Human nature is collaborative, not competitive. We never would have succeeded as a species otherwise. This is capitalist realism, the idea that capitalism is simply the natural order of things.
It seems reasonable to assume that whatever aspect of human behavior might be born of “nature” rather than environment would be collaborative. Otherwise no society would have gotten off the ground. “Human nature” in this case is just shorthand for that idea.
I certainly wouldn’t call any “human nature” immutable, since we’ve seen that environmental effects can make people do almost anything. My statement in the previous comment would have made no sense if I was referring to “human nature” as immutable, since we’ve all agreed that the environment of capitalist society causes humans to behave in competitive ways even when they lead to negative outcomes.
yes like i said i understand the argument and agree with it outside the context of someone using “human nature” in a comment idk it’s one of my petveeves that libs tend to use to argue that communism is impossible “it’s against human nature!” and i prefer to attack the very idea of human nature itself.
Yeah, I see what you mean, actually. I wasn’t saying “human nature” was immutable, but the person I was replying to was. And you make a good point that I should have attacked that explicitly in my reply, actually. I’ll keep that in mind of next time I run into this (depressingly common) “humans are naturally bad” argument.
Human nature is collaborative, not competitive. We never would have succeeded as a species otherwise. This is capitalist realism, the idea that capitalism is simply the natural order of things.
human “nature” isnt real, i get where you’re coming from with this but i dislike letting the notion of some immutable human “nature” go unchallenge
It seems reasonable to assume that whatever aspect of human behavior might be born of “nature” rather than environment would be collaborative. Otherwise no society would have gotten off the ground. “Human nature” in this case is just shorthand for that idea.
I certainly wouldn’t call any “human nature” immutable, since we’ve seen that environmental effects can make people do almost anything. My statement in the previous comment would have made no sense if I was referring to “human nature” as immutable, since we’ve all agreed that the environment of capitalist society causes humans to behave in competitive ways even when they lead to negative outcomes.
yes like i said i understand the argument and agree with it outside the context of someone using “human nature” in a comment idk it’s one of my petveeves that libs tend to use to argue that communism is impossible “it’s against human nature!” and i prefer to attack the very idea of human nature itself.
idk if that makes any sense
Yeah, I see what you mean, actually. I wasn’t saying “human nature” was immutable, but the person I was replying to was. And you make a good point that I should have attacked that explicitly in my reply, actually. I’ll keep that in mind of next time I run into this (depressingly common) “humans are naturally bad” argument.
You would be correct to do so because Marx himself emphasized that point multiple times