DreamlandLividity

It does not change anything about the fact your definition is so broad it can fit almost anything. So yes, it is nitpicking.

Yes, nitpick on the exaggeration of all things. Extremely good faith argumentation. Because if one village or city or country is excluded from the genocide, that makes such a big difference. /s

What do you mean you defined it?! Stateless? What does that mean? How is anything decided? How are people motivated to do shit without money?

What is? The fact that not one person advocating communism actually dares define what they mean by communism? So they just jump from definition to definition to salvage losing arguments? Sure, extremely bad faith, but what you gonna do?

If you consider firefighters communist, you have extremely weird definution of communism.

communism is a stateless classless moneyless society So it’s a fantasy where everyone magically knows what to do, how and when. Then does it with no incentive or punishment. No coordinators, police, or anything else required. Ok, clear. Now can we get back to real world ideas? Because if there is anyone who has the ability to order people to do something and punish them for not doing it or decide distribution of incentives, that is called a government. No matter how you try to rename it or handwave it.

human nature is not an explanation Yes, it is handwaving, because I ain’t spending time writing paragraphs of shit anyone with two brain cells to rub together can easily figure out on their own. communism is a stateless society Just because you string words together does not mean they mean something. If people don’t own/control the means of production, someone else does. Either you have private capital or a governing body. Calling it “stateless society” means nothing. That is actual handwaving of real issues.

We never had communism in the same way we never had a person fly by flapping their arms after jumping of a roof. It’s not that we did not try, it just does not end with a flying person. To have communism, you have to concentrate all the wealth and power in some sort of government so that people don’t own anything. And when you concentrate all power in the government, human nature produces a dictatorship.

Yes but also no. Bit flips will happen unless you have rad-hardened computers but apparently, bit-flips are not really too problematic for AI training.

Now instead of asking to verify age, make the parents input the age bracket and you reinvented parental controls. The correct way to protect children.

As a friend often says, “democracy isn’t perfect, but it’s the best thing we’ve got so far”, and I think the same goes for regulated capitalism, with working anti-trust and taxation. Exactly. I agree. The most important thing is public participation, putting pressure on their leaders to keep the corruption low and well hidden. There are ways for people to hold their leaders accountable. The tragedy is when people are apathetic and don’t do so. When bribes can be received in the open and people just tolerate them calling them lobbying, then there is no hope keeping the system working for the people. The leaders will not stop from the goodness of their hearts.

Except that is true with any social or economic system. You unregulate your president, good luck getting that back under control. You unregulate your communist party/planning committee, hello Stallin my old friend. Humans who accumulate power in any system can corrupt said system. And every system has opportunities to accumulate power. At least in capitalism it’s slower, giving people more time to react. Even now, the state of US capitalism seems easier to reverse than e.g. the dictatorship of Chinese communist party.