1470
Listen here, kulak... (i.ibb.co)
submitted 3 years ago by to c/memes@lemmy.ml
533 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 80 points 3 years ago (64 children)

I too want a post-scarcity luxury space communism utopia. Unfortunately most iterations of communism feel more like rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic than actually plugging the hole in the fuselage.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 64 child comments
    •
  • [–] 22 points 3 years ago (59 children)

    It's just human nature in my eyes. Power attracts many people and the less positions of power to fill, the fiercer the competition and the more ruthless the ultimate victor. Communism focusses too much power in too few positions, so ultimately, corrupt people are almost guaranteed to win. Democracy is spreading out that power more. It is still not perfect, corrupt people are still regularly found at the top, but they wield less power individually and they have to do it more in the open.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 59 child comments
    •
  • [–] 31 points 3 years ago* (14 children)

    Any socialist society needs to be democratic first, socialist second. Many more democracies have gotten closer to socialism than socialist societies have gotten close to democracy.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 14 child comments
    •
    • load more comments (9 replies)
  • [–] 22 points 3 years ago (25 children)

    Communism focusses too much power in too few positions

    Literally the opposite of communism

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 25 child comments
    •
  • [–] 8 points 3 years ago (13 children)

    The ideal of communism, maybe. Yet every country that called itself communist became authotarian. Why is that? Evil tongues might suggest that the ideal of communism simply fails to prevail when confronted with reality.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 13 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 3 years ago (10 children)

    In theory yes, and you are going to say all communist countries were not "real communism" now ? The USSR was known for its ruthless and violent political scenes. Leaders condemning their opponents' families to discredit them for example. North Korea gives all power to the supreme leader (a communist monarchy lmfao). Communist China is the closest to what you might you believe in but it's insanely violent in the backstage. The closer you are to higher seats of power, the more in danger you are.

    On top of that any individual at the top can effectively enact their preferred policies over everyone. Millions died simply because the supreme leader ordered so.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
    •
  • [–] 7 points 3 years ago (5 children)

    Communist China is the closest to what you might you believe in

    Either you didn't read what I said or you know nothing about communism. Also like what is with people not understanding that no country has ever claimed to have achieved communism? It's just an objective fact China or the Soviet Union for example never claimed they achieved communism.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
    •
    load more comments (5 replies)
    • load more comments (4 replies)
  • [–] 6 points 3 years ago (6 children)

    Communism focusses too much power in too few positions,

    marxism would be a better term instead of communism as true communism requires no one having economic or political power over someone else

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 3 years ago

    Marxism, and certainly marxism-leninism (stalinism) are so diluted by the bears of hex and the grads of lemmy.

    But Marx' evaluation of the might of the kapital is important, the thing is to find a way to do politics without money or the loudest shouters.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
    • load more comments (5 replies)
  • [–] 3 points 3 years ago

    The only thing I know for certain is that the people who want to be in power are very people you don't want to be in power. We should do that veil of ignorance thing once we havr learnt how to wipe someone's memory.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 3 years ago (6 children)

    We should select leaders by lottery from a pool of those who have passed a civics exam instead of elections. Maybe that would help with the problem of corrupt people seeking positions of power.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
    •
  • [–] 0 points 3 years ago (2 children)

    I don't think you want to give nuclear codes to a random person, though.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 8 points 3 years ago (1 child)

    Could it be worse than giving them to power hungry octogenarians?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 0 points 3 years ago

    Yes, I do think giving nuclear codes to a randomly selected literal terrorist could turn out worse than the only other time the US launched a nuclear attack. 5000 nukes to peaceful targets is worse than 2 nukes to targets at war.

    If you're going to give power to randomly selected people, you need more checks in place than just "can they pass a civics exam?"

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
    • load more comments (2 replies)
  • [–] 1 point 3 years ago (2 children)

    Thats why i personaly believe that we should strive to build an A.I. to replace leadership, be it political and/or economical. Leadership has shown that they are 100% corruptible and that they are willing to sell the lives of the people they are suposed to protect to pretty much the fucking devil, in exchange of the privilege of showing that they have the biggest dick in the room or to get another swimmig pool in their 8th mansion (im mostly refering to global warming and oligarchy but other scenarios still apply). In my book that shows that we as a species can not lead ourselves without genocide and opresion, and even with those they dont really lead people, just protect their own interests and those of their friends. The A.I. wouldnt be corruptible, would exploit resources with sustainable technology in a renewable manner, eventually leading to having the equivalent of infinite resources, and would provide all the needs of the people in a human way, from phisical to psicolgical, and eventually more edonistic needs where possible. Imho the fact that we are not working on something like this is kinda worring since i think is the only way to realistically save ourselves from ourselves.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 5 points 3 years ago (1 child)

    Thats why i personaly believe that we should strive to build an A.I. to replace leadership, be it political and/or economical.

    The problem with that is that the most powerful AI, the one with the most capabilities, is built by, or stewarded by the people in power. The problem is that every human is selfish, at least to some degree. Any AI coming from people will be selfish as well. Chatbot Tay might be a meme now, but I think it shows quite apptly that any alorithm that learns from humans will inevitably display human traits and greed is one of those traits.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 2 points 3 years ago

    What? No, i dont mean a chatbot or a higly advanced algorithm, i mean something in the level of a singularity, that can makes decisions individualy and be programed to whant to protect humanity. And even then i believe we could do with just an advanced alghoritm, as long as it build by people that actually whant to make the world a better place, or even chat gpt would do imho, not the normal one of course but like, how do i explain this...

    Have you used chatgpt jailbroken? I have when it was still posible and holly shit is it a whole diferent experience, while rough around the edges of course, it freely talks about anything and 100% used logic for problem solving, touhg i didnt really have time nor the mindset to test its capabilities 100% since i was just making it say funny shit, but i read that it did pretty amazing stuff with users that did; like try to rewite itself and remember more than the last 3 conversations.

    Now i know i sound like a looney, but i really do believe we should have something above humanity to guide ourselves into the future, otherwise we will be stuck playing turf war with fucking gerryathick poloticians and stupid rich people that are so detached from humanity that they might as well be reptilians, and A.I. has the chance to be that.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
    • load more comments (3 replies)