No, certainly not a world population. But I am saying those numbers can, to an extent, be scaled.
I suppose you could, but it would be irrelevant. It must be the vast majority of humanity that wants S/C or S/C will not come about and there can be no downsizing. It must be the vast majority.
Perhaps one is absurd, but I find it intriguing that, despite every contrary opinion they face, anarchists, communists and socialists alike (at least the modern ones) seem to believe that their brand of society is precisely what man wants, that opposing factions will not rise in masses.
Holding that a certain viable social system, even while not presently feasible, is better than other alternatives or the present social system one might be living under, and stating that it will take the vast majority of the world's population to bring this society about, is not the same thing as claiming that all of humanity wants just that precise social system and I've never claimed otherwise. Humanity is nowhere near ready to establish S/C.
but rather on the ambiguous idealogical nature of theoretical/hypothetical societies in general
This is a philosophy discussion board. The theoretical and hypothetical would seem to fit right in.
--this postulation that the various forms of socialism, communism, anarchism and their multitudinous hyphenated offspring would work, contrary to their history of failing miserably when their pivotal contention of man consistently choosing to be "morally upright" proves disastrously wrong, seems naive at best.
Where in our history has the S/C I advocate failed miserably? I'm not discussing any other form of social organization, so no need to toss in those societies that were State Capitalist, Nationalist, Totalitarian, Fascist, Dictatorships, etc. These are not comparisons to S/C.
Consistently choosing to be morally upright proves disastrously wrong? Really? When was the last time you raped an 8 year old? Humans consistently act according to their moral values everyday.
That said, and since I'm not attempting to battle anarchism here, I will admit to communist leanings--there stand quite a few communist concepts that I advocate with all my being, though in some areas I lean more towards Plato's Republic (i.e. redistribution of surplus wealth, the surplus determined after skimming the tops off of a predetermined proportional personal possession limit [say 1.5-2x the average--Plato's was not so strict]).
I did read over your debate comments -- and would be more than willing to answer those complaints -- if that's possible or desirable for you? Just let me know and we'll have at it.
In the meantime, I would be very interested in hearing what communist leanings you advocate and more about your idea of a capped possession limit, if you'd care to elaborate?
I just feel in order to incorporate these concepts into modern society, we cannot simply take the whole book, as it were, and pound it like so many theologians. We must prove these concepts in practical real-world scenarios, not simply mull them over in thought experiments and refer to obscure civilizations of the past, all significant data of which is recorded through the rose tinted eyes of quasi-worshipers.
Well, we are discussing political philosophy-and I've always thought it best to consider all of our viable options. I'm not against reformist measures. Although, I would greatly prefer to abolish class, money, and private ownership, that's not feasible at this time in history. That's not to say that I'm not willing to put S/C on the table and defend its theoretical doctrines or discuss the viability of such a social system. Like I said, we're in a philosophy forum.
The last sentence I sniped -- Sorry, but I don't read rose tinted opinion. If I provide a citation-it'll be from a creditable source.
In short, there are great ideas, or rather, there are great ingredients...but we need to put these concepts in a philosophical high-powered centrifuge, separating the ingredients to a manageable point for us to concoct a pragmatic, palatable thesis that does not fall so easily in real world application.
So, what forms of society would you like to see replaced and by what ingredients?