Communism - Yea or Nay?

[Rebdragon]

Calling somebody a douche because they disagree with your point of view. How very mature.

 

If you read my post you'll see I was calling myself a douche.

 

I've read over your post. I can't see how you were possibly calling yourself a douche. Either you're bad with English, or you were flaming. I'll presume the former.

 

How is my English bad there? If I were in a fight and I got punched in the stomach, and then I punched the person who hit me in the face and then said "how's that for a hard hit?", would you assume I was talking about their hit or mine? Just because "douche" is derogatory doesn't make it's impossible use it in that context. You've just never heard someone admit they're a douche; it's not bad English but awkward context.

 

 

 

And while I'm overexplaining myself for no good reason, I'll just add that I didn't attack you for your point of view, but because of the way you acted. Fair enough 1_man?

 

 

 

Not that mister roll-eyes up there doesn't deserve it when assassin kindly explained things to him.

 

Oh please, it's nothing I don't get given to me. How about I lecture you on all my various ideals as if you were incapable of understanding them for yourself, or as if you didn't already know about them?

 

 

 

Make an obvious comment to someone you know already knows better, and they will likely get patronised by it.

 

Do you think his intention was to be a lecturing douche to you? Really?

 

 

 

I mean if it was me, sure, it'd be a different story. I'm not going to say that assassin is perfect but I don't think you'd actually assume that was his intention.

[l0l0lpur32]

I think the most ironic thing about socialism/communism is they preach equality yet want to ban individuals from making decisions for themselves, and have some bureaucrats make decisions for them... some more equal than others right?

 

I think the most ironic thing about capitalism is that it preaches about how it's so financially prosperous, even when we're in the midst of a recession.

 

 

 

How's that for irony?

 

 

 

Capitalism isn't supposed to guarantee constant economic growth, that's unsustainable for a number of reasons. Recessions are a natural part of the trade cycle. The long term trend though is for economic growth to occur.

 

I think I remember saying the same thing myself about half a dozen times on other threads, but thanks for showing the consideration to lecture me anyway, just in case I'd forgotten how capitalism works. :roll:

 

 

 

I was merely displaying there are faults with all systems, thus l0l's "Socialism/Communism sux because Capitalism's an absolute God-send of a system!" stance just comes across as a tiny bit baseless and unexplained.

 

Just like your "turn everyone into numbers on a state computer" stance

[1_man_army]

Calling somebody a douche because they disagree with your point of view. How very mature.

 

If you read my post you'll see I was calling myself a douche. Not that mister roll-eyes up there doesn't deserve it when assassin kindly explained things to him.

 

 

 

But hey, thanks for the condescending attitude mate. Keep it up, we all really like it.

 

 

 

*takes a bow* Thanks, my goal is to please you more and more with each post.

 

 

 

I also like how you use the the "we" to imply that you speak for all tip.it.

[Rebdragon]

I don't see anyone denying it :-w . Not that 'we' has to mean it's a pure consensus, of course.

[purfishx]

I don't see anyone denying it :-w . Not that 'we' has to mean it's a pure consensus, of course.

 

 

 

I'm with Reb. :P

[1_man_army]

I don't see anyone denying it :-w . Not that 'we' has to mean it's a pure consensus, of course.

 

 

 

I'm with Reb. :P

 

 

 

That really cuts deep lol.

[Zierro]

How is my English bad there? If I were in a fight and I got punched in the stomach, and then I punched the person who hit me in the face and then said "how's that for a hard hit?", would you assume I was talking about their hit or mine? Just because "douche" is derogatory doesn't make it's impossible use it in that context. You've just never heard someone admit they're a douche; it's not bad English but awkward context.

 

 

 

It looks like you were trying to mimic his behavior of "acting like a douche" so you tried to "out-douche" him (hence the "How's that for being a douche?" [And it's appropriate since you used an analogy about trying to outdo someone.]) which still means you're calling him a douche. That's just how I read it though.

[Ginger_Warrior]

Whatever. I'm sorry to assassin if he was offended. All this is needless flaming.

 

 

 

I was merely displaying that l0l's lack of explanation to his posts, and confusion between ideology and methodology, leave him susceptible to accusations of hypocrisy, or blind idealism.

[munkis]

bring back a serious discusion about socialism vs capitalism

 

 

 

or as he said communism reformism vs revolotionarsm

 

 

 

stop with the douche stuff it just redictulus....

[duncdar2]

I support it, along with guns, abortion, aithiest, and Hitler, communism falls in there somewhere. I support because since the government has the power (I HAS THE P0W3R!) they can get more done, capitalism runs it through the public, which in most cases takes long, while in that period of time, a Communist can have already thought they're plans. Frankly, Communism gets stuff done. However, I don't support dictators. in most cases they get too powermad. Religion gets in the way too much in dictaorships. Look at Hitler, he was religous (sp?) caused him the war. f he wasn't, he would have attacked Europe right away and won, but since he help off it gave the Allies time to prepare. But I do support all the stuff I mentioned that I supported. (really?!??)

 

 

 

Stalin FTW

[Rebdragon]

How is my English bad there? If I were in a fight and I got punched in the stomach, and then I punched the person who hit me in the face and then said "how's that for a hard hit?", would you assume I was talking about their hit or mine? Just because "douche" is derogatory doesn't make it's impossible use it in that context. You've just never heard someone admit they're a douche; it's not bad English but awkward context.

 

 

 

It looks like you were trying to mimic his behavior of "acting like a douche" so you tried to "out-douche" him (hence the "How's that for being a douche?" [And it's appropriate since you used an analogy about trying to outdo someone.]) which still means you're calling him a douche. That's just how I read it though.

 

Exactly. And for the record, I never once said I wasn't calling him a douche.

[Yes_Its_Ross]

While it would be wonderful to see the world in complete equality and everyone be happy, I can't help but believe that this will never happen. Greed affects the lives of everyone wether you know it or not, and it is hard to imagine a world without it. Someone will always want more power. Greed is why the Soviet Union fell.

[baalboy5]

I support it, along with guns, abortion, aithiest, and Hitler, communism falls in there somewhere. I support because since the government has the power (I HAS THE P0W3R!) they can get more done, capitalism runs it through the public, which in most cases takes long, while in that period of time, a Communist can have already thought they're plans. Frankly, Communism gets stuff done. However, I don't support dictators. in most cases they get too powermad. Religion gets in the way too much in dictaorships. Look at Hitler, he was religous (sp?) caused him the war. f he wasn't, he would have attacked Europe right away and won, but since he help off it gave the Allies time to prepare. But I do support all the stuff I mentioned that I supported. (really?!??)

 

 

 

Stalin FTW

 

Dude, honestly, what are you trying to point out?

[Unoalexi]

Personally, I am not willing to sacrifice my economic and social freedom for the welfare of my citizens. A capitalist economy works out fine for the United States, and becoming "something" is still a dream many people hold in the back of their minds. So I'm going to have to say nay.

 

 

 

I literally laughed my [wagon] off when I read this! Freedom? To what? Forever confine others to a fate of suffering and misery in order for one's personal gain? To earn more money at the expense of other's health and welfare? That's just plain selfish. This person has absolutely no idea what they're talking about... Since when does capitalism work "fine" for the USA? It's the capitalist policies that landed us in this current depression! Because of capitalism, America is trillions of dollars in debt. He is also under the illusion that one has such socioeconomic freedoms in the first place. It is the restrictions placed by the capitalists that discourages the progress of society, though new inventions and such. If capitalism was allowed free reign, then Walmart would be the only store still standing, since it basically kills any new business development in every area that it parks it's [wagon] on. Furthermore, if Big business was given control of the economy, then both human heath and the health of the environment would surely be in jepoardy. People freak out when they hear the word "Communism" because of the backwash due to the Red Scare. Its sad to see that even today, over fifty years since, people are still so ignorant.

[l0l0lpur32]

While it would be wonderful to see the world in complete equality and everyone be happy, I can't help but believe that this will never happen. Greed affects the lives of everyone wether you know it or not, and it is hard to imagine a world without it. Someone will always want more power. Greed is why the Soviet Union fell.

 

Mass genocide and oppression which still affects Russia and Eastern Europe today is the reason why the Soviet Union even lasted as long as it did.

[archimage_a]

Sigh, I have half an hour so please forgive my shortness. (as with the constant 'Communism is doomed to failure' that litter this thread)

 

 

 

Yes I am a Communist, but before that is dismissed as a Stalinist it would be interesting to get some people's opinions:

 

Is anyone here saying that if communism was brought about, magically, overnight, they would refuse to help people? Would you refuse to give food to the starving? Would you refuse to do any work at all?

 

 

 

Now as someone with a fair amount of free time I have actually looked into how to bring about a successful Communist system...If one nation was willing to become bankrupt, willing to ignore the money factor...What if it wasn't that a Government got rid of Money but Capitalism drained it out of a nation... Lets, for instance say that:

 

 

 

Britain's banks were frozen, someone decides to stuff them up...lets say the Governor of the Bank of England is a secret communist. Now then all transactions go though the bank(or did once) of England. Without that what you all say would happen...people would stop working, there would be looting...blah blah blah... Now imagine that while all of this is happening there was a story that the Government had been siphoning off funds...not just siphoning more like ripping money out of the economy to give to American bankers to fund whatever. Now suppose the Government refused to hold an inquiry into that, now suppose that there were riots, small affairs but the people in charge(the mayors, the commanders...even just some random solider with a gun) started shooting. Suddenly out big friendly Government that protects us isn't so friendly. Now imagine that rioters turn protectors...the 'patriots' that are a bit gun happy. Suddenly you have a full scale war on your hands...now the army can't hold on to power, there are too many rioters...rather than try they evaucate the Government, the bussiness owners...all the top part of society that have the money. Now lets say that someone, a socialist, gets to London. The Queen, for some inexplicable reason, gives them power...probably to save her own skin. Now then, rather than trying to bring about socialism they just try to keep the country going...rather than trying to restart industy they buy food from other nations using what little remains in the treasury. Lets say that they manage to get enough for a year or so...thats a year or so for people to come to terms with reality...now you and I both know that the majority of people are Capitalists...but not all...some will try, some will voulenteer. I am not saying alot, but some...Now if you saw that America, that Europe and who ever else had stood idly by while all this was happening, and then there were people trying, desperately, but futily to save some scraps of Britain...then wouldn't you try to help as well...Wouldn't you be inspired...I mean we all know what it is like when we are not working or going to school...its fun for a while but soon there is nothing going on...There is no TV because it is not essencial, there is no real radio because it is not essencial...you can't really go out to eat because people are working hard just to keep houses lit and warm...Now what would you do...Suppose you had children, they need an education...does it matter who provides it? They need to be got out from under your feet....now thoughout this people, regular people, have been delivering food to your house...not the gruff paid workers, but voulenteers who are doing it because they don't want ANYONE to die. Lets say that you actually get talking to this person, they tell you that they arn't getting paid...rather than simply laughing at them because you are busy you actually have time to think about what they said...

 

Now fast forward a couple of years...lets say Britain surives that... Lets say that Industry has recovered...lets say tha Capitalism is on the verge of becoming possible again. Money is sent out to those that ask for it...the rest just good food as usual. People set up shops, superstores...Imports from other countries flood the marketplace...suddenly there are consummer goods again...now bearing in mind that it has only been a few years...do you really think people can support that kind of commerialism? There are no tax breaks or subsidies by the Government...only what people have to spend...pure capitalism. Time goes on again, the system slowly is forced to shut down. People can't buy the goods because Capitalism has been implemented fully, from the off...

 

 

 

In the same way that Communism, if implemented right from the off would fail...its too different and people would try to take advantage of the system.

 

 

 

Now imagine that people had to decide...do they carry on living without money, or do they try to restore money again...it would be alot like asking a 1930s Russia if they want to try Communism again...they have just gone though a time when they didn't have food because the shops were too interested in selling electronics and most people had the Government to provide for them...you have an industrial system that is on the brink again, people are facing redundancy as the 'owned' Industries are forced to shut down because of lack of investment, lack of markets...Unless of course you imagine America pouring billions of Dollars into Britain to restart industry then pouring billions more to open up markets in America that would compete with American goods... So... Britain reaches a point were Capitalism is seen as something...unnecessary...in the same way we seem Communism as unnecessary...I am sure many of you are thinking 'Why bother going though this whole system just to get rid of money? Why not just keep it and ask for social improvements or something like that?' The answer is simple...Capitalism and Communism are states of mind. Capitalism works because people look after themselves, they make sure that they are protected and in the 'in-crowd', that creates demand, which needs suppy, which creates jobs, which supplies the money to pay for the demand...simple. Communism gives people freedom to explore their culture, themselves, other people...People do jobs, not to have money, but to be better than they are...The example of the street cleaner and the brain surgeon being paid the same...Firstly street cleaners wouldn't exist...why create a job for one person to do when everyone could do it? Does it take that much effort to pick up litter? To keep your street clean? I mean look at the suburbs of America...People keep their streets and houses clean...no one needs to be paid to do it, though some houses do, I don't say that every family cleans their house daily. But excusing that a street cleaner would work because he or she wants to keep their street clean...they have pride in themselves. A brain surgeon would work because it is a new field, new discoveries, and it is helping people...What are they going to do otherwise? Are you saying that without money we are incapable of showing compassion? I will admit that Doctors are not ones who would voluenteer so quickly to go back to work...but so what? New people will take up their jobs, people who are idealogically driven...People who have studied the brain in university can teach the next generation how to do certain operations. I am not saying that there will not be deaths during that cross over period...but who's fault is that? Is it the Governments for not paying the Doctors...is it the Governments of the past for exploiting the system for their own gains...is it the people's fault for not being more eco-friendly, not causing all of these problems with pollution and such...is it the Doctor's fault for not working dispite people dying daily? In truth it is everyone's fault...We are all to blame, we are creating problems that can only be solved if the system continues...

 

As I am sitting thinking I think of the depression we are going though...if Doctors stopped doing their Jobs because people stopped paying for them who would you blame? Yourselves for not being rich enough, the Government for not paying for you, the Banks for creating this problem or the Doctors for not showing compassion? Chances are it would be the last three...its not your fault you don't have money, its everyone elses fault for not giving you the ability to make money... Essentially when capitalism fails, you blame those in control...but now think of unemployment...who do you blame there? The Government for not creating jobs, the Industries for not providing jobs or the people themselves for being lazy?

 

Are they the same...in many ways no...there are differences...But in someways they are similar...in the ways that matter.

 

All of you, the few that read this anyway, need to think about Capitalism for all the sides...the workers, the owners, the Government, the unemployed, the lawyers, the doctors, the middle class, the celebraties...We can't just see capitalism as good for us...because at one time or another it will turn on us, and if we try to protect ourselves we shall surely perish.

[l0l0lpur32]

Personally, I am not willing to sacrifice my economic and social freedom for the welfare of my citizens. A capitalist economy works out fine for the United States, and becoming "something" is still a dream many people hold in the back of their minds. So I'm going to have to say nay.

 

 

 

I literally laughed my [wagon] off when I read this! Freedom? To what? Forever confine others to a fate of suffering and misery in order for one's personal gain? To earn more money at the expense of other's health and welfare? That's just plain selfish. This person has absolutely no idea what they're talking about... Since when does capitalism work "fine" for the USA? It's the capitalist policies that landed us in this current depression! Because of capitalism, America is trillions of dollars in debt. He is also under the illusion that one has such socioeconomic freedoms in the first place. It is the restrictions placed by the capitalists that discourages the progress of society, though new inventions and such. If capitalism was allowed free reign, then Walmart would be the only store still standing, since it basically kills any new business development in every area that it parks it's [wagon] on. Furthermore, if Big business was given control of the economy, then both human heath and the health of the environment would surely be in jepoardy. People freak out when they hear the word "Communism" because of the backwash due to the Red Scare. Its sad to see that even today, over fifty years since, people are still so ignorant.

 

No , people "freak out" when they hear the word "communism" due to the massive amounts of genocide and oppression it has caused in Russia, Eastern Europe, China etc. Also what "current depression" are you talking about?

[Rebdragon]

First of all, your writing style is an eyesore. If you want anyone to take you seriously, change it (ex: cut it with the ellipses, stop using the same phrase three times in the same sentence and then again in the next, and try and learn to make paragraphs instead of going stream of conscience on us, etc.).

 

 

 

As for your main points, uh...

 

• Your idea ain't new. I'm pretty sure you could pick up any communist literature and it will explain pretty much what you did: Revolution -> Communism'
   
  You don't really offer justification for why people would do jobs that pay more than the average for the average pay. That is, you don't justify Communism at all.
   
  Capitalism doesn't "turn on us", it goes through short recessions every few years because of the business cycle.

[Ginger_Warrior]

You don't really offer justification for why people would do jobs that pay more than the average for the average pay. That is, you don't justify Communism at all.

 

Not that I support Communism, but this argument is logically irrelevant.

 

 

 

The reason some people earn more for their jobs on average than others in a Capitalist system is because of two reasons:

 

 

 

1) Supply and demand - essentially, labour is a commodity sold on the market, and the price of said labour is determined by market forces;

 

2) Human capital - If I go to university to study, or I work my up through employment or an apprenticeship, I am making myself as a labourer more worthy, because I hold more capital due to the skills I have gained.

 

 

 

The italicised part is the important bit. Communism isn't so much the perfectly even distribution of wealth; it's the elimination of capital as the most powerful force in the economy. The whole "even wages" aspect of Communism stems from that, because point 2) is redundant in a Communist society.

 

 

 

It goes further than that too.

 

 

 

Under Marxist Communism, which is itself incredibly vague since Marx never offers much description past a socialist dictatorship, machinery takes over the vital industries, that is, agriculture, main industry, power stations etc.. Under this logic, demand for human employees is now 0, thus point 1) is also redundant.

 

 

 

Again, I'm not saying I support that ideology, but logically Communism doesn't need to justify even wages. It's like asking to justify why Capitalism needs private investors. It just does.

[Rebdragon]

Err... okay. Historically, even wages has never worked, while private investors have. Private investing is justified in that it has proven itself in the past and present, not in that it is part of capitalism. The idea of even wages has failed wherever and whenever it has been implemented thusfar. Based on the empirical data, we have no reason to believe that the idea of even wages works, while we do have reason to believe that private investing works. Thus, if the idea of even wages is ever to be trusted it must prove itself to work at some point, while private investing is already trusted and thus does not need to prove itself. It's not about what political side they're on, but whether the ideas themselves work at all on large scales.

 

 

 

That is, emprically, I don't see the point you're making.

[l0rd]

Personally, I am not willing to sacrifice my economic and social freedom for the welfare of my citizens. A capitalist economy works out fine for the United States, and becoming "something" is still a dream many people hold in the back of their minds. So I'm going to have to say nay.

 

 

 

I literally laughed my [wagon] off when I read this! Freedom? To what? Forever confine others to a fate of suffering and misery in order for one's personal gain? To earn more money at the expense of other's health and welfare? That's just plain selfish. This person has absolutely no idea what they're talking about... Since when does capitalism work "fine" for the USA? It's the capitalist policies that landed us in this current depression! Because of capitalism, America is trillions of dollars in debt. He is also under the illusion that one has such socioeconomic freedoms in the first place. It is the restrictions placed by the capitalists that discourages the progress of society, though new inventions and such. If capitalism was allowed free reign, then Walmart would be the only store still standing, since it basically kills any new business development in every area that it parks it's [wagon] on. Furthermore, if Big business was given control of the economy, then both human heath and the health of the environment would surely be in jepoardy. People freak out when they hear the word "Communism" because of the backwash due to the Red Scare. Its sad to see that even today, over fifty years since, people are still so ignorant.

 

 

 

 

 

You are a doom-seeing revolutionist. I laughed my [wagon] off when I read your post, and the accusations you made on the validity of my opinion.

 

 

 

You distort the idea of capitalism as to make it seem like some sort of phenomena that gluttonously consumes the wealth from the sick and poor. Unlike your immature and unrestrained rudeness in your post, I'm going to assume you understand the fundamentals of capitalism. Capitalism of course doesn't create utopia, nor even look as good as communism on paper. But my opinion entails that it works better. And that America is just fine under such an economy. Debt will be paid and you know it :roll:

[mmmcannibalism]

It's the capitalist policies that landed us in this current depression! Because of capitalism, America is trillions of dollars in debt.

 

 

 

Just thought Id point out thats not because were capitalist, its because our government takes the term sucking to a whole new level of fail.

 

 

 

Seriously, capitalist or socialist economies can work equally well, how the system is run is often much more important then what the specifics of the system are. For example, try putting a nail through a piece of wood with the claw side of a hammer, that may be the hammers job but you as the person running it are totally messing up the process.

[Zierro]

That is, emprically, I don't see the point you're making.

 

 

 

I don't understand. How can you bring up communist failures and use it as empirical evidence that communism doesn't work, but at the same time ignore the current state of the economy which is running off capitalism?

[Rebdragon]

A recession doesn't mean it doesn't work. A recession means it isn't perfect. You know, just like the humans who drive it *cough barney frank.

[Ginger_Warrior]

A recession doesn't mean it doesn't work. A recession means it isn't perfect. You know, just like the humans who drive it *cough barney frank.

 

The same could be said about Communism, could it not?

 

 

 

And before you start with "empirical evidence" (which you've yet to present), there are examples of Communism actually working in countries, albeit brutally. It could be argued the USSR would not have survived the Nazis' offensive on Moscow and Stalingrad had collectivisation and the FYPs not come before. Britain, to all intents and purposes effectively was a Communist regime during WWII, thanks to the Emergency Powers Act, and yet despite factories being bombed and having their food rationed, production per worker rose by 10%.

 

 

 

I think it would be worth clarifying at this point exactly what 'work' means. Each system has its economical advantages and disadvantages, there's no 'Model X is better than Model Y' answer here.