Communism
- Thread starter Dys
- Start date
Recommended Videos
I dont misunderstand communism, far from it. Iv read quite far into the subject. I just dont like the idea of it nor think it would work in practice.
It leaves no direct personal gain for working hard (yes i know, the community benefits which then benefits you). Whilst in small farming villages this may work, take large cities, are you really going to notice any difference in your 3 or 4 hours overtime?
Also, classless seems to imply that all are equal, something which by human nature is impossible (sexual reproduction, parenting and genetics and all). Even through life it is pretty impossible to make everyone equal and still run a society. If all where equal then everyone would need to be given the exact same amount of food, regardless of age/size and no matter what job you do you would need to be paid (or which other system you go with) the exact same. Thus if i chose to be a climber for my whole life i would get paid the same as someone who works their whole life in a field or spends years getting training. Seems to totally remove the point to get training and do what are now highly paid jobs such as management when you can just do what you want for the same thing.
Also, stateless and democratic dont really go together. If everyone has a say in everything then there is still a state
EDIT: "I have decided that communism/socialism are the best economic policies to emerge as ofyet. Their only problem is that they're too easy to exploit."
So what your saying is their not the best policy then...
It leaves no direct personal gain for working hard (yes i know, the community benefits which then benefits you). Whilst in small farming villages this may work, take large cities, are you really going to notice any difference in your 3 or 4 hours overtime?
Also, classless seems to imply that all are equal, something which by human nature is impossible (sexual reproduction, parenting and genetics and all). Even through life it is pretty impossible to make everyone equal and still run a society. If all where equal then everyone would need to be given the exact same amount of food, regardless of age/size and no matter what job you do you would need to be paid (or which other system you go with) the exact same. Thus if i chose to be a climber for my whole life i would get paid the same as someone who works their whole life in a field or spends years getting training. Seems to totally remove the point to get training and do what are now highly paid jobs such as management when you can just do what you want for the same thing.
Also, stateless and democratic dont really go together. If everyone has a say in everything then there is still a state
EDIT: "I have decided that communism/socialism are the best economic policies to emerge as ofyet. Their only problem is that they're too easy to exploit."
So what your saying is their not the best policy then...
Well, I mean, I have to admit that that is usually how communism ends up, but that's not what communism actually is. We really don't have all that many communist states any more, so... I dunno.Novajam said:
But anyway, I think you're using the word "communism" wrong. "Communism" doesn't change, just like "democracy" doesn't change. "Communism" is (in my superior and infallible opinion) good, but getting it working is hard, and when a nation is in the middle of trying to get communism working, it's usually bad times, then it collapses.
Sort of like how... say, manicotti is (in my still superior opinion) delicious, but getting the noodles stuffed without tearing them is hard, and it eventually ends up collapsing.
Marx planned for Communism to evolve in a modern, industrialized state.
History showed that Russia in 1917 had yet to switch from agriculture to industry, which should have been one part of the problem...
Same goes for Cuba (the major part of the population had even learn to read and write after the Revolution...)
After the ComIntern was established, Moscow pretty much dictated the conditions under which other countries' Communists had to act, so they fucked that movement up on a world-wide scale, which is a petty if I come to think of it.
As the USSR has ceased to exist, on the other hand, there could be a revival of Communism around the world for the better.... I mean, if you asked people if they would like to decide what policies are made in their local vicinity, they would definitely want to take part and decide themselves instead of being scammed by some professional politicians every few years... the kind of direct democracy Switzerland is sporting would be much more beneficial...
History showed that Russia in 1917 had yet to switch from agriculture to industry, which should have been one part of the problem...
Same goes for Cuba (the major part of the population had even learn to read and write after the Revolution...)
After the ComIntern was established, Moscow pretty much dictated the conditions under which other countries' Communists had to act, so they fucked that movement up on a world-wide scale, which is a petty if I come to think of it.
As the USSR has ceased to exist, on the other hand, there could be a revival of Communism around the world for the better.... I mean, if you asked people if they would like to decide what policies are made in their local vicinity, they would definitely want to take part and decide themselves instead of being scammed by some professional politicians every few years... the kind of direct democracy Switzerland is sporting would be much more beneficial...
Good point, I give you that. War as a means of action and transporter of explosions to test your graphics card.
I disagree. It's also a sign of being unable to switch to the new reality and playing to helplessness to habit, i.e. Commie-haters stick to Commie-hating, because they are unable to adopt to a new reality, in which there is no Red State left to be scared about/campaigning against.
Video games aren't purely escapism. They often carry out ideology, too. Propaganda isn't just bound to flyers and pamphlets or pictures... video games can provide that too (and in most cases even more subtly). Think of the *choke* Tom Clancy *choke* line of shooters. That miserable war nerd is so stuck up in his Cold War habit, that you can't help but notice that ingame.
No, communism has no state, as such. Or prehaps you could say it has one party, of which everyone is a member of equal seating, but that would hardly make it a party.Novajam said:
I'd also like to clarify that communism doesn't leave people without goals, as that would obviously leave people with what I like to call "I'm so rich I have nothing left to do now I'm going to go kill myself" syndrome. In a true communist system you can still own personal property (cars, art, computers whatever) but not real estate, the nation may or may not have currency, either way all necissary items (food, shelter, medicines etc) are 'paid' for by the state and all have equal claim to them. So in a small sense, capitalism would not completely be abolished, although it wouldn't really be capitilism..if that makes any sense (I know it doesn't, I just can't word what I'm trying to say).
Another thing that tends to anny me a touch, that I didn't include earlier while I was still feeling annoyed is that communism and democracy are not mutually exclusive, in fact, communism cannot exist in the absense of a democracy, as by definition thats what it is.
I personally believe that communism is an idealist's dream; a literal utopia, a world of equality, peace and prosperity, yet it is only a dream. On a basic psychological stand point, it is simply human nature to want to be better than the next bloke, to be more wealthy, to be more powerful. The very nature of communism is an ideal place for those with low morals, those who are so easily corrupted by greed, to take and abuse power. This is evidenced in the suffering of the millions under Stalin's oppression, China's gradually loosened stranglehold of it's people, and all the other myriad regimes that have flourished and fallen under their own corrupt diseases. These are the men who gain their power and become drunk with it, and will do anything to keep it and the "order" that goes with it, as shown by the Tienanmen square massacre and the millions that Stalin put to death.
Communism could work, it could create a perfect society, only if those who inhabited it were perfect themselves, without vice, greed or ambition, traits inherit in the human being.
A passage in a book I had to read for school goes along the lines of "In the distance, communism looks like a diamond, but close up it is a tear." and while that is being considered, think of this, think of all those who have died for communism's perfect society, all those deemed unhealthy for the regime, those who died for dark, diseased and corrupt regimes that allowed many and varied madmen to flourish, and ask yourself, is humanity truly ready for a perfect world? Or are we simply to blinkered by our hatred and prejudices to see our follies and turn our backs on it, and move forward into, and what could be, the most prosperous time this world has ever seen.
and somehow this turned into a feature length presentation somewhere...
this is just my own, hopefully not too biased opinion, and i hope it doesn't get torn apart to badly.
Note: i've got nothing against communists, just tyrannical dictators.
Communism could work, it could create a perfect society, only if those who inhabited it were perfect themselves, without vice, greed or ambition, traits inherit in the human being.
A passage in a book I had to read for school goes along the lines of "In the distance, communism looks like a diamond, but close up it is a tear." and while that is being considered, think of this, think of all those who have died for communism's perfect society, all those deemed unhealthy for the regime, those who died for dark, diseased and corrupt regimes that allowed many and varied madmen to flourish, and ask yourself, is humanity truly ready for a perfect world? Or are we simply to blinkered by our hatred and prejudices to see our follies and turn our backs on it, and move forward into, and what could be, the most prosperous time this world has ever seen.
and somehow this turned into a feature length presentation somewhere...
this is just my own, hopefully not too biased opinion, and i hope it doesn't get torn apart to badly.
Note: i've got nothing against communists, just tyrannical dictators.
But even in Lenins years there were some very questionable desisions. State capitalism and the NEP were not communist polices but russia would have died without them. There was still serve repression, but no where near as bad as stalin of course.Foggydog said:
Well this is a good example of someone not knowing what the hell they're talking about, quoting Orwell out of context doesn't prove that communism doesn't work. It should be noted that Orwell himself was a Socialist, and that Animal Farm was not criticizing the Communist system, but rather the totalitarian "pseudo-communism" that is Stalinism.Beetlejooce said:
This is almost as far off as you can come... Communism has nothing to do with dictatorship, thought police or anything like it, unfortunatley, attempts to instate a communist system in a country has so far failed, due to corruption, power-hungryness and the likes (Soviet, Cuba). Communism has also been used as a mask, something to tell the oppressed people so they will sympathize with you, whilst you sieze all power for yourself (China).Novajam said:
Actually, Raúl Castro has been in control for a little more than 2 years, assuming presidential duties in july 2006, due to Fidels illness. And after Raúl officially became president in 2008, lots of restrictions imposed on Cubans has been lifted. If Cuba makes it out of the economical crisis it is currently in (partly due to the US-imposed trade embargo), they future might be brighter than it seems.rokudan said:
Now then, on to the question of Communism.
As others have said, Communism is a good idea, however, the end does not justify the means used to reach it. Marx proposed several "stages", one of them was the temporary "Dictaorship of the proletariat" wich would follow a Socialist revolution.
THIS is why I do not agree with Communism, how noble the end cause may be, removing the freedom of the people (which is the foundation of our society, atleast theoretically) is NOT justifiable, the people MUST be in control at all times, and the state should be the servant of the people, not vice-versa.
I can see how you would think that, and I'm not sure I disagree, especially as the two somewhat similar.needausername said:
However I'm left feeling that a state of anarchy can never be permanant, as once all the previously imposed authority has been removed, someone else will eventually assert themselves as leader based on some kind of advantage or resource they have aquired (fuel, water, weapons.. I don't know, could be anything, just general wealth).
I don't know everything about communism but I know a fair bit and it annoys me a lot when people use communism in the completely wrong context especially when they feel that a freedom of theirs is being suppressed in some way. I feel a bit sadder when someone thinks that communism is equal to evil or really that communism is the same thing as fascism.
That all depends on what kind of Anarchy we are talking about here, if it is a Mutualist system (where there's absolutley NO gonverment whatosever, Fallout style (or EVE Online 0,0) ) yes, this would most likely happen, however I believe that in some Anarchistic systems, this can be prevented, perhaps Anarcho-Communism, where everything is decided by direct voting?Dys said:
The result of McCarthyism and the Red Scare, huge propaganda efforts where spent in the US to make the word "communism" synonymous with "dictatorship" or "facism".Logan Keller said:
Communism and Anarchism both will never work because humans by nature are greedy self centred people and it only takes one person like that to destroy a whole society founded on the belief that everyone is equal and all should have freedom. Dictatorships, now they work as long as the one man in power is good at his job
Not true, in an extreme case, humans will cease to be self centered, for if they are, they will not survive. Humans are "herd-animals" we HAVE to depend on one another to survive, if someone is anti-social (such as extremly greedy or just a general bastard), they will be exiled by the larger part of the group, and thus, ultimately die.george144 said:
