Redistribution of Wealth in a Communist Society?

[Fight!]

Perhaps the only thing that has kept me from becoming a full-fledged Communist is the lack of state. I disagree with the complete lack of state for the sole reason of not being able to grasp the entirety of the theoretical nature of wealth redistribution within a Communist state, which as we know is stateless, as well as classless.

My question is: How can wealth be distributed in a Communist society?

[Pontifex Maximus]

Wealth doesn't exist in a communist community, everyone shares.

[CiviC]

Wealth doesn't exist in a communist community, everyone shares.

Wealth doesn't exist in Communism because nobody produces it. Without property there is no incetive for production and progress beyond maybe basic needs.

Communism is against human nature and society; even animals have the sense of property. Comunism destroys civilisation and society and eventualy humanity.

[dogukan]

OP;
Communism is not a sudden change, it would probably take decades maybe centuries of evolution for things to be actually communal. Eventually people will decide how things will work collectively step by step, that is what matters anyways.

Wealth doesn't exist in Communism because nobody produces it. Without property there is no incetive for production and progress beyond maybe basic needs.

Communism is against human nature and society; even animals have the sense of property. Comunism destroys civilisation and society and eventualy humanity.

Don't wanna go off topic but Communism IS a productive society, at least it aims for one. It is a society where everyone is literally WORKERS.
And because there is no major surplus of value due to exploitation you don't see the unneccsary but "nice" stuff capitalism brings to our life. (I'm not going to mention it's depletition of world resources like there is no tomorrow-because profit is what matters)

It is not against human nature, NOTHING is against human nature once you are born into it.

[Fight!]

My apologies, allow me to elaborate.

Not wealth as in currency, wealth as in Capital.

[Rolling Thunder]

My apologies, allow me to elaborate.

Not wealth as in currency, wealth as in Capital.

The two are, in effect, the same thing, or rather, currency is merely capital (and consumer goods) in potentia.

[last_name_left]

If communism is supposed to develop out of socialism which we don't even have yet, how could one tell such things? Maybe the idea of wealth and distribution wouldn't make any sense in a world so transformed? For instance, if we could nano-manufacture gold, or anything else, what would wealth mean, what would distribution mean? Not a satisfactory answer I guess.

[last_name_left]

Communism is against human nature and society

foolish to pretend you know all of what human nature is. or all of what society is. such notions in the past have been proven wrong over and over. your ideas of it are your own. Valid as an opinion, but not definitive.

even animals have the sense of property.

hmm - i think that's stretching the concept of property and is also anthropomorphic. I think this thing about private property being intimately linked with 'freedom' and prosperity is highly dubious. If somebody owns land privately your liberty is reduced - you aren't allowed on it nor are you allowed the product of it.

Wealth doesn't exist in Communism because nobody produces it. Without property there is no incetive for production and progress beyond maybe basic needs.

You mean you are like that yourself? I'm not sure how you can speak for everyone about that, or even just me. How do you know? Again, this is just an expression of your view of human nature, isn't it? Fair enough, but how can you believe you know all of human nature? Aren't arrogance, narrow-mindedness and error part of human nature too?

[CiviC]

foolish to pretend you know all of what human nature is. or all of what society is. such notions in the past have been proven wrong over and over. your ideas of it are your own. Valid as an opinion, but not definitive.

Of course they are my opinions, not yours; they are also the opinion of a majority of people. But guess what, you'll not be send to a gulag to change your opinons and agree with me and others, so calm down.

hmm - i think that's stretching the concept of property and is also anthropomorphic. I think this thing about private property being intimately linked with 'freedom' and prosperity is highly dubious. If somebody owns land privately your liberty is reduced - you aren't allowed on it nor are you allowed the product of it.

First of all, think of all animals that defend a "territory". That territory is means their survival and they take good care to mark it and defend it.

Secondly, you can't be free if you can't own property. I lived for a few years in a society that allowed very few things to own as property. In fact people were the slaves of the state, as the state owned everything. Comunism is the grossest fallacy and utopia human mind ever produced. But as some girls fall in love with serial killers, there will always be people fascinated by this ideology.

You mean you are like that yourself? I'm not sure how you can speak for everyone about that, or even just me. How do you know? Again, this is just an expression of your view of human nature, isn't it? Fair enough, but how can you believe you know all of human nature? Aren't arrogance, narrow-mindedness and error part of human nature too?

Again, chill out, nobody will come to your door and take you and torture you to beleive in things I beleive, after all we live in a free society not in ... Comunism.

OP;

Don't wanna go off topic but Communism IS a productive society, at least it aims for one. It is a society where everyone is literally WORKERS.
And because there is no major surplus of value due to exploitation you don't see the unneccsary but "nice" stuff capitalism brings to our life. (I'm not going to mention it's depletition of world resources like there is no tomorrow-because profit is what matters)

In Comunism there is no motivation for progress, without progress not only society stagnates but society regresses because it can't cope with the increased needs of a growing population.

It is not against human nature, NOTHING is against human nature once you are born into it.

I prefer to see humans as being who can discerne betwen right and wrong; I'm convinced the vast majority of Germans in WWII were aware, at least vaguely genocide and other crimes against humanity were wrong, because the vast majority of human beings are naturally moral. That's human nature. Some regimes try to modify this inherent human nature and make it evil. Ask a child and you'll find he has an accute sense when something injust happens to him.

So very wrong.

Outdated 1970's wishful thinking that mankind is a tabula rasa and only society makes people what they are.

Agreed, I beleive we are born with the sense of right and wrong, personal experience and society (or exceptionally some bad genes) can pervert this concepts.

[dogukan]

In Comunism there is no motivation for progress, without progress not only society stagnates but society regresses because it can't cope with the increased needs of a growing population.

No, in communism there is no over-production. Because "ideally" the state produces the needs of society. Not more....there are zillions of cars in the streets, traffic is literally ed up, I doN't think more people owning their private cas will be a good thing. And this issue is big problem for Istanbul...it literally hurts society. I finished a book when going to my grandmother on the European side.(3.5 hours) and came back(at a late hour) in just 20-30 minutes.

Overproduction not only is unnecassary but it also depletes world's resources like there is no tomorrow. For maximum efficieny LOTS OF THINGS are sacrifised whereas in communism again ideally "optimum" is to be used.
Forget about all the ideological thinking, think of the nature.


Also personal question: If a doctor was paid the same money(this is no communism just asking) with a security...which one would you want to be?
There is still competition in the society, you do not lift competition. You just give everyone EQUAL grounds.
A brighter boy in some poor district can not chat with you and use his potential but a rich idiot spoiled boy can. Is this adding anything to civilazation?

I prefer to see humans as being who can discerne betwen right and wrong; I'm convinced the vast majority of Germans in WWII were aware, at least vaguely genocide and other crimes against humanity were wrong, because the vast majority of human beings are naturally moral. That's human nature. Some regimes try to modify this inherent human nature and make it evil. Ask a child and you'll find he has an accute sense when something injust happens to him.

I know, these people are probably aware life is unjust





Making economy this free is not just. It would be if this was a game, and everyone start a new life everything was reset.
But on the long run, capitalism loses it's core idea, "perfect competition as well"....because eventually economies are even more monopolized.
Starting conditions gets worse for majority. The difference between rich and poor gets greater.

I've learned long ago that trying to explain human nature to a leftist is damn near impossible. They either deny it out right like a communist must in order to hang onto their ridiculous idea of government, or they think of it as something that can be redirected by government in the case of a democratic socialist.

Yeah, I am also genetically stupid.

Do you expect me to teach you the full concepts of why humans seek wealth and power as a species?

Dominating other people, becoming the alpha and the powerfull is the nature of humans. So what....a human being can satisfy his need for this through intelligence, social skills or physical actions.
When you leave economics as a way to dominate each other, things literally get ed up....
If thats your arguement for human nature, then I should have the right to kill/beat a rich man and steal his stuff. Because thats my nature, thats my instinct. Right?

The same as the Church failed to prevent people to have sex before marriage ...
People are not equal, they are different, and a society who tries to make them the same is a nightmare and against nature, human nature.
I support equality for anyone, in the sense we all ae entitled to have the same rights, but we have different potentials and we have also the right to develop to our full potential.

Yeah, and potential of majority can come out better if they are given the same start. I can't imagine how much "brain power" is possibly being wasted in the world right now.

P.S. How come you have Dimitrie Cantemir as your avatar?

I have a thing for intellectuals who understand bost east and west. Also I'm a fan of Ottoman Classical music and this guy's contribution to that is great.

[xcorps]

hmm - i think that's stretching the concept of property and is also anthropomorphic.

Yeah, ants share all their stuff. We should be like ants. But with fewer legs. Or bees. We should be like bees. It would be cool to buzz all the time, right? You could buzz up to the local sharing place and get your stuff, and leave stuff that you have too much of. Then you could buzz and home and chill. And nobody will be mad cuz everybody has stuff.

If somebody owns land privately your liberty is reduced - you aren't allowed on it nor are you allowed the product of it.

Bees don't own honey. They make it for bears.

[CarbEast]

My question is: How can wealth be distributed in a Communist society?

Equally?

[Phier]

It is not against human nature, NOTHING is against human nature once you are born into it.

So very wrong.

Outdated 1970's wishful thinking that mankind is a tabula rasa and only society makes people what they are.

[dogukan]

So very wrong.

Outdated 1970's wishful thinking that mankind is a tabula rasa and only society makes people what they are.

People lived as slaves. People lives believing there is an invisible man who tells them how to live. People put rings to their necks making them longer. People pierce their faces.
There zillions of other examples of weird cultural habits and people adopted all of them.

I don't see a reason why people can not adapt to living together equally.

[Brain_in_a_vat]

So very wrong.

Outdated 1970's wishful thinking that mankind is a tabula rasa and only society makes people what they are.

How? Just... How? Your condescending one liners are so frustrating, it's amazing.

[Phier]

How? Just... How? Your condescending one liners are so frustrating, it's amazing.

I've learned long ago that trying to explain human nature to a leftist is damn near impossible. They either deny it out right like a communist must in order to hang onto their ridiculous idea of government, or they think of it as something that can be redirected by government in the case of a democratic socialist.

Do you expect me to teach you the full concepts of why humans seek wealth and power as a species?

[CiviC]

I don't see a reason why people can not adapt to living together equally.

The same as the Church failed to prevent people to have sex before marriage ...
People are not equal, they are different, and a society who tries to make them the same is a nightmare and against nature, human nature.
I support equality for anyone, in the sense we all ae entitled to have the same rights, but we have different potentials and we have also the right to develop to our full potential.

P.S. How come you have Dimitrie Cantemir as your avatar?

[Fight!]

Equally?

Perhaps I should have been more specific.

In what way is the wealth equally/near equally redistributed?

People are not equal, they are different, and a society who tries to make them the same is a nightmare and against nature, human nature.

Equality and Difference are not antagonistic qualities. Equality and Inequality are antagonistic qualities.

EDIT: Phier, could you stop making Bare Assertions please?

[last_name_left]

First of all, think of all animals that defend a "territory". That territory is means their survival and they take good care to mark it and defend it.

So why do you support property rights? As an able-bodied man I could easily throw some old dear out of her expansive country house paid for by the remnants of British imperialism. That's what an animal would do. Property rights prevent it.

Do birds have to pay tolls when they fly over land during migration? Come on, this is silly.

I lived for a few years in a society that allowed very few things to own as property. In fact people were the slaves of the state, as the state owned everything. Comunism is...

It wasn't communism.

In Comunism there is no motivation for progress, without progress not only society stagnates but society regresses because it can't cope with the increased needs of a growing population.

Bizarre.

P: I've learned long ago that trying to explain human nature to a leftist is damn near impossible. They either deny it out right like a communist must in order to hang onto their ridiculous idea of government, or they think of it as something that can be redirected by government in the case of a democratic socialist.

But how do you know what the extents of human nature are? How about some historic claims about human nature which have been proven wrong - what does that say about such claims?

Is human nature forever immutable and constant?

[CiviC]

It wasn't communism.

Of course, Comunism is an utopia, meaning we would never see REAL Comunism because REAL Comunism is IMPOSSIBLE!!! But what half of the world experienced for the last half of 1900's was what happens when you try to put in practice such a stupid UTOPIA! And it was a NIGHTMARE.