Explain something to me

The nature of the actors depends on their position in society because that gives them certain interests. Executives of a company would tend to vote for lower wages for entry level employees because they profit from that. The entry level employees would vote for higher wages because they profit from that. The whole problem arises when you give "democracy" to only the small elite whose interests are contrary to society as a whole.

My argument boils down to this: whether the system is Capitalistic or Communistic the underlying problem is that resources are misappropriated and goods are misdistributed so long as the base conditions of scarcity and non-self-sufficiency exist. It doesn't matter whether it's a CEO or a Commisar making the decisions within a command economy that fuck large numbers of people, because those decisions crop up as an effect of the underlying conditions.

Yes humans are flawed and will make bad decisions.
We still argue capitalism is fundamentally irrational as a system, for a huge number of reasons that wouldn't exist in socialism

But are we not at such a level of complexity in division of labor that hierarchy and it's trappings are inevitable even within Communism?

Right. But if we advanced technology and engineered a better human, wouldn't that solve the underlying problems more efficiently than quibbling over the means of distribution.

Granted, I do think that Capitalism is worse than Communism in many ways.

oh boy here we go

I'm serious. Why isn't transhumanism a higher goal for you than collectivism?

The only thing that stops me from being a transhumanist myself is other transhumanists.

There's so many things wrong with your viewpoint but the most blatant one is this: Who gets to be the super evolved humans, bucko? It's not us, the measly working class fucks who can barely afford health care. Transhumanism is only a good thing after communism has been achieved. If we're still in capitalism mode, you're just creating a superhuman ruling class.

...

I agree. Socialism will only work when take advtage of the technology available to us.
jacobinmag.com/2015/04/allende-chile-beer-medina-cybersyn/

What makes you think the stuff they'll make will be able to pass on genetically in the first place?

Material conditions shape production. We're far, far more likely to end up with enhancements for the elites to maximize their health and enjoyment, while workers are artificially sedated, dumber and more suited to grunt work.

"Transhumans" aren't all created equal. You're so inebriated with the potential positive possibilities that you're completely ignoring the material reality of society as it stands, and how that would effect cultivation of the sciences.

Will read.

Because genetic modification is heritable by definition?

Not, it isn't. Modifying an organisms' living genetics does not necessarily impact their passing on of genes at all. Seriously, if you don't even understand these rudimentary mechanics, than why call yourself a transhumanist? You're treating it like magic.

Because we're not going to start with retroviruses rewriting the DNA of the living before we start with designer babies, whose enhancements are heritable?

citation needed

Are, as in can be. Genetics aren't so simple that we can just splice in whatever traits we want and have it continue down a bloodline with no complications whatsoever.

And all of this is a moot point anyway, because as I said, these genetic traits to be passed down are far more likely to take on the form of population control than actual improvements. They will inevitably widen the class gap, not erase it.

you're right

Neither are genes magic tricks. If you give the future humans only genes for purple eyes, that is all they will have except a small few that will get mutations, mostly bad ones that cause blindness or slightly off purple eyes.

"Designer" "babies" are modified embryos, their gametes also hold the modified genes. If you give them a set of genes to grow 4 functional arms instead of two, their children will also predominantly have 4 arms instead of two.

That is for sure if you give such powers to government, corporations, and tie them up nicely into the bureaucracy with patents on life such as anything to do with genes, modified genes, or genetic modification techniques.
This is why leftism is anarchism and only by cutting the state out without a transitional "holding corporation" state can we achieve total freedom in society.

I don't have a crystal ball, but in males this kind of procedure would still result in gametes with the mutation and possibly affect female gametes as well.

Well, actually, we can have them as heritable pretty easily.

Alterations to genes don't just have an effect on those solitary traits though. Just like you can't just add a hydrogen molecule or two, messing with the recipe causes a rippling effect, which can either do as you want or seriously fuck you up. I'm not trying to say that it's impossible, or even that far off. Just that it's not going to be a smooth ride to "Ubermensch".
That's precisely my point. We need communism before we start the technological revolution. It's as much as a goal as communism is, not a means of getting to it.

You seem to be missing that a Commissar class is no better than a Capitalist class.

No, you seem to be missing the fact that I am an anarchist, advocating anarchism, which is inherent to communism.

The only difference is semantics and justification. The idea that you can get anarchism as a permanent state, then distribute transhumanist techonology as you develop it across all strata of the population with the human condition as is seems a joke.

Your understanding of politics is equivalent to your understanding of genetics ie clapistan high-school dropout.

...

Only if you ask idiots. That is the definition.
They are in the event of a state-socialist revolution, yes. Again, I am an anarchist.
"press the magic button to make humans double-plus unbad"
I reiterate, oh boy here we go

Some funky genes doesn't do shit about material conditions boyo. Read a fucking book.

Whoaboy

Keep greentexting, maybe it'll make you seem like less of a retard.

No, nigger, it doesn't work that way. Define "better" for me right now. Explain to me why your arbitrary physical alterations will allow people to supercede the nurture half of nature/nurture. Explain how changing the superstructure in the most superficial way possible will change the base.

...

That's not what I'm doing, I'm pointing out that you're appealing to a generalized notion of "better" without understanding that there is no such thing as an objective "better" for humanity to become. It's not definitions, you're just spouting pure ideology. I ask again, what gene will you alter, what trait will you code into the human genome that will abolish the contradictions of capitalism?

Oh no, you've identified that I seem to be mad. I guess that means I lose, right? Because that's what we're doing now, right? Fuck off.

Marx isn't even the first person to propose communism, let alone the only. Even if it were impossible to achieve and genetic enhancements were being dolled out like candy, it still wouldn't matter because society shapes human development and interaction.

The irony.

Words I have never uttered. Well done.

What? I didn't make any favourable statements to markets in my post, I outright said it would be needs based.

Do you not know what a command economy is?

That's cool that you watched a few fictions about runaway mutations but what you believe is completely wrong.
Many genes affect many different parts of your body and many act differently in differnt parts of your life. There are also many genes that turn off (or turn on) those genetic processes in many parts of your body. Yes if you tried this stuff today like China is doing you won't have the kind of success we ultimately seek with genetic modification. That does not mean we aren't rapidly advancing our knowledge to be more capable and less clumsy with each new experiment publicized.
What you are saying in short is that "we cant know what every gene does therefore we won't have any success" and what everyone educated on the subject is saying is that "we know a whole lot right now and we can already do things that prove you wrong and we will continue doing bigger things and doing them faster".
Trying to tie some early 20th century notions of forced government eugenics that some german leaders dreamed of won't change the facts here chum.
I don't know what you're saying about smooth rides because no one else has said anything about levels of difficulty. Try having a normal discussion once in a while without attempting to make any discussion aggressive. You know it is a sign of low intelligence to believe no one will discuss things with you unless you pretend to believe dumb things to make them teach you.

please stop
justifying your argument because "this is how human nature is" is basing your argument on nothing and nothing
in the future forego this impulse to claim human nature for something that happens to agree with your ideals

There is no half. Read some books, here is a recommendation.

By this you mean to ask how changing genes will change human impulses and desires? Most genes are not superficial. Intelligence is not just skin color, I know you think race doesn't exist and if it does it is only skin color. Genes decide who you are.

That's a whole lot of self-satisfaction for someone who didn't disagree with what I said at all.

I think you ended up reading into what I said a whole lot more than what I meant because you were pissed off at my tone. And accusing me of trying to make a discussion "aggressive" are rich, considering your entire post.

I was attempting to critique Mr. transhumanist's belief here that you can just code human conflict out of people's genes and it's sunshine and rainbows from then on.

I'm sorry, but when Fuhrer decides something, does he also take a "democratic vote"? Because your use "democratic vote" makes no sense. Democracy means everyone involved in the decision-making. Unless proletariat is supposed to be slaves (i.e. property; things; commodity) - you do not have Democracy.

Something like this is much closer to reality

By removing the underlying division between the owners and proletariat, the society is no longer divided into "exploiters" and the "exploited". Hence exploitation ceases.

That's not how it works.

Because Transhumanism doesn't solve anything. It is literally no different from the very same Liberalism we had in 18th century. The problem remains the same: if you are poor as fuck - you can't afford anything. Including your freedom or genemods or cyborg implants or whatever it is that "transhumans" you. Some rich fuck becoming a demigod does not change a thing.

What of part of this is so hard to understand?

Alright I'm done with this conversation.

I derive no satisfaction from teaching you a little something so you can properly relay your point against government control of genetic modification in the future. In fact I only wish to see you knowledgeable on this subject that you so clearly have an interest in despite any opposition to what others plan to do with it.

You're projecting here with trying to distill emotions out of my post. I don't know what he believes or what rainbows you mean. You can code a lot of things into DNA and some things we can theoretically code into DNA that nature just wouldn't ever code into it. Before we reach that point there are many amazing things we can do today by just slightly modifying code that already exists throughlout life on earth today.

Good luck.

You can be whatever you choose to be but you won't be an immortal with 10 hands any time soon even if you built robotic arms your mind would be incapable of actively using all of them at once.
I really do hope that was some sort of joke. I hope you don't believe in a blank state human that actually gets encoded by "culture" and "society".

bruh

breh!

I'm not the one who can't comprehend a communist society without a command economy.

What is terminator gene? In a context where genes are under copyright, of course capitalists biotechnological corporations will make sure you can't transmit your modified genes without paying for it.

No. Corporations behave in ways dictated to them by their drive to profit.

Those that don't are being eliminated by those that do; there is nothing "democracy" can do about that.

As for communism, it doesn't implement more or less democracy; it suppresses the drive for profit.

You're assuming they will be able to.

Yes they will. At the very least mandatory contraception or pay huge fines.

You are so submissive. If you allow them to control you they will. Your posts suggest you crave it, that is fine just don't come near me because I will cure you of your disease.

actually end yourself

No thanks. I think I will live.

"Capitalism" is the 19th century equivalent of a meme. Any attempt to endow it with a formal definition is "reactionary."

The word "capitalism" is merely a derivation of capitalist, which is bascially a slur that refers to brown people who sell brown things from far away.

It doesn't. Communism and capitalism fall to the same problem: extremists who want control.

We found a good balance, but over time the Constitution has been bastardized so much that the US has turned into a kleptocratic Oligarchy and its saying fuck you to capitalists and communists both.

...

It's not hard to UNDERSTAND, it's just an unrealistic worldview. Utopian equality for all doesn't exist and can't exist (at least until we reach some singularity point). Reality is predatory by nature.

Communists say "the rich become demigods, so i want to pull them down"
Capitalists say "the rich become demigods, then i'm gonna go make money"

...

this doesn't mean much tbh. these things are caused by monopolies influencing government.

capitalism needs moderation to work, but so does every other system as well. that moderation is called law and it's the key to every society. the problem we face is that the government is beholden to corporations before the law and it's simply up to the people to hold it accountable.

turd positionists say, both are fools, let us bring good society to all men.

bureaucracy is beholden to itself, not some theistic pantheon that keeps everything in check
if the people can make any system work then why capitalism, why not something else
the logic is inconsistent

because capitalism is fiercer. communism might be more of a utopia in the end, but we can all agree that capitalism is predatory.

capitalism is a t-rex.

communists are the humans who group together and kill the t-rex. teamwork yay! everyone gets to eat and together our power is strong. it works really well in small groups.

but one of the communists always realizes that if he rides the t-rex himself he can be the boss.

so imo the constitution is domesticating the wild predator of capitalism (by putting restrictions on government)

i'm sure that communism can work too in other nations under the right set of laws and with the right leadership. USA's capitalist though, and it's capitalism has been very successful.

the problem is simply that the r-rex has to be unleashed.

global banking monopolies are not beholden to the spirit of the constitution (and these days neither is washington).

capitalists and communists both want the same revolution but they just see different endgoals. capitalists want to resaddle the t-rex and communists want to tear it down and share its meat.

holy shit my sides

typo. kills my metaphor! :(
the problem is simply that the t-rex has BEEN unleashed.

might as well keep going right:

crony capitalism has gotten out of hand and the constitution needs to be purged.

local socialism is possible under the constitution. but it takes villages and communities with a ground-up ideology for it to work. and capitalism's still necessary for the nation as a whole to compete with the world at large.

it's big government and globalist meddling that's preventing all of us from getting what we want

So useless outside of very specific forests in the early jurassic?

excellent bourgeoisie damage control
however capitalism is not necessary
neither is the government

well yeah.

if we're keeping with the metaphor, the "specific forests in the early Jurassic" would apply to earth and the industrial age of western civilization. unfortunately for all of us, whether we like it or not, "capitalism" is the top of the ideological food chain.

communism too, since it's on the same scale as capitalism, would be another predator. they can't get along and they fight over territory. communist's always looking for a fight though, trying to muscle in on the big guy's territory. the capitalist t-rex wins tho because he has a stronger self-preservation instinct.

but when they leave each other alone everything works out fine. in fact, with a fence between them and talking on the phone they realize that they are good friends and have a lot in common.

capitalism may very well be obsolete in the post-singularity age that we're breaching now, but we're not quite there yet.

i'll clarify because hey i can admit when i wasn't clear: i'm talking about the bill of rights specifically and the spirit of the constitution (the parts of the contitution that outline the governmental system, checks and balances, etc– could use amendments to give more power to the people now that we have the technology to do so. constitutional reform for an internet age is a damn good idea, but when i talk about the constitution from a philosophical perspective I'm talking primarily about the bill of rights and the restrictions placed on government). good?

whether or not they are necessary, they exist. they are inevitable. nothing's NECESSARY dude. everything's a reaction to everything else.

So far, this thread has used the word "capitalism" as a straw man rather than actually defining it.

thats because capitalism IS a straw man

Describe this age

This is why millennials have become lost souls

the whole earth you say?
whats a "top" of a food chain? do you know raptors and raptor like dinosaurs hunted in packs and ate trexs too?

whats a millenial?
ive seen the term slid around to mean anything the bankers feel it needs to mean

Capitalism is a flood, that comes and goes. It brings silt to fertilize fields and destroys houses.

Socialists are the humans who group together and build irrigation system. Teamwork yay! Houses are not destroyed and everyone gets to have a place to grow food. It works really well in big groups.

Sometimes Socialists forget that it's the teamwork that makes irrigation work and flood happens again.

Keep saying that. Maybe it'll become reality.

...

worst excesses of capitalism happen due to banking and taxation
both of those, in the modern age, exist strictly for capitalism

this fuckin' meme again

it always returns
mods think it helps "board look active" by not deleting them