this post was submitted on 12 Nov 2023
1167 points (93.9% liked)

memes

9697 readers
3955 users here now

Community rules

1. Be civilNo trolling, bigotry or other insulting / annoying behaviour

2. No politicsThis is non-politics community. For political memes please go to !politicalmemes@lemmy.world

3. No recent repostsCheck for reposts when posting a meme, you can only repost after 1 month

4. No botsNo bots without the express approval of the mods or the admins

5. No Spam/AdsNo advertisements or spam. This is an instance rule and the only way to live.

Sister communities

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Phanlix@lemmy.world 4 points 10 months ago (3 children)

Great plain language breakdown for the uninitiated. Doesn’t disregard socialism as a solution to the problems outlined, but that’s a whole other discussion.

I've always pictured socialism as more a middle step toward full blown communism. I also recognize the value of private enterprise and competition. So whatever communist society we end up with still needs to find ways for that healthy competition to thrive.

But like... We can easily meet human needs at this point for everyone. It's unjust and stupid not to do so

[–] pomodoro_longbreak@sh.itjust.works 1 points 10 months ago

I feel like if we could get everyone's basic needs met, then human ambition would fill in the gaps. Not for everyone of course, but that's the case right now - needing money doesn't necessarily make you more ambitious.

[–] Cowbee@lemm.ee 1 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Socialism in the traditional Marxist path is a transitional step to Communism, yes. Communism, however, is fully anti-market, and as such is anti-competition. Communism is a Stateless, Classless, Moneyless society, perhaps you meant to say a system like Market Socialism should precede Communism, rather than some impossible form of competitive Communism?

[–] pomodoro_longbreak@sh.itjust.works 1 points 10 months ago (1 children)

I think we might be mixing up our micros and macros. Seems like some people will enjoy competition and outdoing each other no matter the extrinsic (or lack thereof) rewards. That's how it is now, anyway.

[–] Cowbee@lemm.ee 0 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Competition, sure. Sports, competitive cooperation, and other methods can be had. Market competition would not exist.

I could be saying the same thing you're saying though, so correct me if I'm misunderstanding please.

[–] pomodoro_longbreak@sh.itjust.works 1 points 10 months ago

I don't think we're disagreeing, but I'm thinking of like a somewhat friendly rivalry between, like, two teams of tool makers to outdo each other in design or production efficiencies. Like the kind of stuff that people get up to at work or play, naturally.

I'm no economist, but that doesn't sound like market competition to me. At least there is no driving force behind it, other than human nature, or maybe like an ad hoc competition for kudos or esteem.

[–] Seasm0ke@lemmy.world 0 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

But is it really easily if only one yacht? /s