Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Ozymandias]

Well, that's true, but even if you're talking about a society of saints, it still wouldn't work because in an industrialized society, there is a practically infinite number of ways to produce any given product with the means available at any given time, and only market prices allow for a rational selection. Communism lasted as long as it did in large part due to the ability of communist nations to imitate market production structures. Then, even if one could select an efficient means of production, it would itself be incomprehensibly complex. No human knows or could possibly know how to make a modern pencil, for instance.

Just as important to its functioning as the fact that everyone knows everyone else in a society of 150 people, is the fact that there is a limit to how complex production chains involving only 150 people can get.

[alway]

Unless the 150 people are all programmers and have a huge army of robots.

[lucusLoC]

you mean programmers, chemists, metallurgists,  biologists, physicists, engineers, not to mention the trades peoples such as carpenters, animal husbandry, farming for various crops, mining, smelting, forging, various forms of shop work. . . . someone need to know what the robots are supposed to actualy do and make sure they are doing it right. . .

[PTTG??]

In real life, communistic type societies break down at around 150-200 people, tops.

Below that amount everyone knows everyone else, and so people are honest and hard working. Everyone is happy.

Just like a pure democracy.

No, I'm serious. More than 200 people and you need to have elected representatives and stuff. A Republic rather than a Democracy.

[Impaler[WrG]]

Well, that's true, but even if you're talking about a society of saints, it still wouldn't work because in an industrialized society, there is a practically infinite number of ways to produce any given product with the means available at any given time, and only market prices allow for a rational selection.

POPPYCOCK!!!   Market prices are the only way to make rational decisions with regard to BID AND OFFER PRICES which are just a poor reflection for peoples desires which are themselves far from rational.  You've implicitly defined rational selections to be those that are price optimal... therefore market prices!  If I defined rational selection in some other way then markets fail terribly. 

[jokermatt999]

Welp, we've gone from Dwarf Fortress to political arguments.

Raise your hand if you saw that coming from the thread title?

[Cardinal]

And then economy DF is fairly communistic in the worst, steriotypical sense of the word.

People all get told what to do and the bottem class (haulers) work endlessly for little gain, if dwarfs step out of line (or the leader is just bored) they get put in prison or killed, war against hippies (elves), conscription.

That's not communism, that's the kind of system that Marx was railing against in favor of communism.  Dwarf Fortress is a classical command economy where the nobility gets all the benefits and the poor dorflatariat is crushed under the heel of its aristocratic oppressors.

[TSED]

I'd say it starts off communist (as many have stated) and becomes fascist.


The state owns all properly and only allows others to use it when it feels like it?
Dictates all production?
Dictates all jobs?


Sounds pretty fascist to me...

[Cardinal]

Nah, fascism involves a collaboration between corporate entities and the state entity working toward improving the "nation".  Dwarf Fortress nobles are too medieval in their demands.  Of course, you could always envision Goering and Himmler as DF nobles, where Goering would keep mandating *leather skirt*s.

[TSED]

So you're the state entity.  The nobles are just incompetent for corporate entities.

I do not yet see a contradiction.

[alway]

you mean programmers, chemists, metallurgists,  biologists, physicists, engineers, not to mention the trades peoples such as carpenters, animal husbandry, farming for various crops, mining, smelting, forging, various forms of shop work. . . . someone need to know what the robots are supposed to actualy do and make sure they are doing it right. . .

I never said they were crappy robots incapable of learning. 

[Kinoko_Otoko]

I make my dwarves happy by putting all the beds in one big room and defining bedrooms from each bed that encompass that entire room; I put one or more artifacts in the room and suddenly every dwarf has a royal bedroom. I do the same with the dining room, only this time it doubles as both the dining hall and throne rooms for each dwarf.

In short, every dwarf owns every item communally; every dwarf co-owns each artifact my fort produces as well as all furniture in each room. I'd say this is pretty damn communistic. However, I turn off the dwarven economy because it doesn't really make much sense (and I don't understand exactly how it works).

[Anticipation]

In a way the more extreme political veiws get the more the end result is the same. Magma.

[Zruku]

Reminds me of a book I read about a communist take over of the world. A man came from a different universe and invented a game that promoted capitalism in an effort to combat the communism. Was an interesting read, gotta find the book again.

[dogstile]

Dwarf Fortress depicts a command economy, but insofar as you read a political message into it at all, the game itself is profoundly pro-freedom by showing just how unworkable a command economy actually is in any but the smallest, simplest society.

In real life, communistic type societies break down at around 150-200 people, tops.

Below that amount everyone knows everyone else, and so people are honest and hard working. Everyone is happy.

The problems kick in when you get a very large number of people. Communism simply does not work with large populations because human greed, laziness, and selfishness ruin everything. When you no longer know the person you are harming due to your own actions, you care a lot less about harming them casually.

Ever leave garbage behind in a public place?

You're casually harming the janitors, who you do not know personally, but they have to nonetheless clean up your mess for you, and the messes usually end up being horrific things after having been left there for hours upon hours.

While i do not approve, i do have to mention that a janitor wouldn't be paid so well if all his job involved was locking doors at the end of the day.