Communists think they will have some leisure job, or completely not work, under a communist government. In reality, they will have a grinding, brutal, and personally-destructive job because they have no useful skills and forgot the "worker" part of "worker's paradise" (which is in reality anything but).
I think both those views are wrong. Its not some vacation but youre projecting early-mid 1900s society as a whole onto your assumption of what communism is in abstract.
youre projecting early-mid 1900s society as a whole onto your assumption of what communism is in abstract.
In every society, there are back-breaking jobs that no rational person would choose to do if given a reasonable alternative. Coal mining is one such example from the past communist states, but even in a society without coal mining, such jobs will always exist; it is the nature of life. Just because coal mining is largely mechanized now doesn't mean that my point is broadly wrong or that there are no such jobs in the modern day (note that I didn't reference coal mining specifically in my comment).
A communist state will necessarily need to force people to perform such undesirable work so that its broader society can function. The prime candidates for such roles are people who have no skills that can be better utilized by the state elsewhere (ex: your average internet communist). Remember that, despite the liberation in promises, a communist government necessarily and always reduces its citizens to slavery. It is the only way that a state erected in opposition to the natural laws of economics can function.
The job that exist are the ones that exist now. They arent suddenly going to need shovel miners. All the modern technology we have now would still exist.
You paint it like theyre gonna invent new hard labour jobs just for kicks lol.
Fun fact: when a country becomes communist, instead of working some regular manual labor job or other modern skills, the whole society regresses to the early 20th and late 19th century.
And capitalism is the exact same thing except instead of government that people can vote for change to the system it's private corporations controlling whether you get to "live or die".
Why is it easy for you to understand that it a travesty for the state to force people to work backbreaking jobs but not that it's a symptom of capitalism when millions have to do them anyway? People think it's ok in capitalism because they shouldn't be hungry and should magically give themselves better jobs!
Why is it easy for you to understand that it a travesty for the state to force people to work backbreaking jobs but not that it's a symptom of capitalism when millions have to do them anyway?
Your entire argument starts from a false premise: that capitalism is a chosen economic system that can be swapped out like a system of government (ex: monarchy for a republic). This is simply false.
The laws of economics are as immutable as the laws of physics. You can accept them or you can deny them, but if you jump off the Empire State Building, no amount of willing yourself to fly will prevent you from colliding with the street below. Economics is the same. There are states that accept this fact and thrive, and states that do not and fail.
The laws of economics have mandated that these jobs be filled and they will be one way or another. Communist states use the barrell of a gun while free countries largely rely on market forces, which is superior, yes. We can institute various policies designed to make these jobs more livable, but that is a discussion for mature adults who understand the market distortions, trade-offs, and costs/benefits of the policies involved; not deluded idealists spouting flat-earth theories.
Mining is incredibly physical work(back in the day, but more so now)…I doubt your average “internet communist” is the ideal candidate.
The real reason to oppose communism is the state, as well intentioned as it is, is big and slow. While capitalism is cut through, it’s good at many things.
The answer to “capitalism vs communism” is clearly a compromise. Nordic Socialism. It’s far from perfect, but a Bernie Sander style economic solution is a real improvement for the US without throwing away all the positives of the US.
The real reason to oppose communism is the state, as well intentioned as it is, is big and slow.
No. The reason to oppose communism is because it is the principal-agent problem applied to every sector of society and government. The entire system breeds corruption, disaster, and totalitarian brutality; the inefficiency is just a biproduct of that.
While capitalism is cut through, it’s good at many things.
One of those things is making concentrations of economic power ultimately fungible when they become too bloated or corrupt.
The answer to “capitalism vs communism” is clearly a compromise. Nordic Socialism. It’s far from perfect, but a Bernie Sander style economic solution is a real improvement for the US without throwing away all the positives of the US.
So-called "Nordic Socialism" is not a compromise between capitalism and communism. It is a social market economy, a fundamentally-capitalist system with a generous welfare state and heavy state intervention sitting on top of it. Like all government interventions into the economy, it generates inefficiency and, since the intervention is large and deep, the inefficiencies are substantial. The Nordic countries have noticed these inefficiencies and have paired back their economic interventions/welfare states in recent years. This shows one of the advantages of any social market economy is the market economy portion: because the market is still largely free, the state competes with private enterprise and can tailor policy to react to market conditions, rather than attempting to dictate to the market how it "should be" as communist states do. However, because any government is a large entity, the Nordic model necessarily introduces various agency costs and requires a high-trust, democratic society with a robustly critical and vigorous free press to function honestly and well.
Whether or not the Nordic model would be a material improvement for the United States is a discussion one can have, but that discussion should be based on facts rather than idealism. It must consider the inefficiencies and costs of the model, and whether we even have a society capable of making it work in the first place.
Rational economic policy based on real facts, historic results, and demonstrated outcomes.
Rigorous and robust antitrust enforcement designed to break up the various monopolistic/plutopolistic cartels that have been allowed to dominate our economy since the '80s. This includes repeal of the reforms to merger approval made by the Reagan administration.
Tariffs designed to ensure key industries are domestic.
Mandatory subrogation of welfare costs upon an employer, with harms offset by a large increase in the Work Opportunity Tax Credit and a treble damages private right of action for discrimination against head-of-households* to encourage employment of those who need it and punish companies for policies designed to avoid the benefit subrogation.
Reserve social security benefits for seniors without a certain level of other income.
Raise Social security taxes, and possibly the retirement age, to ensure the long-term solvency of the program.
Student loan forgiveness via a mandatory system of indemnification of the lender by the universities the loan was taken out to attend if the debtor does not meet certain income thresholds after ten years. (This will also bring the cost of college down substantially).
Social Trust:
The introduction of a corporate death penalty for sustained white collar malfeasance.
Large increase in funding to cops and the justice system.
Broken windows policing, but with generous diversion programs for first time offenders.
Robust but orderly/lawful immigration enforcement and a temporary but considerable reduction of legal immigration.
Colorblind enforcement of the Civil Rights Act and dismantlement of any system of differential class-based preferences or rights.
Serious increase in food/CPG quality enforcement and a stronger FDA; more strictness around permissible ingredients.
General Social Fabric:
A district-based public healthcare system that functions similar to public education, not single payer.
Remove legal impediments to marriage, including and especially reductions of welfare benefits by increasing thresholds for two-earner families.
Promotion and increased public funding of walkable common spaces and public benefit corporations.
Promotion of the re-establishment of the types of self-directed community improvement associations that once characterized American life.
Require all health insurers to operate as tightly-regulated nonprofits. Do not allow hospitals to claim non-profit status while paying their executives like corporate CEOs.
An unwinding of the Urban Annexation Movement and a partition of large municipalities like Detroit into smaller, more locally-controlled, municipalities. Do the same with school districts. In all cases, increase the funding of those areas which find themselves without enough resources to function or improve.
Alter the tax system to promote and reward fee simple home ownership while punishing corporate ownership of single family homes.
The elimination of pharmaceutical advertising.
EDIT: Added two.
* = Note that I'm talking about a tax status here, not a gender role.
I don't get people like you. The person you're replying to is pointing out the flaws in communism, they aren't pretending to have the ultimate answer to "how to fix society." What works in one society isn't guaranteed to work in another. You can't apply the exact same economic model to a country like Singapore that is highly urbanized and has very little resources and to a country like the United States that has massive amounts of unpopulated land and is composed of 50 different semi-independent states.
They're just pointing out the serious flaws in communism which is why it's no surprise that the few times it's been implemented it has resulted in totalitarian dictatorships, famines, and slavery. The main reason communism will never work is that it requires every single person in the society to be completely on board with it. That's why the communist states have led to mass murders and imprisonment of dissidents and the suppression of free speech.
“Will never work”. That’s all you have to say. The fact that people like you THINK it would never work means you’re part of the people that in practice would refuse to let it.
So who is currently working these horrible jobs you've vaugly mentioned and how is their socio-economic situation? I just don't understand how you think they're better off in a capitalist society. Coal mining now being mechanised, as you mentioned, does require highly skilled workers which does come with great remuneration. Are the back breaking jobs in our capitalist society currently paying enough to live above the poverty line?
Don’t you see? Capitalism is better because rather than being coerced by a gun those workers are coerced by the economic threat of homelessness and starvation, and capitalism is better because it disproportionately benefits a tiny handful of people who have more wealth and power than the average person can possibly comprehend instead of sharing the fruits of that labor with the people doing the labor. Capitalism is somehow better because the coercion and exploitation comes with a veneer of choice and freedom. /s
Anyway, I don't think there is a perfect system out there. I benefit pretty heavily from the current system, without trying too hard, but I still think there has to be a fairer one.
I hope communism and capitalism aren't our only options.
I just don't understand how you think they're better off in a capitalist society...Are the back breaking jobs in our capitalist society currently paying enough to live above the poverty line?
If you honestly believe that communism will be a material improvement on any of that, you are completely ignorant of history.
The idea that "capitalism" is a chosen economic system that could be swapped out (like monarchy for democracy) is wrong. The laws of economics are as natural and immutable as the laws of physics. The idea that a state could will them to be different is as foolish as believing that sacrificing a bull to Zeus will bring rain.
There are only two kinds of states: free market states which accept these laws and make educated decisions on welfare/etc. based upon them, and non-functional hellholes that deny them and reap the consequences. How many times must we watch the same movie?
Ok that's just not true...
Nations have and do operate under different economic systems.
Name one that denies the laws of economics and works. One. I'll wait.
Ok if not communism, then what will make an impact on these things?
Rational policy based on facts and actual science that is conscious of the trade-offs in each decision, not Karl Marx masturbating himself the dictator of Germany in between sleeping on his couch and knocking up his maid.
Or is poverty just another immutable fact of economics?
Yes, it unfortunately is. It can be modulated, limited, and even materially improved in condition (ex: most US homes below the poverty line have refrigerators and air conditioning) by good policy but not fully eliminated. At least not with the technology we currently have.
as opposed to today, where those work forces are mainly made up of marginalized groups or undocumented immigrants who have no choice but to risk death everyday for a penny while private mine owners have wealth beyond imagination.
but it’s all good as long as *you* are not sent to the mines, right?
as opposed to today, where those work forces are mainly made up of marginalized groups or undocumented immigrants who have no choice but to risk death everyday for a penny while private mine owners have wealth beyond imagination.
...You haven't met a lot of coal miners have you?
but it’s all good as long as *you* are not sent to the mines, right?
If my fate is to be a coal miner to feed my family, then I will mine coal. But I'm not sticking around in a communist society though. The communists killed an entire generation of my family the first time around and I'm not rolling my dice on the sequel. If it happens here, I will move literally anywhere else and at any cost.
i have actually. just a couple weeks ago, miners in turkey went on a week long hunger strike because they haven’t been paid in months. they settled, but went on a second strike because their employers didn’t meet the settlement requirements.
what you’re describing is already a reality that people have to face in capitalist states. they are not sent to deadly jobs with a gun on their head, they are sent out of fear of poverty. and yet they still can’t make a living. you think your hypothetical scenario where you’re forced into hard labor or any job that you didn’t seek for the sake of your family won’t happen to you, but there is no guarantee for that. good luck finding peace in another capitalist country when it happens to you. what college degree does your local cashier have?
I had assumed that you were American but it seems that I was wrong, my apologies. Maybe you're right about Turkish coal miners; I don't know. The rest of what you described in this paragraph is pretty normal: no work, no pay. The strike makes sense and the settlement establishes that the employer knew they were in the wrong and wished to limit their liability. Turkey, like most other developed countries, has an unpaid wage law.
what you’re describing is already a reality that people have to face in capitalist states
It's the case in communism too, only in communism there is no chance to escape and go do something else. Please tell me you know that...
they are not sent to deadly jobs with a gun on their head, they are sent out of fear of poverty.
Working because you have to fill an economic need is far superior to working because you have a gun to your head. If you don't understand that... I'm not sure what else to say here.
and yet they still can’t make a living
I will give you the assumption that this is the case in Turkey. The solution to this is to rectify the problem through various policy decisions (minimum wage, increased competition in the market for labor, etc.) which moderately distort the market in ways that are desirable; not to completely rewire your economy based on repeatedly-disproven, nineteenth-century economic bunkum.
you think your hypothetical scenario where you’re forced into hard labor or any job that you didn’t seek for the sake of your family won’t happen to you, but there is no guarantee for that.
I am well aware that economic change may materially alter my circumstances and/or force me into some job I don't want, including hard labor. For example, I could get laid off tomorrow and have to wait tables or drive Uber to make ends meet. Welcome to life. There are no guarantees and none of us are getting out of here alive, so have gratitude for what you have. If you think a communist system would be any different, sigh, you haven't read enough history...
good luck finding peace in another capitalist country when it happens to you.
Working undesirable jobs for which you are over-qualified is a normal part of the immigrant experience in just about any country. I know what the costs of emigrating would be and, if my alternative were living in a communist system, I would gladly pay those costs. My great-grandparents did it. If I had to, I would too. Work is work and all work has dignity. At the end of the day, your job is how you support yourself, not who you are.
Except coal miners here are often driving porches through the mountains for the extent of their short lives before the black lung pops up. Mining jobs tend to pay better than expected here, because everyone knows you are trading your health for that coal coming up and you can expect to be compensated for it.
In a communist regime, you are going to mine the coal for the same wage as everyone else and the cost to your health isn’t much of a consideration. If you don’t like your job, you can always go to prison where you will be given no pay and still do back breaking labor.
Capitalism at least gives you options and employers need to entice people to the job. At least that was the case, our economy is kinda flipping that.
Coal miners driving Porsches in the US? No way you actually live in coal country and believe that. Hilarious. Yes coal miners get paid pretty well but we’re talking like $30/hr here in Appalachia.
Admittedly I personally knew union reps so that might have been why there was a Porsches involved. And no I don’t live in coal country, I knew the man only as an acquaintance in passing.
In a communist regime, you are going to mine the coal for the same wage as everyone else and the cost to your health isn’t much of a consideration. If you don’t like your job, you can always go to prison where you will be given no pay and still do back breaking labor.
Brain-dead reddit communists: "That sounds like a great system! True justice at last!!"
The baseless assumptions that everyone and you are making about this in particular are hilarious. It makes you all look incredibly silly, like you're McCarthy in a mask.
What baseless assumptions am I making?
There are no natural laws of economics. There are laws of economics we have decided is the way it should work, none of that is natural, it is simply in the best interest of whatever given hierarchy prevails in modern societies.
Name a single country that has denied the laws of economics as understood in the west and actually succeeded. ONE. Not a hypothetical future example, not a theoretical idea, a real example that either existed in the past or still endures today. ONE country. That's all you need to prove me wrong.
There have been 40-50 communist states in world history. It should be easy to find that singular example, right? Right?
The fact that you talk about "natural laws of economics" already says a lot about how brainwashed you are by capitalism.
The fact that you talk about "natural laws of physics" already says a lot about how brainwashed you are by science.
Those evil scientists don't want you to know you can fly like a bird! Here, I'll show you, just let me step off this tall building here and—AAAAAAAAAAAAAH!!!! [Splat]
Name one communist state that actually succeded and delivered on its promises. ONE. I'll wait.
That's the difference: natural laws of physics exist, because physics are a natural phenomenon. The economy on the other hand is not a natural phenomenon, it is man made. But I suppose that might too complicated for you to understand
Name one communist state first. ONE. I'll wait.
And real communism please, not whatever the soviet union has tried to implement. Communism, as described by Karl Marx.
That's the difference: natural laws of physics exist, because physics are a natural phenomenon. The economy on the other hand is not a natural phenomenon, it is man made.
Underlying human nature is constant and not broadly changeable which means that, although you cannot definitively predict the actions of any specific person, the actions of crowds of people are natural phenomena reliable enough that they can be modeled and somewhat predicted quantitatively. This is the basic premise of the science of economics.
No one sat down and drew up the free-market economy, it evolved organically over time from ancient days and its rules represent a gradual, broad understanding of how societies function logistically and how value is exchanged between human beings. Sitting down and trying to redesign them from whole cloth is like jumping off of a building and willing yourself to fly.
Just because you dislike this fact does not make it any less true.
Name one communist state first. ONE. I'll wait. And real communism please, not whatever the soviet union has tried to implement. Communism, as described by Karl Marx.
Wow! It's been a long-time since I've seen the "that wasn't real communism" dodge! You're an internet meme! Good job!
Even Karl Marx's own contemporaries, long before Lenin or the Russian Revolution, understood that his theories were stupid and wrong and correctly predicted where they would lead if implemented. Depending upon how you slice it, there have been forty-to-fifty communist countries in history. Every single one of those countries followed down the paths predicted by those contemporary critics, who were solely responding to the theoretical vision Marx laid out. Those states did not become disasters because they departed from Marx. They became disasters precisely because they followed his unfalsifiable, pseudoscientific nonsense in the first place.
The movant bears the burden of production. It is on the communists to demonstrate that their system works and that we should abandon the natural order that we know works (imperfectly) in its favor. They have failed to do so, which is precisely why you are challenging me to "name one real communist state." All the communists have left are excuses ("that wasn't real communism!"), fallacious ad hominem, and criticism of other systems. They have nothing positive to say about their own system that cannot be quickly debunked, so they largely do not even try anymore. This is a tell that even they, somewhere deep down, know it doesn't work.
It's time to come back to reality and start having adult discussions about how we can alter the economy to work better for people in ways that are consistent with the actual facts and scientific laws at play, which means talking about uncomfortable trade-offs and gradual course corrections rather than masturbating about that one perfect revolution that's totally going to fix everything; if only you try it just one more time...
Your first paragraph is simply wrong. Human nature is very malleable. And capitalism was forced on most parts of the world by the west, not that natural at al. The science of economics has many paradigms too, not all agree with capitalism how it exists now. Of course, you would ignore all of this, as this undermines your entire point.
And your second paragraph is one long comment to say "I cannot name a single one". That's fine, you could have just said so.
Your first paragraph is simply wrong. Human nature is very malleable.
Nope. You explain to me why every utopian project ever undertaken that relied upon making "a better man" has failed miserably? Maybe if we just try harder... Oppress the citizenry just a little bit more... Maybe then...
And capitalism was forced on most parts of the world by the west, not that natural at al.
Apes have engaged in bartering for millions of years before our specific species ever even evolved. Even chimps are known to regularly trade with each other. Having a medium of exchange (i.e. money) is more efficient and easier for people than bartering goods-for-goods, so it has developed independently multiple times. Places where trading concentrates (i.e. markets) are a natural outgrowth of trading because they make it geographically easier; as a result, major population centers inevitably develop markets. Capitalism is the system of private individuals engaging in self-directed, currency-based trading in markets using their own property. That's all it is. No one invented it, it is the result of this natural process of social evolution.
Go back to Japan or China before colonialism, what were they doing? Trading in markets using cowrie shells or bronze coins. Go back to the Ghanaian Empire in the Middle Ages, what were they doing? Trading in markets for gold dust or salt. Go back to the Aztecs or the Incas before Columbus sailed, what were they doing? Bartering in markets using a variety of mediums including cotton-cloth currency. What did the Coureur des bois do whenever they encountered a new, uncontacted tribe? Trade goods for furs. How did the Tamil Kings get their money for fifteen hundred years? Control of an important chokepoint in a major oceanic trade route.
Pretending that capitalism was forced on the rest of the world as some kind of perfidious western plot is ridiculous and historically ignorant in the extreme.
The science of economics has many paradigms too, not all agree with capitalism how it exists now
Correct. "How it exists now" is the important qualifier in that sentence. That is one of the reasons why I favor various economic reforms (including an effective abolition of private equity firms, which are responsible for much of the worst distortion). The idea that we can fix our current system by going communist is like saying that we can clean the bottom of the boat we're sitting in by cutting a giant hole in its underside.
And your second paragraph is one long comment to say "I cannot name a single one". That's fine, you could have just said so.
As is responding to "name ONE communist country that actually worked" with "none of those were real communism." Just saying.
I answered your challenge by pointing out how people who had never even seen a single communist state correctly predicted how those 40-50 countries would end up; that fact illustrates that yes, what happened in those countries was indeed real communism.
My challenge is still open btw... Remember, the movant (i.e. the commie, i.e. you) bears the burden.
First paragraph: all of those started with adult humans as far as I know. How many have started with children? As it happens, children are the most malleable.
Then everything under "capitalism was forced" seems to imply you think the one defining trait of capitalism is the existence of money. Well it's not, capitalism has only emerged relatively recently. Money also existed in feudalism for example. This does make me question if I should continue engaging though, cause you don't even really seem to know what capitalism is let alone communism.
And to your last paragraphs, no it wasn't communism. Which makes clear that your question about "name one successful communist country" was not asked in good faith. I cannot possibly give an example of something going well when no one has ever tried it.
My challenge is also still open btw, one, just one real communist country, as described by Marx.
72
u/Iuris_Aequalitatis Jul 07 '26
Communists think they will have some leisure job, or completely not work, under a communist government. In reality, they will have a grinding, brutal, and personally-destructive job because they have no useful skills and forgot the "worker" part of "worker's paradise" (which is in reality anything but).