I actually am going to check the book out, KA, but even if I did not, it wouldn't be like I said anything wrong by my above statement. I said I would check out the link -- I did. The book looked interesting, so when I get the chance, I will read it. I have no reason or desire to suck up to people on the internet. If I didn't want to read it I would have said so straight up.

Because heavy-handed across-the-board equality is an absurd notion. It's perfectly acceptable to present everyone with equal opportunities. That's what we're 'attempting' to do in America with Affirmative Action. The flaw is our biased implementation. Affirmative Action should be applied to everyone if it's going to be useful and not only to certain races.

If you're simply going to give equal circumstances to everyone (not just opportunities), then there's no motivation to contribute to the society that you're a part of. Theoretically, whatever you do, you'll receive the same benefits of any other member of the culture.

Inequality is what pushes us to further heights--to work and improve.

There's not a monetary motivation to contribute to society. Who says that is the only thing that can motivate people?

Who's just talking about currency? You said equality. You didn't say monetary equality. Give me an example of a motivation that doesn't involve inequality in one form or another.

How about self-satisfaction?

You've got to be kidding. If I could pay the bills and eat and such without having to actually work, I would just stay home all day and play video games and watch TV and shit.

Yea, but you've been born and brought up in a culture where money is the ultimate motivating factor. Is it not possible that there are other ways to motivate people, or do you believe that our way is absolute, and nothing else is possible?

Only because those are fetishes of a capitalist society. You simply cannot make comparisons. In our society we earn money so we can have free time to dick around and eat pizza and play video games. You get fulfillment from that because it is what is defined as leisure and you feel that if you could get it for free it would be equally good, and it would be amazing to be able to do that all day. In a capitalist society, you are correct, if you were handed money you'd sit around all day dicking off. However, you cannot frame a true communism the same way.

He gets the point.

I believe it is ANIMAL nature to want to be the best. How many animals out there, who have no "concept" of capitalism, strive to be the "leader of the pack"? You have to change the way humans are wired, and since we are animals.

I'm not saying it's not "ideal". I'm just saying human nature says it's not feasible.

BTW, thanks PB for the amusing discussion.

That holds true for some of the population. I wouldn't go anywhere near saying most. Lots of people are just content to follow, and if you're content to follow and have no gain (disregard self-satisfaction for the moment) to show for hard work, there's no way you're going to put forth your maximum level of effort.

And to address self-satisfaction:
For this to even be a possibility for the majority of the population, there would have to be other influences. For instance, if everyone thought they would gain the favor of (not literal favors--just favorable opinion) someone they wanted (for instance: the leader of a theocracy or perhaps even just a loved one). Unfortunately, unless the ruler is actually a god, I don't think the any present-day population could live under a theocracy.

No problem. It's enjoyable for me as well.

Bottom Line: Marx was trippy shit!