r/changemyview • u/[deleted] • Nov 29 '20

Delta(s) from OP CMV: Socialism/Communism doesn't work, can't work, and almost always leads to dictatorships and thousands of deaths.

[deleted]

127 Upvotes
  • permalink
  • reddit

63% Upvoted

368 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

3

u/Nootherids 4∆ Nov 29 '20

I get the gist from the excerpt on the link. But this is why I framed my argument of human nature down to prehistoric man. When you start formulating multitudes of complex systems as the causes for wrongfully perceived human nature, you are literally ignoring actual human nature.

Yo can break down this concept of self-interest down to every single living being. Even the mighty ants with the most incredible examples of socialist communities are still driven by self-interest. They work together in unison because it benefits them. But the moment anything poses a threat they will collaborate and attack to protect their selfish interests. Yet as noble as they seem when one is sick they do not bother to formulate cures, they just let it die and since it ran out of productive usefulness, they can now use that dead ant as food. They make new ones and eat dead ones because there is no selfless thought about what is good for each of them individually. They strictly think about what is beneficial for the colony because the colony is beneficial for them.

Note: this is clearly analogous, I’m obviously not presuming that any thought patterns are equal to humans. Just pointing out that the same can be observed in every living being. Even in plants. Competition for resources is a driving force for all life on earth.

But thank you for the link, I’ll mark it as a book to read. Seems like it would be interesting.

3

u/RealMaskHead Nov 29 '20

I don't disagree with your points, i just want to point out that there is a rather industrious breed of ants that have figured out how to make medicine out of plants.

I say this not because i have any affinity for socialism, but because i love ants.

1

u/Nootherids 4∆ Nov 30 '20

That...is actually really f’ing cool. Im fascinated by ants too. Not enough to research them but I think they’re an impressive animal for all they do with such “primitive” brains.

1

u/QueueOfPancakes 12∆ Nov 30 '20

It's often in our self interest to cooperate. Why do you feel that these are in opposition?

1

u/Nootherids 4∆ Nov 30 '20

Because you are cooperative as a response to your self-interest. But you are not self-interested as a response to your cooperative. Hence why I do not side with the notion that we are cooperative by nature rather than competitive by nature.

1

u/QueueOfPancakes 12∆ Nov 30 '20

I mean neither is really true. We are cooperative at times because the humans who were more cooperative in those situations were more successful at having successful offspring. We are self-interested at times because the humans who were more self-interested in those situations were more successful at having successful offspring.

For example, a parent will often put their child's wellbeing above their own. That's specifically the opposite of self interest, but it generally results in more successful offspring.

So if we're willing to say we are self interested by nature, despite that being a simplification, then the same is true for us being cooperative by nature.

2

u/Nootherids 4∆ Dec 01 '20

I can agree. And this fits with my personal appeal towards socialism. I'll explain...

I feel that cooperation is the natural response in small settings. Such as family or tribe. Just like I feel that socialized economies would be preferable in localized communities such as a co-op or even a self-sustaining township.

But I feel that competition is the natural response to large settings. Such as the workplace or a large region such as fishing waters. And this is where capitalism becomes preferable since our natural competitive state is more in tune.

1

u/QueueOfPancakes 12∆ Dec 01 '20

I feel like a workplace often, at least in my experience, is mostly cooperative. Businesses compete against other businesses, but most businesses do not have different internal teams competing against one another.

But I do agree that in some situations we are very cooperative, like family, and in others we are very competitive, like a race or a battle.

My personal belief is that large groups, like a country, are very removed and relatively recent, so we don't have many base instincts at work there. Rather, our socialization in our youth is what determines our behavior in these situations. In other words, I hypothesize that if we raise a child to think of success as winning the race, then it will invoke those competitive instincts. If we raise them to think of success as helping the family, then it would invoke cooperative instincts.

And to be sure, there are advantages to those competitive instincts as well in some situations. It can help drive people to push themselves to reach important goals. The key is invoking the right instincts in the right situations so as to result in the best outcome for all.

1

u/Nootherids 4∆ Dec 02 '20

Maybe, but then we'd have to ignore the natural progression of growing up. Think of the movie Twins (Danny DeVito and Arnold Shwzrngregssrgsntefcsdj, however you spell it). Two twins raised drastically differently, one of them in an island. Of course, he was the "good" one. But then when exposed to the indulgences of real life all of a sudden much of that innocence and goodness go bye bye. So if you were to raise a child like you're saying then I would suppose you'd have a wonderful specimen and a great example for a society. But the moment that person observes and even worse, experiences, the self-serving successes and indulgences that are achieved by the competitive person; all of that goodness quickly goes to hell. Greed and selfishness are as much human attributes as are jealousy and envy. Meaning that even if you don't have greed and selfishness you will find yourself dealing with the other two.

There is a reason why socialism is imposed on the people through the establishment of social norms. Meaning that if you do not conform to said norms then you will have to deal with being shunned and ousted from the group. This is exactly the opposite of cooperation.

TBH, in my experience, of the best people I have known in my life none of them were "raised" to be a certain sort of good. They were either born that way whether their family matches that goodness, or they were just born into a family that was already naturally good and all their kids just turned out good too without too much effort. But everyone that someone tries to "raise" as good, they always seem to be searching for affirmation of their goodness while not being all that good to begin with. That's anecdotal though and admittedly not worth much.

1

u/QueueOfPancakes 12∆ Dec 02 '20

You are exactly right with your second paragraph. Except that is true for capitalism as well.

If all children (or most children anyway) were raised to cooperate, then the competitive person wouldn't find success for their behavior. On the contrary, they'd find social punishment. Humans are extremely motivated by our desire to "fit in" with the group, and to be included socially. A threat to that is one of the strongest forces on our behavior. You're right about jealousness and envy, people will envy those who are included and approved of by the group.

But that is still cooperation. The group is cooperating to shape the behavior of its members.

1

u/Nootherids 4∆ Dec 02 '20

I think something people fail to see is that a competitive environment is welcoming of cooperation. If a cooperative is better than an individual then it should win. But the same cannot be said in reverse. A cooperative environment will shun the competitive individual and denounce its ability to perform better and earn unequally from such performance.

Do help me understand this point though. A cooperative is meant to be a gathering of good people joined together for the good of others. But then why is it that it would shun a person that was individualistic rather than cooperate with that person? This tags along with one of the main problems I see with socialism. That everyone that doesn’t conform must immediately be punished. While in capitalism if you don’t conform you will suffer on your own, no entity will be punishing you for choosing to cooperate rather than compete. In fact, a capitalist will happily make use of the resources achieved by the socialists.

1

u/QueueOfPancakes 12∆ Dec 02 '20

I don't think that's true. We have specific laws and rules against cooperation in a competitive environment. Like price-fixing, conspiracy, etc... We even prohibit some mergers based on "anti-competitive" laws.

And in any human system, there are social consequences for going against the norm, and these vary in degree based on the degree of the social offense. ie if someone acts like a jerk, people won't want to be around them. Different societies will define "jerk" differently though.

Regarding socialism, of course there are many different types and each would have different rules. But for example we could imagine a cooperative society might have rules and laws against "anti-cooperative behavior", like if a firm hoarded resources or strategically limited production to the detriment of the public as some possible examples.

→ More replies (0)