Socialism

So essentially, Pro thinks that we all will magically be equally capable of leading and sharing as one another if there isn't a power to keep our lust, gluttony, envy, anger, pride laziness and greed[1] in tact? What exactly is happening in Pro's society? How exactly can you expect a quadriplegic and a down's syndrome person to even be capable of handling the 'power to the people' to an equal extent as a highly intellectual psychopath and a mediocre-intelligence empathetic human being? What exactly is stopping this anarchic mess to end up forming a corrupt mafia of its own kind and the mob become the new government? Are you seriously assuming that if there end sup being a food shortage in a region, that people aren't going to go as far as torturing, blackmailing and killing others to ensure they and their loved ones get more for themselves than the rest of the community? Pro has absolutely no comprehension of human nature nor do they realize that we originally were in anarchy,a s are all animals other than human beings. There is a simple reason why we rule the world and other animals don't; we have rules and inequality in order to maintain hierarchic structures where everyone has someone to answer to and someone to answer to them. In a purely socialist society, everyone is only free as long as they are totally incapable f comprehending selfishness or of having a slight trait of an ego. this is psychologically impossible, even for Buddhist monks who have to do daily breathing exercises jus to pretend that they've lost what is blatantly present in any and all human beings. The fact of the matter is that humans are inherently selfish, that is impossible to disprove. When we help others it is to either improve our own reputation in a community or just for the sheer joy of knowing the other thinks better of you now that you helped them. If we had infinite resources, land space and tolerance, perhaps this could work as a system. Unfortunately we do not, there will always be those who have more than others and those who want something another has and to protect what they have from other people who want their owned property. It isn't economics, it is basic instinct and a fact of life. Whether this entity is a girlfriend, a job position or a privilege, everyone has things that motivate them to work for it. No one would bother dealing with the stress that a CEO has unless being a CEO gave them some power over their underlings and their underlings had poverty to fear if they got fired. Fear and intimidation via authority and abuse of power is beautiful in its own way. Otherwise we may as well all say 'police brutality' to the very fact you are throwing some idiot in a cell who just raped three women and pulls their hearts up through their mouths. You will always have people who want to hurt others, always, the question is if you have a system where there is enough inequality to ensure that the authorities can immediately discipline this individual in a way where he/she stands no chance to escape it or fight it. Inequality is beautifully great when it is the 'evil' who are the losers out, the necessary catch to this is that such a system means the good can often end up at the bottom regardless. In fact there is no 'good' in an equal world. there's no motivation to say 'haha I'm more selfless than that freaky serial killer' because everyone is so kind. If everyone is kind, there's no joy or pride in being kind in the first place; we only enjoy being kind and helpful since there are sick individuals to consider our selves morally superior to. Sources: [1] http://www.deadlysins.com...