• boonhet@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      19 hours ago

      Yes, and all are equal, but some more equal. Particularly, anyone that was part of the administration of the soviet union was more equal than anyone not close to the administration.

      Administration needs to be humanless.

      • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        14 hours ago

        Communism has never been about “equalitarianism.” Communism is about suiting the needs of all with everyone’s productive capacity, not trying to make sure everyone has the same thing. Over time things will trend towards more evenness, but fundamental characreristic differences in ability will still remain, differences in need, etc.

    • ILikeBoobies@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      8
      ·
      edit-2
      1 day ago

      Can the administration control what the commune does? Laws? Policing?

      If so then given time the people who seek it will elevate that position.

      Public ownership under communism doesn’t mean the government (or administration to use your term without a difference) owns it. It means the population has control over whether it is helping (keep) or hurting (remove) society. And the workers are at the forefront of that not politicians or owners.

      You’re aware that liberalism views landowners as a scourge of society because they make money without adding anything to the world but you cannot view said viewpoint from a communist perspective.

      I’ll give you another crazy idea; political parties/governments are corporations. They will put their own survival above that of the people they represent.