It seems that most of the time, my discussions with people about socialism and communism end up on the topic of "but people are inherently bad, or at least a few people are, and will always take advatange of others. Even during natural disorders, some go steal everything in the stores while other help strangers"

I always have a hard time arguing that human nature depend on the environment, that it takes a few generations, and that there is probably always going to be violence but it's marginal and can be taken care of.

What main ideas am I missing? And how to argue about this and respond to this central idea that refrain a lot of liberals?

Thank you!

If you have any theory that you want to point at, that would also be great

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 13 points 1 week ago

Human nature is determined by the material conditions of a society, e.g. the relations of production, the productive forces, and the mode of production. It’s a historical development and doesn’t exist in a vacuum, neither does it float above us in the sky and beyond our comprehension. To understand human nature we must study how society reproduces itself, from the way our ape ancestors lived up to how human beings live now. Historical materialism is the method we should use to study human nature. We always had to produce in order to exist, however primitive those means of production may have been, and our labor has always been social, however primitive those means of communication were, such as language.

Stalin’s https://redsails.org/dialectical-and-historical-materialism/ is a necessary read for any ML who wants to advance the cause of communism in all aspects of our movement. I suspect that the “human nature” argument that the libs throw at us constantly is one of these aspect we need to understand thoroughly because they keep pushing it and without seeing the misanthropy underlying their logic, no progress can be achieve against “individualism.”

  • source