comes about." I don't propose making it happen. I suppose it could happen if populations were much small enough at some point in the future. I don't predict it though.

[Darius871]

Ah.