Yes, of course. The countervailing notion that Communism is Impossible because People are Purely Selfish is nonsense.
Human behavior is a function of many things, including especially the particular circumstances involved, things people have experienced in the past, and some small, very small, part due to instinctual programming.
Marxists will generally say that Human Nature is Constructed. And also that Humans are Social. And that the aspects of gain that selfish acts might lead to, are themselves socially constructed.
Veblyn pointed out the insanity of accumulating great wealth, where the whole point is in some way prove oneself more worthy than others, a socially constructed value, even if having been achieved crushing the backs of many in the most anti-social ways.
Psychological Research since about 1970 has revealed that above all, most people are highly concerned about fairness. Most people have natural empathy with other people, only suppressed by racist and supremacist ideologies which are unnatural to the smallest children and must be spanked into them. People have a strong desire to nuture, which no doubt evolved to facilitate the long child-rearing process, but is easily generalized to unfortunate people of all kinds (struggling, poor, homeless, or starving) and even to pets and wildlife and inanimate objects. People willingly adopt identities, ideologies, and roles which they support to benefit others even at substantial personal costs, even if it is the identity of an Ayn Rand disciple who alleges to believe only in personal selfishness, but as with all other sects, their missionary zeal comes from the hope of saving the world.
Seen in context of all this, the notion that people are nothing but pure selfish robots is ridiculous. People seek socially valued goals within socially constructed frameworks. When basic needs are met, people seek greater social approval above all else. People want to feel that they are contributing to something greater than themselves, benefiting other people, and being loved for it.
The ruling class has always understood this. This is why every evil is coated in a capsule of good to make it palatable. We must go to war to save people, we bomb countries to save their freedoms, we must put people in prison to protect people and so on. Consistently every evil is wrapped in a claimed overarching good, because goodness (fairness) is what people respect. There must always be lies proving that adversaries in war are being led by inhuman dictators who are utterly at odds with our American Way presumed to be about fairness and democracy.
But it should seem fairly obvious, that if people are primarily concerned about fairness, a society based on sharing and mutual benefits is the best, most efficient, and everything. A society based on enriching and empowering a limited ruling class will always be unstable, and based upon the ability of elites to co-opt others, at least for awhile.
In fact, Capitalism has always painted itself that way, as the kind of social organization that most efficiently produces benefits for all. Attempts to prove this mathematically have shown that it cannot except under the most unbelievable assumptions, such as perfect knowledge of the future. Meanwhile, there has never been a similar proof that collectivism cannot, only illogical ravings by Hayek and others. Before Capitalism, all human societies were were largely collectivist even when highly unequal or hierarchical. Before "civilization" greater equality and collectivism was the norm as people lived together in smaller bands.
In reality, Capitalism is most efficient for the Oligarchs, and least efficient for everyone else.
The only problem is, taking the reins from the Oligarchs and actually replacing Capitalism with Communism. That has actually never been accomplished, but there have been many long lasting and some still ongoing efforts.
You could say, as in fact many Capitalist Ideologues do, that the essentially Social Democratic societies that make up the first world (including the brutal USA, Russia, and Brazil) are Communist Societies in the making. It may have seemed more that way 50 years ago because of how badly things have gone since...but not at the expense of making Capitalism look any better.
Here's a mixed set of voices debating the question (warning: mostly having a strong anti-Communist tilt, but some interesting voices anyway).
Human behavior is a function of many things, including especially the particular circumstances involved, things people have experienced in the past, and some small, very small, part due to instinctual programming.
Marxists will generally say that Human Nature is Constructed. And also that Humans are Social. And that the aspects of gain that selfish acts might lead to, are themselves socially constructed.
Veblyn pointed out the insanity of accumulating great wealth, where the whole point is in some way prove oneself more worthy than others, a socially constructed value, even if having been achieved crushing the backs of many in the most anti-social ways.
Psychological Research since about 1970 has revealed that above all, most people are highly concerned about fairness. Most people have natural empathy with other people, only suppressed by racist and supremacist ideologies which are unnatural to the smallest children and must be spanked into them. People have a strong desire to nuture, which no doubt evolved to facilitate the long child-rearing process, but is easily generalized to unfortunate people of all kinds (struggling, poor, homeless, or starving) and even to pets and wildlife and inanimate objects. People willingly adopt identities, ideologies, and roles which they support to benefit others even at substantial personal costs, even if it is the identity of an Ayn Rand disciple who alleges to believe only in personal selfishness, but as with all other sects, their missionary zeal comes from the hope of saving the world.
Seen in context of all this, the notion that people are nothing but pure selfish robots is ridiculous. People seek socially valued goals within socially constructed frameworks. When basic needs are met, people seek greater social approval above all else. People want to feel that they are contributing to something greater than themselves, benefiting other people, and being loved for it.
The ruling class has always understood this. This is why every evil is coated in a capsule of good to make it palatable. We must go to war to save people, we bomb countries to save their freedoms, we must put people in prison to protect people and so on. Consistently every evil is wrapped in a claimed overarching good, because goodness (fairness) is what people respect. There must always be lies proving that adversaries in war are being led by inhuman dictators who are utterly at odds with our American Way presumed to be about fairness and democracy.
But it should seem fairly obvious, that if people are primarily concerned about fairness, a society based on sharing and mutual benefits is the best, most efficient, and everything. A society based on enriching and empowering a limited ruling class will always be unstable, and based upon the ability of elites to co-opt others, at least for awhile.
In fact, Capitalism has always painted itself that way, as the kind of social organization that most efficiently produces benefits for all. Attempts to prove this mathematically have shown that it cannot except under the most unbelievable assumptions, such as perfect knowledge of the future. Meanwhile, there has never been a similar proof that collectivism cannot, only illogical ravings by Hayek and others. Before Capitalism, all human societies were were largely collectivist even when highly unequal or hierarchical. Before "civilization" greater equality and collectivism was the norm as people lived together in smaller bands.
In reality, Capitalism is most efficient for the Oligarchs, and least efficient for everyone else.
The only problem is, taking the reins from the Oligarchs and actually replacing Capitalism with Communism. That has actually never been accomplished, but there have been many long lasting and some still ongoing efforts.
You could say, as in fact many Capitalist Ideologues do, that the essentially Social Democratic societies that make up the first world (including the brutal USA, Russia, and Brazil) are Communist Societies in the making. It may have seemed more that way 50 years ago because of how badly things have gone since...but not at the expense of making Capitalism look any better.
Here's a mixed set of voices debating the question (warning: mostly having a strong anti-Communist tilt, but some interesting voices anyway).
No comments:
Post a Comment