Humans cannot achieve Communism, but machines can...

Provide proof that we need to do so.

Where did Marx say this?

We don't need machines inside of us to make use of machines. It's that simple. Now, I think we will eventually start putting machines inside of ourselves, but that is so far into the future that I don't think it's worth discussing.

How about replacing it?

Last I checked the last 10000 years of human development never achieved troo communism

The reason isn't hard to figure out numbskull. Humans are evolutionarily flawed and need to extend their evolution to achieve it. Insect colonies do not have a single issue getting Communism done because they do not have flawed biology like humans.

Oh, you're just a Holla Forumstard.

...

It's a simplistic form of it, but it is Communism. They collectively own and maintain the means of production. Check. Stateless? Check. Moneyless? Check. Classless? Everyone in an insect colony works but does different jobs, so… Check Check ==Check==

Anthropomorphising insects and animals makes you sound fucking stupid.

Please don't argue with me if you don't have an argument.

This is what will happen if humans fail to take advantage of advanced technologies and extend their evolutionary limits. The supreme and divine machine race will overtake us and achieve Communism with ease for themselves.

Really fires up your neurons

I'm sorry but you haven't correctly read the definition of Communism if you believe that there is a clause in it that specifically says "only humans can do this."

Oh. Better just keep waiting then.

Even the generic google definition proves you wrong

...

Humans aren't people.

If humans aint, ants sure as hell aint either

I asked how you achieve Communism without human augmentation, not Capitalism. Nice try though.

So you're saying Communism cannot be achieved?

No im saying this and are fucking retarded arguments

You have not given a single proof for that claims you made as to why communism would need augmentation other than "communism has never happened". It could have never happened before, ants isnt communism, communism is a mode of production by humans.

Communism never happened because humans aren't smart enough, actually. Ants achieve Communism easily.

again

But Communism doesn't say it has to be achieve by humans.

Alright then explain how ants are people because society requires people and communism is a way to arrange society.

Societies are made up of animals.

Your point? We are animals but that does not mean all animals have society.

No, but some animals do achieve Communism, because their evolution is suitable for it.

again

You have yet to even present an argument that ants are people thus having a society.

No

...

You haven't presented an argument as to how Communism is achieved without augmenting human beings.

Thats not the argument shithead. It's whether ants capable of being communistic.

...

No, it's whether humans are capable of being communistic, which they aren't without augmenting themselves. =)

Are you incapable of following a conversation? I have been arguing whether ants are capable of being communistic.

Humans aren't, that's the whole point but you keep missing it.

Why not?

Most of them have less intelligence than me, like yourself.

Why do all humans need to be intelligent for a global economic system to work?

Because they aren't smart enough to dispel myths like "The freerer the market, the freerer the people" just by thinking on their own.

Pure ideology: the thread.

Do you think everyone was on board during the transition to capitalism?

Everyone except me is wrong and stupid, and I say we don't need robobrains to achieve communism, therefor, I am right and the op, the cur, is wrong

BTW, as usage of robots increases under capitalism to replace labor with an automated workforce, the only possible way humans will be able to compete for their labor value again is by augmenting themselves to surpass the abilities of whatever robot replaced them.

Human augmentation is assured in Capitalism or Communism either way.

There have been many times and places where people lived in a much more egalitarian manner than they do now. Does the use of industrial technology necessarily preclude them from doing so again?

Just like how everyone got a steam engine installed at the turn of the 20th century. Damn you're stupid.

I mean if you want to go back to banging rocks and sticks together, by all means, but I don't think the rest of the world is going to be following you.

Why does technology need to be integrated to the body in your ideal system? How are computers not already augmenting human intelligence without being bolted into the skull? What needs to change?

ITT: closet Luddites.

Humans already use performance-enhancing drugs to extend their normal abilities to achieve peak performance. Why wouldn't we use technology the same way as a drug if it extended our abilities?

thanks for you insights pal

I was thinking something more along the lines of the collective land ownership and the free cities found in Medieval Europe.

OP doesn't just want to increase human strength or increase resistance to disease, they want to tamper with the human mind. If that technology is developed before a classless society is achieved, can you guess how it will be used?

What would change if the tools that have been the main development QED advantage of our species for millennia were integrated? How would that do more than, say, making better microprocessors or a better steel?

It will be used to further the free mark- err i mean create more jobs!

Basically I'm doubtful that a hammer would be any better if it was sewn onto your forearm. Our tools already augment our bodies and minds, what does cyberpunking them into our bodies add that we couldn't get from them already?

You don't think porky would make the workforce augment itself like prostitutes already do if such means were available?

They're already advocating the use of thumb implants (youtube it) as a security measure to access doors, soon these will be required to operate machinery and weaponry.

There are many jobs today that a machine isn't quite capable of doing due to prohibitively expensive AI requirements, so as long as capitalism provides an entry to participate in more advanced machinery, a market for modified slaves will exist.

It's akin to how in poorer countries it is not uncommon to have highways entirely constructed by manual labour and without the use of prohibitively expensive steamrollers. It's not that the technology doesn't exist, the powers that be will use their leverage to make sure it's as profitable as possible regardless of how scarce it could be.

Because we already change our biology in order to get an advantage when we take performance enhancing drugs or elect for some kind of surgery to enhance our bodies.

Technology is great but transhumanists make me sick.

And this means what? Just because we take drugs doesn't seem to draw the conclusion that we need nanomachines to achieve communism. Just that they might be useful or normal in the future.

...

Now that fascists are pretty much history, transhumanists/technocrats are Porky's new useful idiots.

I don't care about minor transhumanism but things like uploading every mind to the grid, self-replicating machines or AI that continuously upgrades itself are a big no-no to me.

Guess that makes me a luddite to some of these nerds that base all their "theory" off sci-fi.

If you go down the list, most of those jobs would be unnecessary in a communist society anyway. You don't need retail salespeople when you don't need to desperately increase consumption to deal with your overproduction crisis, I can't imagine there being very much demand for fast food when the lower class is no longer worked to exhaustion and can bring itself to cook, guards are useless without private property to defend, when things are produced for use you don't need any cashiers, bookkeeping is much simpler when it's just tracking consumption of the commodities you produce since there is no longer a market, the management jobs associated with all of these things evaporate, and coupled with a general decline in demand for goods because people are no longer barraged with advertisements everyday and production for use only, and you basically have your utopia of leisure, even without any further technical development.

this is why separating philosophy from science was a bad idea

YOU WILL BE ASSIMILATED
THERE IS NO ALTERNATIVE
YOU WILL DRINK THE SOYLENT
AI KNOWS WHAT'S BEST FOR EVERYONE

No one gives a shit how you 'feel' about them retard! They are going to be here whether you like it or not.

Oh, you have a clever 'plan' to stop the relentless march of technology? Please tell me what it is!

You're no different from the retarded Capitalists who can't reconcile their ideology with the accelerating rate of growth in technology and the changes it brings.

Why are you so mad?

yeah except technology taking off under capitalism means everyone is fucked

stop watching too much scifi anime and read some fucking books

Because you didn't provide an argument.

Not everyone is fucked, no, only the people who don't keep up and do whatever it takes to compete.

I don't expect any of these inventions to be developed under capitalism because the environment will collapse first. All of these developments are almost certainly much further off than you would think. In the late 1990s, there was speculation that the completion of the Human Genome Project would open the door to widespread personalized medicine, life extension, and human genetic engineering. It did none of those things and reference genome data turns out to be of very limited use, even for research purposes, but the project did help to spur the development of more advanced sequencing methods, like BLAST. I know the Chinese are busy messing around with CRISPR in human embryos, but besides the treatment of genetic disease there is very little that they can do, and perfection of genetic engineering in humans would require both several generations and a callous disregard for human life. Implants are great and all, until you realize that you'll end up having to get lots and lots of expensive and painful surgeries both when you buy them and later for maintenance. Keep in mind the spread of antibiotic resistant bacteria. You've bought into hype, and should refocus your interest on scientific developments that are actually at hand, like improvements in cancer treatment.

i wish i was so delusional

as always, transhumanists are all wishful thinking and no theory

Science since the 20th century: "Why not?" rather than "Why?"

If you don't want to work 12 hours a day and live on under 1000 calories, you just aren't doing enough to compete, kid.

Then I'm right and Communism will not be achieved because of human limitations.

"""""""""anarcho"""""""""transhumanism

Everyone knows It's really cool and sci fi to put consumer electronics inside you. What could possibly go wrong?

The strongest organism always thrives while the weakest dies, that is not delusional, that is fact.

...

Yeah that's why mice are extinct. Duh doy!

...

Retake high school biology. Evolutionary fitness has nothing to do with being the "strongest."

...

Yeah, your replies really show your intelligence and your knowledge on the topic.

Warping the human mind in order to make people agree with you so that you can have a revolution to bring about a classless society where everyone will be free is the sort of thing a liberal or fascist caricature of a communist ideologue would advocate.

Mice die fucking constantly retard. They are preyed upon by all sorts of stronger animals.

Yes, but they are evolutionary successful and the species caries on. That is what "survival of the fittest" means.

You think there aren't going to people who disagree with you when you say you want to do Communism?

You have 3 options:
1. Kill them.
2. Waste your time trying to sneak around their intellect to make them believe you.
3. Give them the necessary number of neurons and synapses actually required to realize Communism is a good idea.

The first two have been tried already.

No, because while mice do breed fast enough to overcome the natural death toll of their place in the food chain cycle, they do not thrive because they are not at the top of the food chain.

Killing them is probably more moral than hooking them up to the brainwashomatic 9000, tbh. There are plenty of intelligent reactionaries out there, and I think that most of the time the reason they're anti-communist is because the typical American watches 5 hours of tv a day, dripping with implicit and explicit ideology, not just that people are fools who must be enlightened.

please explain what you mean by this

An organism thrives by dominating the majority of other organisms in it's environment and having the most access to resources that sustain it's existence and meet it's needs.

...

Killing them is also cheaper and easier

You sound a little Nietzschean. Are you sure you like communism?

Not if they are valuable as productive human machines.

Where and how did Nietzsche object to Communism?

In The Antichrist, he writes that

...

Actually I don't disagree with his point, but that doesn't mean Socialism still doesn't make sense. It's just humans doing Socialism with their presently flawed human evolution that doesn't make sense.

1. The human mind isn't a machine
2. Machines are only as good as the people who make them
3. Why not skip the whole cyborg craze and just gain mastery over biology so that we can bio-engineer ourselves to be better?
4. Transhumanism will in practical terms more likely create a super-bourgeoisie who live as gods lording over the slave-like remnants of humanity.

I'm 100% pro-transhuman stuff. I dream of leaving my shitty body and uploading to a robot. Problem is, I'm pretty sure it was just be the next level of control. The tech will most likely be created by our good friends in silicon valley, after all.

There will be plenty of incentives for the bourgeosie to provide augmentations. the silicon valley types would especially would want augmented humans to either speed up tech progress or provide them with better services than a regular human would provide. Governments will want to provide these technologies because they will increase productivity and decrease healthcare and disability costs. Of course it's capitalism so it's still shitty but it's not a cartoonish dystopia like i see people imagining. It would be what we have now with fancier technology. Youll also have leftists and others trying to gain access and knowledge of it to resist. I think by the time this stuff comes out capitalism will have burnt itself out though, however that is conjecture. I think the reasonable short term path to better lifespan, healthspan, etc will be a mix of bioengineering and artificial organs and joints, with plastic surgery for the appearance minded people.

I don't think that we need to augment ourselves to have a socialist or communist system. That idea strengthens human nature and misanthropic arguments that are either used against leftism or transhumanism/other promethean ideologies. Reducing people's stress and letting them have more sleep and less work hours, as well as giving them stuff to do has a profound effect on reducing bad behaviors. Reducing or eliminating inequality decreases tensions between different groups and the resulting negative effects of these tensions.

We must become Necrons.

1. Not this shit again
2. Wrong
3. Because biology has limitations that electronic devices don't have.
4. Only if we don't destroy capitalism.

Holy shit, I'm all for transhumanism but OP is an absolute retarded faggot ruining everything. You're not helping the cause one bit, user.

We don't *need* superintelligence to achieve communism, though it certainly wouldn't hurt…

1. It's a crude attempt by nature to produce a machine capable of logic, developed by evolution. The problem with evolution is it's a flawed process that leaves a lot of unnecessary changes from millions of years ago due to bad source control. Subsequent versions of the human mind are rife with bad evolutionary designs that do not help in the modern era of human existence, and in fact, can hinder the organism from performing at peak performance.
2. Machines are better than the people who make them. That's the whole point. The guy who writes a computer code that can do the logical thinking of himself and 5000000 thousand other guys doing some job at 93405720973x the speed has made a machine that is better than all of them.
3. Why skip it in the first place? Why didn't we just skip the industrial era to get to the information era?
4. Yes, this is true. If the access to this technology is limited, this is exactly what will happen most likely. Better keep up with the times if you don't want to be left obsolete.

...