|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Fri Dec 11, 2009 3:40 am
divineseraph In my system, all things would continue, more or less, as they are now. Clothing would not become only one or two styles, but would be created as the world saw need and want. Fashion would still exist, though the general sense of economic power that Abecrombie and such holds would be destroyed. Basically, the people, being in control, would produce what they wanted to be produced. As for entertainment, it's the same idea- It's service to society, and is a viable job. As such, there will always be those who have fun or interesting ideas they want to spread through the world. If they have the skill for it, they will do so and make television shows, act in movies, craft jokes and program video games. The only difference is that there is no monetary gain, especially at the expense of slave laborers in China or Indonesia.  The will of the many...
In essence, in your system these become jobs like any other. All things are relatively maintained but in a different way and for a different reason, you the people rather than for yourself. I mean, all these things SEEM unnecessary, and perhaps will be done away with in a radically different society, however, they are massive contributions to what humans can do and enjoy on their freetime, which will be a big part of a communist society, liberty and free time for the worker, to give them an incentive to keep on working and to help them relax. Perhaps this is sufficeable with only a nice resort or a trip to a national park, but some people who don't like to travel may just want some R&R in their rooms/squad bays/flats so that they can kill eachother in First Person shooter combat.
Further, I wonder if we, in a communist society, will talk about capitalism to the children, mentioning to them in a similar way what capitalists did to us about communism; mentioning how warmongering and truly evil they are.
subjugated by the cruelty of the few.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Dec 11, 2009 8:10 am
Zed Millar I was curious as to what you guys thought about fashion sense. Is it something that'll be abandoned altogether? I mean, as a gay man, I like to wear... well... tight, fit, and smooth sexy clothes. So, I was wondering if this would be something that'd be tossed out in a commie world. Altogether, of course, it's a small loss, but expressing your sexuality in speech, act, and dress are all equally important to me. Entertainment as for television shows, radio, music, satellite broadcasting, interwebs, movie industry, and the like. Whats to happen with this? Will we continue to employ people but have them on a regulated pay scale vice the current rediculous one where people make astronomical wages for no REAL reason? I mean, it isn't necessary per se, but let's be honest, a world without movies, acting, and entertainment is... ******** dull. I wouldn't mind seeing halo take a nose dive cuz it sucks, but still I love L4D <3 Amusement, such as parks, tourism, and the like. This is a huge part of business for capitalism, of course, however, couldn't be a very important part of life, as well? I go to "disney" or "universal" like once every 4-5 years, but still. It attracts people in droves. Is this just because of capitalist's nature or is it because humans like to be amused? I personally think it's important. All these together, when reading through some of Marx and Engel's work, kind of rose a flag with me. I mean, while we can all survive without these things, they are pretty huge parts of our society. To say goodbye to all of this would usher in a societal depression, a revolution coupled with no source of income, and a chaotic almost anarchial enviornment for all involved. Opinions? I wasn't sure if this stuff would get covered under my other thread, so I posted this one. (Kinda devolved into Mods arguing with Seraph rather than explaining things to me >.>) I've thought about this a lot and what I personally feel about it is this, fashion when you boil it down is an art form. I fully support keeping the arts around and not taking funding from them. Although, I don't think we need to have it as widespread as we have it now. I like fashion shows as they're basically the fashion world's version of an art exhibit and a friend of mine and I were talking and thought, well what if we kept those around and even though couture and things like that are not practical for real wear, if you win the fashion show you can go on to paris and compete internationally. Who doesn't like a good competition? But instead of fashion shows being used to display the new styles in fashion, they're merely art competitions. I don't necessarily agree with the drab fashion that the SU had but I think we could tone it down a bit. We don't need people actually walking around looking like Lady Gaga. Entertainment, again an art form. It's exactly as you say, they won't be paid 7 trillion dollars to star in a movie, but we will continue to have movies and plays and television shows. Another thing we could do without though is 10000 channels via satellite. I think that humans like to be amused. I mean, with all the technology we have we don't have to work nearly as much as we did thousands, or even hundreds of years ago. That's why we have problems like obesity and this feeling of "boredom", these weren't issues before because everyone had things they needed to do. But even back in Roman times when work was plentiful they had plays and the Olympics and other forms of entertainment. Personally I love Cedar Point and I think it's a fantastic thing to keep around. I'm not entirely sure what all we'd do with them, but perhaps a reward would be a trip to these amusement parks? I mean, where else am I going to get fantastical elephant ears?? -jk- -goes to read the rest of the replies in thread-
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Dec 11, 2009 2:43 pm
Zed Further, I wonder if we, in a communist society, will talk about capitalism to the children, mentioning to them in a similar way what capitalists did to us about communism; mentioning how warmongering and truly evil they are. I wouldnt recommend it. It would make kids feel like cool rebels if they started acting like those society considers evil (ie capitalists). Its best not to demonize capitalism, rather just point out that it failed. Nokturn's History Lesson You know, Capitalism seemed cool and all back in the day, but in the end all it was was a few social elites controlling the deprived masses Just acknowledge that it looks cool, but it fails to serve the needs of the people.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Dec 11, 2009 4:30 pm
Zed Millar divineseraph In my system, all things would continue, more or less, as they are now. Clothing would not become only one or two styles, but would be created as the world saw need and want. Fashion would still exist, though the general sense of economic power that Abecrombie and such holds would be destroyed. Basically, the people, being in control, would produce what they wanted to be produced. As for entertainment, it's the same idea- It's service to society, and is a viable job. As such, there will always be those who have fun or interesting ideas they want to spread through the world. If they have the skill for it, they will do so and make television shows, act in movies, craft jokes and program video games. The only difference is that there is no monetary gain, especially at the expense of slave laborers in China or Indonesia.
In essence, in your system these become jobs like any other. All things are relatively maintained but in a different way and for a different reason, you the people rather than for yourself. I mean, all these things SEEM unnecessary, and perhaps will be done away with in a radically different society, however, they are massive contributions to what humans can do and enjoy on their freetime, which will be a big part of a communist society, liberty and free time for the worker, to give them an incentive to keep on working and to help them relax. Perhaps this is sufficeable with only a nice resort or a trip to a national park, but some people who don't like to travel may just want some R&R in their rooms/squad bays/flats so that they can kill eachother in First Person shooter combat.
Further, I wonder if we, in a communist society, will talk about capitalism to the children, mentioning to them in a similar way what capitalists did to us about communism; mentioning how warmongering and truly evil they are.
subjugated by the cruelty of the few. My idea is that all jobs are valuable, that's why they are jobs. A doctor can't very well operate if there is no janitor to keep the area sanitary. A car's engine means nothing if there is no frame, or no paint to shield it from rust, and then, a car is no use if there's no farmer to put food on your plate. As such, we should be equal, and free to take as we need- We produce in surplus, there is plenty to go around. We are held back by economy and a need for "profit" which goes only to empower the rich, who use their power to increase the amount produced, when we are just as capable of producing as much as we need anyway. But if we are stable now, where 90% of us are running on 20% of the economic power, there is more than enough room for not only entertainment and relative luxury, but more free time if we fill our necessary roles sooner with the increased workforce no longer needed in economics and business. Our jobs will be for ourselves, as well- We want access to the goods, and we will have them for doing our equal share of the work, be it what it will. It will be, however, stable. There will be no improving ones position, as there is no way to improve without an economy to gain power in. That is a drawback, but not a very considerable one when you see the stability you get from equality.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Dec 12, 2009 2:13 am
xion-tono I've thought about this a lot and what I personally feel about it is this, fashion when you boil it down is an art form. I fully support keeping the arts around and not taking funding from them. Although, I don't think we need to have it as widespread as we have it now. I like fashion shows as they're basically the fashion world's version of an art exhibit and a friend of mine and I were talking and thought, well what if we kept those around and even though couture and things like that are not practical for real wear, if you win the fashion show you can go on to paris and compete internationally. Who doesn't like a good competition? But instead of fashion shows being used to display the new styles in fashion, they're merely art competitions. I don't necessarily agree with the drab fashion that the SU had but I think we could tone it down a bit. We don't need people actually walking around looking like Lady Gaga.
It's fine to look like Lady Gaga, but the wardrobe to look like her should honestly be like 40-50 bucks, not like, 20k. Other than that, i agree
Quote: Entertainment, again an art form. It's exactly as you say, they won't be paid 7 trillion dollars to star in a movie, but we will continue to have movies and plays and television shows. Another thing we could do without though is 10000 channels via satellite. I find it fine to have Several varieties of television, and in a truly communist world, I'd pray to be watching Japanese Sopa Operas on public television in America, like, worldwide education and worldwide entertainment, not in a competitive way but an expressive way. Again, I mostly agree with you.
Quote: I think that humans like to be amused. Intellectual beings like to be humoured and amused. They like to be intrigued, captivated, and to learn. Entertainment helps with this.
Quote: I mean, with all the technology we have we don't have to work nearly as much as we did thousands, or even hundreds of years ago. That's why we have problems like obesity and this feeling of "boredom", these weren't issues before because everyone had things they needed to do. the problems with obesity we have I would say are not centered on less work, because honestly, we work just as much now as we ever did. You can't compare us to the egyptian slaves building pyramids, but for about the last 1,000 years, work has essentially been the same, maybe with a little more concern for the worker's health, but not much difference. It's centered more on depression, and the availability of malproduced fatty shitty foods, capitalists outbuy all other food sources, providing us with the most expensive, overall garbage contented food possible. I have no idea how they get away with charging 4 bucks for a bag of cheetoes or tortillas... I mean for ******** sake.
Quote: But even back in Roman times when work was plentiful they had plays and the Olympics and other forms of entertainment. Personally I love Cedar Point and I think it's a fantastic thing to keep around. I'm not entirely sure what all we'd do with them, but perhaps a reward would be a trip to these amusement parks? I mean, where else am I going to get fantastical elephant ears?? -jk- Amusement parks are sweet, I love them. I only want to go once a year or more, but you know, it is a really rewarding experience. I'd be more apt to going to wildlife parks and national reservations protecting, like, degrading rock chasms, spalunking, deep sea fishing, going to Niagra Falls or seeing the massive catfish at the Hoover Dam.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Dec 12, 2009 2:30 am
divineseraph My idea is that all jobs are valuable, that's why they are jobs. A doctor can't very well operate if there is no janitor to keep the area sanitary. A car's engine means nothing if there is no frame, or no paint to shield it from rust, and then, a car is no use if there's no farmer to put food on your plate. I take a militaristic view to this. Everyone in the hospital should have a medical training to do the doctor's work. There'll be no janitor, no nurse, no bedmaid, no soap pan lady, no cathider boy. There'll just be people, medically trained people, and they all pitch in taking daily routines in latrine duty, swabbing the deck, and overall on a somewhat concious level, participating daily in the overall upkeep of the hospital and it's patients. I think there should be a similar amount of workers in the hospital as you suggest, but they should rotate, constantly getting either a daily feel of their duties and reponsibilities elsewhere within the hospital or weekly. Possibly even monthly, with each division of the hospital directing a certain group of medical staff to supplies, maintenance, bedside people, on call phone operatives, and of course janitorial duty.
Quote: As such, we should be equal, and free to take as we need- We produce in surplus, there is plenty to go around. We are held back by economy and a need for "profit" which goes only to empower the rich, who use their power to increase the amount produced, when we are just as capable of producing as much as we need anyway. But if we are stable now, where 90% of us are running on 20% of the economic power, there is more than enough room for not only entertainment and relative luxury, but more free time if we fill our necessary roles sooner with the increased workforce no longer needed in economics and business. I don't think the central problem with capitalism is it's price or production per se. What do I mean by that? They produce more than should be produced, and more than can be consumed by the people, and are thus lost into losing shelf life and being tossed, or, a week from the expiration date/after, they lower the price so the rats of society, like me, who have no job, can finally afford to eat, albeit degraded slop. My concern is their inflation of the price of their commodities. The real world value of chips cannot honestly be 4 dollars. The labor, the materials, the grand production... meh... let's say 2 bucks is a fair estimate for a humongous bag of bargain brand tortilla chips at Publix/Walmart. But why do they charge 4 dollars? Do they need 2 dollars more profit per each unit commodity? Or are they effectively using this to force inflation to take affect, to rise the price of all commodities, to thus, effectively lower the wage of the worker?
On your points, I believe economics will be necessary. We'll have to run a form of pseudo socialist/capitalism I'd think, there'd be no classes, but there would be money, so that we can continue to trade with various countries, and in this end, we can continue to help promote our ideas to other nations via "good business" because if we don't at least try to look capitalist-ish Britain and the other imperialist nations would subjugate out rebellion but fast, unless, of course, we're lucky enough for the various nations of the world to rise up with a communist vanguard of their own, which, honestly, I think is a far off goal. Communism isn't as popular as we'd like to believe. What would you propose to handle these situations with the various nations of the world? How would we interact with them, or would we practice isolationism? If we'd do that, we'd be spending to much time in a stationary socialist position, and counter productive rebellions toward capitalist reformism would become alto common place.
Quote: Our jobs will be for ourselves, as well- We want access to the goods, and we will have them for doing our equal share of the work, be it what it will. It will be, however, stable. There will be no improving ones position, as there is no way to improve without an economy to gain power in. That is a drawback, but not a very considerable one when you see the stability you get from equality. Improving positions, so you say time and experience in a position, your vast skill and prowess to educate other members fresh into the field, and soon with age and veteranism, your ability to promote reforms and ideals for your field for the socialist state at large, wouldn't prompt you a higher way/compensation for your effort and support for the community as a whole? Or are you suggesting, that with time and effort, your goals and aims and accomplishments will be noted, and you may be compensated equally for the labor you've produced for society, and the contributions you've made, but your position would be name, honour, and respect only, not in actual lordship/domination over others in your field?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Dec 12, 2009 9:26 am
Zed Millar divineseraph My idea is that all jobs are valuable, that's why they are jobs. A doctor can't very well operate if there is no janitor to keep the area sanitary. A car's engine means nothing if there is no frame, or no paint to shield it from rust, and then, a car is no use if there's no farmer to put food on your plate. I take a militaristic view to this. Everyone in the hospital should have a medical training to do the doctor's work. There'll be no janitor, no nurse, no bedmaid, no soap pan lady, no cathider boy. There'll just be people, medically trained people, and they all pitch in taking daily routines in latrine duty, swabbing the deck, and overall on a somewhat concious level, participating daily in the overall upkeep of the hospital and it's patients. I think there should be a similar amount of workers in the hospital as you suggest, but they should rotate, constantly getting either a daily feel of their duties and reponsibilities elsewhere within the hospital or weekly. Possibly even monthly, with each division of the hospital directing a certain group of medical staff to supplies, maintenance, bedside people, on call phone operatives, and of course janitorial duty.
Quote: As such, we should be equal, and free to take as we need- We produce in surplus, there is plenty to go around. We are held back by economy and a need for "profit" which goes only to empower the rich, who use their power to increase the amount produced, when we are just as capable of producing as much as we need anyway. But if we are stable now, where 90% of us are running on 20% of the economic power, there is more than enough room for not only entertainment and relative luxury, but more free time if we fill our necessary roles sooner with the increased workforce no longer needed in economics and business. I don't think the central problem with capitalism is it's price or production per se. What do I mean by that? They produce more than should be produced, and more than can be consumed by the people, and are thus lost into losing shelf life and being tossed, or, a week from the expiration date/after, they lower the price so the rats of society, like me, who have no job, can finally afford to eat, albeit degraded slop. My concern is their inflation of the price of their commodities. The real world value of chips cannot honestly be 4 dollars. The labor, the materials, the grand production... meh... let's say 2 bucks is a fair estimate for a humongous bag of bargain brand tortilla chips at Publix/Walmart. But why do they charge 4 dollars? Do they need 2 dollars more profit per each unit commodity? Or are they effectively using this to force inflation to take affect, to rise the price of all commodities, to thus, effectively lower the wage of the worker?
On your points, I believe economics will be necessary. We'll have to run a form of pseudo socialist/capitalism I'd think, there'd be no classes, but there would be money, so that we can continue to trade with various countries, and in this end, we can continue to help promote our ideas to other nations via "good business" because if we don't at least try to look capitalist-ish Britain and the other imperialist nations would subjugate out rebellion but fast, unless, of course, we're lucky enough for the various nations of the world to rise up with a communist vanguard of their own, which, honestly, I think is a far off goal. Communism isn't as popular as we'd like to believe. What would you propose to handle these situations with the various nations of the world? How would we interact with them, or would we practice isolationism? If we'd do that, we'd be spending to much time in a stationary socialist position, and counter productive rebellions toward capitalist reformism would become alto common place.
Quote: Our jobs will be for ourselves, as well- We want access to the goods, and we will have them for doing our equal share of the work, be it what it will. It will be, however, stable. There will be no improving ones position, as there is no way to improve without an economy to gain power in. That is a drawback, but not a very considerable one when you see the stability you get from equality. Improving positions, so you say time and experience in a position, your vast skill and prowess to educate other members fresh into the field, and soon with age and veteranism, your ability to promote reforms and ideals for your field for the socialist state at large, wouldn't prompt you a higher way/compensation for your effort and support for the community as a whole? Or are you suggesting, that with time and effort, your goals and aims and accomplishments will be noted, and you may be compensated equally for the labor you've produced for society, and the contributions you've made, but your position would be name, honour, and respect only, not in actual lordship/domination over others in your field? While I agree that everyone should be able to do some of the work, specialization is necessary. It would be good, of course, for everyone to also be able to clean up the place, and also know a smattering of generic cover-all doctory. But I don't think it's a good idea to have everyone legally able to do brain or heart surgery. Pandering to other countries is not the best sign. Besides, America is very influential. If our markets suddenly collapsed, the rest of the world would go into panic. Briefly. Until they saw what we did after- namely, restoring the workforce and setting up equality. The international wealthy would hate it, propaganda would fly- But it may just start a revolution of the same sort, everywhere. The idea is to globalize this effort so we don't need economic trade with other countries. Hell, after a while, there may be no point to HAVING separate countries anymore, if he goal is a group of people trying to gain economic influence. But that's neither here nor there. I support isolationism, but at the same time, we should talk with other countries. And not to dignitaries. We should speak plainly and openly about how we set up our system of equality, how it's working for us (assuming it works, which it would be a long shot to fail, mathematically speaking) and the benefits of joining. If they want a part of this, they can join in. If not, they can play with their paper money in their own sad little corners while the global economy crumbles beneath them. Now that you mention it- You're right. I neglected to say that improving yourself can also refer to learning more and becoming more skilled in your field of interest. That would, obviously, be possible. The gains you would not see are the ones many capitalists are interested in, however- You would not gain more economic power or status, since all things would be free to take anyway, with the exception of limited things like jewelry, land, houses and means of production.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Dec 13, 2009 2:56 am
I can no longer be...
divineseraph While I agree that everyone should be able to do some of the work, specialization is necessary. It would be good, of course, for everyone to also be able to clean up the place, and also know a smattering of generic cover-all doctory. But I don't think it's a good idea to have everyone legally able to do brain or heart surgery. That wasn't what I was pressuring or trying to assert, there will still be specialists, but specialists none the less should have their fair-share of grunt work from the ground up, while as those who are not specialized in that specific field of heart surgery/medicine will be the more predominant grunt workers and over all assistant persons, being used in any way their teaching can take them, logically speaking.
Quote: Pandering to other countries is not the best sign. Besides, America is very influential. If our markets suddenly collapsed, the rest of the world would go into panic. Briefly. Until they saw what we did after- namely, restoring the workforce and setting up equality. The international wealthy would hate it, propaganda would fly- But it may just start a revolution of the same sort, everywhere. The idea is to globalize this effort so we don't need economic trade with other countries. Hell, after a while, there may be no point to HAVING separate countries anymore, if he goal is a group of people trying to gain economic influence. But that's neither here nor there. there will be a time when communication with America goes silent, and other imperialist nations will begin to wonder what happened, news will leak, and a socialist revolution on our soil will come to be common knowledge to them. At this point, they could ignore us (highly unlikely) or they'll assist our capitalist oppressors with their own military forces, and despite how organized we may be, we can't fight the American military aligned with the militaries of the imperialist societies, possible the entire world. We'll be crushed. It may set an example of the inhumanity for other nations to rise up against their oppressors, but I think such a crushing defeat as that would scare most people into hiding. WW3, civilians and workers alike rising up to be put down in cruelly slaughtered masses. We must somehow pander to their nations to maintain some illusory goal of capitalism, at least until we have a firm control of our nation as a whole, and are able to reprioritize weaponry and armies of the prior state to do our bidding anew.
Quote: I support isolationism, but at the same time, we should talk with other countries. And not to dignitaries. We should speak plainly and openly about how we set up our system of equality, how it's working for us (assuming it works, which it would be a long shot to fail, mathematically speaking) and the benefits of joining. If they want a part of this, they can join in. If not, they can play with their paper money in their own sad little corners while the global economy crumbles beneath them. I still feel that if we abandon all signs of modern government before other nations are able to accept what we are doing/have done, we will get conquered in short turn, and a puppet government will be set in place in our stead.
Quote: Now that you mention it- You're right. I neglected to say that improving yourself can also refer to learning more and becoming more skilled in your field of interest. That would, obviously, be possible. The gains you would not see are the ones many capitalists are interested in, however- You would not gain more economic power or status, since all things would be free to take anyway, with the exception of limited things like jewelry, land, houses and means of production. I'd think there'd be a difference of wage based on your experience, but due to your experience, your job would be more demanding rather than easier, unlike how capitalists like it. A cog in the American death machine....
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Dec 13, 2009 5:15 pm
Zed Millar I can no longer be...
divineseraph While I agree that everyone should be able to do some of the work, specialization is necessary. It would be good, of course, for everyone to also be able to clean up the place, and also know a smattering of generic cover-all doctory. But I don't think it's a good idea to have everyone legally able to do brain or heart surgery. That wasn't what I was pressuring or trying to assert, there will still be specialists, but specialists none the less should have their fair-share of grunt work from the ground up, while as those who are not specialized in that specific field of heart surgery/medicine will be the more predominant grunt workers and over all assistant persons, being used in any way their teaching can take them, logically speaking.
Quote: Pandering to other countries is not the best sign. Besides, America is very influential. If our markets suddenly collapsed, the rest of the world would go into panic. Briefly. Until they saw what we did after- namely, restoring the workforce and setting up equality. The international wealthy would hate it, propaganda would fly- But it may just start a revolution of the same sort, everywhere. The idea is to globalize this effort so we don't need economic trade with other countries. Hell, after a while, there may be no point to HAVING separate countries anymore, if he goal is a group of people trying to gain economic influence. But that's neither here nor there. there will be a time when communication with America goes silent, and other imperialist nations will begin to wonder what happened, news will leak, and a socialist revolution on our soil will come to be common knowledge to them. At this point, they could ignore us (highly unlikely) or they'll assist our capitalist oppressors with their own military forces, and despite how organized we may be, we can't fight the American military aligned with the militaries of the imperialist societies, possible the entire world. We'll be crushed. It may set an example of the inhumanity for other nations to rise up against their oppressors, but I think such a crushing defeat as that would scare most people into hiding. WW3, civilians and workers alike rising up to be put down in cruelly slaughtered masses. We must somehow pander to their nations to maintain some illusory goal of capitalism, at least until we have a firm control of our nation as a whole, and are able to reprioritize weaponry and armies of the prior state to do our bidding anew.
Quote: I support isolationism, but at the same time, we should talk with other countries. And not to dignitaries. We should speak plainly and openly about how we set up our system of equality, how it's working for us (assuming it works, which it would be a long shot to fail, mathematically speaking) and the benefits of joining. If they want a part of this, they can join in. If not, they can play with their paper money in their own sad little corners while the global economy crumbles beneath them. I still feel that if we abandon all signs of modern government before other nations are able to accept what we are doing/have done, we will get conquered in short turn, and a puppet government will be set in place in our stead.
Quote: Now that you mention it- You're right. I neglected to say that improving yourself can also refer to learning more and becoming more skilled in your field of interest. That would, obviously, be possible. The gains you would not see are the ones many capitalists are interested in, however- You would not gain more economic power or status, since all things would be free to take anyway, with the exception of limited things like jewelry, land, houses and means of production. I'd think there'd be a difference of wage based on your experience, but due to your experience, your job would be more demanding rather than easier, unlike how capitalists like it. A cog in the American death machine.... The big issue here I see is war caused by other countries, which may be a concern- However, firstly, it will be difficult to establish a new economy here if we just ignore it and refuse to work for them, assuming they attempt to "buy" our land or factories. If, however, they go by force, attempting to literally enslave us- Our weapons and military experience, if any, have not disappeared. A defensive war is one of the very few just wars, and one I would wholeheartedly support.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
