It is significantly easier to establish communism in a small community, where you can see the people daily that you consider part of your tribe, than a national communism where the work you put in benefits someone on the far side of the country that you’ve never met, and may consider them as part of your “tribe” on an intellectual level, but not much beyond that.
You already put in work that benefits someone that you’ve never met, in this case it’s a billionaire. I’d rather pay for someone’s lunch than another yacht ykwim
I believe you would. But it wouldn’t happen, you’d be still paying for the rich. Instead of lying about trickle down economy they’d sell you lies about everyone being equal.
We had the Soviet version of “communism” when those fuckers occupied us. Never again.
Sure but you’d also rather benefit a nobody in exchange for money than you would in exchange of “trust me bro”. As you say, you’re working to benefit somebody else in both ways, but only one gives you immediate positive feedback. In enormous societies such as modern countries are you need a strong stimulus to work, money provides that but benefits don’t - you would see much more people happy to pay taxes otherwise.
Not that I wouldn’t love living in a Star Trek federation like communist society, but we ain’t there yet
Yeah, that’s why we need a transition period of Socialism.
That period has to be generations long however and on a multinational scale to set the stage for eliminating money and the state so we’ll probably never see Communism on a national scale in our lifetime. Socialism’s good enough though tbh
It is significantly easier to establish communism in a small community, where you can see the people daily that you consider part of your tribe, than a national communism where the work you put in benefits someone on the far side of the country that you’ve never met, and may consider them as part of your “tribe” on an intellectual level, but not much beyond that.
You already put in work that benefits someone that you’ve never met, in this case it’s a billionaire. I’d rather pay for someone’s lunch than another yacht ykwim
I believe you would. But it wouldn’t happen, you’d be still paying for the rich. Instead of lying about trickle down economy they’d sell you lies about everyone being equal.
We had the Soviet version of “communism” when those fuckers occupied us. Never again.
Sure but you’d also rather benefit a nobody in exchange for money than you would in exchange of “trust me bro”. As you say, you’re working to benefit somebody else in both ways, but only one gives you immediate positive feedback. In enormous societies such as modern countries are you need a strong stimulus to work, money provides that but benefits don’t - you would see much more people happy to pay taxes otherwise.
Not that I wouldn’t love living in a Star Trek federation like communist society, but we ain’t there yet
Yeah, that’s why we need a transition period of Socialism.
That period has to be generations long however and on a multinational scale to set the stage for eliminating money and the state so we’ll probably never see Communism on a national scale in our lifetime. Socialism’s good enough though tbh
Mechanical solidarity
Kind of relevant, minus the religion and customs.