Sadly, the utopia only lasted about ten years. The resources once used to defeat those commie, pinko bastards must now be used to defeat the Islamofascists. As Jefferson said:
So a lottery of sorts (such as drawing straws) would decide who must do these jobs, or else a rota system whereby the jobs are exchanged weekly or even daily. This last system however will lead to less skilled labour. Some jobs have to be done but who's to say who has to do them? Someone stuck with a menial task may refuse and set off to build their own house, farm their own food, and raise their own family. Could they not find a more meaningful and passionate existence in that way? Eventually the children may come to do the menial work while the parents may experience science and art. Is that quote really a communist sentiment?
That's what I thought as well when I read the original post. What was it again... "For each according to his ability, to each according to his need." Something like that.
Jobs will be conducted and performed in rotation. However, rotation after only a few days may lead to poor efficiency, since not much time is devoted to the acquisition of skills in that particular menial task. A person may develop more skill in a job if rotation is done over several weeks to a month. It is like timing of traffic lights for the optimization of traffic flow. People will become multi-skilled unlike today's worker. Everybody essentially agrees with everybody else on who and when to pick the garbage, clean the sewers, and sweep the streets, as well as when to rotate. Children can labor, but it is imperative that they do not strain themselves for more than say, at most, several hours because of health concerns. That being said, adults will inherently perform the vast majority of menial work. Child labor and child abuse is not tolerated under communism. And yes, the quote posted by madanthonywayne does reflect communist sentiment, although it is subject to great pessimistic criticism.
My problem is this Facial: why must we spend a lifetime working for a household, simply because someone else has claimed the land? In reality a suitable building could be constructed relatively cheaply and relatively quickly, and more time could then be devoted to other tasks.
Ah, no. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Communism isn't all that great. I'm not a fan of Capitalism either. Socialism is the way to be. It's WAY more equal then communism. I would never want to live in a communist country.
What does a socialist nation do if/when all of the workers just decide not to work and begin to take their sustenance from the state? Who pays for it all then? And surely you don't believe in forcing people to work if they don't want to work, do you? Yet you seem to believe that they should be given the necessities of life even when they don't work. How do you reconcile that in a socialist nation? Baron Max
Pardon my joining mid-conversation, but this is a really interesting topic to me and I would like to present another point-of-view, if I may. It seems that those who would advocate socialism and/or communism do not fairly acknowledge the nature of humans (maybe even the entire animal kingdom?). It may be a different discussion, but it seems that the nature of man is much more... darwinistic than socialists/communists care to admit. In the animal kingdom, there are always those who are stronger or faster getting a larger share of the zebra, bison, etc. This is the very basic philosophy of capitalism as I understand it: those who work harder, smarter, or faster are rewarded more than those who work weaker, more foolishly, or slower. I make no claims about the moral correctness of such a position, I'm just saying that maybe the reason socialism/communism fails is due to human nature? Of course that isn't the only reason, just one perspective that people don't really like to examine since it places blame on our very nature as humans. Unrelated, but it is my understanding that a correct analogy is: socialism is to capitalism as communism is to democracy; that is, socialism is an economic philosphy and communism is a political one. Or have those meanings been superceded by new ones? -C.
Okay, since I've yet to see it expressed accurately: Communism is a theoretical social system where the means of production are commonly owned or, more expansively, a social system with no private ownership at all. Of course, pure communism has never actually been implemented, most societies who have tried have only been able to accomplish varying degrees of socialism. The main failure of communism, in practice, is that you merely replace the function of capital with political clout. You therefore wind up with the same economic disparities (or often worse) as a capitalistic society. The secondary failure (as Chryso mentioned) is that it does not account for basic human nature. The simple question is; why should I work harder, longer, faster, better, etc. when I don't get compensated for the extra effort? ~Raithere
Succinctly put Raithere, which is roughly why I am more of a socialist. As for why work faster, harder etc, do we not see that in times of total effort during war, eg WW2?
We worked harder in WW2 because most of our armed forces, people's family members, were stuck overseas. If we hadn't worked harder, we probably wouldn't have gotten them back alive. They were in a position similar to hostages, actually. On top of that, if we really screwed up, we would suddenly find ourselves speaking german or japanese overnight.
Thats correct, so, exactly how much is that different from working harder at building roads, making more cars, building houses that your friends will be buying, etc etc? Or in other words, it is possible. But leftie liberal though I am,I am not convinced it is possible to create a society where it happens all the time. We shall see though.
One could not simply find a space of land and begin to build upon it because all land is owned by somebody or some organisation. Precisely my point. Even under 'communism' the harder worker receives more financial reward, which is a Capitalist notion.
Have you a clue? It is a promise of socialism, not communism. Communism is a dream of idiot, that is all you must know about it. e Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! s
If you lock the doors of your home you're neither a true socialist or a true communist. If there are no people whom you don't know living in your home you're neither a true socialist or a true communist. If you have a software/hardware firewall, an anti-virus scanner, or an adware/malware/trojan scanner on your computer you're not a true socialist or a true communist. If you have to steal from someone else to make up for your own inadequacies, or rely on someone else to steal it for you, you're a true socialist and/or a true communist. If you break into my home on the pretense of being a good socialist or a good communist, you'll at best lose to a convergence of applied physics, chemistry, metallurgy, psychology and sport.
