Ok. I’m getting tired. You bested me this round. Have a nice day.

You say it’s the goal of the proletariat to protect the revolution, but why would they? Each proletariat would benefit from the revolution’s failure- they could live better lives as the bourgeois. You talk about the proletariat like they are some monolithic entity, with a single mind and goal. You talk big about helping the individual, but cannot see beyond their class. The proletariat is a person, with needs, desires and opinions. What father would hold the abstract ideals of the “revolution” over the life of his sick daughter? Any father I know would do anything for the safety of his children, even hoard life-saving medicine from others.

Communist logix

we need to abolish private property so everybody has equal power.

we class of people to maintain public ownership

After all, how can we enforce public ownership without a more powerful class of enforcers?

Okay, but what is sparc and pa-risc?

Sorry, I should’ve been more thorough. I meant it functionally ignores the concept of unequal power. Any sufficiently large group effort will eventually build a power structure, regardless of whether it’s capitalist or communist.

It’s less about the fallibility of humans, and more mathematical than that. A person ability to acquire wealth is proportional to the current wealth they have. (And I’m not just talking about money, I’m taking about resources and power) As a result, those with a tendency to act nastier have an advantage in gaining wealth. This same issue is present in a communist economy, because while communism eschues the concept of money, it does not reject the idea of unequal power. Even some super intelligent AI wouldn’t be able to fix this, as long as it was forced to give humanity basic freedoms and follow communist ideals.

Honestly, this whole communism vs capitalism debate is beneficial to the powers that be, since neither system actually tries to prevent the acquisition of power or the abuse of it.

Here I thought this was an IT crowd reference.

My big issue with socialism is more about the implementation. I’m not sure there is a way of enforcing socialism that isn’t antithetical to the goal of socialism- a more even distribution of power (which we quantify as wealth in a capitalist society).

In general, I don’t think there are any stable economic systems that don’t decay into feudalism when abused. At least for the economic systems we’ve come up with so far. The best one I know of is the gift economy, but that requires people to not expect something in return, because otherwise it could be reduced down to capitalism.

In short, all the economic systems so far, despite their best intentions, reinforce inequality.

goes on an anti-tankie post Comments that his posts are always dogpilled by the most anti-tankie group. Claims ad hominem when someone points it out.

:)

1 yard is about a meter. 3 feet in a yard. Just divide by 3 and that’s good enough for 99% of cases.

OG Content Posted on Lemmy!

Do you know of a community to discuss this? I feel like people stop criticizing economic systems once they benefit from it, and so people just default to communism or capitalism without actually considering the game theory behind it all.

I hate being lumped in with all the zoomers in gen z. To me, gen Z is really two generations, gen Z is 1997-2006 and zoomers are 2006-2015. There’s just a huge cultural gap, at least in my experience. I’ll talk about how all my school computers used windows XP, and zoomers will just stare at me like I’m ancient or something.