How Bad Is Communism, Really...?
Options
A1000MILES
Members, Writer Posts: 13,287 ✭✭✭✭✭
...And do you think America is too far past the point where it could ever be successfully instated?...And I mean like close to ideal, Marx type communism...What do you think are the pros and cons for the people?
Comments
-
Mao starve millions on that ? .
-
Good question. In my limited knowledge, I think that there are other kinds of communism in addition to marxism (which , if I'm not mistaken, is itself not a political/economic system) like leninism, stalinism, maoism, trotskyism, and so on, but they all overlap and come from marxism, so that's confusing to me. But if there is a genuinely Marxist-influenced communist state today, Cuba would probably be the protoype? So can American become like Cuba? Yes and no imo.
Yes because America is semi-socialist, and Cuba is socialist. Socialism has worked to some extent in the U.S in the past and in the present. Same with Canada, Britain, and France. And some socialism has the same goal of some compatible democracies and compatible republics: peace, prosperity, equality, individualism, etc.
But ultimately no because communism is a different monster. With communism, you're talking about totalitarianism in which the government controls everything and wealth is distributed "equally." And totalitarianism and communism are essentially un-American, so it would never work. Even though we're slowly moving towards bigger and bigger government that is slowly being controlled more and more by corporations, I can't see America becoming full blown totalitarian or communist, at least not in the near future.
And that's a good thing if you're a "Westerner" who values individual freedom and representation and capitalism but a bad thing if you believe that a government needs to control everything in order to establish a communist utopia (which is ? btw). Cuba is not evil, but it's certainly not perfect. Pros for a Cuba-style America would be universal healthcare, free education, etc. Cons would be censorship and other types of oppression.
-
every place that's run with a Communist government has at the least taken a dim view of people's rights and at worst has proven to be astronomically ? up.
the default argument is usually "none of them are ACTUAL Communist governments," which just goes to prove that Communist is such a fragile concept that it apparently cannot survive in the wild. -
On paper it sounds nice but dont really works that way. our greed ? it up and like janklow said human rights is always ?
-
What Karl Marx was going towards that humans were gonna be consciously awaken and we'll take care one of another.
A real communist economy lacks a government, have you guys even read up on Karl Marx and his ideas? He was sick and tired of Capitalism taking advantage of workers and while the businessmen got filthy rich and fat. He was an idealist who probably lack emotional intelligence who couldn't see the human greed and emotions invovled. We would have to be damn near perfect for this vehicle to even set off for it to work, which sadly it cannot. -
You'll soon find out after Obamacare is passed.
-
All I know is that it has a history of failing.
-
Yeah, like of course it never gets played out right...But that's because ? ain't stickin to Karl's blueprint...It would be damn near a govmt free utopia...Erbody has money, erbody happy, no crime except for the revolution necessary to overthrow the present day govmt...Lol, but of course...Never...However, if we could get close to that, ? capitalism...
-
It could never work
-
every country has at the least taken a dim view of people's rights
Lets not pretend like every country doesn't have a leviathan. -
I'm not holding my breathe for the socialist revolution to happen in my lifetime but i'm not going to say it couldn't happen either. yall don't know what the world and it's people will be like 100 years from now. people could look back on capitalism and be amazed that this country was actually run like that.
-
every country having a similar problem isn't an argument that Communism is able to solve more and do more than non-Communist systems. but it does tell us Communism doesn't solve that problem.Lets not pretend like every country doesn't have a leviathan.
-
Only problem with communism/socialism is the UN and US will shut you out if you attempt to use that system instantly making your government 10x more oppressive than it would have to be do to lack of imports, technology and overall revenue
In concept though a Utopian society where all is equally distributed and the ego has been defeated is ideal for better life for the most amount of people, but since the money has already been distributed it would be impossible for a communist government to truly function as it should
Rich ? aint given up their stake for their quality of life to decrease -
I don't know ask the Chinese:
-
I keep on trying to tell people that the problem isn't Capitalism but the government's manipulation of Macroeconomics but whatever.
-
Economic differences between socialists and communists:
In a Socialist economy, the means of producing and distributing goods is owned collectively or by a centralized government that often plans and controls the economy. On the other hand, in a communist society, there is no centralized government - there is a collective ownership of property and the organization of labor for the common advantage of all members.
For a Capitalist society to transition, the first step is Socialism. From a capitalist system, it is easier to achieve the Socialist ideal where production is distributed according to people's deeds (quantity and quality of work done). For Communism (to distribute production according to needs), it is necessary to first have production so high that there is enough for everyone's needs. In an ideal Communist society, people work not because they have to but because they want to and out of a sense of responsibility.
Political differences:
Socialism rejects a class-based society. But socialists believe that it is possible to make the transition from capitalism to socialism without a basic change in the character of the state. They hold this view because they do not think of the capitalist state as essentially an institution for the dictatorship of the capitalist class, but rather as a perfectly good piece of machinery which can be used in the interest of whichever class gets command of it. No need, then, for the working class in power to smash the old capitalist state apparatus and set up its own—the march to socialism can be made step by step within the framework of the democratic forms of the capitalist state. Socialism is primarily an economic system so it exists in varying degrees and forms in a wide variety of political systems.
On the other hand, communists believe that as soon as the working class and its allies are in a position to do so they must make a basic change in the character of the state; they must replace capitalist dictatorship over the working class with workers’ dictatorship over the capitalist class as the first step in the process by which the existence of capitalists as a class (but not as individuals) is ended and a classless society is eventually ushered in -
Funny how that applies to capitalism too.every place that's run with a Communist government has at the least taken a dim view of people's rights and at worst has proven to be astronomically ? up.
the default argument is usually "none of them are ACTUAL Communist governments," which just goes to prove that Communist is such a fragile concept that it apparently cannot survive in the wild.
-
so that's what happened to the USSR and China?32DaysOfInfiniti wrote: »Only problem with communism/socialism is the UN and US will shut you out if you attempt to use that system instantly making your government 10x more oppressive than it would have to be do to lack of imports, technology and overall revenue
the difference is that capitalism is never presented as a virtuous, pure system that could solve all our problems if only we'd give it a chance in the way Our Holy Communism isFunny how that applies to capitalism too.
-
We're already born into a Communist existence, any and everything else is simply indoctrination. Socialized Communism, on the other hand, is a degree of slavery akin to the prison industrial complex. Genuine Communism does not have a governing body. Authoritarianism 101.
-
There are too many people to have an effective communist existence imo
It's much easier in smaller groups -
High Revolutionary wrote: »I don't know ask the Chinese:
t/s is talking marxist communism not maoist. anything relating to communist china is irrelevant. -
Agree with previous posters. In theory it's not an entirely bad idea, but like most things the problem arises from corruption, with most of the wealth being arbitrarily handled for the bodies responsible for the distribution of said wealth. But then again I don't know what the ? i'm talking about.
-
...which is exactly the point. "oh, China's ? communism doesn't count because it's China and thus not really communism!"Sicky Mouse wrote: »t/s is talking marxist communism not maoist. anything relating to communist china is irrelevant.
from here we go into explaining that even though communism can never exist in the real world it's still TOTALLY AWESOME
-
Just ask THIS man. Remember Obama is gonna send is back to Africa because he's a communist lol. In all seriousness communism doesn't really work.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p5FGGsupJBw -
...which is exactly the point. "oh, China's ? communism doesn't count because it's China and thus not really communism!"Sicky Mouse wrote: »t/s is talking marxist communism not maoist. anything relating to communist china is irrelevant.
from here we go into explaining that even though communism can never exist in the real world it's still TOTALLY AWESOME
never said communism is awesome or how it could work in the "real world". maoism is not the same as marxism. in a thread discussing the ups and downs of marxist communism it's not fair to use maoism as an example, apples and oranges.
