Leo, please elaborate about capitalism and communism

[Emrie]

In response to the latest blog post, I would like to further this discussion. I consider myself a communist, I would like to move beyond capitalism and I really don't see anything other than socialism and then communism as the next steps. I am of course open for suggestions and I reached this point actually quite slowly and carefully.

There are some things I don't fully understand in the Killing Sparrows blog post.

Quote

You can't just get rid of capitalism in the way socialists dream because it exists for good reasons. Be careful thinking that you are more intelligent than these systems. Actually, capitalism is way more intelligent than any socialist revolutionary.

Please explain here. What exactly are the reasons it exists? Why does it work so well? The way that I see it, capitalism causes some serious problems and the only way to solve them is to get rid of it completely. Namely: colonialism (including its arguably worse current form: neo-colonialism), the accumulation of wealth, and therefore power, the corruption of government, wage slavery (the biggest one here, way too many people literally fearing for their lives enslaved to work), and climate catastrophe. That last one I'll admit is somewhat debatable, there are solutions, but the concept of infinite economic growth at all costs really annoys me. And that's not even mentioning world hunger and homelessness despite having plenty enough food and housing available to everyone.

 My understanding is that capitalism is peak stage orange and it empowered the bourgeoisie during feudal times and we built this society that we're living in with these great promises in mind, where anybody, regardless of "their blood", could theoretically build a great life for themselves with entrepreneurship.

Is this it? Is there something else?

And if we're going back to empirical data, saying that all the communist societies failed, therefore communism doesn't work. I'd actually challenge this quite a bit. The US and a lot of the European powers did everything in their power to attack communist countries on all fronts. Covertly via the CIA funding and helping anti-communist groups, overtly via just direct wars like Vietnam. The USSR essentially went bankrupt because they had to spend a ridiculous amount of money on their army to keep up with the US.

But the USSR achieved a lot of successes:
1) Abolished illiteracy
2) Abolished homelessness
3) Abolished unemployment
4) Abolished hunger
5) Literally became one of the two biggest superpowers in the world

And they did all this coming out of feudalism much later than everyone else. They've actually done studies where they compared countries that were at approximately the same level of development, one country would adopt socialism, the other capitalism. And almost all socialist countries had better quality of life indicators: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/2430906/. Variables included indicators of health, health services, demographic conditions, and nutrition (infant mortality rate, child death rate, life expectancy, crude death rate, crude birth rate, population per physician, population per nursing person, and daily per capita calorie supply); measures of education (adult literacy rate, enrollment in secondary education, and enrollment in higher education).

So conclusion of this big ramble:

My point of view is that Karl Marx's scientific analysis is really good. This is the scientific, disconnected from reality, non-empiric, theory that you are right to point out may or may not work in practice. However, taking the neo-liberal theory is just as bad. A theory with perfect economic agents acting in perfect self-interest with all the information available with the law of supply and demand working perfectly and with perfect competition that maximizes the potential of society, I find quite absurd.

And my opinion is that we don't really have good empirical data for socialism and capitalism because capitalism was allowed to build itself and flourish without interference from anyone else. Once we beat feudalism, capitalism could grow and thrive without anyone sabotaging it. But when we tried socialism, the capitalists did everything in their power to prevent it from succeeding. And even with that I would say it succeeded plenty, see above.

So I would like to try socialism without interference. Capitalism worked (emphasis on past tense), but now we're seeing its shortcomings. And unfortunately it might spell the end of humanity (I already know people are gonna call fearmongering and we'll just solve it via technology, ugh.....).

Did previous communist societies make mistakes? Sure, absolutely. The huge incarceration rates, silencing any semblance of capitalist sentiment within its borders, see Leo's dad having to leave the USSR to build his own business, and I'm sure a lot of others. But you know what's great is that we can try again and maybe learn from our mistakes, not make them again. The science works, now let's apply it properly.

[Leo Gura]

This is a deep topic that would require a video to explain.

Communism did not fail because capitalism sabotaged it. It failed from its own internal contradictions. Study the hisotry of communism and you will see.

Edited December 14, 2022 by Leo Gura

[Emrie]

8 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

This is a deep topic that would require a video to explain.

Would really love to see such a video, honestly. I'm pretty set in my perspective and would be very happy to see it challenged properly.

9 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

It failed from its own internal contradictions. Study the hisotry of communism and you will see.

Can you point me to anything? One example of a contradiction, or at least some books to read about the history of communism or whatever research you've done in the subject, since you seem to have done some.

[Leo Gura]

1 hour ago, Emrie said:

One example of a contradiction,

The core contradiction of communism/socialism is that it assumes that people generate roughly equal amounts of work and value. This is grossly untrue. It also assumes that people are ready to be selfless in their economic dealings, which is also grossly untrue.

Capitalism works simply because it is realistic about the selfish nature of current humans. For communism to work mankind would have to be orders of magnitude more developed and selfless than we are right now. Communism might work after 1000 more years of human development.

Quote

or at least some books to read about the history of communism or whatever research you've done in the subject, since you seem to have done some.

Check out The Great Courses, they have some fantastic courses on the history of communism and its failures.

Here's but one:

https://www.thegreatcourses.com/courses/communism-in-power-from-stalin-to-mao

A communist system cannot make society fairer than it currently is because the unfairness of society comes from human selfishness. And a communist system does nothing to fundamentally cure that, it merely tries to impose selflessness from above via ideology and state control, which cannot lead to true selflessness. The levels of selflessness necessary to make communism work can only be achieved through intense spiritual development -- meanwhile communism is atheistic, materialistic, and rejects spirituality. So it fundamentally cannot work.

The best we can do right now is social democracy as in Scandinavia, but even that is hard to achieve because people are so damn selfish.

Edited December 14, 2022 by Leo Gura

[Hardkill]

Communism/Socialism failed because the people in charge became too greedy for power and money. The idea of Socialism, particularly with Communism, is to have no hierarchy and no class structures in a society. Furthermore, everything would be equally owned and equally shared by everyone within an entire society permanently. 

While humans can be compassionate and the human race as a whole has continuously evolved throughout history into better and better beings, they or we are still too selfish by nature to want to share absolutely everything, make absolutely everything and everyone equal (from a relative standpoint), and respect and trust every single person in a society. Plus, pure Communism/Socialism has never produced a strong competitive economy. China tried it before and it didn't end up working out so well for their economy in the long-run. That's why by the late 1970s/early 1980s, the country began to gradually become increasingly capitalistic. This trend towards a more capitalist society continued all the way through the 80s and actually began to accelerate after the early the 90s all the way into the new millennium. China is still mainly a Socialist country run by the CCP, but the country has been forced to become much more capitalistic, than it was approximately 40+ years ago in order to become a strong economy that is now becoming about as competitive as the US economy in its own way.

To my knowledge there has been no known practical way to make Communism/Socialism work in a way that is not conducted or governed by an authoritarian regime. 

Theoretically, Democratic Socialist governments probably have a better shot of working than the authoritarian style Communism/Socialism did. However, I don't think that there are any experts out there on this matter who know for certain that this style of government would produce enough of a strong, competitive economy. Also, I am not sure if there would be enough people out there who would support the idea of having to share a lot more of what they own with many other people they don't know or are not close to. Plus, there would probably be a lot of people out there who may not like the idea of having anyone who doesn't have much business acumen or experience be involved in running or managing a company.

That's why I believe that every society needs to eventually have some kind of social democracy, which is a very regulated form of capitalism that has every kind of social safety net needed for each individual person in a country or island.

Edited December 14, 2022 by Hardkill

[Emrie]

1 hour ago, Leo Gura said:

The core contradiction of communism/socialism is that it assumes that people generate roughly equal amounts of work and value. This is grossly untrue. It also assumes that people are ready to be selfless in their economic dealings, which is also grossly untrue.

Capitalism works simply because it is realistic about the selfish nature of current humans. For communism to work mankind would have to be orders of magnitude more developed and selfless than we are right now. Communism might work after 1000 more years of human development.

I actually agree with this 100%, thank you! I always assumed humans needed to develop themselves massively before being able to do communism realistically. Most communists don't like the human nature argument and say that people are only selfish because of capitalism, but this is a gross misunderstanding of human psychology. It doesn't take into account Ego development, Spiral Dynamics, and spirituality.

1 hour ago, Leo Gura said:

Check out The Great Courses, they have some fantastic courses on the history of communism and its failures.

Here's but one:

https://www.thegreatcourses.com/courses/communism-in-power-from-stalin-to-mao

Thanks for this, I'll look into it.

1 hour ago, Leo Gura said:

The best we can do right now is social democracy as in Scandinavia, but even that is hard to achieve because people are so damn selfish.

I don't like social democracy still because it's still capitalism and I really really dislike capitalism, but yeah.

--

Actually I was thinking about your video on escaping wage slavery and had an insight. What you're advocating for, becoming a massive value provider, is exactly the spirit that I would want to capture in building a new society. You've escaped wage slavery, which ultimately I believe is what most socialists and communists want, they want to abolish wage slavery. And the way you conduct business, you provide the world with massive amounts of value and getting very little, comparatively, in return, but you have your needs met and can enjoy your life.

Essentially this is what we want. But we'll need to develop ourselves massively before being able to do any of that at scale. Only the most developed people can do that for now.

[Leo Gura]

5 minutes ago, Emrie said:

I don't like social democracy still because it's still capitalism and I really really dislike capitalism, but yeah.

Never forget how bad things could be.

You could be living in Stalinist Russia.

[Hardkill]

2 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

The best we can do right now is social democracy as in Scandinavia, but even that is hard to achieve because people are so damn selfish.

 

18 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

Never forget how bad things could be.

You could be living in Stalinist Russia.

But America did have a social democracy during the mid 1900s that worked out great with FDR's New Deal, strong labor unions, and LBJ's Great Society. I'd say that social democracy was especially at its peak during the late 60s. Noam Chomsky talked about how there was much more solidarity in the country during his youth. He said in one interview:

"Q. I read that when you were a child, you began working at a kiosk with an uncle, selling newspapers. Or that you helped him, at least. I would like to know, how did that mark you, how did that influence you?

A. There is a good deal of irony, tragic irony, in that question. I grew up in the Depression. I was a child in the early 1930s. My family were immigrants, mostly unemployed, with really bitter suffering from the Depression, but there was an atmosphere of hope, aspiration and expectation, because of the labor movement. The labor movement was reviving. It had been crushed by force during the 1920s, but it was reviving. There were militant labor actions, there were political parties, radical political parties. There was debate, discussion, cultural activities. There was a sense of: “We can all get out of this together.” In fact, if you look at what happened in the 1930s, the effect in Europe was fascism, Franco, Mussolini, Hitler, other minor figures. That was Europe. The reaction to the Depression in the United States was social democracy. The New Deal, Roosevelt’s New Deal, pressed by labor activism, popular pressure, led to the modern era of social democracy, picked up by Europe after the Second World War. Now that was 90 years ago. Look at today, there are other crises today, very serious ones. Europe is holding on to some form of social democracy. The United States is leading the way to proto-fascism, the reverse of what happened in my childhood. "

https://chomsky.info/20220125/

Edited December 15, 2022 by Hardkill

[Leo Gura]

6 minutes ago, Hardkill said:

But America did have a social democracy during the mid 1900s that worked out great, especially at its peak during the late 60s.

Dude, the 60s were a bad time in many ways. Don't glorify the past. Society today is way more fair than it was in 60s.

America is more developed than it's ever been. Chomsky is painting some distorted picture of things. This crap with Trump is just a temporary dip.

Edited December 15, 2022 by Leo Gura

[Hardkill]

17 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

Dude, the 60s were a bad time in many ways. Don't glorify the past. Society today is way more fair than it was in 60s.

Yes, society today is definitely way more fair, socially, and we of course have far superior medicine, knowledge, and technology than we did back then.

But what do you think about Chomsky's take on social democracy that did occur in the US during his time back then? 

Edited December 15, 2022 by Hardkill

[Leo Gura]

3 minutes ago, Hardkill said:

But what do you think about Chomsky's take on social democracy that did occur in the US during his time back then?

There was def something good about it the FDR era politically. Perhaps we can recreate it in the decades to come. Interesting things will happen, don't get jaded by today's particularly shitty political climate.

Edited December 15, 2022 by Leo Gura

[Hardkill]

Just now, Leo Gura said:

There was def something good about it the FDR era politically. Perhaps we can recreate it in the decades to come. Interesting things will happen.

Fair.

That's why progressives and even many right-wing populists, like Saagar Enjeti, always like to cite back how FDR and LBJ were legendary presidents who helped to radically reform our country for the better. So did both Teddy Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson too as progressive presidents in the early 1900s.

 

[Leo Gura]

40 minutes ago, Hardkill said:

like Saagar Enjeti,

Saagar is a rare conservative. It's hard to even consider him a conservative given how dumb and shameless most current  conservatives are.

Biden has passed some good bills, despite all the progressive whining.

This isn't so complicated. We just need to keep passing more good bills.

Edited December 15, 2022 by Leo Gura

[Hardkill]

3 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

Saagar is a rare conservative. It's hard to even consider him a conservative given how dumb and shameless most current  conservatives are.

Biden has passed some good bills, despite all the progressive whining.

This isn't so complicated. We just need to keep passing more good bills.

Yeah, he does seem to have greater intelligence and integrity than most conservatives in the US.

Biden has passed really great bills with Congress. Funny enough, even Cenk actually said recently that Biden now has successfully completed a percentage of his own agenda that is greater than the percentage of Obama’s agenda that actually got done during Obama’s presidency. 

Otherwise, the increasingly polarized and terrible political climate we’ve been in for decades has really stifled so much progress for our country. 

Edited December 15, 2022 by Hardkill

[Leo Gura]

Everything you're seeing IS progress.

Progress isn't rainbows and teddybears. It's THIS.

Have faith in evolution. It knows what its doing.

Edited December 15, 2022 by Leo Gura

[Tyler Robinson]

2 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

Everything you're seeing IS progress.

Progress isn't rainbows and teddybears. It's THIS.

Have faith in evolution. It knows what its doing.

Why was Russia so inclined to communism? Do Russians generally appreciate communism? 

[Sucuk Ekmek]

8 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

Everything you're seeing IS progress.

 It's THIS.

 

It IS this:  no more humankind. While I agree with you. I won't take my chances with faith, I rather celebrate my chance to be or not to be.

 

[Recursoinominado]

17 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

Communism did not fail because capitalism sabotaged it.

It failed from its own internal contradictions.

Study the hisotry of communism and you will see.

Not true at all.

The two biggest social advances jumps in history was the USSR and China.

The USSR started at the feudal age and in a few decades was competing with the biggest imperialist economy of the world and scaring the shit out of it.

The USSR developed its technology enough to put win basicaly the "space race" with the exception to putting a man on the moon.

China was one of the poorest country in the beggining of the 20th century, raised 700 million out of poverty and now is the second biggest economy of the world, going to be the first very soon.

 

[axiom]

Humans and communism aren’t compatible. Selfishness is a function of mortality, less so entropy in general (probably)

That being the case, communism might work with AI, who knows. Maybe that’s the goal… end humanity and allow communism to proliferate amongst a willing AI population.

[Oeaohoo]

10 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

Everything you're seeing IS progress.

Progress isn't rainbows and teddybears. It's THIS.

Have faith in evolution. It knows what its doing.

This is possibly the worst combination of things ever: obscurantist appeals to direct experience mixed with evolutionary progressivism. “Have faith in evolution” - how much more explicitly could this parody of a religion be stated? The only thing missing is the capital letters: Progress, Evolution, Change…

It is interesting that the original pretence, on the part of rationalists and scientists, that evolutionary progressivism was some kind of empirically proven ideology has largely been jettisoned nowadays in the name of dogmatic and faith-based appeals like this.

“Have faith in Evolution. Put your trust in Change. This is all part of Progress’ plan.” It’s almost as if evolutionary progressivism is a surrogate religion…