Dubstepforum.com

dansci wrote:I doubt any brilliant scientist is going to sit back and receive a pat on the back after devoting years to make a single invention. Communism denies the bright and smart their fair compensantion by making the claim that anything other than basic materials is capitalist evil.

first of all, yes, many scientists are content with a proverbial pat on the back, because they're not in it for external validation. jonas salk could've patented the polio vaccine if he wanted to and made millions - he didn't. and you didnt hear einstein saying "gib me monies and i'll tell you how relativity works." also it implies that scientists are even well compensated in the first place. as someone majoring in physics and planning on doing graduate school b2b research - i wish!

like OGlemon said, communism is a stateless, post-scarce society, where this problem doesn't even exist: "from each according to his ability, to each according to his need". however, until we reach this post-scarcity, we have socialism, which can be seen more along the lines of "to each according to his contribution."

do you really think capitalism truly incentivizes hard work? what about the millions of people in the US alone working well over 40 hours a week on minimum wage, and yet they still live below the poverty line? or the billions in the third world not even receiving a tiny fraction of that (more on the order of cents per day)? touting this myth that capitalism rewards hard work spits in the face of each and every one of them.

haven't you ever noticed that the richest individuals in our system actually tend to be those who work the least? those who contribute the least? what the fuck does a hedge fund manager do for anyone? the only real incentive to work in capitalism is that you have to sell your labor power so you don't get fired and starve. unless, of course, you've already amassed enough of the means of production to leverage that private property to make you more money

you only believe this because the very way you the see the problem is framed by the ideology you subscribe to. it's not a matter of "communism doesn't give individuals the drive to innovate." rather, you have to realize that for every steve jobs, bill gates, etc, every such great "captain of industry," there are millions who aren't receiving any of the compensation they deserve. the bill gates and steve jobs in the world do not exist because of capitalism, but instead, despite it. this is why the whole "great man" narrative (eg, alexander the great, caesar, napoleon, even gandhi and MLK) is so common in bourgeois history - it propagates the false ideology that any individual, with enough effort/brilliance/charisma, can unilaterally achieve what they want


almost as good as the people who say "yeah but marx forgot one reason communism can never work... human nature." yeah checkm8, in decades of thinking and writing, marx, a founding figure of sociology, never thought to consider human nature

I fucking love the human nature rebuttal. You think one of the most revered sociologists just forgot about it in all his writings?

Communism denies the bright and smart their fair compensantion by making the claim that anything other than basic materials is capitalist evil.

This sounds like the excuse a capitalist would make and moreso, you are the one making that claim right now

If, let's say the bright and the smart, still were the brightest and smartest within a communist system, they would get 'compensation' in the form of becomming the experts. It's not like the incentive magically disappears or that everybody would run away to a capitalist system the moment they heard of the idea.
I think the 'fair' alternative compensation in a more libertarian system you are waving- is simply that a lot of non experts would get paid like an expert. Which as we should know by now, means that there's not enough money lying around for necessary expertise. Not even for healthcare

I've actually voted communist.
while realizing that the path to a truly communist state won't come through an election in a democracy
but to indicate that there are people who aspire to communism.
Of course my vote would've been written off as that of a trotskyist ratbag deluded about the joys of life in the USSR & maoist China.
I wish the USA could differentiate between apirational communism & the so-called communism of those countries.

OGLemon wrote:

wobbles wrote:blame the jews imo

I was going to say that.


Most violence has to do with the struggle for economic prosperity and mental illness. Also there is a culture of violence in America. That culture has to do with the deification of the competitive man who will do anything to succeed, the glorification of the military, our tendency to romanticize war, and the anti-intellectualism that plagues this country.

Didn't America spend about 30 years crying, through films and other popular media, about the civil, world, and cold wars?

wasn't so much of a national interest but more of an artistic pursuit within various countries, think grand illusion, paths of glory, das boot.

antiwar is not crying, it's a noble belief in that you don't believe people should be annihilated

hollywood..
wanting to be known for something..
money..

brostep