• NocturnalMorning@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    arrow-down
    9
    ·
    1 year ago

    The problem with communism is bcz it requires strong central planning it tends to devolve into authoritarianism quickly.

    • TokenBoomer@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Computers and databases with logistics didn’t exist in 1918. Walmart and Amazon have strong central planning. Chile began to do it in 1971 with Project CyberSyn, but the CIA and capitalism couldn’t have that in their backyard.

      Edit: There is a failure of imagination concerning what socialism and communism could like in the future. Lenin was materially bound by his time. Actual Communism (worldwide) might look sufficiently different than what’s been done before.

      • NocturnalMorning@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        Yeah, I think we have proven over and over that human nature doesn’t do communism well at large scales. Not that I don’t think at small scales it’s a perfectly good system. Capitalism isn’t really any better tho. I don’t have a solution for how to avoid the pitfalls of socialism and communism. Worker owned means of production is really the thing I want, attainable or not. No single person should own all of the gains off the backs of worker blood, sweat, and tears.

        • TokenBoomer@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Anarcho-Syndicalism or Anarcho-Communism? There’s the rub. I’m still exploring that myself.

    • NuXCOM_90Percent@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      I think there are a LOT more problems than just that, but yeah.

      You can more or less “break” libertarianism and many anarchies by asking about “what happens to the orphans?”. For Communism and its derivatives, the question is usually “Who gets to be a scientist, a doctor, a movie star, and the person who cleans out the sewers? And do they all get the same benefits?”

      Personally? I think the bigger issue is women’s rights. If you consider sex work to be work, how do you figure out who is most suited to be a sex worker? And, regardless, how do you decide who is best suited to be a mother and how that impacts the centralized planning?

      It is one of the many reasons that what we truly need are hybrid socioeconomic models.

    • KepBen@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Why would you rather have Amazon and Walmart plan your economy than a democratically elected government?

    • rambaroo@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Communism doesn’t require central planning. The fact that you think it does tells me you don’t know what communism even is.

      • NocturnalMorning@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Depends on your definition. Each of these is a definition from the web, and two of them involve dictatorship like control of the economy. Next time you decide to basically call someone stupid, make sure you know what you’re talking about first.

        A theoretical economic system characterized by the collective ownership of property and by the organization of labor for the common advantage of all members.

        A system of government in which the state plans and controls the economy and a single, often authoritarian party holds power, claiming to make progress toward a higher social order in which all goods are equally shared by the people.

        The Marxist-Leninist doctrine advocating revolution to overthrow the capitalist system and establish a dictatorship of the proletariat that will eventually evolve into a perfectly egalitarian and communal society.

        • dangblingus@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          Well, we all know now that ML wasn’t about installing a dictatorship of the Proletariat.

          Turns out, maybe straight communism isn’t what humans need, but some kind of…democratic socialism.