/lit/ - Literature

>>11927962
>the rules of the game determine the players' behaviors.
And when people don't change all that much, when you're confronted with human nature, as past revolutions were, you will resort to putting political dissenters and undesirables into camps, indoctrinate children from the earliest point you can get to them, make people spy on each other for their own as well as the common good, and even though all of this follows from your retarded materialist 'new man' doctrine, when your regime of terror crumbles you will insist that the reason for its failure was that it was subverted, that a few corrupt individuals took the power from the people, and that it wasn't real communism.
That, by the way, is what I mean when I say that capitalism does not define your entire life. Sure, the economic reality has an influence on almost anything, but it's contained. You complain about there being 122 different kinds of yogurt, but why should I care? It doesn't define me, I don't need to pretend to care about it, I don't even have to feign interest in it.

The reason businesses fail all the time is that reality is too complex for them to maintain a grip on the market for very long, that knowledge and technology are improving, the problems one has to solve in ones time changing constantly and consistently. That's the whole reason you need an organic structure. If you could map out mans desires and interests that would mean that you'd have mapped out man himself. You say polls do a pretty good job of that as it is, so go ahead and predict the way the internet is going to develop economically as well as culturally over the next five years. If you actually do it I'll see it as proof that your god is the one true god, but that doesn't mean I'll convert to your religion. Why would anyone want to live in that way, even if it were proven to them that it is possible?