rockSlayer@lemmy.worldM to Leftism@lemmy.worldEnglish · 1 year agocrazy idea, let's just feed peoplelemmy.worldimagemessage-square342fedilinkarrow-up11.33K
arrow-up11.33Kimagecrazy idea, let's just feed peoplelemmy.worldrockSlayer@lemmy.worldM to Leftism@lemmy.worldEnglish · 1 year agomessage-square342fedilink
minus-squareLemmysMum@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up3·edit-21 year agoBut you can’t abolish private property. I take ergo you cannot. Private ownership is inherent to the consumption of limited resources.
minus-squareunfreeradical@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up1·1 year agoPrivate property is a social construct, and no more. Some societies hold the construct, others lack it. Interaction with the natural environment requires simply agency and activity, not any particular social construct or system. Some system of management is required for members of society to benefit collectively from the same resources, but private property is not required.
minus-squareunfreeradical@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up2·1 year agoNo. Sorry. Private property is not a concept that coherently describes the behaviors of rats. Private property is a social construct that occurs in some but not all human societies. Modern society, organized by the capitalist mode of production, produces the class disparity through private property. Socialists seek the abolition of private property, and thereby, the eradication of the class disparity.
minus-squareunfreeradical@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up1·edit-21 year agoSharing is a general description of a robust, essentially universal, human behavior. As a general tendency, it also appears within the behavior of many other species. You have been invoking unconventional terminology, and now have descended essentially into incoherence.
minus-squareLemmysMum@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up3·1 year agoIf dictionary terminology is unconventional then yes, we have descended into incoherence.
minus-squareunfreeradical@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up1·edit-21 year agoNo. You’re babbling. You traveled from worker exploitation to amoebas.
minus-squareLemmysMum@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up3·edit-21 year agoYour incapacity to follow a demonstrative metaphore is not an issue of my capacity.
But you can’t abolish private property. I take ergo you cannot. Private ownership is inherent to the consumption of limited resources.
Private property is a social construct, and no more.
Some societies hold the construct, others lack it.
Interaction with the natural environment requires simply agency and activity, not any particular social construct or system.
Some system of management is required for members of society to benefit collectively from the same resources, but private property is not required.
Removed by mod
No. Sorry.
Private property is not a concept that coherently describes the behaviors of rats.
Private property is a social construct that occurs in some but not all human societies.
Modern society, organized by the capitalist mode of production, produces the class disparity through private property.
Socialists seek the abolition of private property, and thereby, the eradication of the class disparity.
Re-read my edited comment.
Sharing is a general description of a robust, essentially universal, human behavior.
As a general tendency, it also appears within the behavior of many other species.
You have been invoking unconventional terminology, and now have descended essentially into incoherence.
If dictionary terminology is unconventional then yes, we have descended into incoherence.
No.
You’re babbling.
You traveled from worker exploitation to amoebas.
Your incapacity to follow a demonstrative metaphore is not an issue of my capacity.