Would Communism work if there were computers processing resources

that's what some commie visionaries in the 80es thought

>>137255146
Communism will and never work, if the USSR would of still existed when the internet became a thing they would of never been able to pull off their brand of communism anymore, I mean look at how much china censored shit.

File: 192564189e204aba9320dd037cfa7852aa8f5bb43ef5f0f17da35c8396fa1832.jpg (19KB, 324x499px) Image search: [Google]

19KB, 324x499px

>>137255146

Yes, read pic related.

you're just shifting the power, giving it to those who control/program the computer

>>137255146
google project cybersyn
that's the final redpill

>>137255146

THe ONLY way Communism would work if humanity had hive-mind. which it doesn't and never will.

>>137255146
>Will automation create a slave state?

What's the point in slaves when machines can do everything?

>>137255734

that's why the whole system must be transparent for all citizens, and everybody should be given lessons in school to understand it, that's how you make it secure.

>>137255332
Eh? it's what Soviet planners in the 1960s thought and it actually worked, then the Politburo shitheads were like "Oh this will cost us our jobs" and labelled computer science a porkie psuedo-science.
USSR literally had a functioning internet in the 1960s that got shitcanned in like 1970 because Brezzy.

https://www.amazon.com/Red-Plenty-Francis-Spufford/dp/1555976042

Good book that covers it.

>>137255949

humanity is increasingly becoming more interconnected, ffs, we are talking from different points of the globe right now sharing ideas, memes, in real time, that would sound like magic not so long ago.

>>137255146
No one cares about communism anymore. It's literally the most boring and outdated political idea ever and needs to be left back as a failed experiment in the 1920s were it belongs.

>>137256268

Ignorant, all the capitalist system is older than communism, which one is the ''outdated'' idea?

>>137256181
Except we still have the invividual free will and desires. With it, Communism can't work.

File: 14624838759031.png (224KB, 945x765px) Image search: [Google]

224KB, 945x765px

>>137255146
Why has no one in the west read late soviet economists?
In short, no: it would only solve first of the two problems
1) Market is a distributed processing system
But there is
2) Only individual free to pursue his self-interest sends real signals to the economy, coercion distorts feedback from economic agents in a planned economy.

>>137255146
To some extent maybe, the actual information/data and processing requirements would be absolutely insane though.

>>137255146
The first thing automation would do is wipe out human race as inefficient.

Not that I'm much against it, though.

>Garbuzov successfully convinced the Politburo that the OGAS project, with its ambitious plans to optimally model and manage information flows in the planned economy, was too much too soon. The committee, after nearly going the other way, felt it was safer to support Garbuzov – and the still top-secret OGAS project was left to languish in review limbo for another decade.

>The forces that brought down OGAS resemble those that eventually undid the Soviet Union: the surprisingly informal forms of institutional misbehaviour. Subversive ministers, status quo-inclined bureaucrats, nervous factory managers, confused workers and even other economic reformers opposed the OGAS project because it was in their institutional self-interest to do so. Without state funding and oversight, the national network project for ushering in electronic socialism splintered in the 1970s

TL;DR: Pubes killed Soviet computer planning/internet because they didn't want to lose their jobs to computers.

>>137256822

Communism respects individuality:

A communist society would free individuals from long working hours by first automating production to an extent that the average length of the working day is reduced and second by eliminating the exploitation inherent in the division between workers and owners. A communist system would thus free individuals from alienation in the sense of having one's life structured around survival (making a wage or salary in a capitalist system), which Marx referred to as a transition from the "realm of necessity" to the "realm of freedom." As a result, a communist society is envisioned as being composed of an intellectually-inclined population with both the time and resources to pursue its creative hobbies and genuine interests, and to contribute to creative social wealth in this manner. Karl Marx considered "true richness" to be the amount of time one has at his or her disposal to pursue one's creative passions. Marx's notion of communism is in this way radically individualistic.

>>137255146
yep the ultimate goal of the USA is NEW WORLD ORDER which is equivalent to COMMUNISM which means CAPITALISM LOST THE COLD WAR which is funny because Americans think they are fighting COMMUNISM when in reality they are ESTABLISHING IT

>>137255146
would said resource allocation be different from what a free market would come up with? if yes, what kind of differences would you expect? if no, what's the point?

>>137256967
Honestly it wouldn't be hard to plan a basic economy. The point of Socialism is an efficient basic economy, you simply won't have the goods you have in Capitalism because Socialism doesn't have Commodity Fetishism.

Hence you should pretty easy be able to develop models for how much product people consume of basic goods (Food, toilet paper, shelter etc) based on average consumption habits of the people. You could then on top, leave luxury goods to a socialist market.

If modern companies can predict fucking average health, consumption, targeted advertising etc through those shitty "Rewards" cards, then it shouldn't be hard to predict how much bread someone consumes in a year.

>>137257213
>>137257137
>>137257015
>>137255538
>>137255146
automation or no,
>the LTV
>subjective value of consumer products and services
and
>post scarcity
ensure communism will never work

>>137257507
>commodity fetishism
until comrade beloved leader decides meat or sugar or toilet paper is commodity fetishism, amirite?

>>137257507
>Commodity fettuccini
m8 your whole ideology revolves around resource allocation and material existence.

File: IMG_0888.jpg (143KB, 776x678px) Image search: [Google]

143KB, 776x678px

>>137257213
>communism respects individuality

>>137257420
free market promotes unequality of resources distribution

File: 1502590944703.jpg (918KB, 1169x800px) Image search: [Google]

918KB, 1169x800px

>>137255146
who designs the program that allocates resources, anon?
.
.
.
.
no anon communism never works

>>137257507
People have thought similar shit before and you almost always end up getting some type of resource shortages or rationing, you really would need fucking insane levels of computer technology and massive data sets.
>>137258207
Communism isn't technically dependent upon the LTV

File: Lenin1.jpg (37KB, 400x525px) Image search: [Google]

37KB, 400x525px

>>137257213
>Communism respects individuality

Nicely said comrade anonovitch.

File: l2.jpg (36KB, 500x333px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 500x333px

>>137257213
>Communism respects individuality

>>137255146
Zeitgeist?
No, communism won't work because anyone who disagrees will be killed, and anyone who might conspire against it will be killed. And anyone who might trying to overthrow the communist party will be killed.
Communism only works if everyone agrees to be a communist, and that won't happen. It will just lead to violence.

Also, computers require a lot of maintenance and upkeep.

File: gommies.jpg (13KB, 250x250px) Image search: [Google]

13KB, 250x250px

Hello gomrades! X_DDddDD Dis general is for disgussion of margsism-lebonnism, da ideology of ebin revolutionary socialism and gommunism.

Gommunism is da next stage of guckery following real society.

Wat exagtly is gommunism according to gommies:

>Gommunism is a stage of guckery in which the produgtive infrustrugture runs away from gommie country, and no goods are produced and beeple starve. X_-DDDD
>Gommunism in full form is obressive, statist society dat follows maxim "gib gib gib!" :-DDDDd
>To achieve gommunism we must replace broduction with murderous obressive rulers liek me, fug working glass beeple. XDDDD Struggle while I liquidate you all FUG. When capitalists run away we win and I gill you all. Eventually the fungtions of state stob and state becomes murderous and indistinguishable from other gommies. Da state withers away liek da people.
https://www.gommies.gom/fug/
https://www.gommies.gom/starve/

GL uses philosphy of gib and starve, see here:
https://www.gommies.gom/ohfugme/

It is recommend you kill yourself so you can avoid starving.

Resources:
https://www.gommies.gom/ohshid/
https://www.gommies.gom/1984/
https://www.gommies.gom/guck/
https://www.gommies.gom/probaganda/
https://www.gommies.gom/XDDDD/
https://www.gommies.gom/hiwherearethefood/
https://www.gommies.gom/benis/
https://www.islamiggommunism.gom/

Da sdages of gommunism.

>Sdage one
Bourgers aren't allowed to vode :-DDD but otherwise da system is digtadorshib of gommies. Everything is stole by digtadors and digtadors rule all.

>Sdade two
Withering
All beeple who aren't digtador glass starve. XDDD Once glass disabears and we steal everything more beeple wither away. Bolice begome unnecessary as beeple are dead lol :DDDDD Central blanning begomes unnecessary begause sgarcity caused starving. (BENIS :_DD)

>Sdage three
Gommunism.
No beeple. No food. My money. Much benis.

>Sdage 4
Nod real gommunism. Nexzt gountry. problems werent. :-DDdd

File: 1486070195480.jpg (30KB, 450x450px) Image search: [Google]

30KB, 450x450px

>>137256040
>that's how you make it secure
You cant make this shit up.
Do you """"people"""" actually believe in a computer controlling your life?
Might want to learn more about it, before making that decision.

>>137261383
>you really would need fucking insane levels of computer technology and massive data sets.
lol no
you don't need all that just to allocate basic products to the markets
even walmart should have such system

>>137261610
In Marx's formulation it does.
>>137262108
> Also, computers require a lot of maintenance and upkeep.
I don't see how this disproves anything.

>>137262552
If it's so simple than why has no genius ever come up with a way to efficiently model allocating resources to everybody in an economy? If they have, why hasn't it been efficiently implemented yet?

>>137255146

No, I'd reprogram the robot to give me one hundred times the resources that everyone else receives.

File: ~CPA-CLPLOGO19.gif (37KB, 242x252px) Image search: [Google]

37KB, 242x252px

>>137262620
>In Marx's formulation it does.

We'll make a party official out of you yet. Well done comrade.

>muh fully gay automatic space system

>>137261866
Actually, one of the core tenants of Communism is that people should have more leisure time in order to pursue personal endeavors. This inherently supports individualism.
Not saying communism is good, but your reaction suggested you were not aware of this.

>>137257213

>Communism respects individuality
That is a bold faced lie, you aren't even trying anymore. Communists are worst than fundamentalists.

File: 26-tremendous-propaganda-posters-from-chinese-communists.jpg_(JPEG_Image,_900_×_450_pixels)_-_2017-08-13_16.02.59.jpg (278KB, 767x450px) Image search: [Google]

278KB, 767x450px

>>137263134
>Communism is that people should have more leisure time in order to pursue personal endeavors

Communism has always been big on allowing people the freedom to do and say what they want.

File: cad363d357b4a0413be742aa538acdb1d540b530085f23cc94a42b41872490de.png (2MB, 1280x800px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1280x800px

Communism is the realm of freedom.

>>137255146
Problem with computer programs is that someone has to design them. The programs are vulnerable to the biases of the designer.

>>137263614

As long as it isn't against the party.

File: communist-Hillary.jpg (26KB, 745x393px) Image search: [Google]

26KB, 745x393px

>>137263987
>Communism is the realm of freedom.

Within party lines. Careful now.

>>137263987
>Communism is the realm of freedom.
As a white male with easy access to the internet, I think you're a little too privileged to make that claim on behalf of oppressed minority groups.

>>137258207
Explain why the LTV is wrong. And keep in mind the LTV is a scientific theory. There are 3 ways to disprove a scientific theory.
1. Show a logicall contradiction in the theory
2. Show that the theory in unfalsifiable
3. Show that the perdictions the theory makes are not true.

>>137255146
No you filthy pinko commie faggot. Who programs the computers? Who oversees their operations? The party, who will naturally favour themselves over everyone else. Fuckin' commies can't even feed themselves what makes you think they can actually program a machine to distribute resources across an entire country? Eat shit and die traitor.

>>137255146
no because if the computer is truly objective he will allocate resources to the most productive members of society, just like capitalism

>>137262620
It means that it costs money, resources and people to maintain, which means you need some type of structure of humans involved no matter what. It's also susceptible to hackers, programming errors, and intentional flaws that would give the leadership priority over everything.
You could also program it will bullshit to make the population believe they are living better off than they actually are, or claim there are shortages when there are not and sell the goods overseas.

>>137255949
Classes allready have shared intrests. Thats enough.

>>137255146
Yes it would. Think about a network of machines, think how you would distribute energy in that network and how you would use the processing power of that network. Would you do that with a robotic free market capitalism? No, that's retarded. You would just assign resources and pick tasks for each machine. That's how humans of the future will be organised. And they'll be happy too because AI knows not only what you need to do, but also what you would enjoy doing.

>>137255146
Read "The Machine Stops".

Faggot.

File: proletariat.jpg (204KB, 780x1200px) Image search: [Google]

204KB, 780x1200px

>>137264241
>As long as it isn't against the party.

Of course. You have total freedom to do as you wish within the bounds of party doctrine.

Communism is such an outdated and shitty ideology. Failed every time it's been tried.

>>137256742
The one that was tried and discarded worldwide, that one is outdated.

>>137255146
Certainly rail car delivery of opposition to the Gulags would be on time and much more efficient

>could communism work if-
No.
>b-but what if automa-
No.

>>137265453
>Failed every time it's been tried.
By humans, yes. But computer networks aren't run using capitalism. Computer networks are organised to give each unit just the power it needs and to get maximum amount of work out of each unit for that power. That's communism. Your PC runs on communism and one day PCs like that will run countries.

>>137265911
>computers work by communism
>this

File: 1457938797041.jpg (100KB, 480x679px) Image search: [Google]

100KB, 480x679px

>>137256064
>leftists
>inventing anything
>provides some biased ass rag

hahahahahahaahahhaahhaahah!!!!! go back to leftypol you shithead.

>>137265995
Great point there m8

File: gommunism.png (32KB, 420x420px) Image search: [Google]

32KB, 420x420px

>>137262321

>>137265453
ээ, cлыш, диды вaeвaли вooбщe тo

File: keen 2011 Marxism 1.png (182KB, 586x860px) Image search: [Google]

182KB, 586x860px

>>137264701
>a scientific theory
...with several philosophical requirements, one of them being that labor is the sole source of surplus value.
Well, here's a one-sentence rebuttal: machines can produce surplus value.

>inb4 muh commodity-power
Consider a two workers, one of them "working" a slot machine, and one of them working a stamp press on an assembly line. Imagine that the machines were built so that both workers are doing the EXACT same thing while "working" the machines.

Now, one is obviously more productive than the other. According to the LTV under Marxist philosophy, the difference between those two workers' output should be SOLELY attributable to the workers themselves. Back to reality, clearly, the difference in surplus produced is SOLELY ATTRIBUTABLE TO THE MACHINES. Furthermore, a fully automated machine could replace both workers quite easily. Therefore, machines can produce surplus value.

If that doesn't do it for you, read Keen's section on Marxist "economics" in his 2011 book. pic related

>>137261383
>Communism isn't technically dependent upon the LTV
The Marxist assertion that "communism is inevitable" and "workers' wages will ALWAYS go down as a share of surplus" and "hiring someone is EXPLOITATION" are dependent on the LTV.

>>137266066

https://pastebin.com/LFMagdVr

>>137257213
You're a thief and thieves get the helicopter.

File: 1459101690754.jpg (88KB, 1190x906px) Image search: [Google]

88KB, 1190x906px

>>137255146
I just love your attempts. It's always fun watching you squirm. Cmon, what's next? is elon musk the new karl marx? I wanna help you finish your fanfic.

>>137260042
>free market promotes unequality of resources distribution
boilerplate slogan. what should be equal to what and why?

>>137265911
Communism run by computers would look just like authoritarian capitalism. Human resources that don't respond to objective incentives would be helicopter dropped.

File: 05bd6e0aa20aaff57a391e31bc69435492f4296ed062d847f81732ae46a084ce.png (97KB, 600x558px) Image search: [Google]

97KB, 600x558px

>>137266346
>You're a thief and thieves get the helicopter.


a capitalist (presumably) calling anyone a thief

>>137257507
Socialism also doesn't have food fetishism which can be quite gauche. You don't need to eat EVERY day..

>>137266612
see >>137266239
mutually beneficial relationships are hardly "exploitation"

File: IMC.jpg (128KB, 1000x1000px) Image search: [Google]

128KB, 1000x1000px

It is going to replace most low level labour jobs. Information based jobs like programming and law will remain human oriented for the foreseeable future. This means that dumb fuck fast food workers are out of luck and will either die out or go on welfare or get educated and actually do something useful. Free labour will make the economy boom though.

>>137255146
We don't need communism, we just need to end globalisation and corporatism

Funny how the leftists knew this when i was still young.

>>137266239
You know the LTV isn't all about surplus value right? Its about the difference between exchange value, use value and congealed labor (value) that correlates with the equilibrium price.

>mashines can produce value.
Imagine you build a mashine that creates diamonds out of thin air with no imput from a person. Diamonds are much much less valueble now right? If the Stamp press on the assemly line was automated then the value of the commodity it outputed would have less value because it is easier to create and less labor goes into it.

>>137263134
>tenants
Tenets you dumb fuck

I'm so sick of seeing and hearing this. If you can't speak English at the 12th grade level just use basic words

>>137256850
Can you translate that image for burgers in the audience?

File: farmjobs.jpg (43KB, 712x550px) Image search: [Google]

43KB, 712x550px

>>137266811
>futurist automation-tards actually believe this
yeah just like all those farmers never found jobs... oh wait

>>137267256
What the fuck are you trying to say and did you even read what I said? ofc they will find new jobs you nignog.

>>137266811
>It is going to replace most low level labour jobs. Information based jobs like programming and law will remain human oriented for the foreseeable future.


Oh woe, being this deluded

Tell me, after a good 30 years of automating low skill level jobs, where do you think the next big cost saving cuts can be made? Shop floor level? Lol no, that's probably the most efficient part of your company. No, its gonna be office jobs, HR is the first. Just look at IBM Watson.

>>137267739
It is going to be a while before it happens but it is going to happen. Yeah and office jobs will be replaced likely earlier.

>>137263987
>freedom
Fucking capitalist pig

>>137266947
>mashines
kek. Commie education in action.

>all of that shit
look you didn't address my point retard. The LTV REQUIRES that labor is the SOLE source of surplus value. I just showed that, even philosophically, labor can't be the only source of surplus value.

>Imagine you build a mashine that creates diamonds out of thin air with no imput from a person. Diamonds are much much less valueble now right? If the Stamp press on the assemly line was automated then the value of the commodity it outputed would have less value because it is easier to create and less labor goes into it.
that was really stupid...

>>137266548
It could look like that. Doesn't have to though. AI of the future knows exactly what you want to do and it knows exactly what you need to have. So it'll find you a job where you do what you want to do and it'll give you what you need as a reward. If you work hard, it'll also give you what you don't really need, but sort of want. We're not in the 80s, we're talking proper futuristic AI here.
I mean it will be a dystopian future where humans are the slaves of the machines. But it would work.

>>137255146

It's leading to a hellish world of shining cities with the political, technological and finance class. Sprawling crime ridden suburbs barely holding itself together and occasionally wracked by gang wars. Depopulated "agro wastes" everywhere in between.

>>137268215
>But it would work.
For how long?
Sooner or later it is in the AI's best interrest to get rid of the human society.

>>137255146
If you don't have any skills you better have a piece of land to grow food on cuz you're gonna starve.

>>137268047
Idk, who is it, some American tax prep company is now doing tax forms for average people with an AI...

Idk how the culture is in the USA, but taxes are usually something pretty privat here.
Also, is it Amsterdam? Some city in Europe with tons of bridges, they are building a bridge, from A to Z with computers. From an AI that designs the bridge, to a metal 3D printer that builds the parts, to a robot assembling it.

Then wasn't there Facebook shutting down their AI project cause it developed a language they couldn't read?

Im just saying, shits not just on the horizon anymore, its the next stop.

>>137255146
no im sure communists would manage to fail even in utopian conditions
you are just that retarded

>>137255146
>Also is automation leading towards communism?
Well, that's retarded.

Communism will never work, not just because of ideology, but because the entire fucking system stands against human nature.

>abolish the right to property
Good luck telling people they can't own their own shit.

It's pretty stupid to try and keep people from owning shit they want to have.
It's impossibly stupid to try to take away what they already own.
Do you want to get shot? Because that's how you get shot.

>everyone gets equal pay and/or as much money as some retard decides they should have
Literally nobody wants either of those. People want to increase their social status and money is a big fucking part of that.
Also people want to have the option of bartering and negotiating the amount of work they do and the money they get. It's called having liberty.

>"we decide what your job is and how/when you do it"
Hahahahaha!