"Luxury beliefs"

Post Reply New Topic

Because in the Marxist utopia that just hasn't ever been tried people won't have self interest anymore?

Ok, good luck with that.

There are three different forms of Communism:

• "True" Communists as proposed by Marx and Engels cannot exist due to human nature (e.g., envy, gluttony, greed, lust, pride, sloth, and wrath).

• "Real" Communists are actually State Socialists currently living in Feudal Empires (e.g., China, Cuba, Laos, North Korea, and Vietnam).  This differs from "True" Communism in that both the State and currency still exist.

• "Faux" Communists (a.k.a., "Hypocrites", "Poseurs", and "Tankies") are those who preach Communism while enjoying all the benefits of living in Capitalist societies.  This is the form of Communism practiced by most self-proclaimed "Marxists".

Which one do you suppose describes our self proclaimed "Marxist" poster?

One describes a fantasy, one describes a lie, and one is closest to the truth.  You can figure it out.

Uh huh and who taught you that that's "human nature", your Sunday school teacher? This sounds like a religious argument to me; your objection to Marxism is based on nothing real.

'Human nature' is partially a list of human traits that are biological / animal and thus may modify somewhat in manifestations based on cultural constraints but they never really disappear. The other important part, the broader game theory, is where conscious agents (any agents with goals to perpetuate genes or just needing to eat) get into certain kinds of conflicts reliably based on the situation much like inequality rises from differences based on capacity and temperament. The later is something like attributes of the environment that are constant in that nature will always provide these issues in heredity, or constant regarding the interaction of conscious agents under any scarcity conditions and the ways in which their survival responsibilities pit them against one another (my opinion with humans - even if we had hyperabundant energy, food, water, and fixed the climate concerns it would still be the case that status is scarce, people who other people would judge as highly physically attractive, there'd still be economic inequality, and we'd still have despotism but maybe less resource coercion, via scarcity, for kinetic war). Similarly any incentive system that can be 'hacked' by anyone will be and it will be shaken to the ground once everyone finds a way to defect that works (free rider problems most notably).

The moment someone has to say 'Real x hasn't been tried yet' typically means that a thing has been tried over and over, reliably breaks down, and moreover reliably breaks down for the same reasons and those reasons have more to do with humans being.


I sometimes think the lynchpin of so many bad ideas right now in the west is 'blank-slatism'. We aren't blank slates. We might be the blankest slates in nature but that's far from saying that we have no hard-wired instinct, nor that in economic and sexual competition that we don't lean into that instinct destructively to further our own genetic interests (whether it's individual genetic competition, lineage, or group, and in more recent history add nation states).

Yeah, no, Fnord just straight-up listed the seven (Catholic) deadly sins, there's nothing scientific happening here, lmao

Hooo-ie some things really don't change, do they?

1770's America: Stuck a feather in his cap, called it "macaroni."

2020's America: Sticks 1950's reactionary politics in his cap, calls it "human nature."