moseslmpg;290070 said:
I've never seen the issue with communism TBH. Sure, it doesn't work in practice, but no philosophy of government really ever does.
Is it counter to human nature? Well, that depends on what human nature is. Leaving that aside, humans are social animals, and despite appearances to the contrary, we are not totally selfish. Altruism is also in our nature.
Depending on your interpretation of human nature, you could actually say that capitalism is the system that is unnatural. I prefer to say that capitalism is realistic while communism is unrealistic, to say nothing of human nature.
Does that make it good or bad? I don't know. I like the idea of all people being equal, but I also, selfishly, like the idea of having my own stuff.I think some of the capital fetish that we may have is driven by capitalism itself though, not by our nature. In a system where you have everything you need, why would you need to own anything really?
Meg: Aren't you Christian? Doesn't that conflict a little with the stuff Rand espouses?
I would say something similar to communism is 'natural', but only in relation to scale. A family unit - a nuclear or extended family, can operate with a 'communist'-type policy. A small tribe or community may also operate with a communist-style 'ethic'. And those are the sorts of group sizes we human beings
were designed to live in - not cities of millions, or nations of billions. When the system reaches a certain size it's apparently difficult or impossible to apply the same kinds of altruistic approach to your million New-Yorker neighbours - if you lived there - as it is to your own family for example. It's evidenced in studies that human beings simply can't spread their concern or time between too many people, including too numerous friends and acquaintences, because there comes a point at which the time put in cannot equal much given out - which is why we each of us tend to have smaller numbers of close friends than not, larger numbers of less significant acquaintances, and a very small few of what we would call 'loved ones', given that we're adapted for life in small co-operating groups, not beehive-like cities, and nurturing these relationships takes time and effort for a human being. Therefore we look after our own small groups in a situation like this, we look after ourselves, our families, our friends. It's not possible for us to
truly care about everyone else.
When you take away actual care or genetic similarity as a motivator to ensuring your fellows' needs are met, what else motivates people? Money, gain, personal progression. It turns the wheels that make possible our huge outsized societies.
So a true 'altruism' suffers in an environment where there are just too many people (except in extreme circumstances or disasters where people will still help each other as often as not); and ensuring that people don't go without health care or education is best managed by semi-socialist policy, not individuals themselves because the scope of all that caring is beyond any one of us.
I'd also suggest that communism works better in developing nations who need stability foremost, and to ensure the people are fed and housed. In developed nations, society's percieved needs progress further, or expand, and I don't think a communist policy covers these needs in a developed nation.
From a personal standpoint, I prefer a system in which there is the opportunity to choose one's profession, also - if one can't choose immediately, to work one's way toward their chosen career. A large society - while it removes a lot of our care for others through its own great size - does allow for much greater scope of personal, cultural and artistic development. And perhaps, mankind really does need an arena in which to compete with other people and attempt to achieve personal best; whether it is for personal gain and a sense of achievement, pure competition in sports, or in wars. There is definitely a part of us that is more than ready to compete with our fellow man on behalf of ourselves, and that is an inescapable part of our nature.
