I would here by Re-define Communism..: ready?... ok.... Communism: (1) "Pertaining to those who choose to, of their own accord, form commune's.. designed for mutual support and security, and activily pursues the efforts to eleviate all suffering, as such are the directives of Love." (2) "A point of view, or political opinion which dictates that is it better for people to live and work together, organised as one big family, who shares and cares, rather than trades and profits off each other." (3) A phylosophy which dictates : "We need not force the wealthy to become poor to help the poor... We need only organise the poor together in love, sharing and compassion, such that with large numbers and continued effort, there shall be no need for poverty any more, I.e... the reason people are poor and homeless, is because no one fucking cares about them, and of all people, the Communist does." (4) Commune-ism is clearly founded in the ideals of forming Communes for mutual benefit, and in the establishment of, in this way, socialist pockets of paradise, and which functions to eliviate the suffering and drawback of the free/ fair markets world. (5) An ideal wherein people organise themselves for love, security, and long term survivability. Such as, the basic Tribe mentality. (6) An ideal that just so happens to be the way Jesus said to live, as well as many other world religions in many different ways. -MT
There are communes in the USA. Try to live in one. Of course they are not going to invent a PC or internet .... not much incentive, and god it must suck like hell when you get a lazy person or 2 living in the group ... but, the veggies are fresh, and they should be - they are generated from your own bowel movements yummy Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Michael
So long as all the members of the commune are there voluntarily, no problem. But if the communists get any real political power and try to force everyone to live by their ideals, history shows it's a bloodbath every time.
i envision... a better commune.... one without any wierdness... and organized.. specfically for intellegent and efficient living. -MT
Moshesh, you keep on dreaming the same impossible dream. Utopia and true communism as you talk about can never exist. No matter how much you'd like for it be true, people are simply no equal in terms of accepting responsibility. In any group larger than one, someone will always be more lazy than the rest and put forth less effort toward the common good. And there will always be those in the group who think they should be the ones to tell everyone else how things should be done. I'm really amazed at the number of people here who simply do not understand basic human nature and the differences between individuals.
Completely true. Its hard enough to find a couple roommates that will pull their own weight and not act like arse wholes. A whole society? Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! The only way communism works in nature is via classes made up ofclones . Who wants to live in THAT society? Michael
I think without some kind of communist mutation modern civilization is doomed. Atomization cant go on forever.
Still, most of those lazy, powergrabbing, etc. humans don't feel quite happy in the social darvinist society which suit their current nature. there is a sense that something is missing. One couldn't discard posibility of a evolutionary jump either. It's all about survival, right? If so, extrapolate modern societary trends in the future. As for me, such a linear extrapolation doesn't appear to be livable, not to say much about happiness and enjoyment.
I agree that those people aren't happy now and still won't be in the future. Why, because whatever their agenda/goal, they can never get enough of it - there's no limit. The lazy will always want to work less than they do at any moment and the power-grabbers will always want additional power. I see no possibility of any "evolutionary jump" in human relations. Again, why? For starters, we've pretty well reached the pinnacle of our intelligence. There's no indication whatsoever that sheer intelligence levels have increased one iota in the past ten thousand years. Technology has improved, yes, and will continue to - but that has no relation to intelligence. Every indication today is that the only thing the future holds along those lines is an overall increase in mental illnesses and disabilities. Society has improved in many ways yet retreated in others. Beneath the skin, we are still the same people we were millennia ago. While we grow tolerant in some areas, we become less tolerant in others. The pendulum continues to swing to and fro and cannot find a central resting place. For all of our great knowledge, there are still wars and conflicts - and always will be. Once again, why? Because at the root of it all we are driven by very basic instincts and the prime directive of all is greed.
Who knows what the future holds? We may be able to direct our own evolution thru biotech. We may encorporate computers into our brains. Humans may download their consciousness to computers. If we can get off this planet without killing ourselves or falling back into barbarism, there's no limit to what we could do.
THATS ABSOLUTELY RIGHT... YOU GOT IT. DO YOU remember a time when you lived in such a situation??? can any of you? can any of you remember a time when you live in a small commune and lived with people... who did not do equal amounts of work. and yet they still shared all their stuff equal.. mostly. where they did NOT fight over the basics.. like food and water.. they shared. you shared... and it wasnt about you all the time... and you were not honored.. and kept on a pedistal... you were treated as an equal... and as no better than anyone else... and the key word and basis for all our actions generally was love. do you remeber any of that? love-ing.... family? so ... since most of you do... it then becomes a question of what limits you put on whos family. and who is not... and is your enemy... as you would let them die and dont care. -MT IT CAN WORK VERY WELL...... on a small scale... everywhere. in divisions as i have put forth. http://theempiricalchurch.blogspot.com/
Of course we all remember those times when we were very young and still living with our parents. However, it still was not as you described - someone still had to leave the home and earn a living. We were not self-sufficient. And they way you describe it is NOT actual communism at all. Divided into small groups like that would be more accurately labeled 'tribalism.' If you know anything at all about history you would be aware that no form of communism ever lasted very long. And neither did/can tribalism. Because there is always someone (in groups) quite happy to raid your peaceful little settlement. They did that then and they would do it again.
NO... its very simple... a percentage work.... a large enough percentage to easily pay for a percentage of pure charity cases.... and many of them.. can still work... for us.. in the commune.. doing alot of simple things... to keep busy and have purpose. little things which help and is of value to those who do work. -MT
Communism sounds easy to implement on paper, but it is more of a long, arduous task. I do not think it is impossible, because of certain telltale signs in the Leninist-militant revolutions.
It is very difficult, and requires mental practice and discipline to free ourselves of capitalist mentality. But it is not impossible.
Then become Xian and join an Amish society. They are the best chance you have at living that sort of life. But theirs is only possible because they live protected within ours.
Protected from whom? From their standpoint, there is no big difference within which society to live. Unless that society is homicidal. Not many of those. Equally, it doesn't matter much for poor folks within which society to stay poor Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!. Sure, propaganda brainwashed them otherwise. However, except some extreme possibilities, it doesn't really matter.
I always thought that tribalism is way more (an order of magnitude or so) older than anything else. It's just that tribalist societies were less techologically/socially advanced and easy to conquer/exterminate. American and, to lesser extent, other developed Western countries mutated quite a bit away from traditional towards atomized, darvinistic, civil societies with little or no folk traditions and/or historical memories, weak family (not to speak of the extended ones) ties, etc.. However, more backward westernized countries in Europe preserved elements of tribalism (mostly in villages) way into 20th century. Unfortunately, the recent wave of capitalist killed everything but homo consumucus. I was lucky as a child to live and see the dying era. And I tell you, no amount of comfort and technology can buy the things those people (my grandparents generation) had, it's called traditions and "community" (not exact term, but I don't know a better one). Community not in the American or any other modern sense, which are prostitution of the word. The real thing (compared to the present, of course). No, it wasn't paradise by any measure. However, looking back from the Darvinistic world, it seems like a glimpse of it.
