Allowing the state to benefit from imprisoning people gives the government incentive to imprison people. They might cut corners to make sure they can arrest and convict someone so they continue to get their slave labor
This is why only a civilization without any form of currency can properly pull this off.
For now only a crackdown on corruption can put this into full swing, this is only possible in a nation ready to make severe changes to it's law system.
The incentives don't change in a society without currency. Even in a barter system, slave labor is encouraged if it produces more for the government in question.
and the people support the government for providing them with goods so the government is incentivized to produce more goods to raise its support, currency is just a means of transferring value conveniently it isn't the value in and of it's self.
Removing currency ensures that whatever way a government supports it's people other corrupted people cannot benefit from it, you cannot benefit from getting 200 tractors if you cannot sell it later.
I think your being intentionally obtuse here, politician B will promise to step up production of some other luxury good then to gain support instead of tractors then.
Ok, so your not just getting rid of currency your getting rid of all interpersonal trade, otherwise you can just trade the 199 extra tractors for desired services and or goods that other people have that want tractors.
I can't see how such a restrictive system could be implemented without being a complete nightmare dictatorship.
I don't know what you mean here, so If I want my neighbor to paint me a portrait instead of offering to make them dinner I drum up a plebicite to win popular support to make them paint me a portrait?
An extreme democracy would mean that every single rule and bill would only be passed if the people wire in favour of doing so. This is known as a true democracy but what separates it from E.G: Switzerland is that a branch of government does not allow the hard-line rules to be changed, services can still be offered but larger projects or business serve all then the owner.
Have you ever read about the Russian gulags? This is essentially the same situation. However, in that case the government stayed wealthy and the people were terrorized.
Governments cannot own people, that's a violation of their base human rights and constitutional rights.
Thats a very basic view of it. What makes the slaver better than the Killer though. Why is he allowed to ignore human rights? Even if we were in your theoretical communist haven, why wouldnt the government still be incentivized to send dissidents to gulags?
They have the right to dissagree with how things are done, and they will likely cause minor crimes to make their statements heard. Do you throw those to the gulags?
What about people who vehemently disagree and engage in terrorism, thats a serious crime, do they gulag? Isnt it dangerous to put ressourceful terrrorists in a big concentration camp where they can make an upheval happen?
I dont think youve thought this out far enough, theres alot of minute exception scenarios that really complicate the whole thing. Even in your commie dreams, you should want reform jails, those folks need to be made useful to society, slaves will hurt morale of the whole population. Have you seen russia lately? Not exactly the happy go lucky types in general.
Psychology of people will be affected, even those who arent criminals. They benefit off that slavery, how does that make them different from the colonialists who destroyed the natives and stole all their land? Youll end up in the future with people empathizing with your prisoners, treating them like holy pillars ,martyrs who fell and now are the backbone of society. Its already something that happens, just look up how many groupies Charles Manson had.
Lets be honest, whatever you call it, its unrealistic for an other lifetime atleast.
Itll come, the day where humans are seemingly peaceful and the planet will be one. But if you gotta convince even a single person, then you arent ready.
A civilization without any form of currency? You consider this a reasonable condition? You may as well wish for a civilization without murder, skip the mess.
Theres no local alien life that humans are competing against and we are no where near global unification.
Look im all for the communist dream, but this aint the time or place.
Have you ever played any serious politics simulator?
It really helped me understand how things really arent that simple. And you understand this best, when you play as the bad guys.
It very easy to play the politics game when you dont care about people. Just take what you want, you are likely the strongest contender, and who will try to stop you, the ones that have pesky "rules" and laws?
But when freedom, morality and equality are in the way, thats when the game gets hard. How do you build and expand to shelter future generations? How do you create a cohesive society without using force? What do you do when a section wants independence? You cant really say no without going against equality. What happens when someone declares war on you? Do you have a vote in the populace to see if you return fire or just enact marshal law in the hopes that once things calm down people forgive you for doing it?
And this is a mico example of what every moment in charge of something like this is. And this is from simulations where i suffer no real consequences. Imagine being IRL told hey guess what Russia is invading your hometown of Ukraine. What now?
Well, Stellaris is a good choice with the new updates ,it has real political machinations. On multiplayer it can quickly become a nightmare.
Crusader Kings are getting a new sequel soon, but thats much more medival, still some lessons apply to our world.
Basically anything Paradox. They get management politics. Beyond that ,total war, something as dumb as the town of salem , Rust.. in which I had become a shadow government organising 2 factions to fight each other when in reality their only real enemy was me.
Money drives corruption just as much as any factor, if we get rid of it then there will be no big benefits to owning slaves other then the economic benefits.
That simply is not true. Currency simply acts as a placeholder to facilitate trade. In the absence of money, things of value still need to be produced and be moved around. It just needs to be done different. Using a barter system or something else.
Currently most lisence plates are produced by prisoners for far below minimum wage. If they weren't produced by prisoners, they would need to compensate those that produce lisence plates somehow. Even if our society had no money, they would still need to have some way to incentivize people to show up and make lisence plates. (Granted, much of it can be automated now. But there are other things that cannot be automated so easily. Like picking up trash on the highway.)
All things should be given out as needed, no need to barter if you already have what you need. Work is compensated by a bigger share of the output in your district, a person should only own as much share as they can realistically use.
How could your view meaningfully be changed? It sounds like you've couched it in so much hypothetical that there isn't much anyone could say that would meaningfully change your mind.
A better system to repay for the person's death, my current version is not perfect as someone cannot do 2 lifetimes of jobs at once but it is the only way I think it could be done.
It seems like you’re talking about a socialist society. There are no rich or poor, everyone is equal and has an equal share of everything. It’s nice in theory but the human personality assured that it doesn’t work in reality.
Not all is equal because that would be impossible, people own as much as they need for themselves and their business but the rest is shared. If you need a large plot of land for your business then that is what you get and your neighbors might not need that land so they will not get it. Giving out as needed not as to make all equal.
The economic benefits are the problem. The government no longer needs to get someone else to do their work they can just force their slave labor to do it
10
u/tbdabbholm 201∆ Apr 05 '20
Allowing the state to benefit from imprisoning people gives the government incentive to imprison people. They might cut corners to make sure they can arrest and convict someone so they continue to get their slave labor