Communism vs. Capitalism, which is really better?
- Thread starter Dorkamongus
- Start date
Recommended Videos
In Communism then you have people that can work but won't, and get as much as the average person.
In Capitalism, you have greedy people.
But they are everywere.
They both have their evils and both have their goods.
But imagine a country which nobody was rich and nobody was average.
Everybody would be poor.
You would need to have some kind of a super country or so much money that everyone can live atleast half deccent lives, and in Communism then you can be a CEO of a governmental owned company and be a man who mops the floors and get the same payments.
Is that right?
In Capitalism, you have greedy people.
But they are everywere.
They both have their evils and both have their goods.
But imagine a country which nobody was rich and nobody was average.
Everybody would be poor.
You would need to have some kind of a super country or so much money that everyone can live atleast half deccent lives, and in Communism then you can be a CEO of a governmental owned company and be a man who mops the floors and get the same payments.
Is that right?
a bit of both in a communistic government some officials think they are more "equal" then others in a pure capitalstic government you get the USA but worse (the richer getting richer the poorer getting poorer) its best used mixed, the frredom of capitalism and the caringness of communism ( in a pure kapitalistic goverment you are on your own if bad things happen)
Cuba seems to be doing quite well with the whole Communist thing. Yeah they're hardly the richest country in the world BUT and this a massive but, they have the best healthcare in the entire world which is free and more importantly a lot of the people there seem genuinely happy.
Capitalism. Communism plays too much into an ideal state of humanity, in the ideal communist state we all work for no other reason than to help our neighbors and make the world a perfect place where we can walk down forest paths and listen to the birds sing without being picked up by the secret police and sent to Siberia for attempted conspiracy against the Party. Capitalism, on the other hand, accounts for people being selfish greedy jerks. It works based on principles that we can see in the natural world around us, i.e. survival of the fittest. While unchecked capitalism can be a very flawed system and can, indeed, lead to some very poor outcomes (housing crisis, stock market crash) it still works.
I would prefer the competitiveness of capitalism to the equality of communism any day.
Communism promotes giving everyone, no matter how little they do, to getting everything that a hard worker who takes pride in their accomplishments.
Think about it, no matter how hard you work, you'll never get anything more than the bottom rung of society which now has an equal standing with you. Communism has proved time and time again an utter failure while capitalism continues to evolve to meet today's demands.
Capitalism promotes ingenuity and self improvement. It drives people to become better at their trade while inciting the bottom rung to take a step up in becoming better citizens.
The government should never have too much control over its citizens - otherwise you're just asking for a revolution or uprising.
And to the people who say Americans need the universal health care system - think about this - illegal immigrants can come and go into any hospital to receive care - all while using the money made by the work of legal citizens - it's not that we don't want it, it's that we will take it when it works to help actual citizens instead of the people who cheat to enter the country. So, would you want your money to go to help someone who is also paying for the same system, or to someone who'll not contribute at all?
Communism promotes giving everyone, no matter how little they do, to getting everything that a hard worker who takes pride in their accomplishments.
Think about it, no matter how hard you work, you'll never get anything more than the bottom rung of society which now has an equal standing with you. Communism has proved time and time again an utter failure while capitalism continues to evolve to meet today's demands.
Capitalism promotes ingenuity and self improvement. It drives people to become better at their trade while inciting the bottom rung to take a step up in becoming better citizens.
The government should never have too much control over its citizens - otherwise you're just asking for a revolution or uprising.
And to the people who say Americans need the universal health care system - think about this - illegal immigrants can come and go into any hospital to receive care - all while using the money made by the work of legal citizens - it's not that we don't want it, it's that we will take it when it works to help actual citizens instead of the people who cheat to enter the country. So, would you want your money to go to help someone who is also paying for the same system, or to someone who'll not contribute at all?
You see, I like communism.
But I also like capitalism.
But which is better...
THERE'S ONLY ONE WAY TO FIND OUT!
FIGHT!!!
But I also like capitalism.
But which is better...
THERE'S ONLY ONE WAY TO FIND OUT!
FIGHT!!!
It always irks me somewhat when people claim "human nature" is the one behind communism not working.
I doubt you know human nature, or indeed anyone does, unless you've observed people with no contact with the outside world living in the wilderness or something, like an even more twisted Truman Show.
I doubt you know human nature, or indeed anyone does, unless you've observed people with no contact with the outside world living in the wilderness or something, like an even more twisted Truman Show.
This question takes me back not so long ago to my high school days and studying Animal Farm.
Remember children (and adults) all animals are equal, but some are more equal than others.
I.E greed is why communism doesn't work but it is why democratic capitalism does.
Remember children (and adults) all animals are equal, but some are more equal than others.
I.E greed is why communism doesn't work but it is why democratic capitalism does.
While I do agree that both Capitalism and Communism have their strengths and weaknesses, basic flaws inherited by modern society will inevitably tear asunder whatever system is put into place. Also, there is the detail of said systems being controlled by a central government. Knowing this, I favor Anarcho-Communism. All people are equal in status, and the highest power one has to answer to is oneself. Granted, there would be varying levels of chaos and mayhem without a constant peacekeeping entity, but it's one of many risks inherent to the system. With capitalism, there are still criminals. The problem is that said criminals have to be very skilled to avoid getting caught.
Anyway, there are certain advantages to anarcho-communism. If you want a home, build it. If you want clothes, make them. If you want something someone else has, try trading for it. (And yes, I'm well aware that I just implied a bartering system in an anarcho-communist ideal. It could work.)
The point is that no system is perfect because Humanity itself is too much of a variable or any system to work perfectly. After all, true perfection is nonexistent.
Anyway, there are certain advantages to anarcho-communism. If you want a home, build it. If you want clothes, make them. If you want something someone else has, try trading for it. (And yes, I'm well aware that I just implied a bartering system in an anarcho-communist ideal. It could work.)
The point is that no system is perfect because Humanity itself is too much of a variable or any system to work perfectly. After all, true perfection is nonexistent.
Quick thought:
When discussing these things, it's easy to try and decide which is the better ideaology by referring to which real-world examples have done well or haven't. The problem is, all our real world ones so far have been flawed in various ways.
Communism, in practice, tends to be incredibly corrupt, and mostly used as a tool to keep a populace dirt poor and unable to effectively fight back against a dictatorial police state, rather than it's otherwise worthy and utopian "from all according to their ability, to all according to their needs" core values. Everyone would have a good life, but be required to contribute also. In reality the civilians work hard for a small share of an even smaller pot, and the ruling class have it very plush, and the military get an unfairly large slice of the pie - either for expansion and bullying, or just keeping people down.
Capitalism, somewhat the reverse. Implementing the purest interpretation of the idea would have monopolies, syndicates and cabals all over the place, charging as high and paying as low as they could get away with, leading to a similar highly polarised oligarchy. Somewhat like Victorian Britain, perhaps. But this model is "tainted" by regulation and other altruistic/philantropic, human drives, which temper it and have instead resulted in fierce competition instead of (generally outlawed!) collusion, often a commie-style guaranteed minimum income (outsourced "third world" workers excepted ... though they're often getting more than they could by subsistence farming), and a great deal of choice, leisure time, technological and social progress and safety-netting.
It's all a big mess...
In summary, THEORETICAL communism "isn't that bad" - in fact, it's arguably a much better model than capitalism. But in PRACTICE, the human factors that have - so far - been in evidence in the competing governmental styles seem to run in reverse to what the models suggest. Maybe it's possible to get a properly altruistic, empowering communist society... just depends who sets it up and runs it. But we haven't had it so far.
(And it's that sort of thing that makes me highly suspicious of governments doing otherwise abhorrent things "for the best", "for your protection", and waving that awful phrase "if you've nothing to hide, you shouldn't be worried"... OK ... and once all this stuff is in place, then they change the idea of what needs to be hidden to include previously innocent people including yourself, then what? It's not like there isn't historical precedent for that kind of crap)
When discussing these things, it's easy to try and decide which is the better ideaology by referring to which real-world examples have done well or haven't. The problem is, all our real world ones so far have been flawed in various ways.
Communism, in practice, tends to be incredibly corrupt, and mostly used as a tool to keep a populace dirt poor and unable to effectively fight back against a dictatorial police state, rather than it's otherwise worthy and utopian "from all according to their ability, to all according to their needs" core values. Everyone would have a good life, but be required to contribute also. In reality the civilians work hard for a small share of an even smaller pot, and the ruling class have it very plush, and the military get an unfairly large slice of the pie - either for expansion and bullying, or just keeping people down.
Capitalism, somewhat the reverse. Implementing the purest interpretation of the idea would have monopolies, syndicates and cabals all over the place, charging as high and paying as low as they could get away with, leading to a similar highly polarised oligarchy. Somewhat like Victorian Britain, perhaps. But this model is "tainted" by regulation and other altruistic/philantropic, human drives, which temper it and have instead resulted in fierce competition instead of (generally outlawed!) collusion, often a commie-style guaranteed minimum income (outsourced "third world" workers excepted ... though they're often getting more than they could by subsistence farming), and a great deal of choice, leisure time, technological and social progress and safety-netting.
It's all a big mess...
In summary, THEORETICAL communism "isn't that bad" - in fact, it's arguably a much better model than capitalism. But in PRACTICE, the human factors that have - so far - been in evidence in the competing governmental styles seem to run in reverse to what the models suggest. Maybe it's possible to get a properly altruistic, empowering communist society... just depends who sets it up and runs it. But we haven't had it so far.
(And it's that sort of thing that makes me highly suspicious of governments doing otherwise abhorrent things "for the best", "for your protection", and waving that awful phrase "if you've nothing to hide, you shouldn't be worried"... OK ... and once all this stuff is in place, then they change the idea of what needs to be hidden to include previously innocent people including yourself, then what? It's not like there isn't historical precedent for that kind of crap)
Because of stigma to do with Communism during the cold war some less educated Americans associate socialism with communism. Given Communism is the extreme left but being a left minded person politically doens't make you a communist by default.
I'm pretty sure you don't know what either communism, free market capitalism (actually you describe it here a little bit), state capitalism or state communism is.Dorkamongus said:
Communism involves every one working for the common good, every one getting equal resources etc, however, if they don't work (it doesn't matter what they work in though), they die, also there is no religion in communism. This results in laziness, lack of adaptability and innovation
free market capitalism is capitalism that is, well, free. There are no restrictions on business. there is no government regulation, but this is not the world we live in today, and is heavily susceptible by almost the same problems communism and can result in extreme monopolies. innovation does occur, however if and when a monopoly occurs, it stops for that sector alot of times.
State capitalism is what we have right now, because we have government regulations in order to protect the people and avoid monopolies, and other modifications to the original system. This results in innovation, forever, and provides incentive for technology, while this can also cause laziness due to lower class funding, it will still create innovation.
State communism is what every supposedly communist nation had, or has. Its government regulated communism, and now, it includes some capitalism in order to compete with the wider world (example red china). This can result in laziness, lack of adaptability and innovation, but in modern red china, it doesn't do to the fact that it is augmented, and government controlled.