Communism: This Dog Won't Hunt

Balatarin
Share/Save/Bookmark

Bahram G
by Bahram G
24-Oct-2011
 

Before you harp all over me with all kinds of invectives, please hear me out. There are two major types of devotees of communism who live in non-communist societies. One is composed of the pure-at-heart idealist who deeply feels the pain and privation of the poor. This type believes that the society should not allow great disparity of wealth, adhering to the famed banner cry, "From everyone according to his means, and to everyone according to his needs."

What a magnificent standard around which to organize human society! As ideals go, this one definitely belongs near the top with other lofty human principles. I would even make it the fourth commandment of our ancient Zoroastrian people's belief as well as the eleventh for the Ten Commandments.

A second type is not motivated by such empathetic human emotion. It feels that the scumbag rich should be fleeced of their ill-begotten wealth. This latter types want their slice of the pie without having they, themselves, earned it. Why so? They believe that the rich get rich by squeezing the very substance of the masses of the poor. So, they exploiting rich better part with their unjustly acquired wealth, they demand.

Philosophical and ethical considerations aside, this dog, communism, won't hunt. Meaning, no matter how you tweak it, it won't do the job that the devotees of communism wants it to do. It is absolutely the wrong dog for the hunt. Why?

This ideal of equitable sharing of wealth, as beautiful as it may be theoretically, fails to translate on the ground for at least one extremely potent obstacle that stands in its way: HUMAN NATURE. All said and done, humans have a powerful predisposition to do what serves them and secure what they need or want with the exertion of the least effort. This disposition is most powerful and in many ways is responsible for humanity's progress going back all the way to tool-making, the invention of the wheel, and even further back.
Fighting human nature is a losing battle. You've got to work around it. Me first, Me last, is a powerful inbuilt human disposition that can be somewhat harnessed over the long term by education in the broadest sense of the word. Belief systems, religious or secular are often the most effective means of moderating, harnessing, and even reversing, on occasions, the inborn disposition. Self nurturing, self serving, and self advancing are the person's engine. Note how an infant takes everything, edible or not, to his mouth. He wants to find out if he can ingest it and nurture himself by devouring it. See how young children push others and take their toys even when they have toys themselves? That's the potent drive of me first and everything for me that Mother Nature instills in us as a vital tool of survival.
Before you can be anything or do anything, you need to survive. And serving oneself without regard to any altruism has a jump on taking a higher ground that involves caring for others. And, in a way, it makes great sense. First, you must be able to take care of yourself. Once you can do that, then you may have some “leftover” to devote to others and other objectives. Charity begins at home, is also about the individual being charitable to himself. Once that’s taken care of, then the humanized human may become charitable to others even at huge costs to himself.

This driving disposition has also served the physically strong as well as the mentally cunning in securing advantages for themselves in the social order.

Without getting involved in a lengthy useless argument, I wish to applaud the admirable motivation of those who are pained by the material injustices of the world and aim to redress it. But translating the lofty ideal into action runs smack into the wall of human nature. If we remove or even significantly impede the rewards that attract exertion of effort by the individuals, then we end up, sooner or later, with a non-motivated non-exerting people that produce very little for all parties to the point that that society, per force, collapses. Think of the present Greece, for instance. They Greeks have gotten used to receiving all kinds of benefits that they collectively are unable to provide. They have become a basket case with a hat in hand begging the European Union for help.

No, this dog, communism, won't hunt and we have had ample instances of societies that tried it and failed. I do not believe that at this point in our human evolution we have what it takes to become pure altruists, exert our utmost efforts, bring the "hunt" to the village and share it with the rest of the villagers who may be sitting around smoking their pipes, figuratively speaking.
Facts on the ground clearly demonstrate the overpowering force of self-interest and self gain. We can see it operate in all societies at all levels. In the United States of America, for instance, there are hundreds of thousands of tax lawyers and tax accountants whose sole job is to find loopholes for their clients--be they individuals or companies--to pay less taxes and keep more for themselves.
There are people that are called thieves. Both the blue collar small time crooks as well as the white collar thieves major embezzlers. All individuals and groups that band together to maximize their own gain in any way they can, are operating in accord with the powerful disposition of self-gain with the least effort. Hordes of lobbyists, in addition to the tax lawyers and tax accountants, also do their utmost at securing the bigger pieces of the pie or privileges for their clients.
We need a more pragmatic yet equitable system that somehow retains the incentive for the individual and groups to exert themselves, yet provide a minimum of care for those members of our human family who, for whatever reason, are not able to personally meet their legitimate needs.
In short, communism is not the system. As a matter of fact even communism’s precursor, socialism, fails because it takes on the losing battle against self interest. Laws and force are, in the long run, ineffective in dealing with the underlying causes of social and economic disparities.
Do I have a solution? Not really. I have a hope that in due time humanity will develop a comprehensive program of living that more effectively addresses our many intractable ills of today. For that hope to materialize, we need our best of the species to put their heads and hearts together and device a plan that would harmonize personal self-interest with that of the collective.

Bahram G

Balatarin
Share/Save/Bookmark

Recently by Bahram GCommentsDate
The Case of a Miscreant Cat
6
Nov 10, 2011
The Case of an Iranian Alzheimerist
7
Oct 20, 2011
Sarnevesht Barreh
1
Feb 12, 2010
more from Bahram G
 
Mash Ghasem

جانا سخن از زبان ما میگویی

Mash Ghasem
Tue Oct 25, 2011 10:26 PM PDT

I agree with practically everything you just said. It's all about the educational process and how much resources we allocatte to it. Glad you liked the book, cheers

 

P.S. Me had never heard of Watson, thanks for the intro. You might say I'm into exact opposit of Behaviourism, Lacan!


  •  
Bahram G

Mash Ghasem

by Bahram G on Tue Oct 25, 2011 09:34 PM PDT

Thanks again for the link. Had a chance to browse through the book. Lots of good points and many admirable ideals. I would love to believe that we human can indeed become much much better. We certainly have a long way to go. Yet, I would be hesitant to buy very much into any ideology that is not firmly based on facts as we have them. I applaud, for instance, some of the high ideals expressed as views of authority figures and analogies as well as metaphors presented.
All said and done, facts support the contention that humans are highly educable. They can become truly angelic or personification of evil. We, humans, arrive in this world with great many dispositions, constructive and distructive. It all depends what influences selectively nurture which dispositions. In short, we are not born as either angels or evils. We are only potentials. The task for the human society is to create conditions that are most conducive to the nurturance of our good/constructive dispositions. And it is here that education, in the broadest sense of the term plays a most critical role. I'm sure you are familiar with John B. Watson's famed claim.....give me a dozen....somewhat exaggerated claim, yet close to the mark.


  •  
Bahram G

Oon Yaroo argomand

by Bahram G on Tue Oct 25, 2011 07:18 PM PDT

"AL AHDO VAFA." yeah, sure I'm showing off my Arabic. Hope it doesn't offend you and you are not one of those dear Iranians who want nothing whatsoever to do with anything Arabic. I need to get my daily dose of ego stokes and I try to get it anyway I can. So, act impressed. Will you? That's what friends are for. And you're my friend. Right?Now, the reason for the above Arabic adage. I did deliver what I promised to you. Check the blog about the Alzheimerist, if you care to see my response to your invitation to dear Martha's place.Yours,Bahram g


  •  
Bahram G

It's My Blog

by Bahram G on Tue Oct 25, 2011 06:55 PM PDT

Since it is, I can say any sense or nonsense and get away with it. Right? Or is it that the whole thing is under the unforgiving sharp JJ knife?In any case, I'll take my chances. Oon Yaroo jaan, I don't care from the back of which mountain you showed up. I'm glad you showed up and have become my friend. As for you Aynak gerami, I would even change my mind and take a chance and go to dear Martha's place if you promise to go :).Seriously, it is just exhilarating for me to be able to communicate with people like you two. It just feels like being with dear friends back home. A home That I sorely miss. I also enjoy the sense of the serious and the absurd mixed together. It makes more like this world we live in.So guys, I'm delighted you bothered to participate and hope that we do go to dear Martha's place one summer day and do some SHAYTOONI. Life's too short to squander all of it on serious stuff. Let's have some fun also.Warmest regards to the both of youBahram g


  •  
Oon Yaroo

Ayank Jon, I refer you to the response BG wrote me...!?

by Oon Yaroo on Tue Oct 25, 2011 06:45 PM PDT

I believe he understood what I stated! You see, dear Aynak, written communication between two people is not a "memoryless" concept! You need to take a statement in the context of many consecutive statements!

I was not trying to come across as arrogant or condescending and If it comes across that way it is probably because the person who is reading it is putting a condescending filter on! You may want to wait for Mr. BG to come and express his interpretation of what I said! 

As for the 2nd paragraph, if you can point to just 1 (one), not 2, not 3, not n  just 1 "Iranian" philanthropist commie who has lived, worked, and become successful in any of the communist countries I will gladly change my name from Oon Yaroo to Een Yaroo! 

As for coming from bahind a mountain, I have to admit that yes indeed I am coming from behind not one mountain but several mountains! You see, from my village to the nearest town, I would have to ride a mule and then get up on the back of a pick up truck to get to Karadj! That's call mountains! :-)

As for the bathing suit, you need to wait a while. The forecast around Boston is predicting light snow unless you are of the kind who likes to go into the ocean in the middle of Winter!

Omeedvarm keh az man delkhor nashodeheed!


  •  
aynak

Re:Dear Agha Khanoom Oon Yaroo

by aynak on Tue Oct 25, 2011 05:31 PM PDT

 

"In other words, what I was trying to 
imply/infer/insinuate/conjecture/suggest/.. was that coming up with a
solution to achieve the goal above  is very challenging, complex, and
possibly feasible and of course worthy of an Economic Nobel Prize! I was
complementing BG! 
"

Doosteh Mohtram,

As they say, either you have come from behind the moutains, or you think I have?   Who can read your original post and not sense the complete and   unequivocal  condescension?

"In the 2nd paragraph, I was addressing the West-residing Iranian
commies/tudeheeis/chapies/leftists who used to and to a great deal today
admire/glorify/champion/defend communism but have never set foot on any
communist countries. You know the hypocrites kind, you know the kind I
am talking about!"

Doosteh Mohtram, how are you connecting, Gooz beh Shaghigeh?  Someone here is saying, you can be as rich as you want, but can we have a bare minimum for all humans?   This sounds to me as a sane policy, not from a altruistic view, but even a pragmatic one.  Last I checked, one of the richest men in the world, W.Buffet, is pushing for the same, and he is a great philantropist too.   

I am getting my bathing suit, what is the address?

 

 

 

 

 


  •  
Oon Yaroo

Dear Agha/Khanoom Aynak, you got it all wrong, If I may!

by Oon Yaroo on Tue Oct 25, 2011 04:55 PM PDT

In my 1st paragraph, I was actually referring to BG's statement, "We need a more pragmatic yet equitable system that somehow retains the incentive for the individual and groups to exert themselves, yet provide a minimum of care for those members of our human family who, for whatever reason, are not able to personally meet their legitimate needs..."

In other words, what I was trying to  imply/infer/insinuate/conjecture/suggest/.. was that coming up with a solution to achieve the goal above  is very challenging, complex, and possibly feasible and of course worthy of an Economic Nobel Prize! I was complementing BG!

In the 2nd paragraph, I was addressing the West-residing Iranian commies/tudeheeis/chapies/leftists who used to and to a great deal today admire/glorify/champion/defend communism but have never set foot on any communist countries. You know the hypocrites kind, you know the kind I am talking about!

BTW, my dear friend Bahram G. knew what I was referring to! We have become great friends and I have invited him to Martha's Vineyard for some fun activities! Would you like to join us? If interested, bring a bathing suit with you please!


  •  
aynak

Oon Yaroo, show some imagination

by aynak on Tue Oct 25, 2011 09:58 AM PDT

 

This poor guy, starts defensively, with a title or more a disclaimer that reads:

 "Communism:  This Dog Won't Hunt"   (i.e Communism is not effective, won't do").

So if you did not read what he wrote, at least the title should have told you where it is leading:  (Let's find something that does hunt, other than communism?)

Now it only take an imaginative person like yourself to respond:

".... this is $64000 question!"   followed by: 

"By the way, why are some Iranians so super charged when it comes to the
old school of communism? And to top it up, they themselves live in the
luxury of the west while prescribing distribution of wealth of others
for the others!?
"

I think only bright guys like yourself can forget that the most critical view of the west, has come *not from the East* but by the Westerners themselves.   It is call critique.   It is ok, you can enjoy the life, but ask questions too.   It really is OK.   That is really how they became great.  Not by never asking, but by always *at least asking* how to improve?

 Unless of course, your own stay in the West, has thought you anyone who asks should go back?

 

 

 

 


  •  
Bahram G

Doost gerami Oon Yaroo

by Bahram G on Mon Oct 24, 2011 07:06 PM PDT

I did confess that I did not have the solution and expressed the hope that brighter and better people such as you would put their hearts and minds together and devise an equitable system. See, now you got your assignment and get with it. Good point. It has been a major puzzlement to me, also. The business of living in affluent capitalistic societies yet championing the cause of the disadvantaged. It is simply another enigma of life that I have no answer for.Your kind invitation about the beach thing has me all excited. I'm mulling it over and the near future I intend to inquire a bit more before I invest in a bathing suit. I realize that wearing bathing suits is optional and even undesirable at your festivity. But, by nature I'm very shy and wish to break in as fully exposed member gradually. Shall respond in more details soon. In the meantime I'm enthralled by the whole thing. Just thinking about it reminds me of the saying : VASF-UL-AYSH, NESF-UL-AYSH. I couldn't pass of the opportunity of showing off my command of Arabic. I mastered the language in Qum at a HOZEH. Yes, and it did have a HOZ, the place. Your friend, the aspiring sandpiper-- the bird with a very long and deep poking beak.


  •  
Oon Yaroo

!?!?!?!?

by Oon Yaroo on Mon Oct 24, 2011 03:15 PM PDT

Double post 

 


  •  
Oon Yaroo

Agha Bahram G, this is the $64000 question!

by Oon Yaroo on Mon Oct 24, 2011 03:04 PM PDT

What is the system that optimizes (maximizes) an individual's yield while at the same time satisfies the needy and the disabled!? I would nominate your greatness for the Nobel Prize in Economics if you solve this problem!

By the way, why are some Iranians so super charged when it comes to the old school of communism? And to top it up, they themselves live in the luxury of the west while prescribing distribution of wealth of others for the others!?

Do you still want to join us in Martha's Vinyard? 


  •  
Bahram G

Dear M.G.

by Bahram G on Mon Oct 24, 2011 02:15 PM PDT

Thanks for the link. Somehow my iPad is not loading it. I have noticed that some servers are very slow today. I'll try and access it later.

Bahram g


  •  
Mash Ghasem

Parecon: Life After Capitalism.

by Mash Ghasem on Mon Oct 24, 2011 12:34 PM PDT

Parecon is an abbreviation  for: Particpatory Econimoics.

//www.zcommunications.org/zparecon/pareconlac...

It practically covers all the issues you have discussed as an obstacle above. happy reading.

The problem the world is facing doesn't seem to be lack of a proper theory or philosophy  to guide us to a viable, feasible destination. The problem seems to be rather the lack and non-existence of the movements to get us there.


  •