[randomdata]

> I've lived the first 14 years of my life under the Romanian communist dictatorship so no.

That doesn't make any sense. Communism's defining feature is that there is no longer a state. How can you recognize Romania, and especially a Romanian dictatorship, without there being a state?

Perhaps you're confusing communism with rule by the Communist Party?

- Communism is a work of science fiction that imagines what life is like in a post-scarcity world – indeed, science fiction that some people would like to see become reality. Star Trek is a more modern adaptation on the same basic idea, which you may be more familiar with.

- The Communist Party is a political group that, at least on paper, is focused on achieving post-scarcity through capturing the means of production. It was once theorized in a certain Manifesto about Communism that post-scarcity would not be achievable through capitalism as the capitalists would set up barriers to seeing it through, and that the way to protect against that was the bring the means of production into social hands. Hence why the Communist Party is so-named.

But that would be like saying that democracy doesn't work because you don't like what the political party known as the Democrats are doing in the USA. Or that workers don't work because you don't like what the National Socialist German Workers' Party (Nazi) did.

> There is no post scarcity. The goalposts for scarcity just move up.

Perhaps. But it remains that communism cannot exist without having achieved post-scarcity. How could it?

[nottorp]

> Communism's defining feature is that there is no longer a state.

Seriously? Who takes all the resources and allocates them "according to each person's need" then? :)

> But it remains that communism cannot exist without having achieved post-scarcity. How could it?

All the scarce resources are being stolen^H^H^Hshared in common.

Communism predates the idea of post scarcity by a hundred years or more AFAIK.

[randomdata]

> Seriously?

Yes. Communism's key attributes are that it is classless, stateless, and moneyless.

> Who takes all the resources and allocates them "according to each person's need" then?

We'd need to know more about how post-scarcity is achieved in order to answer that question. Star Trek says the replicator is responsible, although that seems unlikely outside of the imagined Star Trek universe. Based on what we can see today, I'd guess robots. But this is all speculative as we don't really know what post-scarcity truly looks like, or if it is achievable at all.

> Communism predates the idea of post scarcity by a hundred years or more AFAIK.

Are you referring to what is oft referred to as primitive communism?

Although I find it hard to believe that humans have ever not thought about post-scarcity. It seems like the first thought/dream anyone would have when first faced with scarcity constraints.

[nottorp]

> what is oft referred to as primitive communism?

Did communist utopians realize it doesn't work so now they're adding "post scarcity" to it to make it work?

Will they add "AI" next?

Edit: "Based on what we can see today, I'd guess robots." Oh yea, "AI" is next.

[randomdata]

> Did communist utopians realize it doesn't work so now they're adding "post scarcity" to it to make it work?

Did TV fanatics realize that Star Trek doesn't work? What does this even mean? Communism isn't something real, it is a work of science fiction that details an imagined world after post-scarcity. Always has been, probably always will be.

Hell, even if we actually do reach post-scarcity some day, the chances of going the communism route are about as likely as us going the Star Trek route. Reality has a way of turning out quite different to what you envision. There is effectively no chance of communism becoming more than science fiction.

Is that what you mean by "doesn't work"? That it will never be more than science fiction? In the same way aliens, time travel, etc. "don't work"? Fair, I suppose, but that makes your communism obsession rather bizarre.

> "Based on what we can see today, I'd guess robots." Oh yea, "AI" is next.

How do you foresee AI being useful? Robotics is by and large how we've achieved post-scarcity in food production. If we were to achieve full-on post-scarcity, chances are we would do so by finding additional robot applications. We're not that creative as species. But who knows.

[nottorp]

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/cuba-said-to-reduce-bre...

I suppose in your modern communism they'll blame the "AI".

[randomdata]

Are you struggling to say that Cuba will blame AI for allowing the USA to beat them to their post-scarcity goals? Perhaps. American innovation is unquestionably leading the way to communism right now.

If communism ever is realized as more than science fiction, it will almost certainly be because of the USA's efforts. There is no chance Cuba will get us there. Of course, their official claim of seeking post-scarcity is only for pretend to keep up political appearances. The USA, in contrast, is actually trying. You might say ironically, but I'd say that Marx just got it wrong and that capitalism, not socialism, is the most likely path to communism.