Communism in Small Scale Doesn't Work Either!steemCreated with Sketch.

in #philosophy • 7 years ago (edited)

robot-1635794_1920.jpg


I have exposed and explained Communism in detail why it doesn't work in my past articles:

So basically I have explained the sort of fallacious argument that leftists bring forth, saying that the Soviet Union or any other "communist" country wasn't really communist since it had a ruling class, and basically pure Communism refers to a classless society. However I have explained there that it's pretty much inevitable that things turned out the way they did, since the massive initiation of force in 1917 coupled with the totally unnatural, forced, abolition of private property, really resulted in the Soviet Union as it was. Even if it was not pure Communism, it was really the endgame of that ideology, in fact today we have leftover tenets of that ideology, that is still haunting us. This over-socialization, over-collectivization of our lives, and this collective coercion that we are facing is pretty much exactly what Socialism or Communism advocates. So read my previous article if you want a lengthy but thorough view on that subject.




Small Scale Communism Myth

In this article I am going to expose the last leg that this myth is standing on, so that we can really end Communism for good this time.

So after all the atrocities of Stalin and Mao have been exposed, and all of this "forced Communism" have been irrevocably classified as really crimes against humanity.

There is 1 myth left that has to be shattered, namely that Communism works in small scale. They say that it was totally horrible what happened under Stalin since it was forced, and million of people are hard to "manage", but what if Communism could work in a small community of friends like 30 people living in a village and totally sharing everything, no private property, and so on. What then?



1) Theory

Well equality is pretty much a myth. It doesn't mean that it can't be a goal through voluntary pursuit, like for example non-discrimination, non-racism could be voluntarily achieved, and it doesn't have to be forced. But pure equality will never happen, unless you create a superclass that is above that will take from those that have too much and give to those that have too many. This means force, violence, since people naturally defend their property, so this can only happen via the initiation of violence. This instrument is the State.

Think of it like a lawnmower. You have a garden where the grass grows to random sizes, and you always have to mow the lawn so that the grass will be equal size. And basically tomorrow you can start over since then the grass has grown again. But what this means, since you cant cut away the long grass and paste it to the short grass, what you have to do is cut the long grass to the size of the short grass.

What this means is that high achievers, successful people, rich people, will have to be beat down, extorted, and forcibly confined to a mediocre state of existence, to the lowest common denominator in order for everyone to be equal. So if in a communist community you have a dumb guy with an IQ of 80 who is drunk alcoholic, then there is nothing you can do to him to turn him into a genius Einstein of 150 IQ, it's literally impossible. But what happens is that everyone else who is smarter than him will have to be made poor, and smartness has to be disincentivized from that community, this is how you get an equal community. Of course all of this is done through violence: taxation, public indoctrination, propaganda, etc...

And the "manager" , the State will always be above it's subjects that it "manages" to be equal. So it's a big paradox, but this is the only way you can have Communism in large scale, through State enforced tyranny.

So this proves exactly that all kinds of voluntary communist initiatives all end up exactly like the tyranny Stalin had imposed, there is no voluntary equality, only equality through violence and tyranny.



2) Practical Evidence

The most basic socialist unit is the family. You basically have a family where the guy and the woman share resources so you have "from each according to his ability to each according to his needs" and the kids basically just draw resources they don't contribute, so both the kids and the parents live on the collective resources of the family.

So if Communism were to work in small scale, it has to be proven, beyond the shadow of a doubt, that a family unit works best if they have a socialist structure. And this is really the litmus test of this myth.

  • If Socialism can really work for 2-3 people, then is has to scale up, since it's really a superior system to managing resources to private property.
  • But if Socialism doesn't work for even 3 people, then how the hell can you expect to scale up to 7 billion people?

I am here to prove beyond the shadow of a doubt that Socialism doesn't even work for 2 people in a voluntary contract, which would be a married couple without kids, just to make this example simple.


Proof 1 - Money:

There is overwhelming evidence that couples who manage separately their money are better off. There is less bickering, less hostility, less fights. It's just so much more natural to have private property and manage your own money, study after study finds:

So this proves that the concepts of private property are very important in a marriage. Just ignoring where the money came from and spending like crazy, and then fighting over why the woman had bought this 5000 EUR pair of shoes or why the guy gambled away 4000 EUR on a soccer game is just crazy. Just keep the money separate and then everyone knows their limits and how much they can spend.

This doesn't mean they can't share resources. This only means that the money belongs to who earned it, and that person has to voluntarily share it with you first.


Proof 2 - Sex:

There is also a mountain of evidence that supports that couples that sleep in different rooms have better sexual lives and will stay together longer. So this proves that not just the money has to be separated, but the private territory as well.

Think of it this way, do you want the bedroom painted pink and filled with girly stuff, or do you want it painted blue and filled with manly stuff..... and then you will fight over this bullshit for eternity.

Isn't it just so much better if you both have your separate rooms, decorated by your own desires and wishes, and then you just invite the spouse over for sex voluntarily. I know for sure that it works better this way because me and my wife are doing exactly this, we have both separate finances and separate rooms.

So while a large part of the house is "common ground", it's still healthy to keep some level of separation and private property. I mean a marriage is a union, but it's not a totalitarian union, where the spouses read eachother's thoughts via some Matrix-like brain implants.



Conclusion

So it is what it is. I have proven beyond the shadow of a doubt that Communism can’t even work for 2 people, the literal minimum number of people it requires, since the individual is the individual.

Now if Communism doesn’t even work for 2 people which would be really the basic minimum. Then how the hell can you be so crazy to think that it can somehow scale up?

And we haven’t even got into the consequences of private property and how it’s a good strategy to manages resources, I have just shown a simple example as in the basic group of society, the family, how it’s much better working if the concept of private property exists in the family.

Whatever problems there are in a socialist family unit: the bickering and fighting over resources, however tiny like fighting over what to spend the remaining 1000 EUR house money on. Now this gets amplified on large scale communist experiments, and leads exactly to tragedies like the Holodomor.

The issues don’t disappear if you scale the system up, they only amplify themselves, and the tyranny that it results in only grows larger and larger and larger until the whole thing implodes under it’s own weight, like we are seeing a live example of in Venezuela.

Sources:
https://pixabay.com

Upvote, ReSteem & bluebutton


#politics #anarchy #government #communism
7 years ago in #philosophy by
$4.67
  • Past Payouts $4.67, 0.00 TRX
  • - Author $3.77, 0.00 TRX
  • - Curators $0.90, 0.00 TRX
60 votes
Reply 1
Sort:  
  • Trending
    • [-]
     7 years ago 

    Great. Thanks for sharing. I vote for you and begin to follow you. And Resteemed...

    $0.00
      Reply

      Coin Marketplace

      STEEM 0.18
      TRX 0.16
      JST 0.030
      BTC 65631.30
      ETH 2609.36
      USDT 1.00
      SBD 2.70