Erm when you say 'no, that wasn't communism/socialism' aren't you just falling into the no true scotsman fallacy? Every time I ever see anyone say to someone advocating socialism in one of it's guises, just look at all previous attempts they are failures. The standard reply of the Lefty being talked to is that that wasn't 'real' communism or socialism. By which I'm guessing they mean that wasn't their very very specific, and completely untested I might add, brand of socialism. It is a reliable catch all excuse to hide behind when confronted with the failure of over 100 attempts by societies to implement socialism.
And as if communism wasn't unworkable enough already, you seem to think that it would go well with anarchism? central planning leads to the obvious problems we have seen time and again throughout history. However, anarchism towards that end would be impossible. It would be difficult enough to build a house without a project manager, even if you had all the appropriately qualified builders. A few questions that come to mind are; what makes people pull their own weight? What would create the transformation in the mindset of the people from our current one, to an extremely collectivist one, if not ferocious state propaganda? What would dictate the direction this society goes in, given that socialists can barely agree on anything? How is this going to happen in a globalised economy? It would require the entire world to rise up in unison, and for there to be extremely charismatic leaders showing the way - who must also be willing to give up the power they would gain from such revolutions. How will you silence people advocating different systems? How will you cope with food crises?
When you pick and choose poiltical theroies I presume your starting point must be what is on paper the best political system we could have. You then work backwards from there plotting a course in your head as to how that could come about. But the reality is that between here and where you want society to be there are a billion ifs and buts, and let's not forget human nature buggering everything up along the way. You cannot seriously say with a straight face that our lives would be better under this system, or that it could even be achieved. Many better, and cleverer, people than us have tried and failed miserably. Their intentions when they begun were undoubtedly very close to yours, then reality set in and they realised their communist utopia wasn't going to appear out of thin air, and that it needed some serious leader ship and cracked eggs so to speak.
I have a political theory - MSBism. Under my system no one will work more than an hour a day. We will all drive hover cars, and everyone will have access to unlimited amounts of free drugs. Now all we have to do is hash out the details, but I definitely think it is achievable. Who's in? Or do I need to get a lengthy list of academics on side? Joking aside, if I could pick and choose what happened to society I would probably be with you. But I don't think it is realistic on a million different levels. You can call me close minded or unable to think outside of the box, but looking at a theory and coming to the conclusion that it's impossible doesn't make that so. There are thousands of theories and permutations of those theories, and my way of assessing those theories is firstly by how realistic they are and what the outcomes would be, as well as by looking at real world examples of those theories in practice.
.. every word was familiar and I remembered so much of it despite not watching the show for ages n ages. awesome scene. picked up on the Young Ones from it's very first showing when I was a young un and I've loved it forever
... I'll leave it to Brimz!