quick reminder

No, you see, you have to upvote it because communism is great

I'm about to leave Lemmy too because the main thing that shows up is /c/memes and half the time the posts aren't memes and when they are they're just reposts from 10 years ago.

Infographics have always been memes. They're inherently meant to be memetic in nature. What they intend to do is literally what the word "meme" means.

I'll never understand how owning guns is normalized.

I prefer bikes

You could have a personal garden, but to have a farm you'd have to obtain a lot of land. Then you'd have to make the land productive with either large and resource hungry machinery i.e. capital or you'd have to obtain and exploit the labor of farm workers to work by hand.

I don't think most communists would have a problem with people trading crops that they grow themselves. The problem comes in when someone hires employees to grow more crops for them, starts collecting profits, and grows the farm even bigger. All under the expectation that they own everything that their employees worked for. Cause that's literally capitalism on a small scale.

Of course it needs to be possible for multiple people to come together and start growing crops, but only as long as no single person can take over the entire operation. Leaders would be elected, and be given a somewhat higher salary to reflect the additional responsibility.

That's a paddlin'

That requires owning land yourself, which strictly speaking isn't a thing in communism.

Get some LEGOs

you going to manage a 10 acre farm by yourself and eat everything?

you can grow a few vegetables in a garden, but as long as people help you do it, it's not really personal property

"Today, five countries exist that can be said to be communist: China, Russia"

Tell me you have no idea what you are talking about without directly telling me you have no idea what you are talking about. In what way can today's Russia "be said to be communist", and how does its current, very explicitly anti-communist government, contribute to the point you are making?

Stock market? The thing where you buy tiny fractional ownership of of a company, too small to influence it, then try to sell that legal construct for a little more to someone else later? Why would you need that at all?

The USSR famously took ownership of Tetris away from its creator.

He developed the game on company time. If he'd lived in a capitalist country, the government wouldn't have taken control of Tetris, but the company would have. Every software company contract I've ever heard of has a clause that says the company owns any code you produce while working there.

Those websites are highly capitalistic and never brought any innovation, all technologies related to the internet were researched by public money.

Look into patent trolls. Patents are bad, publicly funded research is always better, but it doesn't prevent people from spending money to do research, but it doesn't entitle them for the profits.

I'm not advocating FOR communism, I'm just trying to dispel myths.

Socialism is soluble with capitalism.

No you can't own a platform like youtube or facebook, but you could make content on it, intellectul propriety is not a thing as you don't have to produce art just to get a monetary return, but just because you enjoy doing so, there's no need of a stock market in an ideal communist world because everyone gets what they need based on what they can provide, but if it's just a country i guess it's the government who takes care of it.

Regarding those 5 countries i'm not sure of every one of them, but talking about China as you said it's not a communist country but it is not a dictatorship of the proletarian either, as it's not the proletarian class nor their democratically elected representatives who govern the country.

In the end i'll add that greed is not more "human nature" that wishing to kill someone annoying.

If it makes money (or some equivalent) then you can't own it. Parents aren't necessarily, if you're supported so that you can invent for the betterment of society or for fun.

Dictatorship of the proletariat is supposed to be a temporary phase, but it is a fundamental weak point in the transition to communism that I think cannot be overcome, because once people get that power, they won't be able to give it up (or they'll be removed by people who don't want to give it up).

So I consider communism sort of an unattainable ideal that we should strive towards rather than actually considering implementing irl.

Under communism, how does the stock market work? I’m not a big fan of it, but it’s pretty hard to imagine getting rid of it now that the global economy is pretty much dependent on it.

Under capitalism, how would fiefs work? I'm not a big fan of it, but it's pretty hard to imagine getting rid of it now that our grain reserves are pretty much dependent on it.

This. Someone who knows how to use their brain.

There is no Paradise. There is no solution. Reality will always be messy and every solution will always end up creating its own problems. True for capitalism, socialism, or any other social order.

Which is not to say we should not always attempt to improve the world.

No you wouldn't be able to own Facebook or Youtube as its private not personal property.

Patents could either not exist or be owned collectively depending on the flavour of your ideology.

There would not be a stock market as that would be private ownership even though most stocks on stock exhanges do nothing even if you own all of them.

think communism is what we should be striving for.

Simple - it's the ideal. Will we ever get there? Possibly not. Is it even desirable? Debatable. But it's always better to know where to go and not know how to get there than having the option of going anywhere and not knowing where to go.

My country used to have communism. Niche shops like this barely ever started as small businesses and instead usually started out as specialized departments of large all-encompassing state corporations. Instead of there being a company that specialized in making furniture, the furniture would be made by the logging company. The company that ran a chemical plant would directly sell shampoos, paints, toothpaste, fertillizer, etc. It cut out middle men but the products were usually crap quality because it couldn't focus on each product individually. This stifled progress. My dad wanted to learn programming (this was the late 80s) but because the government was too oldschool to open a computer science degree programme, the only way to get near a computer was to go to a university that specialized in mining and take a programme in mining machine automation.

Well if the comminity really wanted a unicycle repair shop everyone chips in to build the shop, and gets the equipment or the state directly decides you need a unicycle repair shop.

Although you and a few of your buddies could decide to make a unicycle repair co-operative. You don't have enough money so. You go to the credit union to get extra starting funds, you then use these funds to contract out the building of the shop as you are unicycle repairers by trade. You then get all the equipment and run it as a co-operative.

There are many ways to run a co-operative and in the begining you and your friends are probably going to split the profits directly using your equal shares to recieve divedends. If it takes off and you start needing to hire people, you may start having salary bands instead so everyone will always make X amount of money working with you depending on their position, but will also make a variable amount from dividends depending on the unicycle repair excess profits and might also have a say in how things are run.

This is a more general left-wing idea which can happen in many left-wing, socialist, and communist societies, rather than just communist.

Like, if a community really wanted a unicycle repair shop, how would that get started?

Pretty much the same way a community would start a co-op right now.

Would that be up to a local government (or some other governing body)?

Public participation, of course. The community would form councils, where people would collectively decide whether this is a good idea or not. That literally what the word soviet means - councils of people making decisions (which is why the Bolsheviks hijacked them and turned the word into a cruel joke).

How do new means of production come to be?

Production lines/robots, how else?

Communism meant that there were equal people and some more equal than others. If you have convinced the right people they got funds to do things. But it is highly burocratic and slow unless instructions come from above. Communism also meant that everyone capable of working must work so they made up many-many bullshit jobs where people just spend time.

The line? When you start selling things to people en mass. One or two custom things you sell occasionally? Workshop. Start setting up production lines and hiring people? Now it's for the people

Honest question, at what point does a workshop transition from ownable to not

If you also live in it, it becomes personal property - ie, ownable by you personally.

or in the outdoors of town among large factories?

I mean, that pretty much means it already is factory-like and no, it doesn't become ownable (unless you also live in it). If it involves other people's labor, then all the grey areas vanishes - it becomes communal.

The picture above is not completely accurate - a community might decide, for instance, that all firearms must be communally owned - ie, as in a communal arsenal (essentially a library for guns) - which, let's face it, would probably be necessary anywhere in the US (because it has more guns than people - and far less sense).

Yes. What this is saying is large industries that are meant to feed people or provide commodities cannot belong to just one person. We are seeing the effects of monopolization right now in our time.

(but your chains)

Workers owning the means of production is socialism yes.

Socialism is the stage previous to communism when there's a State in which the proletariat is in power, the purpose of the State is to use its repressive forces by one class over the other to oppress them and keep them in place, capitalism (also called the dictatorship of the bourgeoisie) has the bourgeois as its ruling class and oppresses the proletariat, socialism (also called the dictatorship of the proletariat) utilizes the State to oppress the bourgeoisie until global socialism is achieved, on that point on class society is abolished and the State is dissolved. This late stage is what we call communism.

It's not, never once has communism worked, not has socialism ever worked. They all end up being dictatorships and the same capitalist problems for the others. Only difference is there is barely any social climb in a dictatorship except at the beginning.

Look up some stats. More people that lived during the stable years miss it compared to the economic unrest they face now.

"Common ownership" as in the workers collectively own the means of production. You, individually, don't get to own it, but a union of workers, a local collective, or the state might own it and decisions would be made, ostensibly, by the workers who make up those entities.

An individual can't own the means of production, it's supposed to be "owned" by the people. I'm not a communist, but that argument never changed.

But that's what this meme says

A country that has done remarkably well considering the blockade they have been under for 60+ years?

Food is rationned, meaning everybody has food, and healthcare is great.

Socialism and capitalism work together.... Socialist countries do work and have worked. However, none of the successful ones were fully socialist. Mainly because the world isn't utopian and people are people. Communism and socialism aren't the same thing. Socialism can be designed to work with capitalism allowing a free market but providing basic human needs like shelter, food, and water. it can also be designed to create fair wages and lower the wealth gap between the wealthy and poor. Communism can not work with capitalism and a free market and can be successful in very small groups but fails in larger groups. Capitalism is not for the masses. It promotes unhealthy work laws and without socialist ideas like unions you wouldn't have things like fire excapes, limits on the amount of hours one can work without overtime, or the average 8 hour work day. Before you tout capitalism as the most amazing form of an economic system do research on it, look at history, and don't just take capitalistic indoctrination as truth.

"During the years of Stalin's reign, the Soviet nation made dramatic gains in literacy, industrial wages, health care, and women's rights. These accomplishments usually go unmentioned when the Stalinist era is discussed. To say that "socialism doesn't work" is to overlook the fact that it did. In Eastern Europe, Russia, China, Mongolia, North Korea, and Cuba, revolutionary communism created a life for the mass of people that was far better than the wretched existence they had endured under feudal lords, military bosses, foreign colonizers, and Western capitalists. The end result was a dramatic improvement in living conditions for hundreds of millions of people on a scale never before or since witnessed in history." Michael Parenti, Blackshirts and Reds: Rational Fascism and the Overthrow of Communism

read a book you moronic dipshit, specifically this one ,[https://valleysunderground.files.wordpress.com/2020/04/blackshirts-and-reds-by-michael-parenti.pdf] , look it's even free, you have 0 excuses to not educate yourself, you're welcome

And the reason is the US coup'ed every single one of those experiments.

Private property is the capital, the actual means of production. Personal property is your stuff.

Lol telling people to go look up the definitions without yourself knowing the definition is giving Facebook.

But that's exactly what this meme is saying

https://www.spring.org.uk/2023/01/intrinsic-motivation.php

Turns out people are actually more productive if you don't force them to do it in order to live.

Good. Productivity killed the planet.

You mean capitalism?

There's a reason capitalism always wins.

it was totalitarian, nobody wants a totalitarian state. communism and totalitarianism are different things

why don't you quote the homeless people in the US and the drug problems of philadelphia, the capitalism of south africa, and saudi arabia?

we disagree, it's okay.

barley came to work

I thought Stalin ate all the grain