Can you reconcile Marxism with the idea that material wealth is not necessary for happiness and satisfaction?

Can you reconcile Marxism with the idea that material wealth is not necessary for happiness and satisfaction?

Other urls found in this thread:

washingtonpost.com/news/the-intersect/wp/2016/07/28/reddit-tried-to-introduce-a-remote-kenyan-tribe-to-porn-it-did-not-go-as-expected/
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

...

What are you trying to say

You can't. But ehy would you want to? Claiming that happiness and wealth are completely unrelated and that you can be truly happy in extreme poverty is ideology of pretty hogh purity.

*why *high

I don't think OP understands marxism like Holla Forums does

I don't think there's anything to reconcile. You don't develop socieoconomic theories from the starting point of bad new age sound bites about happiness.

As if could achieve happiness and such without having some basic needs met.

Surely, you've noticed that cultural, scientific and political advances have generally come from the upper class. Who else has the free time to do it?

Why do you think the ruling class developed religion? Opium for the people.

I do

It's a lot more complicated than that. Maslow's hierarchy of needs might apply in the capitalist west, where wealth is a strong indicator of a person's social class. And then you have dirt poor farmers in Peru or whatever who are satisfied with nearly nothing.

Human self actualization can't be measured by using a simple pyramid

Try contemplating your ideal political system after not eating for two days.

Try composing music while you looking for shelter and facing the onset of frost bite.

Those dirt farmers have food and shelter and do not generally live in fear for their lives.. and the moment such isolated peoples encounter consumerist goodies they go nuts for them.

Beyond basic survival, (which no one on this board would accept as enough) poverty is relative.

Do you have any evidence that the ruling class actually conspired in this fashion, or are you trying out to be the left-wing Alex Jones?

Communism isn't just about giving everyone the basic needs, though. It is an ultra-materialist philosophy obsessed with appropriating wealth and economic power from the upper classes.

Examples?

washingtonpost.com/news/the-intersect/wp/2016/07/28/reddit-tried-to-introduce-a-remote-kenyan-tribe-to-porn-it-did-not-go-as-expected/

Really? The history of progressivism is basically that.

Oh,, I don't have a smoking gun,, a written confession form Moses that he made the whole thing up or anything like that.

I just have a skepticism of the natural, and a knowledge of history. Every religion is used to justify a power structure that spiritual leaders do quite well in.

Those upper classes will run you down into basic needs if you let them.

You don't need to. You can believe that material wealth isn't necessary for happiness and satisfaction, while at the same time realizing that the majority of humanity will never reached an such a state where their happiness is independent from their material conditions. Therefore, everyone's basic needs should be met to avoid suffering. And you and I can continue pursuing this mental/spiritual freedom.

Damn straight!

Very well put.

Does it matter if people are happier?

You seem to think that communism is just capitalism where thugs take the wealth from indentured capitalists, and distribute it too do nothing layabouts. It's more about taking the means to produce from those who claim ownership over it without actually making use of it, thus the producers of products have a proportional claim to the overall amount of resources and goods available equal to what they put in.