I like socialism, communism, but I don't like the abolition of private property part. I want a big gated farm all to myself.
What's it called if you divide the country up into equal parcels and give every citizen a piece of land? Government is just there to make sure no one infringes on anothers property.
The government would allow you to start a farming coop so you could sell your produce.
But the government ownership of the land is not negotiable.
why do you need it all to yourself when you can just go roll around in any of the collective farms
Sounds like you’re a distributist to me.
People are largely unappealing, and I want my own little 100 acre kingdom to myself to live my life. A refuge.
And when I pass away, the gov. can take it and give it to a new citizen.
If you work the land yourself instead of profitting off the labour of others who are working on your land, then it wouldn't be "private property" but "personal property".
Ownership is just a technicality anyways.
The government would give you a house and a plot of land to grow your crops and materials for your farming coop.
Cuba has farming coops for instance.
This.
You are aware that the system you suggest will not work in the end.
read capital tbqh
NO STATES
You want to farm all by yourself? In a gated up lot? How about some vertical hydroponics. Anything bigger is going to require some teamwork. So team up with a local garden/farm, gate unnecessary. Your personal property, home, would ideally be within walking distance. Yours to live in till death do you part, if you'd like.
The abolition of private property only means that cannot own the work of others that work your farm you can still have personal property that you work yourself. If you were to hire someone to work on it however they would have to have a say in how the property is run.
well op you have a choice here
1.have the state give assign you a plot of land and give you the materials to start your own farming coop.
2.have an anarkiddie society in which anyone grows anything anywhere and get massacred by foreign invaders.
OP just wants to buy some land to farm where he can live comfy without anyone bothering him. This is impossible in a communist society.
OP, capitalism gives you the freedom to do whatever the fuck you want without being gulag’d by the secret police because you just want to be left alone.
In the communist society the state would not only provide the op with the material but also the training.
In the capitalist society he'd need hundreds of thousands of dollars.
In what world do you live in where buying land for a farm would cost hundreds of thousands of dollars? In a communist society, what OP farms would be forcibly taken and distributed without any say. He put in the work and it’s taken without question. He should have the option to sell the goods he created with his bare hands to who he sees fit and to make an actual profit for it.
Your religion is poison.
Here's a quote from the cpusa program
It's called Earth bucko.
Maybe some permafrozen siberian shithole. How hard did your daddy coddle you? Your meme fearmongering is absolutely retarded.
So unlike capitalism then where your work is owned by your boss.
That isn't what distributism is at all
So no one can own a Bugatti?
There'd be four brands of car.
state sport car, state suv, state truck and state regular car.
And they'd all be electric.
Those would be your choices.
And you'd be encouraged to use public transport instead.
And your only choice of color is red but you can choose to have a gold hammer sickle painted on the hood.
this but unironically
I'd like to think that with enough labourbux you could even buy a boat.
The same boat as your stuck-up neighbour Jim, of course.
kulakism
Why would it be ironic comrade. Under a centrally planned economy there would be no such thing as intellectual property and no incentive to churn out numerous competing iterations of the same luxury good unless it's a real improvement over the last version.
I suspect a similar thing would happen to engineering in general. Engineers, now self-managing, would skew towards "sexy" blue sky projects rather than optimizing existing technology except in service of the former. You could see this attitude in the Soviet Union as well. It's not necessarily better than capitalist engineering, just different.
If there were boats they'd be rentals and you might have to share them.
With automated cars, car collecting will eventually become a thing of the past. Who in a hundred years will want a Bugatti? They'll be museum pieces.
Live will be luxurious for those who want that kind of life.
...
...
Boats are bourgeois frivolities and there aren't enough for everyone.
Its only proper that they'd be rentals.
We're not going back in time. There can be boats enough for everyone. Not everyone would want to own them though. Like cars. It will be far more efficient to just borrow them when need, or want, arises.
There is nothing wrong with hobbies. If someone wants to collect cars i socialism they can do that. Car ethusiast should get to have as many cars as they want while people whith no business driving gets off the road. It's a win-win for everybody.
I can see that.
I can also see people designing and flying their own vehicles someday.
Those would be obsolete with bullet trains anyways
Reminder that in most coastal areas boating is a prole pass time. Rich people have proles who know what they do man their boats for them.
That still implies the abolition of private property, albeit with individual management of production rather than social production. You're basically advocating Max Stirner's "union of egoists" (which is retarded as fuck imo).
We were talking hobbyists
Utopian socialism is definitely retarded. And Stirnerite "socialism" isn't simply retarded but reactionary as fuck, basically being feudalism without feudal lords.
Read The German Ideology.
I get it I get it.
...
...
oof
oof
oof
OP can be a lonely tenant farmer on his plot of land, that the community gave you into tenancy. Without paying any actual rent.
The technical details on what tools he will be given, maybe either a tractor to be shared with other lonely tenant farmers.
There is even a word for it, from german 'landpacht'. If you have seen the movie Grapes of Wrath, the Joad family were the precise tenant farmers.
Such proposal can be a valuable data point on self-sustenance farming. If you would track your labour times, track your inputs and outputs, it would be valuable economic data that could be used on how much land will a different person like you given if they would want it.
The only question is how much is your desire fueled by today's capitalist alienation and the obvious observation that it is highly prohibitive to actually work your living instead of mediating it with wage labour and money.
But if one genuinely wants to directly work for a living on a lower degree of labour specialization, I don't see how that would be a problem to me or any other person. Especially if all is accounted for and you are given as much as anybody else and are giving what is required for you. Such as giving part of the production to contribute to socialized services like healthcare.
But smart person would probably let such fool to go on with this experiment, because over time they will come back running that they want to cooperate with others. Edgar H. Schein has a great book, "Psychology of Organization" which compiles various conclusions from various sociological and psychological research into the working class in the working environment.
If properly calculated for all the social production, then there should be no problem with having a boat as a personal property.
Of course one can bet hard money that it would be much more affordable to lend a boat for some time rather than buy it in its entirety.
Nice meme
Well, since no one wants to be honest to you. You won't get it. No successful revolution is going to happen wherein you receive one hundred acres of land to farm, by yourself. I'll return to this, but first let me make some obvious statements the """socialists""" of Zig Forums can benefit from.
The only useful, possible Communism is one without private property, i.e. Marxist Communism. You might as well have said "I like breathing, but I hate air". You don't know what you are talking about.
Furthermore, and I can't believe this hasn't been said, your idea of splitting up land is INSANELY stupid. You would have to forcibly remove everyone into their new state-sanctioned land. Rapists, murderers, rich, poor, everyone gets the same land, and housing will have to be abandoned in DROVES to accomadate whoever gets 100 acres of New York.
Oh yeah, and lets not forget about cities, or just valuable land in general. Does everyone get an equal absolute amount of land, or a certain value of land?
Or, you know what, I won't deconstruct this retarded idea because it is retarded, and treating retarded ideas as worthy of criticism is firmly the activity of the retarded, and I refuse to be a retard.
Anyways, Communism is not a wish granting system. You are not getting a big plot of land to waste, just like I'm not getting a yacht to boat around in, and we are not all recieving lambos and mansions. In the Communist system, the Capitalist class is going to be abolished, destroyed, annihilated. Then, the proletariat class will follow as it will no longer have the means to exist either. The means of production will be socially owned, by society, for society's benefit. Living conditions will rise because of the massive, massive amounts of value returned to people, and so forth we can imagine to our heart's content how the future will be.
But, the facts are, if you own a farm, you will likely lose it so it can feed people instead of line your pockets. If you want to own a farm, you can work on one and have your rights to it like the other workers do. If you want to own a "farm" l, you can spend your own money to buy land, which you can farm yourself, or with anyone who wants to help you.
These are the only options, realistically, outside of super FALC bullshit, and, of course, in make-believe land with FALC, you can have all of the make-believe farms you could ever want!
Having a tiny garden.
Well in case of my country that is. In case of places like hong kong it would be having your own personal poststamp.
so…communism
READ MARX
Earth. This ridiculous assumption that land is cheap shows how naive and sheltered you are. I own a business and literally everything costs a fuck ton of money. Usable land is generally expensive, cheap land is typically undesirable (on a mountainside etc) and wouldn't make for a good farm. Some exceptions exist of course but by and large land, and anything else that one needs for commerce, is fucking expensive. This is the reason that most 'entrepreneurs' are actually rich kids or others with 'fuck you' money. This is the result of the capitalist machine.
Tough shit. A "big farm all to yourself" would either require you to hire labor to maintain it, or waste a shitton of land that could otherwise benefit society for no reason other than your hubris. Neither are acceptable. You'll get a dacha with a garden big enough to be maintained by one person or a small family, like in the USSR. That should be plenty enough for a comfy hikki lifestyle.
Also we get "guyz I don't like people what do under socialisms xd" threads every week. You won't be forced to interact with other people, though you will have to work. However, many barriers to socialization will be gone. You will probably not have this problem under socialism in the first place.
If you want to grow some food as a hobby and/or for yourself, family, friends, neighbors etc. you can do that in your personal property. In order to produce food for society at large though, collectivization is optimal and more efficient and thus must be done.
Sounds like Geolibertarianism. As I understand it, you implement a land-tax that rises exponentially as you get more land, and goes negative if you own no land at all. That way land is distributed pretty much equally among the citizenry. Those who own more than an equal share have to pay for it, and those who own less get a basic income.
en.wikipedia.org
If it's a CoOp like Cuba I don't see the issue, the main problem being the enormous population of the earth and limited livable space. Frankly I too would like an area of land that's 10 square kilometers or so where I can do whatever I want and just live quietly in peace, but that's probably going to be a problem for us. We were born too late to explore the unexplored land areas of the earth, and born too soon to experience the wonder of non-earth colonies and space exploration. What a time to be alive.
There isn't enough good land to give everyone their own farm. Duh?
If you want everyone to have big gated farms, then what you're looking for is a socialist country with a very low population density.
You need to take your pills, Sebastian. You're not sane without the pills.
No. Feudalism is based on individual subsistence production. Communism is industrial and social. There's a massive fucking difference.
feudalism
Perfect bait thread.
I love how a guy having his own farm, with enough land and just wants to be left the fuck alone is "problematic" for adolescent commies and anarchists.
If I can't own my house, car, and personal entertainment, I don't want to live in your shitty communal society where everyone is forced to work, share, everything.
Could introverts even exist in communism/anarchism?
Just seems that you want to force people into a miserable, communal society where you can't own anything, you can't have privacy.
Being anti-social isn't healthy, but getting ample alone time isn't so bad either. Happiness comes from a lot of balances.
I hope for eradication of states and all unjustifiable hierarchies. Hermits would be free to run off to a secluded cabin all they like.
Did you read the thread at all? Most responses say it's fine as long as he's not employing others to extract labor from them.
...
WTF? How is this any more or less true in capitalism? Unless you're rich and living off stock dividends, you have to work and interact with people on a daily basis. It's basically impossible to completely retreat from social interaction in our society (or any real society for that matter: you had to interact with people under feudalism as well). Communism will require you to contribute to the common good, just as capitalism does, but we're not going to force you to live in a commune and socialise with people at the point of a gun.
You'll be able to have these things you idiot, they have nothing to do with private property in the marxist sense (though you won't be able to rent rooms out or sell your house on the market, since the housing market will be abolished).
You will have to work though. No is going to tolerate you freeloading unless there is a good reason to do so (disability for example).
If you convince nearby people that you owning the land and working it by yourself will be healthier for society you can get way with it. But it really depends at what stage society is. If we get to fully automated farms and smaller world population i don't think farmhouses for outcasts would be a problem, might be a good prison program even.
You probably won't be able to work 100 acres of land alone tho.
You could probably have a small isolated property with enough space for you to get busy and be productive, If your place is small and isolated enough people will be even less bothered since you will be growing most of your own food.
That's not how it works you fucking idealist brainlet. Private property under socialism is specifically property used for value extraction, either from the labor of others or indirectly through rent. Everything else is personal or public property. That's it. None of this "if you can convince" bullshit. Socialism isn't "wah this guy has a bigger house" meme.
It doesn't matter whether he has a plot of land large enough for five mansions, as long as the land is actually being personally used–either he has an extended family, is somehow managing the land on his own, or works it with a coop.
Not that guy but:
Please kill yourself.
My mistake. I meant under capitalism. There's no private property under socialism.
Ah, sorry for telling you to off yourself then.
No one said this.
