4 ms·

The notion that we'd be able to design a society from the ground up in the manner dictated by Communism is fundamentally science fiction as well. This isn't un

The notion that we'd be able to design a society from the ground up in the manner dictated by Communism is fundamentally science fiction as well. This isn't unique to Communism, overall I think the degree a society can be controlled by anyone in power is significantly overstated. It's quite a parallel to the project of terraforming Mars. Nobody is doubting we might affect a change with policy or violence, but what's missing a degree of control in the magnitude and direction of that change.

FrustratedMonky 3y ago
We can design it. That is what Congress should be doing by passing laws. We have a system that is kind of working. Laws and regulations are ways to tweak the system, tune it for better performance. So, lets say we notice that huge wealth inequality is having a negative impact, then we can tax the wealth, and yes, 'distribute' it, like to build roads. That does NOT mean suddenly we are communist. People stuck in the Capitalist's/Communism argument, if they think it is binary, then really don't understand either one.
- marginalia_nu 3y ago
  > We can design it. That is what Congress should be doing by passing laws. They sure are passing laws, yet there has been repeated failures at affecting the desired change despite near unilateral agreement among the lawmakers about the direction of the desired change. This includes the war on drugs, the prohibition, and so on. I'm not disputing these laws have some effect, I'm disputing the ability to envision an outcome, and pass a law such that it has the desired effect.
  - FrustratedMonky 3y ago
    I'm just saying, we do have a system in place to make corrections. Because they have not been doing it, doesn't mean we can toss it all out and start over.
    - marginalia_nu 3y ago
      I'm not sure that would follow in the first place. If the thesis is that strong guidance over the shape and direction of a society is largely impossible, then starting over wouldn't really make much of a difference.
coliveira 3y ago
Communism seems bad because Western countries still have a good quality of life for a large percentage of the population. The moment this stops being the case, people in the West will be clamoring for communism. This is just a matter of time and perspective.
- j4yav 3y ago
  The children yearn for the state-owned mines
  - ctxSw1tch 3y ago
    USSR wasn’t communist it was fascist. That it was communist was propaganda so communist == bad. It’s not about economics but the emotional tone of a society. Under capitalism in the US I can let you die in the streets without lifting a finger. Guess you didn’t capitalize hard enough.
    - _teyd 3y ago
      Your position is the state communist party of the Soviet Union wasn't communist, they were fascist, but they called themselves communist to make communism look bad? These guys? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ideology_of_the_Communist_Party_of_the_Soviet_Union https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ideology_of_the_Communist_Part...
      - marginalia_nu 3y ago
        In recent years, the term fascism has grown to expand almost anything with an authoritarian or totalitarian bent, which would certainly include at least the Lenin and Stalin years of the Soviet Union. Though I think this is a bit of unfortunate expansion of its definition, as it leaves us with no term to use when talking about Fascism.
        _teyd 3y ago
        I could sort of see that, though I think authoritarian does a fine job of saying the same thing. But to say the communist party of the Soviet Union wasn't communist, that they used the word communism to make communism/themselves look bad? Thats hard to even follow the logic.

FrustratedMonky 3y ago

We can design it. That is what Congress should be doing by passing laws. We have a system that is kind of working. Laws and regulations are ways to tweak the system, tune it for better performance. So, lets say we notice that huge wealth inequality is having a negative impact, then we can tax the wealth, and yes, 'distribute' it, like to build roads. That does NOT mean suddenly we are communist. People stuck in the Capitalist's/Communism argument, if they think it is binary, then really don't understand either one.

marginalia_nu 3y ago
> We can design it. That is what Congress should be doing by passing laws. They sure are passing laws, yet there has been repeated failures at affecting the desired change despite near unilateral agreement among the lawmakers about the direction of the desired change. This includes the war on drugs, the prohibition, and so on. I'm not disputing these laws have some effect, I'm disputing the ability to envision an outcome, and pass a law such that it has the desired effect.
- FrustratedMonky 3y ago
  I'm just saying, we do have a system in place to make corrections. Because they have not been doing it, doesn't mean we can toss it all out and start over.
  - marginalia_nu 3y ago
    I'm not sure that would follow in the first place. If the thesis is that strong guidance over the shape and direction of a society is largely impossible, then starting over wouldn't really make much of a difference.

coliveira 3y ago

Communism seems bad because Western countries still have a good quality of life for a large percentage of the population. The moment this stops being the case, people in the West will be clamoring for communism. This is just a matter of time and perspective.

j4yav 3y ago
The children yearn for the state-owned mines
- ctxSw1tch 3y ago
  USSR wasn’t communist it was fascist. That it was communist was propaganda so communist == bad. It’s not about economics but the emotional tone of a society. Under capitalism in the US I can let you die in the streets without lifting a finger. Guess you didn’t capitalize hard enough.
  - _teyd 3y ago
    Your position is the state communist party of the Soviet Union wasn't communist, they were fascist, but they called themselves communist to make communism look bad? These guys? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ideology_of_the_Communist_Party_of_the_Soviet_Union https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ideology_of_the_Communist_Part...
    - marginalia_nu 3y ago
      In recent years, the term fascism has grown to expand almost anything with an authoritarian or totalitarian bent, which would certainly include at least the Lenin and Stalin years of the Soviet Union. Though I think this is a bit of unfortunate expansion of its definition, as it leaves us with no term to use when talking about Fascism.
      - _teyd 3y ago
        I could sort of see that, though I think authoritarian does a fine job of saying the same thing. But to say the communist party of the Soviet Union wasn't communist, that they used the word communism to make communism/themselves look bad? Thats hard to even follow the logic.