: Two words: Job Rotation.Some additonal words : It requires authority and the crushing of dissention to work, or the absolute agreement of everyone involved. Hmm, not difficult to predict which will be in ascendency. I'm glad you addressed this further down.
: And capitalism always assumes that everyone's a selfish shit.
'it' assumes that people will select their actions according to what they believe will be of the greatest benefit to them. A person will walk past the bear's den rather than into it, the person will eat the food to statiate hunger rather than practice dance moves in the hope of achieving the same end. A person who sees another using skills to achieve goals will try to learn those skills rather than just pray for the same results. These would be examples of people being 'selfish shits'.
Its not exactly a difficult proposition. Poeple value 'stuff' differently, they discriminate between poeple, places and activities they perceive gaining benefit from and seek those out rather than engaging in people, places and activities which they believe will disbenefit them.
That many people choose to do things which dont appear to be in their objective best interest (eg taking masses of heroin) is evidence of 'irrationality' rather than a disproval of the above.
: The same people who enforce the minority's usurpation of privilege in the current regime: armed officials recognized by the state to enforce the rules of the state. (I've said all this before in this post.) The state, in the socialist future---however---will be operated by a different class than the class which operates the state presently: the great majority of workers will rule in the socialist future---instead of a small minority of capitalist overlords!
Oppression whether by one or millions is still oppression - the above seems an appeal to utilitarianism - the hope that if many demand it then the sum of oppression will be less and that will be 'ok'. Its disconcertingly unconvincing, though I can follow the intent.
: You again make the erroneous assumption that everyone has equal access to the means of production, Gee! That's utterly misleading!
In socialism they are supposed to have - so the above question stands.
: According to Business Week magazine (that bastion of communist agitation):
You and I (and septimus!) know that there are also articles and research suggesting that people are becoming better off over time and that I could repeat lines from them only to have you disregard them because they dont fit with your ideology.
When you link back to this you are inadvertantly shooting yourself in the foot.
