It's a fantasy world where the dragons are dyed in the wool Communists

>It's a fantasy world where the dragons are dyed in the wool Communists

What would this world be like?

If this is fantasy world with dragons and magic, then communism might actually work there.

There would be multiple communist empires run by powerful dragons who would also be a foundational support for the empire? You can point to any communist dictator you know: a dragon is way, WAY better at enforcing societal order from the top down.

So your ancap adventurers could run around assassinating dragons and stealing their wealth and simultaneously destabilizing their communist empires, I guess.

Well, first of all, you'd have to have a whole bunch of dragons living in close proximity to eachother. A big departure from their traditional depictions.

Actual communism or "state capitalism" communism?

I feel like if there were giant terror lizards who stole from the rich and gave to the poor, it would frankly be hard for capitalism to compete.

Also just on a rough guess, like 90% of the replies to this question will assume that "Communism" means "Stalin's USSR" as opposed to something like the Paris Commune.

Either way, I'm going to post the Communist Paladin that someone on Reddit made.

>the dragons are the ones saving people from greedy overlords
mite b cool

Also, since the Soviet's "socialism" was all about rapid industrialization, industrial dragons would certainly be interesting.

Communism is supposed to be bottom up, not top down.

What world, what dragons.

I suppose Ravnica technically had industrial dragons, what with Niv-Mizzet ostensibly being in charge of the water and power systems.

They say that they want to redistribute the wealth (and maybe they really do) but can't resist hoarding it for themselves, so a lot like any real-world communist nation.

>like 90% of the replies to this question will assume that "Communism" means "Stalin's USSR" as opposed to something like the Paris Commune.

Can you blame them?

The Paris Commune lasted a few months. Soviet Russia lasted over half a century.

Depending on the size and nature of the dragons, they could work with the humans of their society, providing the heat and fire that would normally need to be produced by coal. Of course, that gets into a situation where the dragons are suddenly an exploited class, reliant on humans to feed them while the humans benefit greatly from their labour.

Communist nations don't hoard wealth, they waste it through corruption, inefficiency and incompetence. I don't think there'd be much corruption, inefficiency or incompetence if an ancient fire-breathing revolutionary monster was in charge.

>Turn the Bourgeois

Mein siden

What if the powerful dragon ruling-class is corrupt though?

Yeah, but the Soviet Union was also not communist. In fact, Lenin redefined a synonym for Communism to describe what he felt needed to be done to eventually pave the way for Communism.
Honestly the USSR is the worst thing to happen to Communism. Marxism-Leninism being the picture in everyone's mind of what Communism "is" is just terrible. Whether it's the people who think 400 gorillion people were killed by Stalin personally, or the people who think that Stalin was a pure leader who did nothing wrong and literally all criticism of him is CIA propaganda, even if it comes from the far left.

At least the Paris Commune was close. Sure, they still had wages and shit, and they fucked up in letting the bourgeoisie come and go (and take out loans from the bank to then kill the Communards with), but damn, at least they tried.

Anyway the biggest stumbling block for real world Marxist-Leninist countries is that actual communism isn't viable in a world where the United States exists, and the United States controls all the technology and guns. In a fantasy world it's easier to abolish work and have the workers control the means of production because the means of production can be magical.

Elves are generally already communist, especially when they don't have rulers. Because their magic allows them to grow food without devoting 8 to 16 hours and everyone has a home, so no one is forced to contribute because everyone's willing contributions are already more than enough to maintain society.

>Communist nations don't hoard wealth, they waste it through corruption, inefficiency and incompetence.
You're thinking of capitalism.

O look a lefty/pol/ thread. Much rarer but just as cancerous.

>You're thinking of capitalism.

Communism tends to obscure market signals through central planning. This, in turn, leads to stagnation among other bad things. Order has an emergent quality which Communist reason ignores.

Not particularly different from normal dragons, only with more people starving.

You remember Animal Farm? Like that, only instead of a farm run by pigs, it's a fantasy kingdom run by dragons.

>Sar the dragon decided to start implement a socialist transformation of the nation by evacuating the cities and moving the population to the countryside.

What could go wrong?

If communism lead to stagnation, the Soviets wouldn't have gotten to space first, and the CNT/FAI wouldn't have had an expansion of industrialization. Also, we have stagnation in capitalist countries (especially as 90% of jobs since 2005 are freelance or part time), and most of the innovation in capitalism is done in the private sector, using government funding. That's not Communism, but it's about as communist as the USSR, so...
(I feel like it's obvious that I'm an anarchist, so Stalin was too conservative for me)

Also, "order" is just another word for the application of state violence. It's not an emergent quality, it's enforced.
Markets are bad, and account for human needs about as well as central planning (which is to say, not very)

Communism, especially the Communism of Marx, Engels, Lenin, Stalin, etc (and Marx was not the founder of Communism), was focused on the industrial revolution and the rapid creation of labour saving devices and the ability to free people from working long hours only to have no control over the things they produced. Even if you know of communism only through the USSR, the entire point of their centralized government was to forcibly industrialize the previously feudal mode of production so that they could go through the motions as Marx felt would happen for Europe when he was writing decades prior.

"Moving to the countryside" isn't communism, it's starting a cult.
Which, I mean, is in character for dragons, admittedly. Just because the hippies living together is called a commune doesn't mean it's communism.
(I mean, it can be, but I have no idea why that's where your mind would go)

>"Moving to the countryside" isn't communism, it's starting a cult.

I think the idea in Cambodia was to rapidly industrialize agriculture--thus forcing everyone into the fields. A parallel could be drawn with Maoist China and their failed attempt to get everyone to have a metal forge in his back yard.

>communism in a pre industrial society

> A mass murdering monster perched atop a giant pile of stolen wealth

Now imagine if this person was a dragon!

>implying Marx wasn't heavily influenced by the Epicurean communes of the Hellenistic period and Roman empire

>Communism before the industrial revolution

Is such a thing possible?

>In a fantasy world it's easier to abolish work and have the workers control the means of production because the means of production can be magical.
I strongly disagree.

"The workers shall control the means of production" is a reaction to the existence of factories, infrastructure that society allows to be controlled by an elite few rather than held collectively for the common good. Magic MIGHT work like that in some very rare fantasy settings, but not in ones with dragons.

Magic doesn't normally work on infrastructure in most fantasy settings. Dragons and wizards and such are individually powerful in a way that is inherent to them, based on their knowledge or inherent mystical nature. Communism in that sort of setting would be based on enslaving the inherently great and fantastic people in the service of the masses who cannot achieve greatness for themselves. It'd be a textbook example of Communism... if the textbook was Atlas Shrugged.

I can't actually think of any fantasy setting with the sort of infrastructure-based magic that makes Communism a meaningful concept that isn't a flat-out steampunk-ish parody of the industrial revolution. Anyone got an example?

Ah, Mao, a communist so dumb that he undid any good he accomplished just because he wasn't in charge anymore. And now his country is a hypercapitalist shithole that's poised to take the reigns when America shoots itself in the foot and bleeds out.

Honestly there need to be more settings where magic is used to create an industrial revolution. Added bonus is that Magic is mostly clean energy, as opposed to the choking smog of the historical Industrial revolution, or the way that we blow the shit out of mountains and poison the rivers now.

I know I already used this line, but "you're thinking of capitalism".
I mean, hell, that's just Shadowrun!

There's plenty of settings where magic is infrastructural. Anything with enchantments, for instance. Or ambient magic. A garden that grows food twice as fast and twice as big.

I'm also not sure how you get Atlas Shrugged out of this. I mean, yeah, like I said above, , a society reliant on the extreme magical efforts of a few might end up with those people being the proletariat, but I'm not sure how that's Atlas Shrugged. Also I would say it'd be impossible to keep down a proletariat made of magical giant lizards, but, I mean, there's already more workers than bosses and yet somehow the workers haven't killed their bosses and fairly distributed the fruits of societal labour yet.

But anyway, there's plenty of "infrastructural magic". Like I said, a lot of elf societies seem to rely on gardens and fruit trees that just have bountiful harvests without actually needing to devote lots of time to it. Trees grow into the shape of homes.

Hell, while they're pre-industrial, aren't the Hobbits kind of communist? They share their food, they don't seem to care about money, and they spend their days gardening and getting fat. Though I don't know how much is devoted to how they grow so much when all the hobbits seem fat and lazy and happy.
I wonder if there's a bunch of exploited hobbit immigrants who are made to spend hours each day picking food.

>gardens and fruit trees that just have bountiful harvests without actually needing to devote lots of time to it.

Good point. A lot of this sort of magical infrastructure doesn't need maintenance, it just continues to provide a benefit over time without input. A communist dragon with the ability to create lasting magical workings would just fly around creating them and occasionally set people on fire when they try to take control of the magical tree to sell the apples.

>the Hobbits kind of communist?
Not so convinced about this one. Sam is Frodo's gardener and friend. You could interpret him as a devoted manservant, or as an equal who happens to like gardening, but either way Frodo never seems to do anything other than have sole use of the biggest house.

That's fair, I haven't read Tolkien, I just know a lot of what I see is hobbits dancing around being fat and having two or three breakfasts.
Maybe the ones we follow are just the bourgeoisie ones.

>Because [the elves'] magic allows them to grow food without devoting 8 to 16 hours [a day] and everyone has a home, so no one is forced to contribute because everyone's willing contributions are already more than enough to maintain society.
Shouldn't that make them an ideal foundation for a capitalist society instead? The only reason they'd need to work is for luxury goods, so work would always be done voluntarily and paid for fairly by the free market.

Dragons are probably the last species to even consider any sort of altruistic economic system. The dragon would be "communist" only because he or she has the ability to give humans false hope that they could ever dream to seize the means of production. Humans are already nepotistic, tribalist, violent and callus apes that can control very little of their savage instincts with their weak logical abilities. A dragon is just that but replace the first two with utter selfishness. Dragons would make communism a complete fantasy, ironically.
Not quite sure how achievable actual communism is in real life, but dragons would ensure that it would never happen unless every other human had weeaboo powers.

Wait, what is Sam even paid in? Do the hobbits ever talk about currency or anything? Does Sam live with Frodo?

I don't think anyone has ever actually sat down and tallied up the waste produced by decentralized economies though.

>only watched the movies

> Does Sam live with Frodo?

Yes, they share the house Frodo inherited from his uncle. Sam's wife later came to live with them and so did the couple's children. Frodo eventually handed the house to him for good when he packed up and left with the Elves.

>waste produced by decentralized economies

It is waste with a purpose when selection mechanisms are at play though. Inefficiencies weed themselves out.

i always get a good giggle out of people who mistake Frodo and Sam's master/servant dynamic for homoerotic bullshit

>communism in a pre-industrial society that can harness actual unlimited free energy, making control over work completely irrelevant to their economy

Sheesh. Who let the kid from PoliSci 101 in?

"supposed"

You're really going balls deep into the word Fantasy aren't you

It's what they say, but there's actually no mechanism in the market to make sure that any lessons that are learned from that failed enterprises get transmissioned and the overall efficiency of the market is improved.

In fact, right now failure gets rewared the same way as success as soon as enough cash is involved and improving processes to reduce waste is being punished as re-organize production to externalize waste losses is much cheaper.

>Frodo never seems to do anything other than have sole use of the biggest house.
I seem to recall Frodo being from a wealthy and respected family, essentially a noble.

>What would this world be like?
Filled with red dragons.

Early Marx I think said it wasn't possible, that a state had to advance through rapid industrialization and capitalism before communism, but I think he changed his view later in life, and Kant and Trotsky probably took the view further.

They kind of are. The rest of The Shire doesn't seem to have it so bad, but all of the big-name hobbits in the series except for Sam are idle landed gentry.

Not Kant, Engels, sorry.

>t's what they say, but there's actually no mechanism in the market to make sure that any lessons that are learned from that failed enterprises get transmissioned and the overall efficiency of the market is improved.

Sure there is. It's called learning from the mistakes of others and humans of sufficient intelligence have been doing it for as long as there have been humans.

>In fact, right now failure gets rewared the same way as success

And that's entirely due to government interference. Governments shouldn't be in the business of picking winners and losers.

His share in the dragon's hoard made Bilbo independantly rich, I gather.

>i always get a good giggle out of people who mistake Frodo and Sam's master/servant dynamic for homoerotic bullshit

That's because they've never seen an actual master/servant dynamic and have seen plenty of faggots. You filter what you see through the lens of what you know.

Tolkien's 30s, 40s, and 50s readers either knew the Victorian & Edwardian master/servant dynamic first hand or from their immediate elders. Tolkien's 70s, 90's and 10s readers lack that experience but do have personal experience with faggots. It's only natural that they see the relationship in a way which matches their experience. Thus Frodo and Sam are pillow biting, butt bandits.

Going by Jackson's casting, I'd say Frodo is the bottom.

This Dragons as prominent party leaders. Gotta amass wealth, in order to redistribute it.

>Sure there is. It's called learning from the mistakes of others and humans of sufficient intelligence have been doing it for as long as there have been humans.

Doesn't really work if the person that made the mistake's removed and the experience isn't passed on in any way.

>And that's entirely due to government interference.

The government isn't paying management billions in golden parachutes, user. It's also not forcing companies into speculation.

Like Soviet Russia, but even more draconian.

So instead of hoarding gold, they seize the means of production?

This actually raises an interesting point: what happens when the laborious class i.e. Proletariat are more capable than the Bourgeoisie? It's hard to say the Proletariat are oppressed when they could overpower their economic superiors at any time, which means that if the higher classes do exist they would have to because the lower wills it. But are they even the higher classes if they only exist because the workers allow them to? Would these super-workers not be the highest class by virtue of their abilities?

>There's plenty of settings where magic is infrastructural.
Reminds me of the book where they had a dragon chained up in the city center, with all the towns sewage running there.

The dragon was in a pit, and unless it burned all the effuse it would drown.

Deception is a thing. Convince the proletariat to be wagecucks and to support politicians who are against their interests. It happens in democracy all the time. It happens in history all the time. People are doomed to be ruled by those who have the most confidence and charisma, not those who have the most competence and benevolence.

>what happens when the laborious class i.e. Proletariat are more capable than the Bourgeoisie?

Capable members of the proletariat become members of the bourgeoisie.

I see the dragons polymorphing into humans and slaying the kings and clergy of kingdoms, ending the system of feudalism.

They them protect the small villages(communes) from any invaders.

FPBP

>they've never seen an actual master/servant dynamic and have seen plenty of faggots

This makes me sad. So very sad.

>If communism lead to stagnation, the Soviets wouldn't have gotten to space first
Gues fucking what: mass hunger riots in the SU happened literally at the same time they went into space.

That's actually some pretty good story material right there.

It wasn't exactly uncommon for there to be... homoerotic subtexts in Victorian literature. Like the master/servant dynamic was occasionally used as rational or a way to hide it from censors. Oscar Wilde kind of got in trouble for being just a little to blatant about things.

Tolkien probably didn't mean for it to come off as homosexual in any sense, but it's not unreasonable to assume the writers of books he read when young were all writing about completely platonic master/servant relationships.

The working class
Can kiss my ass
I've got the foreman's job at last

>homoerotic subtexts

This is code for fags seeing fag stuff everywhere they look. Hammer/Nail

>pillow biting, butt bandits

Merry and Pippin, though. Those two are clearly married, and damn the appendices.

Yeah people seem forget in all the heated debates of "My team, fuck you" debates that the people of the different economic situations are still the same people, they might buy different quality bread but they still eat it.

Honestly communist china is such a great example of this, farmers becoming millionaires and so becoming hellbent on keeping anyone else from becoming a millionaire.

you can come out of the closet, billy.

>homoerotic subtexts

Hammers only see nails.

Everything is about fags when you're a fag. Everything is about niggers when you're a nigger. Everything is about cunts when you're a cunt. Ditto spics, gooks, slopes, crackers, etc., etc., etc., etc.

Hammers only see nails.

I think you're just looking to get nailed.

Dragons, left weak and emaciated by their retarded economic philosophy, are harvested for their wool.

Because the last thing that anyone would associate with homosexuality with is upper class England.

As a black man, I do think that the works of the Bronte sisters are fundamentally about The Struggle, though.

Stop shilling for an ideology that has repeatedly failed to be properly implemented and is based on the world as it existed a century and a half ago.

Oh boy, I can't wait for all the incredibly informed opinions about competing economic models from Veeky Forums

>post a short Response to someone bad mouthing Julius Evola and correcting the poster on his minsunderstanding of Evola's ideology
>banned for 2 weeks for offtopic discussion

>post half a manifesto on communism
>completely unaffected despite its lack of relation to anything that could be considered to be a traditional game

I'd play/allow it.

>people living in a state of nature
>dragons consume living creatures and thus would be dominate
>no industrialism so how would the dictorship of the prolls even work?

It appears the communists miscalculated: the enemy is not necessarily the upper class itself, but people who abuse power regardless of their class.

good shit user

no if i'm not mistaken the orthodox writers planned this.
the dictatorship of the prolls would exist until the people would shake it off and live in communes

White Dragons are Marxist-Leninists
Black Dragons are Trotskyists
Green Dragons are Maoist Third-Worldists
Blue Dragons are Stalinists
Red Dragons are Hoxhaists

Though, technically, they're all Red Dragons, aren't they?

>power just gives itself away freely...
Just like the fascists who strive for ancomoletel totalitarian system until unity and order is created then they live as ANCAPs.

>fascists
>anarcho capatilism
those things would be mutually exclusive.
is it a mcdeath squad thing?
also how are thing going to run on time if all the roads are gone?

Fascists make the trains run on time. And lolbertarians love trains.

>the Soviet Union was also not communist

>If communism lead to stagnation, the Soviets wouldn't have gotten to space first, and the CNT/FAI wouldn't have had an expansion of industrialization

Jesus fuck, your ideology is so inconsistent that you can't even keep your excuses for its failures straight.

BUT THERE ARE NO TRACKS.
OR ROADS?

also shouldn't Rand's theories be completely rejected by a system that focuses on a collective embodied by the rule of the state

>>the Soviet Union was also not communist
it technically wouldn't be but it was consistent with their belief system.
>believing the cnt could achieve anything, aside from sinking the popular front.
heh

Libritarians can be alright but ancaps are insufferable
most ancaps end up being white dudes who hate niggers and like weed

>most ancaps end up being white dudes who hate niggers and like weed
But that just means they're racist not fascist.
the two are not the same

kek
Underrated.

fascist hasn't meant literal fascist in about 70 years, in the states at least

Ironically, Mussolini thought that people of other races were okay but was a cultural supremacist.

>70 years, in the states at least
from orwell, since it came out and in europe too

That would require fascism to be consistent in the first place. Ultimately fascism is just the worship of, and the grasping for, sheer naked power, cloaking itself in whatever words and terminologies are convenient at the moment.

so the mods have legitimately given up on this board