• gmtom@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    11
    ·
    8 months ago

    I mean if you redefine communism, sure. But a communist society as described by Marx is moneyless, classless and with not central government. Because if all your needs are met and resources shared amongst the commune, what purpose would money serve?

    • Jojo@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      8 months ago

      People redefine capitalism every time it suits the rich folk, why can’t we redefine communism too?

        • Jojo@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          8 months ago

          Sorry, I’m not sure I understand your response, we can’t redefine communism if you play the “communism has never been tried” card based on a rigid definition?

          Is someone saying that? I don’t think I am.

          …are you?

          I’m so confused.

          • mindbleach@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            8 months ago

            It sounds like you’ve got it but don’t want it.

            Yes, linguistic descriptivism is fine… unless you engage in linguistic prescriptivism on the same subject.

            Yes, you can redefine communism… so long as you’re not one of those people whose defense of communism heavily involves a particular definition of communism.

            If that’s not you, personally - great. You know how a conditional statement works.