RE: Fascism of the Left: Dinesh DSouza Breaks Down The Fun and Obvious Reality
No, communism is not a state. It is utopian, it never has been "a state." The sovereign Westphalian state dates back to the 17th century and is a historically, mostly Western governmental invention. It has nothing to do with communism, absolutely zero. It is in fact antithetical to the state. Communism does not need a “centralized governing body” (who ever said that?) but is an expression of direct democracy. That is why the ancient polis is often been used an example of how communism would look like. “In order to implement universal housing, healthcare, transit, education and on and on, you would [NOT] be required to have a dictatorial force to impose this.” Just look at the number of example I gave you. If you are interested to learn, although it seems that you are not, why don’t you have a look at the history of Barcelona, the Paris Communes etc.? What is the reason you don’t want to study? You do not seem to understand that communism does not work and is not compatible with capitalism. They are two different political-economic systems. The state is the product and facilitator of capitalism. The British Empire and Western colonialism more generally thrived on the basis of state-led capitalist colonialism. They exported, facilitated and implemented the Westphalian state system around the world.
“Explain how communism works without a government, none, zero, zilch, nada. Explain it.” From each according to his ability, to each according to his need (or needs), that is the basic principle and it has been done and continues to be done around the world. I have given you many different examples around the world, but you can even look in your American backyard. The occupy movement was/ is (?) a clear example of direct democracy without a state. It was dissolved (?) not because of internal tension, but because of the capitalist state with its monopoly on violence. Why it has this monopoly? To protect private property. Yes, again an attribute/ key cornerstone of capitalism.
You seem to think that governance is always equal and has always been equal to the state, but you seem to forget that there was no state before its modern invention. Its poor historisation. Please do some serious reading. There is lots of material out there, it would be a shame to put all of it to waste. Plato>Kant>Hegel>Marx>Nietzsche>Foucault = is the least difficult way towards emancipation. You owe it (only to) yourself.
Okay, I see what you mean. So you're talking about maybe the "true" form of communism which is peer to peer rather than through a governing body. If that is the case, the conversation turns to individual moral principles. And communism in your view is an adoption of individual principles that people should choose to adopt, not necessarily be forced to adopt. That I can respect. Although, in practice as organized, under the "guise" of communism it has been done by force, and with extreme failure. Even by forcing the public to be "charitable" the system fails. From a peer to peer method, I would assume it to fail as well because from a societal standpoint, people are not universally charitable.
Theoretically I would say what you want is charity, I would argue that under "free market capitalism" there is a greater degree of charity than under any other system. US is probably the most charitable country globally (as far as peer to peer transactions go), it may fall into the category more cleanly than the system you are trying to adopt. You might consider capitalism as a more realized utopia.