The Internet, the best example of Communism that works?

[VirusClock]

I tend to view the internet as a near-perfect communist structure because of the way it works. Although the people in it most of the time don't hold communist behavior because of the actual capitalist thinking we are raised with. Although if you notice, users that are more "in-depth" with the internet, a lot of the time find sharing information and other stuff enjoyable.

[DiscoBallClock]

Yes, but there's no money or other valuables involved, at least not in most things.

[VirusClock]

Yes, but there's no money or other valuables involved, at least not in most things.

Communism moves away from having a monetary system. Although that's impossible in practice considering our whole human society runs on this system.  In the internet it works, because this system doesn't have power here.

[CubeMelonClock]

Holy shit, I was just thinking something so similar to this last night.

The interenet is like a new place of freedom; howerver, more and more the "real world" is seeping in to place restrictions and take away this marvelous marvelous thing we have; or at least change it.

But who knows?! Maybe it will be fore the better, I dunno.

I know that I LOVE the internet for many personal reasons, and at the same time I am not addicted to the internet.

Bleh, these are all incomplete thoughts, yeah, but I can't be bothered to sit here and type out my entire train of thought on the matter.

[shit for brains]

The internet is more of an Anarchy than communism. Everyone here do whatever they want, for their own agendas, rather they good or innocent fromm starting little groups of interests to sharing information about each and very topic can be written about or bad things such as stealing hundreds and thousands of dollars worth movies and giving them away so others may take it for free.

[Bigglesnoots]

what about clockcredits

[RomanClock]

I was thinking the opposite. Its THE place for service based jobs and communication transactions. If you haven't noticed, the internet isn't free.

Also, sharing information isn't communism, its education :\
And intellectual property is still property and has value.

[Slurpee]

Communism sees that everybody is equal, but if you ran into Tom Fulp or Lowtax you'd be like whaaaaaaaaaat.

Because they totally capitalismed their respective ways into the upper echelon of internet society.

[billiardball-1]

The internet has as many forms of societies as it has communities. As a whole, though, sharing seems to be the way of things and ideas gain exposure based on merit, not marketing. That second bit is probably the most important aspect of the difference in information exchange. By eliminating mass media and allowing absolutely anybody to catch on, entertainment and culture benefit massively.

You've touched upon something very important, though: a sociological phenomenon that is unique to our times. We have developed communities that aren't survival oriented. This is probably why the internet seems so strange in comparison with the rest of the world. Social traits are adaptive or maladaptive for entirely different reasons, so they evolve in new directions.

I can't wait until anthropologists at large get serious about the internet.

[FlavorClock]

People charge for information (in various forms and structures) on the circlebutts all the time though. And nearly every page you see that hosts any actual content is being paid for with IRL currency by someone. Even ad-supported content is shifting money around between bank accounts somewhere at some point.

It could be seen as a form of semi-anarchic free-market capitalism to some extent, in that there's no all-encompassing regulatory force that governs the business practices (if there were, we probably wouldn't need spy/malware scanners), aside from IRL government, which has proven ineffective in restricting shady online business ventures (see Direct Revenue, creators of some of the most vicious and profitable system-paralyzing advertising viruses, and their complete invulnerability in the courts).

But despite the apparent lack of business regulation, it's also a panopticon in which, at any chosen point, offline authorities can decide to attack individual Internet users for their online activities, typically resulting in nary a peck of the invincibility that hardcore incorporated online criminals (Josh Abram, et al.) are privy to by making bajillions off of the unsuspecting public through the major offline corporations who pay them.

So essentially, you've got two major classes of online citizens: Individual users and business ventures. Both are able to do whatever they want, within their own technical capabilities, but the former group is under constant surveillance by the latter, and can face offline consequences for their actions, should the overwatch decide to make it happen. Conversely, individual users are expressly forbidden (by enforceable offline law) from attempting to infiltrate and survey the online actions of the businesses.

In that respect, it's a polyarchy of companies who siphon offline money from the rest of us by various means with various ethical standards, and we're generally free to do whatever we want, so long as it doesn't interfere with them.

[RevolutionaryClock]

I don't really see how the internet could be considered an example of communism. For starters, users really aren't all on the same level in quite a few ways. (Sites you need to pay for, social prestige created in different circles of people, sites generally controlled by those who pay for them and not the community.) Its almost like a small more trivial version of the society we live in mixed with some anarchy from the general lack of authority.

Ironically, the best example of working communism is probably the military.

[Il Duce]

The internet is more of an Anarchy than communism. Everyone here do whatever they want, for their own agendas, rather they good or innocent fromm starting little groups of interests to sharing information about each and very topic can be written about or bad things such as stealing hundreds and thousands of dollars worth movies and giving them away so others may take it for free.

I agree to this. The idea of communism is a central government body decides what is produced and what businesses are to be made. Free enterprise is highly discouraged. Because of the lack of regulation, there is more "free enterprise" on the internet, so it leans more towards capitalism or anarchy.

[GearBoxClock]

I never considered that.

[WildCherryPepsiClock]

The Internet is where you can be yourself and do your own thing without making a big impact on everyone unlike real life.

[SilverCherryClock]

Ironically, the best example of working communism is probably the military.

Wouldn't the military ranking system be more similar to an aristocratic/bourgeois capitalist system?

[RevolutionaryClock]

Wouldn't the military ranking system be more similar to an aristocratic/bourgeois capitalist system?

Not really because there aren't boundaries to upwards and downwards movement and the power isn't determined by wealth or luck of the draw. Even then, rank is mostly about decision making authority and not so much special privileges or anything. Sure commissioned officers make a lot more than enlisted personnel, but everyone gets the same free medical care, life insurance, opportunity to education, food, and housing provided at the government's expense. Even the shops on post are mostly government owned and operated. Its not a perfect example of communism, but probably the best one we have that works.

[Heliopios]

The internet's more of an anarchist government ruled over by dictators/clan lords.

[noseclock]

ive always thought of the internet being chiefly led by the capitalistic american government, but commercially in a consumer's mind, anything could be possible, just as long as the consumer is content with this "internet" and still pays the bills to upkeep it and constantly uses it, since its the information communication super high way, yadda yadda

[Loki Clock]

If it's a communist system, then access to that system is still on a subscription.

[Whipped Cream]

To answer your question simply there are none, unless you measure the success of a political regime by how much power they wield over the masses, and individual, however this power can only be held through violence and terror, all minorities have to be supressed and there is absolutely no room for individual rights or dissenting opinions.
 
As a result the only way to maintain power is through totalitarianism. And generally most totalitarian states (like most governments) are run by people (incompetent) who got to where they are not because intelligence or general political process but because of power they wield (near exclusively military), so you get that lacks the skills to effectively run a country, and because of this they spend more money and time simply trying to maintain power and control.