...so I'm gonna tell you something here instead.

I think a future communist society would have more nomads. For the bulk of humanity's existence, nomadic life was the norm. Property and contractual obligation has made settled life mandatory in most of the imperial core, with a slim handful of exceptions.

Here in the states, the contradiction is mind-boggling. We're told the settlement of America was necessary to the establishment of freedoms, that nobody else enjoys as much liberties as we do today. And yet, for those "liberties", we had to stop people from leading nomadic lives. Corralled and marched people miles, so they could be free. Stole babes from families, so they could be free. Free to do what, exactly?

Centuries ago, nomadic life was a fundamental freedom for millions. Maybe it could be again...

~

...not that I know what that nomadic life would look like, or how it would interplay with settled life... just that it seems like something that should be striven for

  • Vampire [any]
    ·
    2 years ago

    What does this have to do with communism?

    Wouldn't nomads be more prone to social parasitism? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parasitism_(social_offense)

    Why do you think a centrally planned economy "would have more nomads"?

      • Vampire [any]
        ·
        2 years ago

        I can see it in a private-enterprise economy. Services for hire. Like traditional tinsmiths and silversmiths, even performers/carneys/acrobats. But I don't see how it'd be possible under communism.

        • usernamesaredifficul [he/him]
          ·
          2 years ago

          the simple answer is that they just wouldn't be part of the planned economy and would just do what they have always done it's not like their lifestyle hurts anyone

          • Vampire [any]
            ·
            2 years ago

            I don't get this thread at all. The claim being made is "I think a future communist society would have more nomads" but there's no support for the claim.

            I mean, sure, they could maybe keep doing what they've been doing under some forms of market socialism with private enterprise, but it wouldn't be part of communism.

            It seems to me that the opposite is likelier to be true: a future communist society would have fewer nomads, like happened in the USSR

    • Wheaties [she/her]
      ·
      2 years ago

      I think a communist future would allow for more flexibility in how people can live and interact within it. I'm not saying it should be some "goal" of a centrally planned economy that's in the processes of building communism, but I do think such a system would be better able to adapt to nomadic people if/when it comes up.

      • Vampire [any]
        ·
        2 years ago

        That sounds like Utopianism rather than Communism.

        In addition to the USSR laws I already, mentioned, there were similar "sedentisation" measures in communist Czechoslovakia (Law no 74), and Romania after 1977