What would a true communist society/country look like?

[Trolldor]

I didn't avoid the question at all.
But, again, absence of thought impedes you.

[Coito ergo sum]

Answer me this: what if someone doesn't want to work at all? Some guy is just damn lazy. Wants to stay home. Can he?

Why would he want to? He wouldn't be making very many friends that way.

Why does everyone evade the question?

I don't know why he would want to, but plenty of people do want to. There are plenty of slackers out there, who like to stay home and do as little as possible. Some have friends, others don't.

Now, can that guy stay home and not work at all? What if he says he isn't "able" to work? Who decides if he's "able" and what he's "able" to do?

Why are you and and Mad Hatter resistant to answering this question? I think I know why: because it exposes a gaping flaw in the supposed "ideal" system - and illustrates the reality that SOMEONE must decide, and it can't be the guy who says he's not able to work.

[Coito ergo sum]

I didn't avoid the question at all.

Of course you did. You never answered who decides an individual's need. You never answered who decides an individual's ability. And, you never answered whether the guy who says he has no ability to work get's to decide that on his own, or if someone else decides for him.

But, again, absence of thought impedes you.

I'm done with you. You don't want to really discuss something, and like some others you just want to dance and jig around the issues. Go for it. I thought you might want to have a real discussion of what communism means and what it would look like in practice. I was wrong.

[PsychoSerenity]

Answer me this: what if someone doesn't want to work at all? Some guy is just damn lazy. Wants to stay home. Can he?

Why would he want to? He wouldn't be making very many friends that way.

Why does everyone evade the question?

I don't know why he would want to, but plenty of people do want to. There are plenty of slackers out there, who like to stay home and do as little as possible. Some have friends, others don't.

Now, can that guy stay home and not work at all? What if he says he isn't "able" to work? Who decides if he's "able" and what he's "able" to do?

Why are you and and Mad Hatter resistant to answering this question? I think I know why: because it exposes a gaping flaw in the supposed "ideal" system - and illustrates the reality that SOMEONE must decide, and it can't be the guy who says he's not able to work.

Sure I'll answer the question. I don't know. I don't know enough about the supposed "ideal" system that you keep going on about, to know what the answer would be if that system was put in place.

But you are just glossing over the fact that exactly the same problem arises in capitalism. People don't decide for themselves what they're capable of; they do what they must to get by. And if they're lucky enough to be in a society that offer's them social support when they are unable to support themselves, SOMEONE must decide what they're entitled to.

[Coito ergo sum]

Answer me this: what if someone doesn't want to work at all? Some guy is just damn lazy. Wants to stay home. Can he?

Why would he want to? He wouldn't be making very many friends that way.

Why does everyone evade the question?

I don't know why he would want to, but plenty of people do want to. There are plenty of slackers out there, who like to stay home and do as little as possible. Some have friends, others don't.

Now, can that guy stay home and not work at all? What if he says he isn't "able" to work? Who decides if he's "able" and what he's "able" to do?

Why are you and and Mad Hatter resistant to answering this question? I think I know why: because it exposes a gaping flaw in the supposed "ideal" system - and illustrates the reality that SOMEONE must decide, and it can't be the guy who says he's not able to work.

Sure I'll answer the question. I don't know. I don't know enough about the supposed "ideal" system that you keep going on about, to know what the answer would be if that system was put in place.

Fair enough. Others seem to think they know about it. If you look at this portion of the conversation, it started with one person stating that the idea of communism is great. My followup was designed to elicit what's so great about it, since it seem rather horrid. It seems rather horrid, because if you are going to have a system of no private ownership of property and no private production of goods and services, and then have everyone receive according to their "need" and contribute according to their "ability" then someone must decide (other than individuals doing as they please, which is what we have now) what is produced, what property is used for, and what people's needs and abilities are. The fact that we as individuals might think our needs and abilities are different than what the decision maker(s) think they are seems obvious to me to be cause for quite some concern.

But you are just glossing over the fact that exactly the same problem arises in capitalism. People don't decide for themselves what they're capable of; they do what they must to get by.

Not true. They have many choices in our capitalist society today. A person getting into blue collar jobs can build cars, can work on bridges and roads, can do carpentry, electrical work, etc. Or, they can be an artist or whatever. Plenty of people make these choices every single day. Yes, people choose to do things, often, based on their economic necessity. But, it's still their choice.

And if they're lucky enough to be in a society that offer's them social support when they are unable to support themselves, SOMEONE must decide what they're entitled to.

Exactly! And, that SOMEONE is the State. So, if you are going to make it so that everyone is ONLY entitled to what they "need" (one of the basic pillars of communism) then the same type of analysis that goes into whether you "need" social assistance (and how much) will go into EVERYTHING that you get in a communist society. No longer will you be able to work hard and get more. You get what you "need" and only what you need, whether you work harder or not. Right?

[PsychoSerenity]

And if they're lucky enough to be in a society that offer's them social support when they are unable to support themselves, SOMEONE must decide what they're entitled to.

Exactly! And, that SOMEONE is the State. So, if you are going to make it so that everyone is ONLY entitled to what they "need" (one of the basic pillars of communism) then the same type of analysis that goes into whether you "need" social assistance (and how much) will go into EVERYTHING that you get in a communist society. No longer will you be able to work hard and get more. You get what you "need" and only what you need, whether you work harder or not. Right?

I'm not sure what you mean by State here. I would think it best if the people decided what the people need. And if you work harder, everyone benefits. It seems obvious to me that cooperation has the potential to be more productive than competition, and I wouldn't have a problem with living like that.

[Trolldor]

Coito doesn't seem to understand that communism is community run, not state run.

[Coito ergo sum]

Coito doesn't seem to understand that communism is community run, not state run.

So who decides?

The community decides what you are able to do? The community decides what your needs are?

So - you want to be a writer, but "the community" needs ditch diggers and you are able to dig.....you dig, right?

[Coito ergo sum]

And if they're lucky enough to be in a society that offer's them social support when they are unable to support themselves, SOMEONE must decide what they're entitled to.

Exactly! And, that SOMEONE is the State. So, if you are going to make it so that everyone is ONLY entitled to what they "need" (one of the basic pillars of communism) then the same type of analysis that goes into whether you "need" social assistance (and how much) will go into EVERYTHING that you get in a communist society. No longer will you be able to work hard and get more. You get what you "need" and only what you need, whether you work harder or not. Right?

I'm not sure what you mean by State here. I would think it best if the people decided what the people need.

How? By vote? If so, then "the State" is a pure democracy. How much food you get would be up for popular vote. The size house you live in would be up for popular vote. Yes? Or, if I've got it wrong, then how do "the people" decide what you or I need? How do "the people" decide what you or I are "able" to do?

[PsychoSerenity]

Sure Coito, whatever you want - you get to decide how all decisions are made, since it matters so much to you...
You know my position on this whole topic, I've repeated it often enough.

[Coito ergo sum]

Sure Coito, whatever you want - you get to decide how all decisions are made, since it matters so much to you...

Awesome. Great response. Why even bother discussing an issue like this if it's just going to ruffle your feathers so much that you get all persnickety?

You know my position on this whole topic, I've repeated it often enough.

Sure you have.

[PsychoSerenity]

Sure Coito, whatever you want - you get to decide how all decisions are made, since it matters so much to you...

Awesome. Great response. Why even bother discussing an issue like this if it's just going to ruffle your feathers so much that you get all persnickety?

You know my position on this whole topic, I've repeated it often enough.

Sure you have.

Hey, my feathers are just fine , but this thread has become a joke.

It's like you've got this idea of "true" communism in your head, and you've built it up into a huge evil invisible monster, the love-child of Marx and Lenin, and though it's a hundred years old, it's grown strong with supporters, and it's become a terrible threat to all that's good in your world, and you need to know all it's intimate details so you can find it's weaknesses, and single-handedly slay the beast. And everyone else commenting in this thread is supporting it, and knows the secrets of this monster, we know it's weaknesses, but we're keeping them from you to protect it, so you have to keep probing for more and more detail, to find out exactly how it works.

The trouble is, it's only in your head.

Most of the answers you're looking for have been faced and dealt with by nearly every society on this planet, and in many different ways, so why do you think it would be a problem for a communist society to do the same? Why do you really think communism is so bad?

[Coito ergo sum]

Sure Coito, whatever you want - you get to decide how all decisions are made, since it matters so much to you...

Awesome. Great response. Why even bother discussing an issue like this if it's just going to ruffle your feathers so much that you get all persnickety?

You know my position on this whole topic, I've repeated it often enough.

Sure you have.

Hey, my feathers are just fine , but this thread has become a joke.

It's like you've got this idea of "true" communism in your head, and you've built it up into a huge evil invisible monster,

Certain people seem to advocate communism as a good thing. If they think it's a good thing (great idea) then they should be able to describe how it is so great based on the basic principles involved.

the love-child of Marx and Lenin, and though it's a hundred years old, it's grown strong with supporters, and it's become a terrible threat to all that's good in your world, and you need to know all it's intimate details so you can find it's weaknesses, and single-handedly slay the beast.

Actually, that's not at all it. The thing that sticks in my craw is the common refrain that communism is good "in principle" or as Mad Hatter put it "a great idea." Whenever I hear someone say that, or something like it, I try to get them to tell me what they think is so great about it, in light of the basic principles like "from each according to ability and to each according to need," and all that. Invariably, people who say that communism is a great idea, can't really explain how it would be so great for the individual. and, they most certainly can't explain how an individual's need/ability is determined.

And everyone else commenting in this thread is supporting it, and knows the secrets of this monster, we know it's weaknesses, but we're keeping them from you to protect it, so you have to keep probing for more and more detail, to find out exactly how it works.

Look -people know what you're talking about our you don't. Everyone here has made it perfectly clear that they don't. They advocate something that they haven't the slightest idea how it would really function.

The trouble is, it's only in your head.

Most of the answers you're looking for have been faced and dealt with by nearly every society on this planet, and in many different ways, so why do you think it would be a problem for a communist society to do the same?

I didn't say anything would be difficult or easy. I want to know what someone advancing the idea of communism to explain what it would look like, and why it's such a good idea.

Why do you really think communism is so bad?

I'll try to explain it a different way.

If communism entails "from each according to his ability and to each according to his need" then there must be someone to decide what the ability is and what the need is. That can be the individual, but if it's the individual then the individual might measure his own need really high when most everyone else would say that his need is not so great. One might say "I need central air" when one doesn't, or one might say, "I need two cars and an SUV" when one doesn't. It seems to me to be inescapable that someone other than the individual himself must make the determination of his need.

And it has been said by others here on this thread that it would be "the community" or "the people" that would decide that need. Yes, that could be the case. I'm willing to accept that. But, is that a good thing? I think not. Why? Because that means that what you "need" is now up to some political process that must take place. Is it a vote of all the people? Is it a committee or a planning bureau that makes the determination? Someone must make the determination. Either way, it means that the food in your refrigerator and the personal possessions you own and the money in your account have now become subject to a political process. There is no other way.

That means the community could very well say that you should live in a smaller house, and there you must live. The community could say you need to not turn on your air conditioner, even though you can pay the bill. The community could say that you only get 1/2 a gallon of milk, even though you want to pay for a gallon.

Don't you see that as a bad thing?

[sandinista]

I like the whole "you can do whatever you want in a capitalist society". If you want to be a welder, be a welder, rockstar? be a rockstar! Poet? Be a poet. Wealthy banker? Of course!! Individual choice to do whatever you want, what a great system. ummm..yes, a little sarcasm. Coiito's utopia rises again. Funny how so many people choose to work flipping burgers and cleaning bathrooms. Some people even choose to work in sweatshops and 3rd world mines. Amazing.

[Coito ergo sum]

I like the whole "you can do whatever you want in a capitalist society". If you want to be a welder, be a welder, rockstar? be a rockstar! Poet? Be a poet. Wealthy banker? Of course!! Individual choice to do whatever you want, what a great system. ummm..yes, a little sarcasm. Coiito's utopia rises again.

I never called it a utopia. But, if you want to be welder, neither the State, nor "the people" nor the community can stand in your way. If you are great at welding, but would prefer to be a rock star, neither the State nor "the people" nor the "community" can stop you. That's just reality. It's not magic-land where people are guaranteed success at what they choose to do, but you're certainly free to do it.

In a communist society, where you are required to give to the commune in accordance with your ability to give, if you're good at welding, but not good at singing, then you would not be allowed to sing, you'd have to weld. Wouldn't you? Otherwise, how is it "from each according to his ability?"

Funny how so many people choose to work flipping burgers and cleaning bathrooms.

They do it for money.

The only thing your communist system adds is a prohibition on a burger flipper quitting, except with "community approval" of course. In a communist society they MUST do what they are deemed able to do. In the US the burger flipper can, and many do, roll the dice and move to LA and try to make it in show business. The communist system you advocate would simply allow NOBODY to advance beyond what the "community" dictates. Isn't that right?

Some people even choose to work in sweatshops and 3rd world mines. Amazing.

You mean like in Communist China? Communist North Korea? Or, you mean like in old communist Soviet Russia? Or, the worker's paradise, Cuba?