Why not compromise?

I'm obviously not the best of people to be putting my 2 cents into this but. . .

Wouldn't a fully communistic gift society(a voluntary one seeing as the final stage of a communist society is anarchistic) either have to wait until we develop a post scarcity state or we somehow reduce ourselves back down to small hunter gatherer communes?

The former being for all intents and purposes probably unobtainable and the latter being(as far as I'm concerned) undesirable I don't see a fully communistic society becoming feasible any time soon(unless, once again, we fuck up royally).

I await education.

Quote from: SexyPiranha on October 14, 2014, 07:18:09 PM

It's not so much to do with a state of post-scarcity as it is with all of the jobs being automated. You can't have the means of supply owned privately without a labour force, and capitalism becomes a ridiculous structure in such a society.

In saying that, the rate of technological advancement won't necessarily abolish scarcity any time soon, but it'll certainly induce abundance.

Although I don't think anybody here is advocating communism. I don't want to live without a government.

Oh,no doubt capitalism will become unfeasible, possibly in the near future, due to the fact that a certain scarcity has to be maintained for it to be a viable model. Anything producing an overabundance would gum that right up. Totally agree on that.

Perhaps I'm mistaken in assuming a gift society must be anarchistic?

Your post was essentially advocating a compromise though, if not to some degree, right?

Yes, to the extent we shouldn't allow people to die and starve in the streets.

I know Door is less conservative than me when it comes to fiscal policy, so his compromise would likely be larger than mine.