Society without property?

Not true. The US alone have the capacity to produce enough food for the entire world several times over every year. The reason we are not producing as much is because of economic reasons. What do you think would happen if food become cheaper than dirt?The third world countries, who coincidently also have the highest pop increase rates, will definitely have problems. However, the world overall will not suffer the fate that Malthus predicted.

I'm sorry, but this is complete nonsense. There were more societies under true communism (with overwhelming success) than there were societies in other forms. The thing is when communism were experimented in large scale, say a whole country rather than a tribe, it was met with failure. This is because these societies, notably China and Russia, tried to leap frog from feudalistic-like straight to communism. It doesn't work that way, at least not according to Marx. If a society that large want to turn communism, it has to go through industrialization first. Neither China nor Russia took that necessary step.

This is simply not true. The majority of civilizations that ever existed were communistic. 19th century England got pretty close to true Capitalism, and it failed miserably. It almost reverted back to the times where there were the haves and the havenots.

Sorry, Jar, but I'm terrible at reading your mind. What's going on?

This is like saying there aren't any Romans around anymore therefore the Roman Empire never existed. Yes, the problem is industrialization, or the lack thereof. Read Marx again. According to his theory, a society must go through all the phases in order to achieve true communism in a modern form. So far, none of the major experiments actually followed this outline. Instead, they jumped from feudalism to communism. And this is exactly what I was saying. These societies were small but efficient. You seem to deny the fact that they existed at all. Ok, how many times do I have to repeat myself? Let me repeat one more time. Industrialization, according to the theory, does not occur under communism. Communism come after industrialization. No, it is not. True capitalism will result in disaster. The guilden age was an example. 19th century England was another example. You just end up with a hand full of people monopolizing everything.As much as people deny this, the fact of the matter is modern western societies have many communistic traits. Social security, unions, welfare, insurance, etc. are all communist ideas.

I don't know about France, but Sweden seems to be getting there. The problem that I see is that an industrialist society tend to be agressive (just look at Britain and the States). Unless there is some kind of worldwide change, I just don't see any country being able to become a post-industrialist society and stay that way for long.

Depends on what kind of production we are talking about.

According to my geography prof, the world pop is going to exceed 7G pretty soon. It's going to double by the time I have my kid is in high school.Unfortunately, the trend seem to indicate that the poorer you are the more kids you have. What have been puzzling me is how the heck do we try to solve the pop problem in the near future? No government on Earth would want another country to tell them what to do, especially something like curbing the population. China seems to be doing well with their pop control but at the cost of one of their most cherished traditions. But other countries who are having with pop can't seem to take such radical measures like China. India's pop is still rising rapidly and may one day exceed China's. Africa can't seem to run out of starving people (whenever they a person is starved to death, 2 more is born).

Hey Contra, it would really help for those of us who are reading but not participating this thread if you click on the proper reply button.

What did you think I mean by capacity?The power of receiving or containing; extent of room or
space; passive power; -- used in reference to physical
things.Unless both my geography and ethics classes lied, the US does have the capacity (potential) to produce enough food for everyone several times over.However, since we are a developed nation, our people are more worried about what to wear to conform with current fashion or what to do for fun and recreation. Like I said, we will definitely see some serious food shortages in the near future in other parts of the world. However, strictly speaking, the US and other developed countries will not face such disaster for a very very long time.The other thing is how do you propose we go about controling the population explosions in underdeveloped countries without some kind of millitary intervention? We can't. These countries have very deep rooted traditions that call for 24/7/365 reproduction rate.I have a cousin in Vietnam that already has 9 kids and another one coming. The irony is all of them are hungry all the time because they live in extreme poverty. Yet, he and his wife keep pumping them out just so they could starve very slowly. It is very sad for me to have to see them like that everytime I go back. Whenever someone says something to him about focusing on making a living rather than pumping out children, his response is always "god's purpose is for us to be fruitful and multiply" bullshit. Now, imagine a whole nation having the same mentality.Again, my question is how do we make these people aware of the problem that is right in front of their faces? China seems to be doing ok with their 1 child only law (I'm pretty sure many of them are gay if you know what I mean). India ain't doing so well and their pop could very well exceed China's in a couple generations. Africa is a mess. Aside from bombing them, what can we do?

Not in the grand scale that he intended it for. Yes, and in order to achieve such a goal, a society must go through a period of industrialism and capitalism where production of goods goes as high as it can. Once the industries, farms, tools, infrastructures, and other necessities are present, then the civilization can take the first steps toward true communism. The problem is noone has ever actually perform the experiment the way Marx intended. Russia jumped from a feudalistic society to communism. It lacked the industries, tools, infrastructure, and other necessities to feed and clothe its people. Stalin tried to compensate for that by having one 5 year plan after another.China jumped from a feudalistic society to communism. It, too, lacked the infrastructure to support its population. Mao tried to compensate for that with the cultural revolution and the great leap foward, which pretty much starved tens of millions of people.This is why one cannot simply say communism doesn't work. Noone has ever tried to perform the experiment the right way.I am one of those that is still confident it can be done. The US is already on its way very slowly. Most of the European countries are also on their way to true communism very slowly.

What part of my definition of "capacity" don't you understand?Also, what contra said.During the great depression, the US government actually went around paying farmers to burn their crops. This helped tremendously with the prices of crops.Like I said, the US has a very deep rooted tradition of purposely not producing as well as destroying some produced crops in order to keep its economy going strong.Again, what part of "capacity" don't you understand?Added by edit. This is something I forgot to mention. Instead of producing meat products, we can use the same resources and space to produce grain and the net product would be many times greater. Again, capacity. Capacity. Capacity. Well, you can become famous by coming to my university and literally change what they teach in geography and philosophy. I'm pretty sure the university will welcome you with open arms, that is if you have the figures and studies ready to defend your position. In the mean time, I think I'll trust my school more than you, if you don't mind.This message has been edited by Troy, 04-22-2005 04:28 PM

I don't think I owe any apology. I kept referring to capacity and you kept referring to the actually rate of production. That's not what capacity is. Look through my posts again. Provide me with a quote that says my school is teaching that communism is the best way to live.This is why I lost my patience in my last post. You kept twisting my words.

Well now, I must admit I was being hostile but you just exceeded me by several times there. I think I will shut up intead of continuing on with this. Have a good day.

There is an old Vietnamese proverb: It is better to give them free food than to motivate them to compete with your bussiness.