@TheCaptain7777 said in #98:
> How is that determined by everyone else? In your previous comments you've said that I wouldn't want to do something that isn't useful to the collective. But I absolutely would want to play chess all day, whether or not it benefits the collective. This isn't because I'm alienated, I just happen to like chess better than work.
Well, in this case, it would be your way of working! And without knowing it, you're helping people to lear chess or to watch interesting content.
@CSKA_Moscou said in #101:
> Well, in this case, it would be your way of working! And without knowing it, you're helping people to lear chess or to watch interesting content.
Really? The reason I'm not already doing that is that people don't want to watch me play chess. And if people don't want it, then it's not really useful to the collective. Ask people what they would like to do if they could get paid to do nearly anything. Nobody is going to say they would like to pick up trash. Nobody will say that they want to maintain sewer systems. So in the end, the socialist government will require somebody to do those jobs. And that is totalitarianism, not socialism.
socialism,,,is,all,our,aim,we,desire,to,free,all,
no,dictators,we,can,work,for,the,collectie,or,we,can,play,chess
crowley,,,says,,,it,,well
"do,,,,what,,,,thou,,,,wilt,,,,harm,,,none"
@TheCaptain7777 said in #102:
> Really? The reason I'm not already doing that is that people don't want to watch me play chess.
No, it's rather because other classes, self-proclaimed ruling classes, have formed a system, a system called capitalism, which in one way or another forces people to do what they don't want to do and to make workers believe that they can "climb" the social ladder or have advantages by contributing or taking out loans. If you currently cannot do what you want, it's because it's not profitable from an economic point of view and therefore, it's frowned upon from a social point of view because it's not considered a serious activity by many people because of the stereotypes conveyed by the acceptance of capitalism.
> And if people don't want it, then it's not really useful to the collective. Ask people what they would like to do if they could get paid to do nearly anything. Nobody is going to say they would like to pick up trash. Nobody will say that they want to maintain sewer systems. So in the end, the socialist government will require somebody to do those jobs. And that is totalitarianism, not socialism.
Well, sewers and garbage collection are inevitable consequences of excessive urbanization.
Stop this form of capitalist urbanization and prioritize more ecological solutions by encouraging everyone to sort and recycle their waste and drastically reducing the use of plastic in everyday life. Miraculously, it will be more virtuous and the world will be cleaner. And no one will need to do such jobs anymore, especially with today's rise in technology that can do the necessary sorting. The same can also be said for people working on offshore platforms or in mines. In a world where these products are no longer consumed as much, it becomes pointless and obsolete to exploit workers to do such dangerous jobs.
@CSKA_Moscou said in #104:
> No, it's rather because other classes, self-proclaimed ruling classes, have formed a system, a system called capitalism, which in one way or another forces people to do what they don't want to do and to make workers believe that they can "climb" the social ladder or have advantages by contributing or taking out loans. If you currently cannot do what you want, it's because it's not profitable from an economic point of view and therefore, it's frowned upon from a social point of view because it's not considered a serious activity by many people because of the stereotypes conveyed by the acceptance of capitalism.
>
>
>
> Well, sewers and garbage collection are inevitable consequences of excessive urbanization.
>
> Stop this form of capitalist urbanization and prioritize more ecological solutions by encouraging everyone to sort and recycle their waste and drastically reducing the use of plastic in everyday life. Miraculously, it will be more virtuous and the world will be cleaner. And no one will need to do such jobs anymore, especially with today's rise in technology that can do the necessary sorting. The same can also be said for people working on offshore platforms or in mines. In a world where these products are no longer consumed as much, it becomes pointless and obsolete to exploit workers to do such dangerous jobs.
Why would we have a decrease in mining? Without materials for all the stuff you need and want, your standard of living will decline. Look around you. Every piece of metal is mined, which is a dangerous difficult process. Every piece of wood is cut and processed by logging companies, which is a difficult and dangerous business. Every piece of plastic is made in highly toxic factory assembly lines that require workers. Who will do those jobs? Very few people really want to. How will cars be made? Factory workers are necessary to build a modern car. The list goes on. Dangerous jobs will continue to exist no matter how socialist you make your country. I am more and more convinced that socialism is a lie told to workers to get them to submit to a totalitarian government. I made this thread because I honestly thought socialists had a practical idea that I had not heard of yet. I am now convinced that socialism would merely bring misery to any nation it is implemented in. Goodbye, I will not longer reply on this thread.
@TheCaptain7777 said in #105:
>I am more and more convinced that socialism is a lie told to workers to get them to submit to a totalitarian government.
No, you were already convinced of that before the thread even started.
>I made this thread because I honestly thought socialists had a practical idea that I had not heard of yet.
Our very best idea is to expropriate the capitalist class and prevent them from exploiting people in future. One practical idea to think about is that machines manufactured in capitalist society have something called built-in obsolescence. This mean they are purposely designed to break down after a few years so you have to buy a new one. Continually releasing new models also means that you can find it difficult to get replacement parts. All this is grossly inefficient and a socialist society would put a stop to it. Another thing is that, at the moment, research and develop in any given field is conducted by a number of competing capitalist enterprises. There is a great deal of duplication, which is also inefficient and would be ended by a socialist society.
>I am now convinced that socialism would merely bring misery to any nation it is implemented in.
It would definitely make you miserable, because you seem to hang about with right-wing insurrectionists, but it would greatly benefit working class people as a whole.
>Goodbye, I will not longer reply on this thread.
How will we survive? lol
This topic has been archived and can no longer be replied to.