3 ms·

It sounds like you are confusing communism with central ownership or state ownership. Communism is only concerned with the ability of workers to have meaningful

It sounds like you are confusing communism with central ownership or state ownership. Communism is only concerned with the ability of workers to have meaningful control of work activity and output.

aminok 10y ago
No I am not confusing anything. Marx laid out what mainstream Communism is, and that includes expropriating property from people, and denying the people the right to engage in voluntary economic interactions. You may be confused as to what 'voluntary economic interactions' means, so I'll explain: This would be any kind trade enter into by two consenting adults, like for example, doing a number of hours of work in exchange for a number of units of currency. By denying the right of employers to hire workers on any terms other than giving workers all of the revenue generated by the business, communism denies the right to engage in the aforementioned class of voluntary economic interactions. I really recommend you think about these concepts. You seem to have a very shallow understanding of what communism is, and the implications of what it advocates for. To advocate for radical reconfigurations of society, brought about by force, without thinking through the moral implications, is very reckless and morally irresponsible.
- broke_wagon 10y ago
  You seem to have a very particular idea of one kind of communism, and you seem happy to interpose it into my opinions. Having said nothing about how or even if communism should be brought about, I certainly acknowledge that it seeks to bar certain apparently voluntary economic interactions on the grounds that they are not as voluntary as they first seem. Take the rest of your strawman with you, I have no use for it.
  - aminok 10y ago
    >I certainly acknowledge that it seeks to bar certain apparently voluntary economic interactions on the grounds that they are not as voluntary as they first seem. It would bar transactions that any court of law would find to be consensual. It's not a just system. You're right I can't criticize your views that much because you do not actually outline what they are beyond vaguely saying they're communism but not saying specifically what that means in terms of what happens to the property we earn in private trade, and what private trades we're allowed to engage in. That suggests to me that you are hiding what you truly believe in because you know it is not palatable while still promoting the 'communism' brand, knowing full well what most interpret that as.

It sounds like you are confusing communism with central ownership or state ownership. Communism is only concerned with the ability of workers to have meaningful control of work activity and output.

aminok 10y ago

No I am not confusing anything. Marx laid out what mainstream Communism is, and that includes expropriating property from people, and denying the people the right to engage in voluntary economic interactions. You may be confused as to what 'voluntary economic interactions' means, so I'll explain: This would be any kind trade enter into by two consenting adults, like for example, doing a number of hours of work in exchange for a number of units of currency. By denying the right of employers to hire workers on any terms other than giving workers all of the revenue generated by the business, communism denies the right to engage in the aforementioned class of voluntary economic interactions. I really recommend you think about these concepts. You seem to have a very shallow understanding of what communism is, and the implications of what it advocates for. To advocate for radical reconfigurations of society, brought about by force, without thinking through the moral implications, is very reckless and morally irresponsible.

broke_wagon 10y ago
You seem to have a very particular idea of one kind of communism, and you seem happy to interpose it into my opinions. Having said nothing about how or even if communism should be brought about, I certainly acknowledge that it seeks to bar certain apparently voluntary economic interactions on the grounds that they are not as voluntary as they first seem. Take the rest of your strawman with you, I have no use for it.
- aminok 10y ago
  >I certainly acknowledge that it seeks to bar certain apparently voluntary economic interactions on the grounds that they are not as voluntary as they first seem. It would bar transactions that any court of law would find to be consensual. It's not a just system. You're right I can't criticize your views that much because you do not actually outline what they are beyond vaguely saying they're communism but not saying specifically what that means in terms of what happens to the property we earn in private trade, and what private trades we're allowed to engage in. That suggests to me that you are hiding what you truly believe in because you know it is not palatable while still promoting the 'communism' brand, knowing full well what most interpret that as.