A Nietzsche-like question: Since hierarchies exist everywhere in nature...

[Random Variable]

does the communist system defy nature? In other words, is it inherently destructive?

 

[Passions]

r0x0r!

 

[Czar]

in some way but socialism is not like communism you know

socialism is that everyone helps the weak.
communism everyone is equal so everyone is weak.

or something like that

 

[Random Variable]

<< in some way but socialism is not like communism you know

socialism is that everyone helps the weak.
communism everyone is equal so everyone is weak.

or something like that >>


If I had said communism, everyone would have erroneously thought of totalitarianism.

 

[Random Variable]

Czar,

You are completely wrong. In a communist state everyone is a master.

 

[Czar]

<<

<< in some way but socialism is not like communism you know

socialism is that everyone helps the weak.
communism everyone is equal so everyone is weak.

or something like that >>


If I had said communism, everyone would have erroneously thought of totalitarianism. >>


but that is the accurate discription on what defies nature because of the non existent hierachial system, in theary that is. Socialism doesnt.

 

[Czar]

<< Czar,

You are completely wrong. In a communist state everyone is a master. >>


or the weak one, depends on how you look at it, how they look at it or how the system works in most cases.

 

[Random Variable]

<< but that is the accurate discription on what defies nature because of the non existent hierachial system, in theary that is. Socialism doesnt. >>


But socialism clearly tries to mess with hierarchical structures (not as much as communism, though).

 

[Random Variable]

<< or the weak one, depends on how you look at it, how they look at it or how the system works in most cases. >>


That is not true. How can anyone be considered weak when the master/slave relationship disappears?

EDIT: And especially when the people own the means of production?

 

[Czar]

<< But socialism clearly tries to mess with hierarchical structures (not as much as communism, though). >>


what socialism does is the same as with the african wild dogs (dont know the exact english name) that even if one dog breaks its leg the others support him still the same and give him food.

 

[Czar]

<<

<< or the weak one, depends on how you look at it, how they look at it or how the system works in most cases. >>


That is not true. How can anyone be considered weak when the master/slave relationship disappears?

EDIT: And especially when the people own the means of production? >>


because the competition wouldnt be as harsh so compared to other countries they would be weak. Communism is perfect only if there is no outside influence

 

[DioCassius]

Not to butt in, but I think what Czar meant is that if everybody is a master, then nobody is a master of somebody, so nobody has power, thus everybody is weak. (?)

Anyway, don't humans defy what nature has created constantly, ever since the Industrial revolution?

 

[Czar]

<< Not to butt in, but I think what he meant is that if everybody is a master, then nobody is a master of somebody, so nobody has power, thus everybody is weak. (?) >>


something like that

 

[Random Variable]

<< because the competition wouldnt be as harsh so compared to other countries they would be weak. Communism is perfect only if there is no outside influence >>


That's a faulty argument to say that true communism leads to a lack of motivation.

 

[charrison]

Socialism/communism is impractical. If you excessivly steal from the achievers they will either move or stop acheiving.

 

[Czar]

<<

<< because the competition wouldnt be as harsh so compared to other countries they would be weak. Communism is perfect only if there is no outside influence >>


It's a faulty argument to says that true communism leads to a lack of motivation. >>


only compared to other systems like copitalism and socialism

 

[nihil]

mmmm.....nietzsche.

 

[Czar]

btw

socialism /= communism

 

[nihil]

<< btw

socialism /= communism >>



yeah, i've had to debate this one with tons and tons of people. even though in some ways they are alike that does not make them the same thing. kind of like when people assume that communism = totalitarianism.

 

[Random Variable]

The bottom line as I see it is that democracy defies the hierarchical structure of nature a little bit, socialism defies it a little bit more, and communism defies it a lot.

 

[Random Variable]

Czar

A socialistic state could be communist state depedening upon who owns the means of production.

 

[DioCassius]

But you could also say that mass consumption, the bases of capitalism, defies nature a lot as well. No other system in nature consumes more than it needs (that I know of).

 

[Random Variable]

<< But you could also say that mass consumption, the bases of capitalism, defies nature a lot as well. No other system in nature consumes more than it needs (that I know of). >>

Put algae in a pond without any fish and watch what will happen.

 

[Sir Fredrick]

<<

<< But you could also say that mass consumption, the bases of capitalism, defies nature a lot as well. No other system in nature consumes more than it needs (that I know of). >>

Put algae in a pond without any fish and watch what will happen. >>



It will reproduce. Having reproduced, it will need more surface area, and the cycle continues until the pond is covered.
That doesn't mean that the algae is consuming more than it needs in the same way that so many people eat more than they need to the point of becoming obese. Reproduction is natural.

 

[DioCassius]

<< Put algae in a pond without any fish and watch what will happen. >>


Ok, I'll be right back.