3 ms·

The premise of Star Trek kind of is 'what if we reached communism and hence could science up actual space travel?', which DS9 somewhat digresses from by having

by cess11 2y ago

The premise of Star Trek kind of is 'what if we reached communism and hence could science up actual space travel?', which DS9 somewhat digresses from by having these episodes about social struggle like the bar strike and the battle of the sanctuary district as well as the genocide arcs. It speaks to the foundational values of the franchise being widely accepted that the strike episode is what is remembered as the labour thing, as if a lot of people would like the results of an egalitarian society but have been taught that the means to achieve it are somehow controversial.

philipallstar 2y ago
If you're still inventing and discovering things, you probably don't have communism, because not all inventions are distributed equally (straight away) and not all places can be shared by all people.
- vidarh 2y ago
  Communism does not require equal distribution. In fact Marx argued communism explicitly requires unequal distribution. In Critique of the Gotha Program he outright ridiculed what is now the German SDP for demanding that "the proceeds of labor belong undiminished with equal right to all members of society". He went on to write: "Further, one worker is married, another is not; one has more children than another, and so on and so forth. Thus, with an equal performance of labor, and hence an equal in the social consumption fund, one will in fact receive more than another, one will be richer than another, and so on. To avoid all these defects, right, instead of being equal, would have to be unequal." Later in the same text he then reiterated the traditional socialist slogan, that explicitly also rejects equal distribution: "From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs!"
- cess11 2y ago
  Communism is a society without class stratification, capital and money. I'm not sure how you come from this to that conclusion about "inventions". For one the slogan of communist movements tend to be 'from each according to ability, to each according to need', and secondly it is more likely that a communist society would use scientific academies or committees rather than rely on inventors to accomplish technological or other achievements.

by cess11 2y ago

philipallstar 2y ago

If you're still inventing and discovering things, you probably don't have communism, because not all inventions are distributed equally (straight away) and not all places can be shared by all people.

vidarh 2y ago
Communism does not require equal distribution. In fact Marx argued communism explicitly requires unequal distribution. In Critique of the Gotha Program he outright ridiculed what is now the German SDP for demanding that "the proceeds of labor belong undiminished with equal right to all members of society". He went on to write: "Further, one worker is married, another is not; one has more children than another, and so on and so forth. Thus, with an equal performance of labor, and hence an equal in the social consumption fund, one will in fact receive more than another, one will be richer than another, and so on. To avoid all these defects, right, instead of being equal, would have to be unequal." Later in the same text he then reiterated the traditional socialist slogan, that explicitly also rejects equal distribution: "From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs!"
cess11 2y ago
Communism is a society without class stratification, capital and money. I'm not sure how you come from this to that conclusion about "inventions". For one the slogan of communist movements tend to be 'from each according to ability, to each according to need', and secondly it is more likely that a communist society would use scientific academies or committees rather than rely on inventors to accomplish technological or other achievements.