• Bobby Bandwidth@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      My point is that even in community based organizations you still have human administrators who have to make decisions for the community which ultimately leads to corruption of the system. That’s what my original argument was.

      Edit: will go ahead and add that the same thing happens in capitalism however the huge difference is that there any many capital owners to distribute resources (ie companies, corporations, the state) VS in communism it is only the state that distributes the resources.

      • Jentu@lemmy.film
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        How does the state distribute resources if the state doesn’t exist under communism? I think you might be misunderstanding the basics of communism.

        • Bobby Bandwidth@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Maybe so. But, in reality every communist country has a state. I get that could be the “transitory” stage between capitalism and pure communism, or a tainted form of communism altogether. Cool. Let’s assume we get past that and are able to get to that idealized version of communism. Let’s have a thought experiment. Let me preface by saying I am not trying to have a gotcha moment, but honestly think this through out loud. In pure communism, who manages the water utilities? Like, who makes sure that water is delivered to the people and that it is safe to drink?

          • Jentu@lemmy.film
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            I don’t really think you need a state to have administrative powers over large things like food production, power, and other utilities. Ideally the communities would be fully self sufficient in power, food, water, housing, etc. Big power plants that supply power to a massive amount of people would be difficult to set up, but is still possible with enough community effort.

            The biggest threat to communism and socialism is that capitalist countries will starve them out of international trade (or do more active things to try to prevent a successful communist movement) because they won’t play ball. It would be extremely easy for a capitalist team to destroy a few small crops and kill any chance of self sufficiency- meaning they’d have to depend on trade with those capitalist countries.

            • Bobby Bandwidth@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              Thanks for the thoughtful response. I kind of see what you’re saying, but on the other hand it seems like there is a big ? between revolution and pure communism. Like here’s a hyperbolic meme-y way to look at basically what communism is proposing: step 1- revolution with whatever means necessary, dissolve the state and all the things that people rely on 2- ??? 3- find ourselves in a pure communism society that functions and is a place that people want to live. That’s going to be a tough sell for most the worlds population.

              And I agree that capitalist countries will do starve our communist countries. But I think that leads to another point, communism is weak when it comes to dealing with threat actors or disasters.

              And I would like to push back on your idea that communities that are fully self sufficient wouldn’t be in a way a form of state themselves. Sure it’s more local, but you still have power concentrating within leaders of a community. If the water stops working, who’s going to fix it? There needs to be a system of accountability and specialists. These specialists will need to have resources to survive. These resources will he provided by the community. And so. You can see how this leads to the development of a state wether you call it local government or a “community”