it doesn't work out as intended.

People resort to these excuses, always falling back on horrible examples from our history which weren't run properly, saying that it's not possible to have a non monetary society.

That is because it completely ignores human nature to assume that everyone will be content being fundamentally equal. You will always have people who crave power, and you will always have people who will feel unmotivated to do more with themselves unless they are getting more for it. In other words, it ignores the fact that we are still animals, primate mammals evolved from a reptilian ancestry, which is reflected in our brains and our instincts. I can imagine perfect societies, but none of them can work with present-day humanity, only with a subset of it. Your best bet in the near-to-mid future for establishing a perfect society is to start a colony. And even that probably won't be able to work.

In other words, it ignores the fact that we are still animals, primate mammals evolved from a reptilian ancestry, which is reflected in our brains and our instincts.

Well, I think the commies made some major mistakes:

1. Ignoring nearly all individualism (everybody the same car, the same food, etc...) This is discussable though.

2. Once you have the power over all national products, many won't be able to let go of it in the next elections and will use it to remain in power.

3. Quality of all products, technologies and scientific studies go down as there is no healthy competitor to the the state.

4. People lose interest in taking various studies for specific jobs, they are less aware of the world and don't have a clue what is going on on the other side of the country.

Then why not take it a step further, the perfect society must be anarchy, and nobody will force money on you either. It's absolutely true, apart from that it doesn't work either.

I think you have it upside down. Taking away money doesn't give you the ideal society, but in an ideal society you don't need money.

"Human nature" doesn't exist!

You have to teach people how to behave properly for them to behave properly.

This is just another excuse for why things can't be better than they are.

This might just be the most ignorant and naive thing I've ever heard anyone say. I don't mean that as an insult, just as a fact.

Regardless of society, you will still have certain things that people feel inclined towards. People have instincts, people are programmed a certain way by their genes and brain structure. I am not saying that we can't overcome these things, but I am saying that they must be taken into account and that some aspects of our nature are nigh-impossible to overcome and cannot be ignored.

For example, try to eliminate the human sex drive without any kind of drugs or gene alterations, and tell me how that goes.

These are simply biological traits passed down from generation to generation. They are nature, and they are human, but when people talk about "human nature", they are talking about psychological traits, which are learned through society (we are taught to think and act a certain way). Anything learned isn't universal.

EDIT: To reiterate that, genetics only accounts for physical traits, not mental traits. Saying that something is human nature tends to be an excuse for why things should be the way they are now, rather than change. I'm sure we all have used this excuse before at least once.

And surely if someone was taught to not do something then they'll never do it, right? /sarcasm People will do certain things regardless of what they were told because they just can't help themselves, or if they do hold themselves back against their nature due to conditioning it can cause a lot of stress and even long-term psychological trauma (please do not say that this isn't true, I know more than enough walking, breathing examples, myself included).

I'm not saying that people should just be allowed to do whatever they feel inclined towards. I'm just saying that you can't ignore these things when planning a better society.

No it isn't.

I am the first person to say that things can and should be better than they are.

and the kind of world that I ultimately want cannot exist

If you have a society that can properly manage it's resources, you can give everyone a high standard of living and won't need money.

Something like greed isn't natural

You are?

The kind of world you want may not be possible without altering human biology. The kind I want is one that educates people, teaches them civilized values involving respect, generosity, modesty, etc. so they can behave better and feel happy as a result.

It is used as an excuse- people argue that we will never be able to eliminate problems with our society because of our natural inclinations.

Maybe we should try to avoid a "quote war" from here on.

People can be taught to be civil and respectful, and to have proper self control.

genetics only accounts for physical traits, not mental traits

Yes it is. Greed isn't a learned behavior, so where does it come from if not from natural inclination?

And that world would still have room for improvement which would require fundamental changes to humans.

One time

Yes, but under some circumstances it can also lead to a lot of negative effects to a person's health and wellbeing. So clearly that is insufficient.

Not true at all. I don't have the time to go through all the ways in which this is incorrect, but it most certainly is.

Proper self control doesn't mean bottle up all your emotions. Besides, we'll always have psychologists, and in a non-monetary society this kind of care can be more accessible.

No, it wouldn't.

Only once?

I think you're the one being cynical now.

It's a real shame critical thinking is not a skill selected for in news anchors.