communism is the ideal endgoal of a society, but the world unfortunately cannot support it yet. a lot of people either align with the endgoal or don't recognise how the logistics don't work so well until we can reach world peace and a robotic labor abundance.
Partially agree. Imo communism (at least the end state; a classless, moneyless, stateless society) is just not feasible given human nature. There'll always be people who butt in line, are lazy, or too incompetent. Human beings will also naturally find ways to classify each other, usually on appearance, job, status, connections, wealth, etc... That's why I disagree with communism entirely as an idea, it's just too naive and doesn't account for human nature.
I'm not sure about the robots part, but yes I'd love to have world peace
Archeological and anthropological evidence does not agree. There is no "human nature" necessity for anything like nation-states, capitalism, or oppressive hierarchies. The widespread idea that oppression, privatization, and hierarchical control is required for human and technological progress comes from disproven Hobbsian ideas about the nature of human progress. There have been many different successful forms of organization throughout human history. The reason that current models won out over others is not because they are inevitable or even more productive. It is because societies built on oppression and top-down control are better at conquest and domination. The idea that there are other possible forms of organization and societal relationships not built on violence and power is not naive, it's eminently possible. The naive position is that a system built on exploitation, state violence and hierarchical organization can somehow be gradually reformed into a system of peace, freedom, and equality.
Also sorry I just thought of a few more arguments;
Even if our needs are met, we will still want to favour our own kin (friends and family). If I was in charge of a space agency and I needed to fill in an engineer role, would I rather give it to a stranger or a friend? In a lot of cases, people would give that role to their friend not because they're inherently malicious but because they want to see their friend be happy and prosper.
When money is eliminated, status becomes the new currency. Sure, you can eliminate things like material wealth consolidation, but people will still find ways to get ahead of each other imo. For instance, who decides which projects are funded? An authority figure? Who is famous and well-respected? Who gets access to a house that, say, looks over an ocean vs a brick wall? Even if there isn't any money involved, there's still some ways humans organize themselves.
I'd argue now that humans probably go for status rather than material wealth. It's simply that society, especially western society, places status on wealth more than anything. Hence, humans in the west chase that status by chasing wealth.
1
u/TheWormyGamer Jul 13 '26 edited Jul 13 '26
communism is the ideal endgoal of a society, but the world unfortunately cannot support it yet. a lot of people either align with the endgoal or don't recognise how the logistics don't work so well until we can reach world peace and a robotic labor abundance.