LogFAQs > #883537641

LurkerFAQs, Active DB, Database 1 ( 03.09.2017-09.16.2017 ), DB2, DB3, DB4, DB5, DB6, DB7, DB8, DB9, DB10, DB11, DB12, Clear

Topic List	Page List: 1
Topic	Capitalism vs communism
Hexenherz 07/24/17 10:14:54 PM #26:	Samurontai posted... Hexenherz posted... How are those not prime examples of truly communist societies? The basic needs of the society are the primary motivating factors behind the actions of the society, they don't typically have private property, there's little to no "corruption" because there's nothing to fight over except the potential power play for a leadership position, but those are generally very highly revered and protected by religious dogma and deep-rooted tradition... and realistically because of the limited population sizes, there isn't really much room for a potential usurper to multiply influence to take over anyway. Because tribes aren't communists societies The term wasn't even coined until the 1700's, and you're literally the first person I've ever seen label tribes as "ideal communistic societies" It's akin to calling the Romans of the Roman Empire the idealistic capitalists or some shit It makes no sense. Sure they have similarities, but that's pretty much where it ends. Just because the modern concept of communism is relatively young doesn't mean the phenomenon or principle can't be applied to something that predates the coining of the term. <cite>Hexenherz posted [p:883537641] in Capitalism... [t:75601280]...</cite> <quote><cite>Samurontai posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Hexenherz posted...</cite> <quote>How are those not prime examples of truly communist societies? The basic needs of the society are the primary motivating factors behind the actions of the society, they don't typically have private property, there's little to no "corruption" because there's nothing to fight over except the potential power play for a leadership position, but those are generally very highly revered and protected by religious dogma and deep-rooted tradition... and realistically because of the limited population sizes, there isn't really much room for a potential usurper to multiply influence to take over anyway.</quote> Because tribes aren't communists societies The term wasn't even coined until the 1700's, and you're literally the first person I've ever seen label tribes as "ideal communistic societies" It's akin to calling the Romans of the Roman Empire the idealistic capitalists or some shit It makes no sense. Sure they have similarities, but that's pretty much where it ends.</quote> Just because the modern concept of communism is relatively young doesn't mean the phenomenon or principle can't be applied to something that predates the coining of the term.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Topic List	Page List: 1