5 ms·

Well, mostly, because capitalist systems work. Look at Sweden, or Germany, or Japan, or the United States (largely) or Canada. These are all capitalist economie

Well, mostly, because capitalist systems work. Look at Sweden, or Germany, or Japan, or the United States (largely) or Canada. These are all capitalist economies. Communism for a technological society doesn’t work in any capacity because of the basic tenants of communism. Some forms of capitalism work better than others (maybe look at Norway vs idk Brazil or something) but they largely work.

pbhjpbhj 9y ago
>These are all capitalist economies. Communism for a technological society doesn’t work in any capacity because of the basic tenants of communism. // Work for the betterment of the community in preference to selfish ambition; from each according to there abilities, to each according to their needs; ... These are what I think of as basic tenets of communism ... What about this is not consistent with technological progress of society? Communism seems, to me, to be our last great hope for a long future for the human race. I suppose some would prefer technological advancement over sustainability.
- TeMPOraL 9y ago
  IMO in terms of technological advancement, the primary difference between (theoretical) communism and (theoretical) capitalism is that the former lacks a strong forcing function. One has to admit that market pressures are a tremendous incentive to develop new technologies. But it's also totally misaligned with what's important. I feel a communist-tech society might develop slower, but in more meaningful ways.
  - flyinglizard 9y ago
    It's hard to direct and regulate the use of technology. The barrier is getting to first breakthroughs, once it's available then it spreads and adapted. E.g. military technologies getting into the civilian markets, or faster computer chips getting into medical devices (surely a market too small to be targeted by Intel, NVIDIA and others).
- muninn_ 9y ago
  But that's not how a communist economic system works - which is what we're discussing. In fact, those tenets of communism you speak of are compatible with capitalism and are also compatible with technological progress. Hell, they're compatible with Christianity. But communism is most notably common ownership of the means of production and the abolition of classes. The ownership of the means of production simply does not work - especially if it's run by an organization with a monopoly on violence. It's been demonstrated. > I suppose some would prefer technological advancement over sustainability I prefer both. Capitalist countries like Sweden and Norway (my two favorites) do a great job with advancing technology and sustainability. Some (the U.S. right now) are very good at one, (I would argue both but w/e) but maybe not the other.

pbhjpbhj 9y ago

>These are all capitalist economies. Communism for a technological society doesn’t work in any capacity because of the basic tenants of communism. // Work for the betterment of the community in preference to selfish ambition; from each according to there abilities, to each according to their needs; ... These are what I think of as basic tenets of communism ... What about this is not consistent with technological progress of society? Communism seems, to me, to be our last great hope for a long future for the human race. I suppose some would prefer technological advancement over sustainability.

TeMPOraL 9y ago
IMO in terms of technological advancement, the primary difference between (theoretical) communism and (theoretical) capitalism is that the former lacks a strong forcing function. One has to admit that market pressures are a tremendous incentive to develop new technologies. But it's also totally misaligned with what's important. I feel a communist-tech society might develop slower, but in more meaningful ways.
- flyinglizard 9y ago
  It's hard to direct and regulate the use of technology. The barrier is getting to first breakthroughs, once it's available then it spreads and adapted. E.g. military technologies getting into the civilian markets, or faster computer chips getting into medical devices (surely a market too small to be targeted by Intel, NVIDIA and others).
muninn_ 9y ago
But that's not how a communist economic system works - which is what we're discussing. In fact, those tenets of communism you speak of are compatible with capitalism and are also compatible with technological progress. Hell, they're compatible with Christianity. But communism is most notably common ownership of the means of production and the abolition of classes. The ownership of the means of production simply does not work - especially if it's run by an organization with a monopoly on violence. It's been demonstrated. > I suppose some would prefer technological advancement over sustainability I prefer both. Capitalist countries like Sweden and Norway (my two favorites) do a great job with advancing technology and sustainability. Some (the U.S. right now) are very good at one, (I would argue both but w/e) but maybe not the other.