1) Yes, we are active, rational agents and can override our baser instincts. Absolutely. But saying we can do something is different than counting on it, and counting on it across the vast majority of the population, which is what's necessary to make this sort of thing work. Being capable of doing a thing is not the same thing as being capable of doing it consistently. When you say we're capable of being good to one another, that's kind of like saying we're capable of running a 3:45 mile. We have that within us, too, but not everyone can do it and even fewer can do it consistently.
The fact that my reply was in fact a reply and not a thesis is where you're confused. Deadite seems to think that it is something like a property of being that prohibits the possibility of a better society. He used facts about our animal existence to back this up. However, the fact that we are clearly something more than animals denies this. The possibility is clearly there, and so you cannot use the over-determination of our animal natures to close it out.
Also, I'm not sure how I'm 'counting' on anything. Clearly, the communist position is an inventive one, where a new society is to be constructed in order to realize that
particular possibility I'm speaking of.
First, we must know that we are in fact capable of running that time. Then, we must train. Deadite is pretty much just pointing out to a fat person that, because he is currently fat, it is impossible for him to think that he'll ever get into shape. What I pointed out was that any fat person can at any moment decide to shape up. This is the power of the subject. I don't count on fat people doing this, but I know that it's possible. Of course communism will take work. No one ever denied this.
2) "Human nature will be modified." While I agree with the idea that systems can have a huge effect on how we behave (assuming that's what you mean), I think history shows us over and over that certain basic human impulses will always strenuously resist control. We can curb and suppress temporarily, or redirect, but we can't never merely modify people. The only two ways I think you can say this are either a) by suggesting we'll be ready for this after many, many generations are basically bred for things other than base survival, so that communism will be possible in some far distant future once humanity has evolved into something very different, or b) that it'll be made possible through pacifying the population with genetic modification. Which is absolutely horrific.
I put human nature in quotes, because there is no real human nature apart from the world they are in. Certainly not for a human who lives within a society not an ecosystem. There is no human nature is what I'm saying. There is total autonomy of what we call human apart from what is the human animal. Human nature is simply an internalization of what we call
humanity. The fact that previous historical situations internalized the same sorts of things as capitalism says nothing about future historical situations, because they are just that... historical situations. history shows us societies not biologies.
People are ALWAYS 'modified.' They are NOTHING BUT the mediation between others. There is absolutely no notion of the self without the community. This is what i mean. Neither of your choices. To finally bring this fact out is yet another characteristic of communism insofar as it focuses on the community and not the individual.
3) Regarding scarcity. Technically, you are correct: scarcity always exists in the sense of what we desire in comfort. If we desire much less, it's possible that we will have much less scarcity. But that goes back to the idea of modifying human nature. It's also a tough sell, because it's basically talking about trading a huge amount of basic human striving and excellence for this communist ideal. Even if you find this to be worthwhile trade off, it is a trade off.
There is no reason why there should be a trade off at all. It is only a trade off in capitalism where donating movie money to africa would collapse the movie industry and make it impossible for us to watch movies whilst not doing much for africa in the long run. What communism must be if it is to be truly a resolution of capitalism is not at all a redistribution of already existing wealth as it is in the system but a reconstruction of how 'wealth' is constituted in the first place.
i'm not saying that human nature has to be curbed. I'm saying there is no human nature, but what you call human nature is simply a result of the social relations in which we find ourselves, and that this will unavoidably be changed by a change in social relations.
again, it is a direct response to deadite. a system following capitalism will be precisely an attempt to nullify the social relations of predation and competition within 'human nature' which does not exist and is simply a reflection of society in the first place.
Also, even then, there will be scarcity. Maybe a lot less, but there will always be some. Things will always go wrong, even if we're much better to each other and much more modest in our expectations of comfort and wealth.
things 'going wrong' has nothing to do with anything. things 'go wrong' in any system and so bears not at all on any particular system. furthermore, you cannot say that capitalism deals with things going wrong better than any other system due to its fluidity. there are simply other ways in which we can concieve of 'going wrong' that captialism alone runs into that compensates for this.
people steal and so forth. this is going wrong in capitalism. this is not something that would happen in communism, you understand. so that entire 'wrong' is eliminated. surely, there will be other problems perhaps analogous to 'stealing' but people will not steal per se. this is not a problem in communism. it is a problem in capitalism that has no translation into communism.
every system has its 'random' problems like earthquakes and so forth. every system also has its structural problems. communism is an attempt to resolve the structural problems of capitalism. geoengineering would an attempt to resolve the problems of earthquakes.
Reply to Topic
