Aspie Communists Unite

Post Reply New Topic

The "Seven Deadly Sins" are part of the human behavior package; and as such, they are anathema to both Christianity and Communism - both of which seem to rely on humility, contentment, self-denial, chastity, calmness, charity, and industry to work.

• Pride is excessive belief in one's own abilities, that interferes with the individual's recognition of the grace of God. It has been called the sin from which all others arise. Pride is also known as Vanity.
  
• Envy is the desire for others' traits, status, abilities, or situation.
  
• Gluttony is an inordinate desire to consume more than that which one requires.
  
• Lust is an inordinate craving for the pleasures of the body.
  
• Anger is manifested in the individual who spurns love and opts instead for fury. It is also known as Wrath.
  
• Greed is the desire for material wealth or gain, ignoring the realm of the spiritual. It is also called Avarice or Covetousness.
  
• Sloth is the avoidance of physical or spiritual work.

However, both Capitalism and Democracy seem to thrive on these natural traits as virtues instead.

You can't have subordination in a non-hierarchical society. You two sound like loping cassettes ignoring all the points have been made. Yes, humans are capable of being greedy, but they are also capable of altruism. Hierarchys tend to turn people into monsters. You two ignore me every time I bring up a real functioning social anarchist societies that collapsed only because of invading armys. Defense is the largest issue when it comes to real socialism and real communism, other than that it seems to work out quite nicely.

Its only the rich few that are incapable of altruism.

Market Socialist here. Not a huge fan of democracy either. Not sure if i'm a communist or a socialist though. lol

It's the management class that is against Communism.

That fantasy does not explain the tremendously large number of low-income people who share with each other their homes, food, clothing, and income. Everybody is capable of altruism. "I'm not rich enough to help the poor" is a Republican-style cop-out.

You're not a Republican, are you?


Where do you get these stupid ideas? Certainly not from real-life events!

People who are against communism are people who see what has happened in countries that implement it - poverty, rulership by committee, and the rationing of food, medicine, fuel, housing, and other necessities of life - part and parcel of a communist regime. Furthermore, if you are a citizen of a communist country and you complain about your lack of "civil rights", you are likely to end up in a prison work camp.

I am against communism for these reasons, and for the fact that if America suddenly went commie, everyone would live in poverty, and only the 1% at the top would enjoy - at the very least - a middle-class existence.

Communism is just another word for feudalism - a system for structuring society around the holding of State-owned resources in exchange for service or labor by the masses.

Last edited by Fnord on 10 Mar 2013, 11:16 am, edited 1 time in total.

A modest proposal:

Are there any kibbutz's left? I would think some of the above posters would welcome a chance to demonstrate their achievements, as opposed to forum posts that appear to have minimal impact.

My views are considerably closer to Fnord's.

Many kibbutzes of the 1950s have gone corporate, or they sold their lands outright for a healthy profit.

Communism does not endure.

Fnord, please don't link communism to feudalism. Fuedalism allowed for competing political forces, a series of mutual obligations, and property rights (ie, the feudal contract).

Quite so. But trading and property which are two key ingredients of capitalism go back to the time when God invented dirt. The addition baggage of claiming part of the workman's output as rent for the machinery and workplace provided by the owner, complete the triad and you have capitalism. So two out of three parts of capitalism go Way Back When.

ruveyn

Communism allows those same things, as long as you are a member of the ruling Party. The proletariat / peons / serf have no such rights under either system.

Communism is just Feudalism at the point of a gun.

That is the version that survived and flourished in the real world for a time. The Marxist version is essentially anarchist in its essence.

ruveyn

We'll agree to disagree on this one. Membership in the ruling party did not protect the high-level officials purged the USSR oer the years. Yes, there were competing forces in each communist nation, but nothing like the seperate powers of the Church, cities, monstaries, local fiefdoms, etc. of feudalism.

Yes, Feudalism had a dividing line, below which you also had very limited rights. This was often (but not always) mitigated by the power of the church, which at some points in Western European history had 20 percent or more of the population under some form of protection (usually serfs pledged to local church holdings). See generally the struggles behind "Benefit of clergy".

I have posted this on WP before, but just in case people forgot:

The factors positively correlated with economic growth:

- Strong economic freedoms
- Low barriers to international trade
- High human capital
- Low public expenditure

Seminal study:
http://relooney.fatcow.com/BarroDemocracy.pdf

Meta-analysis:
http://www.international.ucla.edu/cms/f ... liagos.pdf

Communism fails outright on 3 out of 4 of the above...

Human capital (education, science) is a bit more complex.. Who is the greatest enemy of enlightenment? Trofim "Lamarck is Back" Lysenko or Rick "The Evangelical Scourge" Santorum?

You are suggesting there is no personal property in anarchist communism. In fact the only type of anarchist I know that's against personal property are the extreme individualist anarcho-nhilist types like Max Stirner, who believe individuals should just take stuff as their property with might.

@ fnord and ruveyn

if you're going to respond citing the doctrine of human selfishness, I have not the energy to respond.

All i will say is this- the basis for class heirarchy is based on our current mode of production (Heavilly reliant on manual manpower) and our outdated form of trade in currency.

Automation and resourced based economics will remove the basis for social classes which is a learned construct.