3 ms·

A Star Trek ideal would be nice but I don't see it happening. Government is just too slow and inefficient to provide such things effectively. Food is a necessit

A Star Trek ideal would be nice but I don't see it happening. Government is just too slow and inefficient to provide such things effectively. Food is a necessity, but you don't have to look that far back in history to find a government trying to provide that for its people and see the problems. For one of the worst cases of this ever, take a look at the Great Leap Forward in China. Millions died from famine.

crankylinuxuser 8y ago
> A Star Trek ideal would be nice but I don't see it happening. Government is just too slow and inefficient to provide such things effectively. That's because tbis government was formed before the idea of post scarcity could actually be implemented. There was also the idea that citizens and government were in opposition with each other. > Food is a necessity, but you don't have to look that far back in history to find a government trying to provide that for its people and see the problems. For one of the worst cases of this ever, take a look at the Great Leap Forward in China. Millions died from famine. I'd be very wary in citing governmental propaganda. Capitalism also has great costs, including over suffering and death of humans and the destruction of the environment. Except in capitalist countries (USA) it gets turned around to blame the individual for having $bad_thing done to them. You also seem to implicitly think that I would want socialism/communism. In a way, yes. But most Marxists want the standard 'governmental control of the factories'. In the end, the citizens end up trading corporate master for govt master. Instead, I find that I agree much more with cooperatives. Democracy, one voice one vote, is generally considered good - why not also apply that to our workplaces rather than a dictatorship? I see that much more of a way forward, than some idiotic overthrow for more of the same.
- zip1234 8y ago
  I didn't mean to say that you wanted socialism/communism. That was just the most obvious example of nationalizing such a basic need, food. I don't mean to say that a capitalist society has no costs. Capitalism definitely has some tradeoffs for sure. I'm not certain that environmental destruction is as much a capitalist thing as it is a human thing. Human history leads me to believe the latter.

crankylinuxuser 8y ago

> A Star Trek ideal would be nice but I don't see it happening. Government is just too slow and inefficient to provide such things effectively. That's because tbis government was formed before the idea of post scarcity could actually be implemented. There was also the idea that citizens and government were in opposition with each other. > Food is a necessity, but you don't have to look that far back in history to find a government trying to provide that for its people and see the problems. For one of the worst cases of this ever, take a look at the Great Leap Forward in China. Millions died from famine. I'd be very wary in citing governmental propaganda. Capitalism also has great costs, including over suffering and death of humans and the destruction of the environment. Except in capitalist countries (USA) it gets turned around to blame the individual for having $bad_thing done to them. You also seem to implicitly think that I would want socialism/communism. In a way, yes. But most Marxists want the standard 'governmental control of the factories'. In the end, the citizens end up trading corporate master for govt master. Instead, I find that I agree much more with cooperatives. Democracy, one voice one vote, is generally considered good - why not also apply that to our workplaces rather than a dictatorship? I see that much more of a way forward, than some idiotic overthrow for more of the same.

zip1234 8y ago
I didn't mean to say that you wanted socialism/communism. That was just the most obvious example of nationalizing such a basic need, food. I don't mean to say that a capitalist society has no costs. Capitalism definitely has some tradeoffs for sure. I'm not certain that environmental destruction is as much a capitalist thing as it is a human thing. Human history leads me to believe the latter.