Is true egalitarianism actually impossible?

Attached: ST-plantobsessed_SG24.jpg (1484x989, 341.63K)

Pol Pot confirmed for being the only authentic Marxist of the 20th century

Attached: barai.jpg (999x745, 286.21K)

Communism is a moneyless society.

>working with monarchists and cia
literally a utopian faggot

Marx never made any such statement, thankfully enough because it's beyond retarded and has more to do with the idealism of reactionary agrarian Romanticism than with any sort of materialist approach.

Technological development is already making the urban-rural divide outdated. Contemporary agriculture is increasingly capable of yielding crops regardless of environmental setting.

edition.cnn.com/2017/10/07/world/automated-farm-harvest-england/index.html

Attached: retard w.png (645x729, 74.68K)

A. Marx specifically wrote about the merging of urban and rural areas and evening out development so as to abolish the divide between urban and rural areas, and B. there is no money in communism, and certainly not any individuals trying to sell their goods.

its almost like full communism is retarded

GOT EEM

Read Anti-Duhring you colossal faggot.

In which of Marx's books did he talk about this?

But does it really? If food could be grown in urban areas as efficiently as in rural areas, this would just make rural farmers obsolete. It would only further the urban-rural inequality.

Can you point to any segment of Engels' book where he advocates the abolition of cities under communism?

It most definitely would — under capitalism. Technological development under late capitalism will increasingly make many people superfluous because the market simply has no use for them and their skill set and/or level anymore. It is the task of socialism to create a social arrangement in which everyone can enjoy their share of social wealth with no possible threat of economic exclusion.

From section/chapter three 'Production'.

no, goyim, biology is a social construct of cisnormative racist-sexism!
without discrimination and bad economy stuff things, just remove them, and utopia ensues!
everything is possible, reality is like a sandbox

Attached: 1515849393927.jpg (800x732, 65K)

Nice meme

go back to Zig Forums nigger

Pulling a rake through dirty is barbaric, and breads futility. All agriculture should be automated.

In no way does he advocate for the abolition of cities in there, in fact he effectively promotes mass industrialization and urbanization — "the most equal distribution possible of modern industry over the whole country". He merely describes overdeveloped megalopolis as eventually doomed artifacts of the town-country divide.

everyone ITT seems to be talking about farming as if its the middle of the 20th century. Farming today is mostly automated and all the farms are owned by some of the largest corporations. The immigrant pickers I see all the time, and I see them all the time precisely because they live in the city and are bussed in and out of the fields to do their work. It's cheaper that way.

There's more of a divide between urban and suburban communities these days

Societies need food production from rural areas to feed people mainly in urban areas, which are unable to grow food.

Synthesis: Move the food production facilities into the cities through vertical farms and green, self-sustainable buildings.

Guess I am now a dialectics grand wizard.

But as was already mentioned:

Moving food production to urban areas would decimate the rural population. People would leave the rural areas in droves, leaving only the old and sick behind. The rural countryside would become a hellhole dystopia.

Nice spooks. All culture is equall.

Not under a communist system which stresses equality.

Nice waste of iron. In terms of resources and labor traditional forms of farming would be more efficent and easier.

Under communism everyone would have relatively equal wealth so even if vertical farming was a thing rural areas would exist because there would be n incentive to move of the city. And some people (Burgers) prefer rural areas.

So you're telling me someone in a rural area would have the same access to theatre, music, libraries, opera, whatever, as someone living in an urban area? If I live an hour away from an opera house, I have less access to culture than someone who lives down the street from an opera house.

What incentive would that be?

I bet this is the same guy who buys organic. But seriously in Full Communism due to high levels of automation people’s workdays would be like a few hours a weak. So people whould be free to spend the rest of there time doing as they please, and most farmers enjoy doing what they do so there’s no stoping people from farming.

It costs more labor to build those machines than the amount of labor it saves by growing crops.

This isn’t advocating for agrarianism, it’s advocating for suburbia.

Waste of Steal

Many schools in rural areas do plays at night at various times through the year.
iTunes
E-books
Waste of time

I ment to say no incentive. I forgot the O

No

Also, no. They're both workers so they belong to the same class. Cultural distinctions might develop and they may hate each other for those differences, but I don't see that happening either. I don't foresee a difference between urban and rural life in FALC because they would be intertwined. Agriculture would be fully automated and could easily exist within a city.

No longer an issue.

How about no. He was not right. He was a nut and so are his fans.

Attached: Ecocity.jpg (723x548, 200.98K)

How can rural and urban areas, which are separated geographically by distance, be "intertwined"?

That ecocity pic looks pretty cool. I gotta wonder how life is outside the city borders though.

I meant they'd be one in the same, neither would exist. Bad wording on my part. See the pic I posted

But that region has no agricultural productivity.

How do you know? Those could be cherry trees. And all meat would be synthetic, we don't need farmland in the traditional sense at all.

Why would it be any worse? We're living under FALC right now

Are you sure about that? Even if that were the case, technology is constantly evolving and there will come a time in the near future when they will be much cheaper.

okay

How the fuck does this follow?

The only way this would be conceivable is if population density and population distribution would be uniform within a country. I don't see how that would be possible, unless you go full Pol Pot and start forcing people in and out of certain areas.

kys reddit

rural porky seems scared :^)

I didn't say that, did I?
Why would we need acres of land dedicated to raising cattle if it's 3D printed or some other futuristic shit? Some fully automated factory somewhere would deal with that.

We're living under FALC, there are no countries, but ok, I'll give you that. I envision the "rural" part of society to just be a more simple area. I can imagine a planet wide mega-ecocity with pockets of completely untouched land being nature preserves. Nobody would live in these areas.

No, you.

Attached: Ecocity 2.jpg (650x472, 61.87K)

Does such a thing really exist? I'd wager 99% of porkies are living in urban or suburban areas.

I don't know where to start with this one, guys. I think it might be brain damaged.

Grow the goddamn vegetables in some scifi hydroponic system buried deep in the ground. There, no surface land is needed. Ya'll need to be more creative.

I think he means farm-owning porkie.

LE FALC XD

What exactly is it that makes you think this is a problematic project?

the op explicitly mentioned falc you sperg

The most commonly known is '9th plank' in the commiefesto

In glorious anprim society there will be no urban vs rural divide to argue over. Checkmate statists.

Attached: let_that_sink_in.png (446x892, 33K)

But what about communism pre 10,000 AD

If it was cheeper the Bourgeois would be doing it right now. Drones cost lot’s of labor to build. They also need oil/elericity to operate which is becoming more scares right now. Not to mention the labor of the people operating the drones. This was a publicity stunt, not a profitable operation. Besides even if this tech was profitable it was done on a grain. Which of all crops is the least labor intensive. Vegetables like cabbage and rhubarb, or fruit like apples and blueberries are much more labor intensive than grains.

No you idiot it’s peasants who are scared.

There isn’t enough iron in a hundred Earths to produce the amount of steal nessicary for a planet wide megacity. Especially if you’re doing Vertical Farming. Besides the amount of people needed for a Earth wide megacity over a Trillion. That isn’t ecological or sustainable. Cities would expand under Communism, but only to where current day suburbs are. They realistically can’t expand more than that.

WellI hope these are present day natural parks. Because if they aren’t you’d be evicting people and no better than Gentrifying Pokies.

Photosynthesis needs lot’s of light,which only the sun can produce the amount of light needed for photosynthesis.

If this vertical farm meme was ever possible (maybe we gain the ability to extract Iron from Earth’s core or some shit) Kulaks would just buy vertical farms. Meanwhile virtually all peasants would be unemployed.

You would need extreme amounts of Iron to build them. You would have to turn the Iron into steal. Then you would have to build the robots to automate it. Which would require tons of rare-earth minerals. Which extractions require harming the environment.

I wouldn't say retarded insomuch as it is incapable and unattainable in our current stage of society.

Urban and rural areas will become wasteland alike.

Attached: 1407115065742.png (451x577, 374.1K)

So there are a lot of things wrong with this.
No clue what that is. Communism isn't about that.
Maybe? I don't care, be more specific so all of the Zig Forums geniuses will stop making positions for you and then arguing against them.
Maybe this is an interesting point but it has came from someone uninteresting.
This is a false dichotomy, for one. What about the industrial workers, and the service workers? What about the medical workers? What about the educational workers? Don't even speak to me if you haven't considered the conflict between the janitorial industrialists and the custodial agriculturalists.
For two, you're working with some strange nano-market that doesn't exist. People can't just charge others more for things with no limit, there's competition and such.
For two-point-five, there isn't going to be a market under Communism, these people won't be competing.
I already talked about how these """classes""" don't exist anymore than the competition between all industries, especially not without a market
No, these aren't production relations of any sort that have been discussed. Marx has discussed how individual workers on a market end up competing against eachother, however, they do not suddenly constitute their own class. He has never mentioned this, this would have to be your own theoretical contribution. This is sarcasm, don't
Probably? But maybe not? Lots of rural people have plenty of food, education, etc… No reason to expect this couldn't be fixed. But no one should care! Yes, the people who choose to live in these rural areas will probably not have as much access to resources as the urban people. So what? Not only has this been the case throughout all of society, Socialism can't magically fix this without a huge, huge change of some kind that would probably make it irrelevant or presuppose it. Rural people can live with less access to resources, it won't cause any sort of giant conflict. To be short, it's been this way, it will either be fixed (great), be improved (cool), or will totally stay the same (okay).
Also, Pol Pot's solution was to kick everyone out of cities, which only made everything worse and fixed none of the inequality.
Finally, there's a lot I want to talk about here but I have about splitting headache, and your post isn't really detailed enough for me to continue.
It is somewhat interesting to imagine how inter-industry conflicts (perhaps even cultural, social, etc…) could negatively impact a Socialist/Communist society.
This is (almost) a complete tangent, but why do some here have such an idealized view of Socialist/Communist society? You all just think society is perfect minus the bouegeois?

dotting a city with lettuce towers wont feed humanity.

when you imagine vertical farming, don't imagine a beautiful arcology city. imagine something like a large sprawl of 3~5 story warehouse like buildings with few windows. They light their floors inside with a reddish light optmized to deliver as much light as the plant will use in only the spectra it will use it, for as little energy as possible, powered by solar panels either on the rooftops or elsewhere.
You could even build such structures underground if you wanted.
like greenhouses, this makes the farm more expensive, but more productive.

I dont think you fully grasp the concept of "full communism" or even "normal communism".

also

Spoken like a true urbanite.

>What are fusion reactors soon plz

Be more creative lad. Plants are really fucking inefficient at capturing solar energy anyway.

Are you actually mentally handicapped or are you just pretending?

How does forcing everyone into the countryside not fix the urban-rural inequality? If there is no urban population, how can there be inequality between rural and (nonexistent) urban populations?

Fixing inequality at the cost of aggregate and mean welfare is killing the goose that lays the golden eggs. An equality of subsistence farmers is not preferable to the inequality of the rural urban divide as we know it.

Why not?

Because being a subsistence farmer is less pleasurable. It also makes you less free, as it amounts to submitting to the tyranny of nature.

How do you know that? Did you personally spend time as a subsistence farmer?

This is literally the "equal spreading of misery" meme lmao.