COMMUNISM - CAPITALISM - SOCIALISM
androbot2084 wrote:
Under Communism every child is your own child.
Like I said, in theory.
And learned behaviour
@ username - androbot2084 - I know I agree with you but, are you a "troll"? - I am just wondering, your replies are awful short and declarative.
I apologise if such perception err from your intentions.
ruveyn wrote:
HairlessAlbinoCat wrote:
androbot2084 wrote:
Under Communism every child is your own child.
Like I said, in theory.
Not even in theory.
ruveyn
Objectively that is true
Subjectively that is not necesarily true
I believe I am more accepting of this concept due to being an antinatalist when it comes to already-born generations and an advocate for eugenetics when it comes to future generations.
HairlessAlbinoCat wrote:
androbot2084 wrote:
Under Communism every child is your own child.
Like I said, in theory.
And learned behaviour
@ username - androbot2084 - I know I agree with you but, are you a "troll"? - I am just wondering, your replies are awful short and declarative.
I apologise if such perception err from your intentions.
Oh androbot is better than a troll he is an AI-bot I think he is getting much better
he used to be horrible.
_________________
?We must not look at goblin men,
We must not buy their fruits:
Who knows upon what soil they fed
Their hungry thirsty roots??
http://jakobvirgil.blogspot.com/
JakobVirgil wrote:
HairlessAlbinoCat wrote:
androbot2084 wrote:
Under Communism every child is your own child.
Like I said, in theory.
And learned behaviour
@ username - androbot2084 - I know I agree with you but, are you a "troll"? - I am just wondering, your replies are awful short and declarative.
I apologise if such perception err from your intentions.
Oh androbot is better than a troll he is an AI-bot I think he is getting much better
he used to be horrible.
Are you serious? I cannot tell (this is not sarcasm)
Was that sarcasm?
HairlessAlbinoCat wrote:
JakobVirgil wrote:
HairlessAlbinoCat wrote:
androbot2084 wrote:
Under Communism every child is your own child.
Like I said, in theory.
And learned behaviour
@ username - androbot2084 - I know I agree with you but, are you a "troll"? - I am just wondering, your replies are awful short and declarative.
I apologise if such perception err from your intentions.
Oh androbot is better than a troll he is an AI-bot I think he is getting much better
he used to be horrible.
Are you serious? I cannot tell (this is not sarcasm)
Was that sarcasm?
I may be wrong but I am serious.
@androbot2084 I apologize if I am wrong.
_________________
?We must not look at goblin men,
We must not buy their fruits:
Who knows upon what soil they fed
Their hungry thirsty roots??
http://jakobvirgil.blogspot.com/
Here is why communism cannot sustain itself:
Assume your child (the one you begat or adopted and bonded with since he/she was young) was drowning and the neighbor's child was drowning and you can old save one. Which one do you save?
Ah ha! I thought so. People are hardwired to protect their own bonded children first and foremost. That is the way humans are. Communism demands we treat all equally. It will never, ever work. It is contrary to human nature.
ruveyn
androbot2084 wrote:
That's not a fault of Communism but rather a fault with humans.
humans are a product of their environment.
_________________
?Civil government, so far as it is instituted for the security of property, is in reality instituted for the defense of the rich against the poor, or of those who have some property against those who have none at all.?
Adam Smith
ruveyn wrote:
Here is why communism cannot sustain itself:
Assume your child (the one you begat or adopted and bonded with since he/she was young) was drowning and the neighbor's child was drowning and you can old save one. Which one do you save?
Ah ha! I thought so. People are hardwired to protect their own bonded children first and foremost. That is the way humans are. Communism demands we treat all equally. It will never, ever work. It is contrary to human nature.
ruveyn
Assume your child (the one you begat or adopted and bonded with since he/she was young) was drowning and the neighbor's child was drowning and you can old save one. Which one do you save?
Ah ha! I thought so. People are hardwired to protect their own bonded children first and foremost. That is the way humans are. Communism demands we treat all equally. It will never, ever work. It is contrary to human nature.
ruveyn
It could work one day when we get over our primitive instincts
ruveyn wrote:
HairlessAlbinoCat wrote:
androbot2084 wrote:
Communism is the ultimate utopia.
In theory I agree.
It has been said that the fault with communism is that it goes against human nature, but how about when speaking of Aspie (human) nature?
People will always prefer their own children to the children of others. Commonality simply will not work.
ruveyn
have you ever read huxley's island? people always interpret this kind of thing in a very extreme way. i grew up in a working class community in the uk in the 1970s, and in that place at that time, people within the community looked out for one another. children weren't communal, but to a point the community did actually work like an extended family. it quite simply works.
_________________
?Civil government, so far as it is instituted for the security of property, is in reality instituted for the defense of the rich against the poor, or of those who have some property against those who have none at all.?
Adam Smith
puddingmouse wrote:
androbot2084 wrote:
Under Communism every child is your own child.
It's statements like these that make me distance myself from the radical left (despite the fact that I agree with certain aspects of Marxism).
why? a community functioning as an extended family is, to me at least, far, far superior to the policies of the reformist left of heavy social intervention and children of parents who are experiencing difficulties of any sort being snatched by the state and either put in homes or with foster parents. i see very often first hand the inherent problems this system creates both for parents and children.
_________________
?Civil government, so far as it is instituted for the security of property, is in reality instituted for the defense of the rich against the poor, or of those who have some property against those who have none at all.?
Adam Smith
peebo wrote:
have you ever read huxley's island? people always interpret this kind of thing in a very extreme way. i grew up in a working class community in the uk in the 1970s, and in that place at that time, people within the community looked out for one another. children weren't communal, but to a point the community did actually work like an extended family. it quite simply works.
Isn't -Island- a work of fiction? What does it have to do with reality?
It takes a village to raise an idealist who is out of touch with reality.
ruveyn
peebo wrote:
puddingmouse wrote:
androbot2084 wrote:
Under Communism every child is your own child.
It's statements like these that make me distance myself from the radical left (despite the fact that I agree with certain aspects of Marxism).
why? a community functioning as an extended family is, to me at least, far, far superior to the policies of the reformist left of heavy social intervention and children of parents who are experiencing difficulties of any sort being snatched by the state and either put in homes or with foster parents. i see very often first hand the inherent problems this system creates both for parents and children.
My problem is communal children. It doesn't work very well. The kibbutzim children were pretty traumatised by it and would sneak into their parents' houses in the night.
I'm all for a community functioning as an extended family; I believe that sort of thing agrees very well with human nature. However, social workers don't just intervene for any half-baked reason. You can do without them in a small community but in a big city, you need them.
_________________
Zombies, zombies will tear us apart...again.
ruveyn wrote:
peebo wrote:
have you ever read huxley's island? people always interpret this kind of thing in a very extreme way. i grew up in a working class community in the uk in the 1970s, and in that place at that time, people within the community looked out for one another. children weren't communal, but to a point the community did actually work like an extended family. it quite simply works.
Isn't -Island- a work of fiction? What does it have to do with reality?
it is a work of fiction, yes, but in the way that a few of huxley's (and other fiction writers) other books are, it is very much a political/social critique. don't you often find reality mirrored or critiqued succinctly in works of fiction? i certainly do.
Quote:
It takes a village to raise an idealist who is out of touch with reality.
ruveyn
ruveyn
is this in some way directed at myself? for your information, i did not grow up in a village, although i have been accused of being an idealist who is out of touch with reality on more than one occasion, although generally i am of the belief that i approach life in a far more pragmatic way than said accusers.
_________________
?Civil government, so far as it is instituted for the security of property, is in reality instituted for the defense of the rich against the poor, or of those who have some property against those who have none at all.?
Adam Smith
peebo wrote:
ruveyn wrote:
peebo wrote:
have you ever read huxley's island? people always interpret this kind of thing in a very extreme way. i grew up in a working class community in the uk in the 1970s, and in that place at that time, people within the community looked out for one another. children weren't communal, but to a point the community did actually work like an extended family. it quite simply works.
Isn't -Island- a work of fiction? What does it have to do with reality?
it is a work of fiction, yes, but in the way that a few of huxley's (and other fiction writers) other books are, it is very much a political/social critique. don't you often find reality mirrored or critiqued succinctly in works of fiction? i certainly do.
Quote:
It takes a village to raise an idealist who is out of touch with reality.
ruveyn
ruveyn
is this in some way directed at myself? for your information, i did not grow up in a village, although i have been accused of being an idealist who is out of touch with reality on more than one occasion, although generally i am of the belief that i approach life in a far more pragmatic way than said accusers.
in America being raised in a village does not have a pejorative connotation or if it does
then it is a reference to Hilary Clinton's book. <-- I think this is how ruve means it.
What you all call villages we call small towns and only WholesomeGoodness(tm) comes out of them.
_________________
?We must not look at goblin men,
We must not buy their fruits:
Who knows upon what soil they fed
Their hungry thirsty roots??
http://jakobvirgil.blogspot.com/