433
Protestation (discuss.tchncs.de)
submitted 2 years ago by [B] to c/communism@lemmy.ml
53 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 9 points 2 years ago (2 children)

Yes, Matpat will save Marxism.

No, seriously, what problems does Marxism have, and how does Game Theory "solve" them or point them out?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 0 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    There are different kinds of work which needs to be done for our society to function. These tasks have costs for those who perform them (lost time, spent energy, danger, boredom, etc).

    In pure communism, everyone works hard and everyone is given the spoils of the work we collectively provide. But it is rational for any individual to not work as hard, because he will bear less of the cost of that work, but still realize the same gain

    Therefore most people tend to shirk their duties, and the output of the entire collective drops. In order to maintain the system, the threat of violence is introduced, and we quickly get to Stalinist purges

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Ah, vibes-based analysis that ignores all of Marxist theory on how a transition to Communism would work, and just vibes out how it would be. Nice.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] -5 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    What I described is exactly how it played out in about a dozen instances where a transition to communism was tried

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 4 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Has it? Has it truly?

    Your argument can be made against all forms of social services, and ignores that people work to get paid. This hasn't panned out in your game theory favor at all.

    If you're trying to argue against higher stage Communism, "from each according to their abilities, to each according to their needs," then that also doesn't follow. Higher stage Communism has never been achieved by any AES country, so again, your example is false.

    In no reading of your statement does it follow reality.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] -2 points 2 years ago (2 children)

    How about instead of just saying that I am wrong, describe to me how an individual in a higher stage communist state would be prevented from slacking in his duties (and still gaining "according to his need") without state induced violence

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Do you think Communists believe upper-stage Communism can be achieved in our life time? No, it is only achievable after rapidly improving production. Communists advocate for naturally building up to that point through steady improvements and collectivizing production through Socialism, then lower stage Communism, then finally upper stage Communism.

    Another thing - an upper stage Communist society would be both international and stateless. You're arguing against Anarcho-Communism, and poorly as well, not Marxism.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] -4 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    You're still not answering my question.

    But it's now clear that communism for you is a religion. Upper stage communism is the paradise that is promised to those who follow the tenets of the faith fully, and I am a heretic non-believer

    I will not be continuing this discussion any further

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 5 points 2 years ago

    What specifically have I not answered?

    Communism is not a religion, it's a process of collectivizing property and improving production so as to produce based on the needs of society rather than profit.

    You seem to be arguing against a vague abstraction well into the future as though it has already been tried, which is why you said it "happened in the dozen or so times it has been tried."

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago

    I don't really think it can placed as a comparative argument, because under capitalism it's more or less the exact same. Either you work or starve/jail.

    For a more wholehearted answer. Under each ideology there is a perfect citizen for each of them. Any one ideology will fail in real life. Providing a rouge actor doesn't disprove the ideology. Almost each country implements some aspect of each ideology in order to run smoothly.

    Problem arises when a lot of people under capitalism feels left out, because only ruthless capitalism is rewarded. They try to find their communities online and now we are here. I'm almost certain that people here could create a functioning communist state. But you can't create one, when people who are born in one are already part of it.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent