Prove to me that socialism has no internal contradictions

feels over reals
:^)

The main contradictions within post-scarcity communist societies will be those dealing with individual problems relating to love, physical relationships with others, natural disasters / geographic locations and the philosophical alienation that is being a conscious being in the first place.

Also, Engels states that the primary contradiction left for humanity to deal with when it reaches Full Communism is the struggle against nature.

Haha, this is not simply a feels over reals philosophical argument I or you are making.

You cannot reduce the individual human being simply to that of purely objective object that has material inputs and outputs. Such a philosophical argument finds its foundations in the current technological capacity that mankind currently finds itself in – namely, computers.

All societies have created ideological philosophies based on the current tech that they have, from the fluid like motions of Plato's day stemming from water power, to the pavlonian behaviourism of the industiral era, and now to the computer based interpretations of humans that we have now.

Human beings are complex creatures that adapt to their world naturally, based on experiences and interactions with the world both mentally & physically. We are not simply mechanical objects like computers that store various inputs (or chemicals as you would state) that can simply be given the right amount of x chemical or stimuli to produce fully autonomous and happy individuals.

It probably will, but we cannot envision it yet, because imagining a society without wage labour and value-form in general is already hard

I never understood this. How can you have post-scarcity when certain materials and climate conditions are only available in certain parts? How does that even work? Who is in control of those resources, and how do you prevent a 'war' breaking out over them?

Okay so here's the deal. Current economics and planetary/neural technology is just a fraction of the total knowable entropic forces unleashed by digging up fossil fuels then proceeding to burn all of them as quickly as possible from the geological frame. Darwinism on its own cannot fully explain the emergence of complexity, a point dialectical biologists (from Engels and even earlier) and teleological evolutionists tried to grapple at but could not form a precise concept. The thermodynamic trend is towards greater and greater complexity, until it hits a point where dynamic equilibrium starts breaking down, and then there will be a bifurcation / singularity (a term unfortunately coopted and dumbed down by the futurist movement) event where everything takes a leap over the abyss into the next qualitative level, infinitely different to anything remotely familiar to us now.

Good post

Isn't someone with a difficult job being exploited by someone with an easy job if they all get the same pay/allotment of resources/labour certificates/whatever else? If not, why?

Post-scarcity is a term that means that the basic phsycial needs of society are meant for all persons: food, housing, medical, etc. Basically the bottom two rows of Maslow's pyramid of needs.

When the basic physical needs of everyone within a society are met, then they are able to have the free time necessary for further material & spiritual development, or the top 3 needs in Maslow's pyramid. Marx and Engels would actually argue that beyond the top row (Self-Actualization) would be the struggle against nature itself. This struggle would take on the form of humanity against nature by tackling disease, increasing life expectancy, warding off natural disasters and the like.

Now, to answer your question…
1. Post-Scarcity is the fulfillment of the basic physical needs of a population.

2. Since communism is intended to be an international system, theoritical everyone (or at least the representatives from each given geographic and cultural area) will have control of these resources which should prevent a war from breaking out.

3. Yes, certain materials and climate conditions are only available according to given cultural / historical periods of time. But, as indicated in point number 2, humanity as a whole will be represented. Also, materials and climate conditions are constantly changing, even from the medieval ages to our spectacle of capitalist development. Thus, with the implementation of what I would assume an eco-socialist mode of production, new materials would be used to adapt to changing climate conditions that are only available in certain parts. Materials that are not within a specific area will also be traded among the communist countries / areas.

So we get to focus on actually being human beings? Neato

and contend with the real underlying battle, the struggle of the species against the environment

and discern the meaning of life.

Are these contradictions my friend?

Not economic contradictions no, but I was just trying to think of something that could be considered "contradictions" I guess. But you are right, these are not contradictions in the sense that Marx or Marxists in general are talking about when they critique capitalism.

My bad comrade. I am muddling the theory here for newer comrades.

ok for the last time leftcoms, i agree with abolition of the commodity form, the reason thats in that fucking meme is to explain to newcomers what socialism is about, and the idea of pay is something they can grasp onto.

...

HAPPY NOW LEFTCOMS ITS FIXED YOU AUTISTS!

True, but it also creates a misconception. The sooner they get despooked on money and money costs, the sooner they will understand how a communist society works.

dang ju ::–D

It's really telling how fucking spooked this board is by left communism when any random person getting Marxism right is presumed to be a leftcom. This is fucking historical lmfao.

...

good now spread that maymay to the ends of the earth

What is your point?
1. Communist movement is about abolishing the current state of affairs
2. Capital is the dialectical analysis of Capitalism, which starts with the commodity.
3. Capitalism is the current state of affairs and must be abolished. Therefore the "seed" of capitalism must also be abolished.
4. This means commodity production (production for exchange) must be abolished.
It isn't that hard to understand.

It can't work socialist and marxist don't even have charts to help explain what and how much of an item needs to be produced in order to maximize resources and not just have random items rotting on the shelves. It's laughable how much the average person never sits down to think about how complicated it is that a store knows what and how much to order to maximize profit and satisfaction for a customer base.

Us capitalist analyze data by the hour to know what we need to buy, how long the structure should be operation, when to close, and when at the worst it's optimal to cut losses and try something new. Commies chronically die smashing their heads against a wall and never even try to rationally look at the number, facts, and realistic solutions.

I made one

The joke is that I'm the only and first one ITT who actually finds himself aligned with the leftcom position, let alone uses the fucking flag, and that somehow in spite of this someone who's likely not a leftcom at all and definitely doesn't show themselves to be in any way is instinctively called a leftcom when they use the Marxist critique of political economy properly to correct an ebin graph that's incorrect in many places.

Then why not use that data to actually help people, instead of maximizing profit. I hope you understand that under communism profit isn't the goal. It is getting resources to where they are needed. And don't even claim that products don't rot on shelves under capitalism because they obviously do, since products are thrown away every day, to the point where they have to guard the trash cans outside supermarkets. Same goes for the housing market, where there are empty houses, enough even to accommodate every homeless person. No one claimed that a planned economy is easy, it just makes sure that profit doesn't get in the way of "human satisfaction".

Needs more butterflies and rainbows.

Wrong again, kiddo

Maximizing profit is helping people even if you don't immediately see it. Caring about profits and incentives is what helps the great machine of a civilization run smoothly and not have every starve after a couple of years.

Profit is the carrot on a stick that makes people even if unknowingly care about scarce resources.

Look at that chart if you can even comprehend it. It's the epitome of getting the right resource to the correct people and not have anything wasteful, unwanted, and unneeded produced it's what helps us keep the majority of a first world nation fed while also being able to pump out new tech to help ease the lives of the common man and the most beautiful part is it's all voluntary.

Planned economies always fail because we can't see the future and a free flow economy is perfect for addressing issues like a bad crop season or spikes in pricing due to new tech needing certain alloys or other materials and not cause the nation to rape the environment to get more because some central planning demanded that a nation produces a new item when realistically the demand for the item wasn't that high.

You can talk about what you think is fair and right but the fact you're well fed and posting here on a computer or phone is a testament to how people like me analyze and act on economic data.

...

Socialism, as in a transitional phase between capitalism and communism, does have contradictions, mainly the existence of a state that surpresses the capitalist class.

I'd take it over what we have now. It would be all so much simpler and better

I can see at least 3 gigazizek worth of ideology in this.

my GOD, you should immediately show it to as much people as possible, this way we can prevent crisis of overproduction and even forcing third world farmers out of land because some 🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧american🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧 corporation have more money than them!

my GOD, this is so revolutionary, if we should take all farming subsidies from first world and post socialist countries so they can produce more food

thank GOD raping environment to get more natural resources for making more products than people need is MUCH MORE ENVIRONMENTALLY FRIENDLY

the fact I am well fed and posting here on a computer shows only that farmers, factory workers and truck drivers are doing good job, dipshit

...

As a #STEMlord I can tell you that those curves are nothing special and that Marx explained prices of production before your neoclassical abstraction. Also, Cockshot explains how to handle resource management without money prices.

I don't think communism or socialism is without them. The truth is that absolutely no system is eternal.

...

feels are real you retard

for this boards love of zizek most of u dont see how much he reconciles idealism and materialism

In a society with scarcity (which is likely just inevitable) that tries to work together to emancipate the individual, there are going to be contradictions with individual and collective will. That is just inherent in the whole thing, the only way it can disappear is if there can be such an extreme abundance of labor and resource access that you can basically live in that Isaac Asimov novel where one of the space colonies has robot slaves that allow the humans to live like they're southern aristocracy. You have your robot slaves that do everything for you, and you're just the sensitive brain of the entire thing casually directing the robots to do whatever pleases you.

That is so fantastical with our current trajectory that it is total speculation and doesn't seem important to think about. Real lives socialism will have compromises, there will definitely be control of the individual, especially because of the ecological catastrophes that are occurring right now that need to be addressed to not significantly damage the entire ecosystem. Maybe after a point of settling into a coherent society that takes ecology into account and finds itself sustainable and very pleasing to humans can more technological growth take place. At the moment it looks like there will have to be a painful, labor intensive period of changing whole urban environments, power grids, methods of transport and resource extraction, deciding whether or not we need to limit population etc. in order to live in an environment that is both healthy, beautiful, rational and sustainable. All of that means subjecting the individual to the collective to a greater degree than might be necessary in future conditions.

t. hasn't read the book

You forget literally NOBODY is in favour of equal pay for all. So why are you spreading around lies?

Communism does not say we can only live material lives. The idea is that well being for all will free people so they no longer worry about trying to survive. They can actually focus on creating culture, philosophy, ect

Prove to me that capitalism can last forever.

why am I not surprised

this
no end of history nonsense

Two things comrade.

This quote by Marx (pic) refutes any form of the economic calculation problem under a fully fledged Socialist mode of production.

And this pdf refutes the economic calculation problem under the transitional phase towards Socialism that uses central planning and that would only exist for a few years anyway: macs.hw.ac.uk/~greg/publications/ccm.IJUC07.pdf

Fuck off.

Stop, this is Holla Forumstard level retardation

You literally can't prove a negative though wtf

rationalwiki.org/wiki/Negative_evidence
Educate yourself boy

huh, fair enough.

It's still a lot easier to talk about this if you give at least some specific part of Socailism.

A surprisingly good mestizo, I must say.

You're supposed to post the contradictions yourself.