• Demdaru@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    10 months ago

    It’s similiar, not the same. From what I recall, Americans didn’t have their country violently buttfucked behind a curtain, something that is still visible where I live - thankfully less so in the country itself, but it’s still embedded into people. And I don’t fear communism. I despise it. I do admit, maybe unjustly. Hard to feel otherwise though, seeing effects of one of the greatest, or at least highest scale shots at it’s implementation.

    However, yeah, my definition of socialism must be fucked, will educate myself further before making fool out of myself again. :|

      • Demdaru@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        10 months ago

        To be quite honest, it seems to me - and I can be wrong - that it simply substituted power of wealth for power of position. Where I live I know that during occupation people were deemed as important based on where they worked - because where they worked dictated what they could steal obtain, be it items, access or favors.

        There always will be someone on top, one way or the other. In capitalist society, it’s the guy who has the most money. In co- … socialist…? society it’s the guy with most connections.

      • SupraMario@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        10 months ago

        Because there is not a way for communism to work… sounds great on paper but always ends the same.

          • SupraMario@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            5
            ·
            10 months ago

            You can doubt it all you want, but communism’s fatal flaw is humans. They will always want more.

            • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              5
              ·
              10 months ago

              Why is it bad for people to want more in Communism? Do you think once a Stateless, Classless, Moneyless society would be reached, people would want to regress?

              • StellarExtract@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                10 months ago

                This is an aspect I’m genuinely curious about (as someone who is relatively uneducated on this subject) because my answer would be that yes, there will definitely be people who want to regress. There have always been individuals who are willing to sacrifice absolutely anything to obtain more material wealth or power. They’re a minority, but their existence has to be assumed and accounted for. For all of capitalism’s failings, one of its strengths is that it does give these people a path to follow that produces (some) benefit to society. How does a fully-implemented communist society deal with these individuals without them subverting and corrupting the system?

                • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  10 months ago

                  I think a big misconception on your own part is that Communism would put a ceiling on people. It would, perhaps, in the sense that it wouldn’t let people lord over others, but it would absolutely not prevent people from working to improve their own material conditions. In fact, that’s one of the base assumptions made by Marx when proposing a Communist system!

                  The goal is a Stateless, Classless, Moneyless society, where you can get what you need from what you can give. It isn’t a society where everyone lives in a 700 Sq ft 2 bedroom apartment made of concrete, it’s a complex system meant to be built up towards, that would allow people to work on whatever they want and get whatever they want by working for it, as long as what they want isn’t a business to lord over people.

                  • StellarExtract@lemm.ee
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    3
                    ·
                    10 months ago

                    Thanks, I guess it’s the “get whatever they want” part that doesn’t make much sense to me. What if what I want is astronomical, and I want to get it by doing as little work as possible? Who says whether I can or can’t have it?

              • SupraMario@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                10 months ago

                That’s not how human nature works. You really think you can sit there and tell me that someone who did 10 years of school and has the knowledge to operate and save people should be getting the same as someone who’s job is to cook you fast food? You live in a fantasy land where the Star Trek replicators exists. No one is going to do more work for the same amount as someone who does less. Society doesn’t work this way.

                • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  10 months ago

                  That’s not what Communism is, though. Even Marx says that Skilled labor is represented in value by that which labor power is required to recreate it, ie training adds value to labor.

                  • SupraMario@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    2
                    arrow-down
                    1
                    ·
                    10 months ago

                    Cool, so what is that value then? Bigger home? More land? Larger car? You see where I’m going with this right? Cause if you’re not going to reward someone for doing more, then they’ll just do the least…and if you do reward them, then isn’t that just capitalism with more steps?

    • iain@feddit.nl
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      10 months ago

      The problem is that people point to the problems of the USSR and say it’s because of communism, but when the USA does similar things, it’s just them fucking up, not because they’re capitalist. It’s a double standard hinted at by OP.

      The problem with the USSR was not that they were communist. I think that communism worked well for them, which magnified both their successes (beating nazis, reducing poverty, increasing literacy, getting to space, etc), but also magnified their mistakes (suppressing religion, art, etc).