Tag: communism >>

unbossed:

iicraft505:

unbossed:

iicraft505:

unbossed:

iicraft505:

unbossed:

iicraft505:

unbossed:

class-war-hooligan:

eldritch-universalism:

iicraft505:

Anarcho communism is cool and stuff but you do realize that human nature wouldn’t allow for it to work, right? Humans are selfish. They will try to take power.

citation needed

Emma Goldman just rolled her eyes in her grave.

And wild bears break into houses because they’re looking for a tricycle to ride.

What does that have to do with anything?

Bears in captivity ride tricycles so it’s obviously “ursine nature” to behave that way.

I’m not really sure how animal abuse in captivity is relevant to the selfish nature of humans.

http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/539611/Scientific-Study-finds-humans-selfish

And anarchism would turn into a world of what is now considered crime. Look at what people do with laws, and imagine what they would do without them.
Look at the book Animal Farm, for example. Even The Lorax works as an argument. Animal Farm was originally written as satire for Stalinist Russia. However, it has grounds in society today. Why does the US have “checks and balances” to keep one branch of government from becoming too powerful? BECAUSE HUMANS WILL TRY TO TAKE POWER IF GIVEN THE OPPORTUNITY, AND IT CORRUPTS. In Animal Farm, the pigs took power because they were the smartest. They originally were (at least supposedly) there to help the other animals. However, as time went on, since the other animals weren’t smart enough to notice or fight back, the pigs started to take advantage of them. Sure, they were animals in the book, but they were personified animals. They were showing what humans would do in that situation.

Now, I know that’s Stalinist communism, not Marxism. I think communism is a beautiful idea, but I don’t think that it is possible to totally implement it in a way that would work. I don’t think humans can’t be taught. Our current way of life is too far ingrained into us, and by the time we got it learned, I find it hard to believe that the group teaching us wouldn’t have taken power. 

I’m not saying I don’t like communism, I just don’t think it can be implemented properly given how ingrained in our current lifestyle we are without it backfiring somehow.

(Also if capitalism has been around longer than communism I think that it would be our nature not just conditioning) 

The point I am making is that humans, like all animals, adapt to the circumstances and conditions of their environment. The economic/social environment that we currently live in conditions us to act selfishly, much as so many captive bears have been trained to behave in a way they wouldn’t outside of that similarly coercive environment. The only provable characteristic of human nature is to adapt to our surroundings.

As for the study you cite, it proves that the subjects’ previous training from society still held sway over their choices in the game. Would the outcome have been the same if they had been raised in a gift economy, such as was the norm for many, many human cultures for the majority of history? I highly doubt it.

Edited to add that I somehow completely missed the final, utterly ignorant assertion that capitalism is older than communism.

Right, I get that. I understand that it is ingrained into humans through conditioning. I’m just not sure how you’d change that since most people are used to capitalism.

Right, their PREVIOUS TRAINING FROM SOCIETY. How would you override that for the superior (admittedly) idea of anarchist communism?

I said if, I don’t know. Is it not?

And please, I want sources.

(I have to take something to my son at his job sort of soon so this won’t be as thorough a reply as I’d like. I can be pretty bad at coming back to things if I don’t immediately address them, though.)

I believe it starts with building alternative relationships within our immediate communities. It starts with learning what much of life was like before commonly held land was stolen by the state and turned into the private property of the  predecessors of today’s capitalists. It’s not going to be an immediate transition, of course. The invention of capitalism took a while and growing out of it will, too. As an old Sergeant Major once told me during an especially tedious training exercise, “You don’t eat the whole horse in one bite, son. Start with his nose and gnaw your way to his ass.”

Building a culture that values sharing and de-emphasizes consumption as status-seeking will take a lot of different and varied approaches. Diversity of tactics applies in the social aspects of the process of revolution just as much as it does in direct clashes in the streets. Things like neighborhood “tool libraries” where infrequently used tools like lawnmowers, hedgers, shovels, etc. are shared, backyard-sharing garden clubs (and canning clubs) where people with growing space to spare share it with others who don’t have as much, and other forms of cooperative living aren’t the full solution, of course, but they can begin to build a foundation. (I’m not talking about trying to bring back the good old days of slit-trench shitters, cholera, and burying grandpa at the ripe old age of 40, though. I also don’t pretend that backyard gardens are enough to feed humanity. These are simply tools to change the way we relate to one another.)

I dashed off a first-thought, half-assed, but better explanation for this foundation building elsewhere. One of these days I might get around to fleshing it out in more depth but here it is, as it is. I’m past the halfway point in life for men in my family, though, so I know I won’t live to see more than seeds and saplings being planted. I’m content to be one of those “old men who plant trees whose shade they’ll never nap in.”

Okay, I get the little things. But eventually we’ll have to “attack” big corporations, won’t we? How do we go about replacing those with a more equal (fair, whatever) systems? Do we just eventually run them out of business? What?
Also, what about clothes? I can imagine there’d probably be some sort of system to pass it down, would there not? I’m really confused with that part of it. It’s just hard to wrap my head around, but I am trying and I’m using the internet to learn.

And I’m not saying it’s likely, but somebody has to initiate this, right? How is it completely impossible for them to end up taking advantage of it? I’m not saying it’s likely, I just want to know how we’d assure this. (Maybe I’m just being ignorant here, though.)

The questions you’re asking don’t really have answers because we haven’t reached the point in time/conditions when there are answers to them. We can only make plans and act based on observing current conditions and past events. At best we can only do our best to make conditions as favorable as we can for the people who will be shaping that phase of the revolutionary process when those answers arrive.

We know what feeds capitalism and the state. (Alienation, consumption, isolation, artificial scarcity, etc.) We can take action to counter those and weaken them. We know what nurtures and sustains a successful insurgency. (Popular support of the masses, de-legitimization of existing power dynamics, mutual aid and solidarity, etc.) We can take action to build and strengthen them.

We won’t know the answers to those questions. To be honest I don’t think my sons will, either. Some day somebody will, though, and we owe it to them to make sure they have the tools necessary to see those answers become the solutions humanity needs.

That’s just my take, though. I’m not an anarchist for myself, except perhaps as a way to atone for things I’ve done and abetted that have harmed humanity. I’m in this because there are things more important than my fleeting, ultimately to-be-forgotten, existence.

Then I feel like there might be a problem if we don’t really know what we’re doing, wouldn’t there?
I guess we wouldn’t reach the point where those answers would be necessary until we know the answers to those questions, will we? I guess I’m not the only one confused by this.

If we can start making efforts towards weakening capitalism’s hold, though, we would definitely be making progress towards the answers and reaching the ultimate goal here. Right?
(I’m so used to it, saying “weakening capitalism” feels weird.)

contradicciontotal:

iicraft505:

contradicciontotal:

iicraft505:

contradicciontotal:

iicraft505:

Anarcho communism is cool and stuff but you do realize that human nature wouldn’t allow for it to work, right? Humans are selfish. They will try to take power.

Do you realize that the argument of “selfish human nature” is crap?

If that were true we would never have survived as a specie. Caveman would have never shared fire, food, knowledge and so on.

Selfish as a species, then. Look at how little concern (capitalism at least) has for other species.

Also, if you read all my other reblogs of this post, you’d see that I had backed off that argument and that I’m now trying to fully understand how it would work.

“Capitalists” are the ones who donnot care about other species. Capitalism is just a theory.

Honestly didnt read all other reblogs. If you are interested in learning how would it work investigate about EZLN, paris comune, anrchism in spain and some other things i can remember.

And Please stay away from “anarcocapitalism” thta shit is not anarchism.

Exactly. Because they are selfish. Selfishness of businesses is why it’s so damn hard to get them to give one fuck about the environment.
How is capitalism a theory if it is a common form of government?

It would be a good bit ridiculous to expect you to read all those walls of text, honestly.
I am definitely trying and will look into those.

Trust me, I just read something about it, I have no interest in it as a concept at all. It’s an oxymoron to be frank and quite honest.

Capitalism is a theory just like socialism, communism and anarchism. The thing is that is widely used around the world, not as “form of government” since capitalists are the ones who really decide what to do , they are the bosses of presidents and then call it “democracy”. (I am not talking about conspiracy or illuminati crap)

I would not call them selfish, they are greedy heartless pieces of shit that only care about having more money and power to keep them as the ruling class.

P.S. I love the word oxymoron.

Okay, then. I guess I just have to take your word for that since it doesn’t make much difference to me.
It’s not “direct democracy”, and I don’t see anyone claiming that it is, but it’s democracy in a sense.

Yeah, isn’t that what selfishness is? Only caring about yourself and your advancement at the expense of others is selfishness, is it not?
I definitely see how capitalism is problematic.

I mean really, capitalism and anarchism have no place together.

contradicciontotal:

iicraft505:

Anarcho communism is cool and stuff but you do realize that human nature wouldn’t allow for it to work, right? Humans are selfish. They will try to take power.

Do you realize that the argument of “selfish human nature” is crap?

If that were true we would never have survived as a specie. Caveman would have never shared fire, food, knowledge and so on.

Selfish as a species, then. Look at how little concern (capitalism at least) has for other species.

Also, if you read all my other reblogs of this post, you’d see that I had backed off that argument and that I’m now trying to fully understand how it would work.

hushed-obscenities:

iicraft505:

unbossed:

iicraft505:

unbossed:

iicraft505:

unbossed:

iicraft505:

unbossed:

class-war-hooligan:

eldritch-universalism:

iicraft505:

Anarcho communism is cool and stuff but you do realize that human nature wouldn’t allow for it to work, right? Humans are selfish. They will try to take power.

citation needed

Emma Goldman just rolled her eyes in her grave.

And wild bears break into houses because they’re looking for a tricycle to ride.

What does that have to do with anything?

Bears in captivity ride tricycles so it’s obviously “ursine nature” to behave that way.

I’m not really sure how animal abuse in captivity is relevant to the selfish nature of humans.

http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/539611/Scientific-Study-finds-humans-selfish

And anarchism would turn into a world of what is now considered crime. Look at what people do with laws, and imagine what they would do without them.
Look at the book Animal Farm, for example. Even The Lorax works as an argument. Animal Farm was originally written as satire for Stalinist Russia. However, it has grounds in society today. Why does the US have “checks and balances” to keep one branch of government from becoming too powerful? BECAUSE HUMANS WILL TRY TO TAKE POWER IF GIVEN THE OPPORTUNITY, AND IT CORRUPTS. In Animal Farm, the pigs took power because they were the smartest. They originally were (at least supposedly) there to help the other animals. However, as time went on, since the other animals weren’t smart enough to notice or fight back, the pigs started to take advantage of them. Sure, they were animals in the book, but they were personified animals. They were showing what humans would do in that situation.

Now, I know that’s Stalinist communism, not Marxism. I think communism is a beautiful idea, but I don’t think that it is possible to totally implement it in a way that would work. I don’t think humans can’t be taught. Our current way of life is too far ingrained into us, and by the time we got it learned, I find it hard to believe that the group teaching us wouldn’t have taken power. 

I’m not saying I don’t like communism, I just don’t think it can be implemented properly given how ingrained in our current lifestyle we are without it backfiring somehow.

(Also if capitalism has been around longer than communism I think that it would be our nature not just conditioning) 

The point I am making is that humans, like all animals, adapt to the circumstances and conditions of their environment. The economic/social environment that we currently live in conditions us to act selfishly, much as so many captive bears have been trained to behave in a way they wouldn’t outside of that similarly coercive environment. The only provable characteristic of human nature is to adapt to our surroundings.

As for the study you cite, it proves that the subjects’ previous training from society still held sway over their choices in the game. Would the outcome have been the same if they had been raised in a gift economy, such as was the norm for many, many human cultures for the majority of history? I highly doubt it.

Edited to add that I somehow completely missed the final, utterly ignorant assertion that capitalism is older than communism.

Right, I get that. I understand that it is ingrained into humans through conditioning. I’m just not sure how you’d change that since most people are used to capitalism.

Right, their PREVIOUS TRAINING FROM SOCIETY. How would you override that for the superior (admittedly) idea of anarchist communism?

I said if, I don’t know. Is it not?

And please, I want sources.

(I have to take something to my son at his job sort of soon so this won’t be as thorough a reply as I’d like. I can be pretty bad at coming back to things if I don’t immediately address them, though.)

I believe it starts with building alternative relationships within our immediate communities. It starts with learning what much of life was like before commonly held land was stolen by the state and turned into the private property of the  predecessors of today’s capitalists. It’s not going to be an immediate transition, of course. The invention of capitalism took a while and growing out of it will, too. As an old Sergeant Major once told me during an especially tedious training exercise, “You don’t eat the whole horse in one bite, son. Start with his nose and gnaw your way to his ass.”

Building a culture that values sharing and de-emphasizes consumption as status-seeking will take a lot of different and varied approaches. Diversity of tactics applies in the social aspects of the process of revolution just as much as it does in direct clashes in the streets. Things like neighborhood “tool libraries” where infrequently used tools like lawnmowers, hedgers, shovels, etc. are shared, backyard-sharing garden clubs (and canning clubs) where people with growing space to spare share it with others who don’t have as much, and other forms of cooperative living aren’t the full solution, of course, but they can begin to build a foundation. (I’m not talking about trying to bring back the good old days of slit-trench shitters, cholera, and burying grandpa at the ripe old age of 40, though. I also don’t pretend that backyard gardens are enough to feed humanity. These are simply tools to change the way we relate to one another.)

I dashed off a first-thought, half-assed, but better explanation for this foundation building elsewhere. One of these days I might get around to fleshing it out in more depth but here it is, as it is. I’m past the halfway point in life for men in my family, though, so I know I won’t live to see more than seeds and saplings being planted. I’m content to be one of those “old men who plant trees whose shade they’ll never nap in.”

Okay, I get the little things. But eventually we’ll have to “attack” big corporations, won’t we? How do we go about replacing those with a more equal (fair, whatever) systems? Do we just eventually run them out of business? What?
Also, what about clothes? I can imagine there’d probably be some sort of system to pass it down, would there not? I’m really confused with that part of it. It’s just hard to wrap my head around, but I am trying and I’m using the internet to learn.

And I’m not saying it’s likely, but somebody has to initiate this, right? How is it completely impossible for them to end up taking advantage of it? I’m not saying it’s likely, I just want to know how we’d assure this. (Maybe I’m just being ignorant here, though.)

History has given us plenty of examples of how the workers can “attack”, that is, collectivize, corporations so as to bring production and distribution under workers’ control. The formation of the soviets in the Russian Revolution and the process of collectivization in the Spanish Revolution are two great examples. Simply out-competing conventional firms with independently formed co-ops is not a realistic strategy. Private enterprise is at an enormous material advantage within the market, and it has the backing of the state to perfect it if it comes under threat. To achieve socialism, it will be necessary for the workers to take over their own firms–which they are completely justified in doing, as the producers of all of the firms’ wealth.

Some person or group will have to initiate revolutionary action at some point, but ideally the workers would be so organized by that time that the movement would very quickly become a collective effort, led by everyone and no one all at once. Opportunists may (in fact they will, inevitably) attempt to ride the wave and take the helm, as the Bolsheviks did in Russia, but a properly organized anarchist proletariat would be able to spot such threats and nip them in the bud before they gain too much power.

My main problem with communism, in fact the only one, is how it played out in Russia. It started out good but ended poorly, which is why I’m still a bit skeptical.

As long as it’s well organized enough to prevent the corporations from preventing a revolution from succeeding and it has already been determined as to what will happen after a revolution, I do see how it would work. I mean, “overpowering” corporations has happened before.
But also, once it’s there, how do we prevent a capitalist revolution?

And I guess it’s far out of my wheelhouse, so to speak, but I’m still finding it hard to wrap my head around it in reality. It’s probably because I’m used to corrupt American capitalism, heh heh.
And if environmentalism is part of this I’m definitely down. Is it? I feel like it would be a bit more valued in the that type of society because the amount of money in something wouldn’t be a concern.

Also, again, what about things like clothes? How do we do that part?

unbossed:

iicraft505:

unbossed:

iicraft505:

unbossed:

iicraft505:

unbossed:

class-war-hooligan:

eldritch-universalism:

iicraft505:

Anarcho communism is cool and stuff but you do realize that human nature wouldn’t allow for it to work, right? Humans are selfish. They will try to take power.

citation needed

Emma Goldman just rolled her eyes in her grave.

And wild bears break into houses because they’re looking for a tricycle to ride.

What does that have to do with anything?

Bears in captivity ride tricycles so it’s obviously “ursine nature” to behave that way.

I’m not really sure how animal abuse in captivity is relevant to the selfish nature of humans.

http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/539611/Scientific-Study-finds-humans-selfish

And anarchism would turn into a world of what is now considered crime. Look at what people do with laws, and imagine what they would do without them.
Look at the book Animal Farm, for example. Even The Lorax works as an argument. Animal Farm was originally written as satire for Stalinist Russia. However, it has grounds in society today. Why does the US have “checks and balances” to keep one branch of government from becoming too powerful? BECAUSE HUMANS WILL TRY TO TAKE POWER IF GIVEN THE OPPORTUNITY, AND IT CORRUPTS. In Animal Farm, the pigs took power because they were the smartest. They originally were (at least supposedly) there to help the other animals. However, as time went on, since the other animals weren’t smart enough to notice or fight back, the pigs started to take advantage of them. Sure, they were animals in the book, but they were personified animals. They were showing what humans would do in that situation.

Now, I know that’s Stalinist communism, not Marxism. I think communism is a beautiful idea, but I don’t think that it is possible to totally implement it in a way that would work. I don’t think humans can’t be taught. Our current way of life is too far ingrained into us, and by the time we got it learned, I find it hard to believe that the group teaching us wouldn’t have taken power. 

I’m not saying I don’t like communism, I just don’t think it can be implemented properly given how ingrained in our current lifestyle we are without it backfiring somehow.

(Also if capitalism has been around longer than communism I think that it would be our nature not just conditioning) 

The point I am making is that humans, like all animals, adapt to the circumstances and conditions of their environment. The economic/social environment that we currently live in conditions us to act selfishly, much as so many captive bears have been trained to behave in a way they wouldn’t outside of that similarly coercive environment. The only provable characteristic of human nature is to adapt to our surroundings.

As for the study you cite, it proves that the subjects’ previous training from society still held sway over their choices in the game. Would the outcome have been the same if they had been raised in a gift economy, such as was the norm for many, many human cultures for the majority of history? I highly doubt it.

Edited to add that I somehow completely missed the final, utterly ignorant assertion that capitalism is older than communism.

Right, I get that. I understand that it is ingrained into humans through conditioning. I’m just not sure how you’d change that since most people are used to capitalism.

Right, their PREVIOUS TRAINING FROM SOCIETY. How would you override that for the superior (admittedly) idea of anarchist communism?

I said if, I don’t know. Is it not?

And please, I want sources.

(I have to take something to my son at his job sort of soon so this won’t be as thorough a reply as I’d like. I can be pretty bad at coming back to things if I don’t immediately address them, though.)

I believe it starts with building alternative relationships within our immediate communities. It starts with learning what much of life was like before commonly held land was stolen by the state and turned into the private property of the  predecessors of today’s capitalists. It’s not going to be an immediate transition, of course. The invention of capitalism took a while and growing out of it will, too. As an old Sergeant Major once told me during an especially tedious training exercise, “You don’t eat the whole horse in one bite, son. Start with his nose and gnaw your way to his ass.”

Building a culture that values sharing and de-emphasizes consumption as status-seeking will take a lot of different and varied approaches. Diversity of tactics applies in the social aspects of the process of revolution just as much as it does in direct clashes in the streets. Things like neighborhood “tool libraries” where infrequently used tools like lawnmowers, hedgers, shovels, etc. are shared, backyard-sharing garden clubs (and canning clubs) where people with growing space to spare share it with others who don’t have as much, and other forms of cooperative living aren’t the full solution, of course, but they can begin to build a foundation. (I’m not talking about trying to bring back the good old days of slit-trench shitters, cholera, and burying grandpa at the ripe old age of 40, though. I also don’t pretend that backyard gardens are enough to feed humanity. These are simply tools to change the way we relate to one another.)

I dashed off a first-thought, half-assed, but better explanation for this foundation building elsewhere. One of these days I might get around to fleshing it out in more depth but here it is, as it is. I’m past the halfway point in life for men in my family, though, so I know I won’t live to see more than seeds and saplings being planted. I’m content to be one of those “old men who plant trees whose shade they’ll never nap in.”

Okay, I get the little things. But eventually we’ll have to “attack” big corporations, won’t we? How do we go about replacing those with a more equal (fair, whatever) systems? Do we just eventually run them out of business? What?
Also, what about clothes? I can imagine there’d probably be some sort of system to pass it down, would there not? I’m really confused with that part of it. It’s just hard to wrap my head around, but I am trying and I’m using the internet to learn.

And I’m not saying it’s likely, but somebody has to initiate this, right? How is it completely impossible for them to end up taking advantage of it? I’m not saying it’s likely, I just want to know how we’d assure this. (Maybe I’m just being ignorant here, though.)

yenantalk:

iicraft505:

unbossed:

iicraft505:

unbossed:

class-war-hooligan:

eldritch-universalism:

iicraft505:

Anarcho communism is cool and stuff but you do realize that human nature wouldn’t allow for it to work, right? Humans are selfish. They will try to take power.

citation needed

Emma Goldman just rolled her eyes in her grave.

And wild bears break into houses because they’re looking for a tricycle to ride.

What does that have to do with anything?

Bears in captivity ride tricycles so it’s obviously “ursine nature” to behave that way.

I’m not really sure how animal abuse in captivity is relevant to the selfish nature of humans.

http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/539611/Scientific-Study-finds-humans-selfish

And anarchism would turn into a world of what is now considered crime. Look at what people do with laws, and imagine what they would do without them.
Look at the book Animal Farm, for example. Even The Lorax works as an argument. Animal Farm was originally written as satire for Stalinist Russia. However, it has grounds in society today. Why does the US have “checks and balances” to keep one branch of government from becoming too powerful? BECAUSE HUMANS WILL TRY TO TAKE POWER IF GIVEN THE OPPORTUNITY, AND IT CORRUPTS. In Animal Farm, the pigs took power because they were the smartest. They originally were (at least supposedly) there to help the other animals. However, as time went on, since the other animals weren’t smart enough to notice or fight back, the pigs started to take advantage of them. Sure, they were animals in the book, but they were personified animals. They were showing what humans would do in that situation.

Now, I know that’s Stalinist communism, not Marxism. I think communism is a beautiful idea, but I don’t think that it is possible to totally implement it in a way that would work. I don’t think humans can’t be taught. Our current way of life is too far ingrained into us, and by the time we got it learned, I find it hard to believe that the group teaching us wouldn’t have taken power. 

I’m not saying I don’t like communism, I just don’t think it can be implemented properly given how ingrained in our current lifestyle we are without it backfiring somehow.

(Also if capitalism has been around longer than communism I think that it would be our nature not just conditioning) 

These people.

Every time.

Without fail.

That nearly everyone is forced to read fairy tales about the dangers of inferiors unseating the status quo at some point sometime in school has absolutely nothing to do with the benefits the propertied class receive from mass political powerlessness. No way. Just ridiculous.

Animal Farm is about how bad Stalinist Russia is and the lesson is “ultimate power corrupts ultimately”. I don’t get what you’re saying.
I don’t get what’s confusing about how the pigs tried to implement communism but instead created an oligarchy.
Also, yet again, could somebody explain to me or give me sources as to how actual communism of any form would be implemented successfully? Because yes, it is better than capitalism.

If somebody can tell me how anarcho-communism would be successfully implemented or give me sources I’d be happy to listen since it’s certainly more equal and less corrupt than capitalism.

Also, if you could explain or give me sources as to how you would prevent someone from gaining power I would be happy to listen. I just don’t really see how it would work, human nature aside, even though it’s a nice idea.

mindless-b3havior:

eldritch-universalism:

iicraft505:

Anarcho communism is cool and stuff but you do realize that human nature wouldn’t allow for it to work, right? Humans are selfish. They will try to take power.

citation needed

anarcho communist are cool. Humans can be taught to be selfish. Why can’t we be taught to be communist. 

https://libcom.org/files/Anarchist%20communism%20-%20an%20introduction.pdf

“Self-determined needs”

Seems like a surefire way for some shallow people to take more than they need and do less than they can out of laziness, huh?

This form of government relies even more heavily on the honor system and full participation in the group than capitalism does. It also relies really heavily on altruism. I just don’t see how it would work.

I gave it a chance but there’s really no hope for it.

unbossed:

iicraft505:

unbossed:

class-war-hooligan:

eldritch-universalism:

iicraft505:

Anarcho communism is cool and stuff but you do realize that human nature wouldn’t allow for it to work, right? Humans are selfish. They will try to take power.

citation needed

Emma Goldman just rolled her eyes in her grave.

And wild bears break into houses because they’re looking for a tricycle to ride.

What does that have to do with anything?

Bears in captivity ride tricycles so it’s obviously “ursine nature” to behave that way.

I’m not really sure how animal abuse in captivity is relevant to the selfish nature of humans.

http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/539611/Scientific-Study-finds-humans-selfish

And anarchism would turn into a world of what is now considered crime. Look at what people do with laws, and imagine what they would do without them.
Look at the book Animal Farm, for example. Even The Lorax works as an argument. Animal Farm was originally written as satire for Stalinist Russia. However, it has grounds in society today. Why does the US have “checks and balances” to keep one branch of government from becoming too powerful? BECAUSE HUMANS WILL TRY TO TAKE POWER IF GIVEN THE OPPORTUNITY, AND IT CORRUPTS. In Animal Farm, the pigs took power because they were the smartest. They originally were (at least supposedly) there to help the other animals. However, as time went on, since the other animals weren’t smart enough to notice or fight back, the pigs started to take advantage of them. Sure, they were animals in the book, but they were personified animals. They were showing what humans would do in that situation.

Now, I know that’s Stalinist communism, not Marxism. I think communism is a beautiful idea, but I don’t think that it is possible to totally implement it in a way that would work. I don’t think humans can’t be taught. Our current way of life is too far ingrained into us, and by the time we got it learned, I find it hard to believe that the group teaching us wouldn’t have taken power. 

I’m not saying I don’t like communism, I just don’t think it can be implemented properly given how ingrained in our current lifestyle we are without it backfiring somehow.

(Also if capitalism has been around longer than communism I think that it would be our nature not just conditioning) 

Anarcho communism is cool and stuff but you do realize that human nature wouldn’t allow for it to work, right? Humans are selfish. They will try to take power.

EDIT: I don’t understand how it would work large scale. Also, I’ve backed off this argument. Also, ya’ll keep saying we’ll find the answers to how it would work later. Frankly, I’m not going to subscribe to an idea until I understand how it would work.