• dual_sport_dork 🐧🗡️@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    9 months ago

    The problem with that and most other proposals for whatever other moneyless utopian society is that they all implicitly require some manner of all-powerful central authority to ensure that the rewards get distributed, the labor gets allocated, and the rules stay followed.

    And we already know how well that’s going to turn out.

    • Deceptichum@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      9 months ago

      That’s odd, me and my housemates can distribute our housekeeping jobs amongst ourselves without having someone come along and tell us what to do.

      Yet when it comes to the country I live in, this is suddenly unimaginable because who would want to live somewhere functional of their own volition.

        • Deceptichum@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          7
          ·
          9 months ago

          You’ve tried?

          There’s this thing called democracy, where people can come together as a community to discuss issues and work out solutions - such as allocating work loads as need be, you see this in many large community projects across the world. That’s the same underlying principle my house uses, communication not authority.

            • Deceptichum@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              9 months ago

              That is literally an authoritarian system.

              What do you think the role of ‘General Secretary’ was? Its tankie shit.

              • Cryophilia@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                9 months ago

                That is literally an authoritarian system.

                Huh, wonder how they went from communism to authoritarianism. Well, surely that was a one time coincidence and not indicative of a systemic failure of communism as an ideology.

                • Deceptichum@kbin.social
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  9 months ago

                  They didn’t actually, they got trapped in the centralise everything under a state model of socialism.

                  Also I’ve been arguing for anarchism, so you’re really just hitting and missing non-stop today.

          • redcalcium@lemmy.institute
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            9 months ago

            I’m genuinely curious, how could communism be applied to millions of people without any central authority to oversee the system? Say, the sewer need to be maintained, and the people assigned to the work by the community decided “nah, I don’t want to clean the sewer” and not show up to work, what would the community do? What if the people assigned to mining coals decided they don’t want to mine coal anymore because it’s a horrible job and no one volunteer to replace them? Will the community force them to work or face punishment? If so, who make the decision if not a central authority?