/leftypol/ - Leftypol

Proletariat without Borders

Mode: Reply

Max file size: limitless

Max files: 3

Remember to follow the rules

Max message length: 4096


/Leftypol/ is a backup board for 8ch.net/leftypol/.

IRC: Rizon.net #bunkerchan
https://qchat.rizon.net/?channels=bunkerchan


Open file (64.74 KB 378x300 enlarge.png)
hello Comrade 04/15/2018 (Sun) 18:23:15 [Preview] No. 6749
recently someone told me that 'communism doesnt work because there is no competition and competition innovates' whats an easy way to debunk this if they bring it up again??

btw happy ww3
tell them that they are right
>>6749
There's big list here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Soviet_inventions
What he probably means is that the USSR didn't come up with piles of consumer tat. Which is right, it didn't.
>>6761
But didn't that come from competition against capitalists countries?
>>6762
So, there is competition in communism?
>>6762
Partly, but there were also institutions competing for resources within the USSR.
>>6749

It's true that capitalism encourages innovation

It's also true that under capitalism creative people are forced to abandon their passions in order to survive.
>>6786
>It's also true that under capitalism creative people are forced to abandon their passions
Can't you see the irony here?
>>6761
>>6761
Competition in economics is the rivalry among sellers trying to achieve goals like increasing profits and sales volume, just because the USSR had some good inventors doesn't mean anything in regards to competition.
only the rich can compete in the first place
>>6786
>capitalism encourages innovation

It doesn't. Innovation nearly never comes from the private sector. It comes from researchers and scientists who love their job.
>>6749
Cuba's medical innovations like and HIV and lung cancer vaccines. USSR beating the US to space.

And many of the 'innovations' of capitalism don't make anything better. Look at planned obsolescence of consumer electronics or price-fixing in oligopolistic industries like airlines or telecom.
>>6749
but like practicing some of these gimme questions is super important for cadre-building. looks bad if you don't have a good answer to the 50 most commonly asked questions.
This is the biggest oxymoron from competitivist. In industry or any workforce that is large enough, teams are formed to complete task effectively and efficiently. A cohesive team is a good team. A teams goal is rarely to be competitive. Rather their objective is just that. An objective to be completed. The objective may be for competitive gain for the capitalist but for the team members it is just a stupid task with a cunty deadline attached. In capitalism we can see this as team A from company A, and team B from company B. (to spice this up we can also say A is from country A and B is from country B). Both A and B are working on the same thing, both have their trade secrets which give them an advantage, and both are working to subvert the other. This is a huge waste of time, resources, and labour. And most importantly the competitivist goal is still to generate surplus value for the capitalist. which could be argued as the brainlet as
>muh inovates.
but dont sell yourself short comrade there is moar muh inovates down the road...

Now compare this to the opposite example of A and B collaborating together. They both share ideas freely. They work in coalition. They are no longer scheming about the other. They are AB or BA. Now knowing that your friend may be asking for irl examples. Public hospitals are a good example. They are efficient and effective. Wards are triaged into specialised teams that work cooperatively. The open source of information and communication is critical. Now imagine a person has arrived at Hospital A and has passed away. it is ascertained that they are an organ donor. Team A retrieves sed organs. One kidney is put in the icebox and transported to hospital B where team B gives that kidney to the kidney recipient. 1 organ = 1 life if everything grafts aohkay.

Now if we injected the second scenario back into the first scenario we get a macabre outcome. Hospital A (kekistan shares boarder with bunkistan) gets the kidney. Hospital B (bunkistan shares boarder with kekistan) calls HosA and asks if they have any kidneys. HosA says "nah mate". hangs up phone. HosA holds onto the kidney just in case they can get a competitive edge over those gibs at HosB. Kidney goes passed use by date. Time. Resource. Labour. Life/Lives.
B pays the price ot kidney to A. Sends kidney packed in HosA(tm) package to B. Life and resources saved.

Delete
Report/Ban

Captcha (required for reports and bans by board staff)


no cookies?