Is the fatal flaw in Communism its inheirent idealism...

Is the fatal flaw in Communism its inheirent idealism? Are Communists too distracted with their goal of achieving Utopia that they carelessly speed past necessities (such as a stable agricultural economy) to skip to the "cool stuff" like industry, military, monuments, etc? If so, could this argument be applied to other idealist ideologies, such as Fascism

Other urls found in this thread:

worldfuturefund.org/wffmaster/Reading/Germany/mussolini.htm
twitter.com/NSFWRedditVideo

the idea of a utopia is impossible in the present human condition. communism and fascism would work if we weren't human, but those that seek power are typically those that are corrupt or intend to abuse it. humans are fickle meat bags who constantly think "What if it were like this though????????" and this gives rise to idealism. nothing will ever be perfect unless we can change our consciousness.

I doubt it, since population growth under communist regimes was usually higher than their capitalist counter-parts.

In my understanding there's nothing wrong with communism societal structure or ignorance of human nature. The problem with communism is it's inherent inefficiency. To calculate prices for an economy you literally need to account for thousands of variables. Not only that the inherent inefficiency of a system that requires an organization to produce centralize than redistribute goods for and services at the price and amount to be deemed the most beneficial, instead of producing to maximize profit is to complicated. By the time you determine the right amount to be produced, market conditions have already changed and you have to do it all over again. The only way I can believe communism can work in this day and age is through the use of supercomputers to model the economy and the way it'll change through time

one of my friends is unironically a commie, when faced with the human nature argument, says that socialism serves as a bridge between capitalism and anarchocommunism through which humans are fundamentally changed and society is prepped for communism
how retarded is he

Humans are blank canvases, defined by their ideological environment.

Theory vs reality certainly is a problem, but that often becomes the "it wasn't real communism" excuse.

Human nature argument is a meme argument desu senpai

Yes and no. The Soviet factory did not suffer from productive inefficiency, when they had the raw materials to work with they worked like motherfuckers. However, soviet distribution of raw materials to factories really as a clusterfuck, goods needed in factories would sit in storage for years at a time before gosplan could rubber stamp their transfer. Anything produced regionally would get there speedily, since it was easy enough for managers to justify to transit officials, but everything else went up quite a few superfluous levels.
A regular ol' corporation can deal with this easily: downsize staff and give more authority to remaining middle management, rather than distributing the same task to 50 or so layabouts. However, with the soviet union basic economic problems always involved far more delicate political problems.

Any ideology that ignores humanity's natural tendencies lacks wisdom and is likely to cause harm. In that sense fascism is better than communism in that at least the fascists recognise that hierarchies exist and that we're not all equal but ultimately communism fails because the ideas it are fundamentally wrong; from each according to his ability, to each according to his need is an impossible dream and when you think of just how much wealthier the western lefties are compared to the average person and how little they're willing to share their wealth with such people it just shows you why it'll never work. People need to develop what Thomas sowell refers to as "human capital", not blame "the system" for inequality when inequality is quite obviously the norm and always has been (and will be)

No it isn't, people are constrained to some extent by their abilities, which to some degree must necessarily be controlled by their genes. While there's a lot of variation in human behaviour there's a lot of continuity and you can't expect people of a low IQ to do things that people of a high IQ can, plus you'll never get farmers (or anyone else) to work for the love of their fellow man, people work for their own self-interests and no amount of claiming that everything is a social construct and that we are entirely malleable is going to change that

>human nature

Q for commies: What is the extent of human nature?

the imperative to eat and drink, to fuck, to pursue self interest within the group but collective interest to its outside (such as defense against predators). Have I missed anything?

>Communism
>Idealism
It's a materialist idealogy you brainlet, Marx specifically made his idealogy in opposition to idealism. Your quote (by Evola, famous Idealist and Traditionalist) even says as much

The word you are looking for is either quixotic or utopian.

Communism fails to in respect to human nature but really its economics. socialism relies on people not being selfish, impossible, whereas capitalism uses selfishness in order to innovate. In capitalism if you are selfish and want anything, first you need to produce something for someone else to get the goodies. In communism, profit is theft, so in USSR if you buy a plate for one ruble and sell for two, you get arrested. In order to enforce you need to violate basic premises that are innate to humans. profit is the opposite of theft, yet under communism this needs to be corrected

why not simply plunder for goods

>posts a quote that attacks communism because of its materialist worldview
>Is the fatal flaw in Communism its inheirent idealism?
Fuck this place

No, the fatal flaw in communism is misunderstanding class relationships. The lower classes, as classes, are essentially cuckolds. They might say they want to be in charge, or to end class systems entirely, but that's not really true. The upper classes, the ones who actually are in charge, are there because the lower classes desire an oppressor, and if one doesn't show up quickly enough, they'll make one.

...

The fatal flaw of communism is honestly pretty simple. It supposes there are only two kinds of people in the world, proletariat and boursgeoisie. Which results in a philosophy which oversimplifies society to the degree it cannot be valid. Plus, Marx vastly overestimated the importance of class in social life

Yes, and what was that thought articulated by? A middle class man. Who predominantly supports and drives for communism and/or marxism? Middle class people, usually in academia. It's not a lower class movement at all, it's one that attempts to harness the lower classes power while simultaneously completely misunderstanding what they actually want, and then whine about "false consciousness" when their predictions are wrong again.

>could this argument be applied to other idealist ideologies, such as Fascism
>Fascism is therefore opposed to all individualistic abstractions based on eighteenth century materialism; and it is opposed to all Jacobinistic utopias and innovations. It does not believe in the possibility of "happiness" on earth as conceived by the economistic literature of the XVIIIth century, and it therefore rejects the theological notion that at some future time the human family will secure a final settlement of all its difficulties. This notion runs counter to experience which teaches that life is in continual flux and in process of evolution. In politics Fascism aims at realism; in practice it desires to deal only with those problems which are the spontaneous product of historic conditions and which find or suggest their own solutions (9). Only by entering in to the process of reality and taking possession of the forces at work within it, can man act on man and on nature (10). - the doctrine of fascism

>the doctrine of fascism

Do you have a link of that book user?

Marx is in no position to speak for the proletariat since he himself is completely outside that class of people. He was within the 1% in his day, the most elite class of people who did not have to work for a living.

also, communism fails because it is incapable of realizing that material wealth is only a small abstraction of the exercise of power. In addition, communists do not seek to destroy the problem of materialism at the source; instead, they merely seek to replace the hedonistic desires of the rich with the hedonistic desires of the poor. This leads to incurable corruption and immorality, as it is merely people seeking for more power rather than fixing the problems of society.

here
worldfuturefund.org/wffmaster/Reading/Germany/mussolini.htm

Thanks user

Pretty retarded
Human nature can't be changed

>People want to be part of some utopian collectivization
People just want to be left alone you little sperg
>OVERTHROW THE BOURGEOISIE WE MUST TAKE THE MEANS OF PRODUCTION
>AAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
is not what normal people think about 24/7

YES