View Full Version : Communism
missrizzla
08-21-2006, 09:55 PM
Whats your thoughts on this form of politics?:)
FeastonThisSHITT
08-21-2006, 09:57 PM
It will never work due to human competative nature, but a perfect society would use this in it's pure form to abolish poverty lines and make all people equal.
Smokin EnDo
08-21-2006, 11:04 PM
I think TRUE communism could never work because of natural human greed. It is an excellent idea but racism, greed, sexism, and power would have to bow down to it. It's truly sad that people have made a slip of paper sometimes more importent than the well-being of another human.
Bong30
08-21-2006, 11:54 PM
socialism doest work
Most of you are not even smart enough to talk about it....ie you dont have enough information on it to make a decision about it... right now you are running on Emotion Only........
^^^^^ especialy looking up there^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Oneironaut
08-22-2006, 12:35 AM
I think TRUE communism could never work because of natural human greed.
That's like saying capitalism could never work because it's human nature to cooperate and share things with others. Just because people can be greedy doesn't mean we have to base our whole economy on rewarding the greediest people in society with tons of power and property, so they can constitute an elite that runs all our industries. That's just insane.
Communism, simply put, is a classless society, where the means of production are owned and managed directly by the people, under the principle of "from each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs". If resources are allocated properly, and people's needs and desires are fulfilled, why would people demand more than what they need to fulfill their basic needs and desires? If food is freely provided to you as long as you contribute to society according to your abilities, you're not going to hoard tons and tons of food; you'll only take enough of the food you like to get by.
A communist society would eliminate a lot of the unnecessary labor under capitalism, freeing up a lot of work power to doing actual productive work. Once private property is eliminated and bottom-up democracy replaces top-down fascism in the workplace, there will be no need for accountants, managers, CEOs, lawyers, marketers, salesmen or anything of the sort. Without a constant drive for more and more profits, we can concentrate on actually providing what is needed in society instead of trying to create as many artificial desires as possible.
Communism also implies the absence of a state. Yes, that's right, a stateless society. Communism is not absolute state control over the economy, although some communists do support state control over the economy as a transition period on the road to communism (I don't subscribe to this view however, since all past attempts at this kind of transition have failed miserably). Communism is the ultimate expression of democracy; people arranged in free associations exert direct control over social affairs in an egalitarian manner, without presidents, politicians, parliaments, police or other pesky parasites on society. If people are capable of running society for themselves, as the principle of democracy clearly implies, then there is no need for government or any type of rulers to tell us what to do. The few rotten apples who pose a threat to society can be dealt with in a democratic, egalitarian manner, by decentralized citizens' militias if need be.
The only thing i hate about communism is that its too equal. I wouldnt like it because i would hate to be a doctor for example but get paid the same as a busboy(which i am right now).
dopesmoker
08-22-2006, 01:45 AM
socialism doest work
Most of you are not even smart enough to talk about it....ie you dont have enough information on it to make a decision about it... right now you are running on Emotion Only........
^^^^^ especialy looking up there^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
socialism and communism are different. A socialist country is not quite communist, but on its way to becoming communist.
As for communism i'm a whole hearted supporter. I DO NOT support the Soviet Union's form of communism, just to clear that up.
CultureCherryPopper
08-22-2006, 01:50 AM
Perfect on paper, ideal and noble...
...but...
...power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely. May not be a factual quote, but it applies none the less.
Hamlet
08-22-2006, 04:31 AM
Right...reads great on paper; works great for bees, but humans have a lot of evolving to do before we could ever manage it correctly. Borrowing some elements of it and diluting them down would be worth doing though. Socialized medicine for one.........
Transition Force
08-22-2006, 08:30 AM
Eeek heavens no!
I believe in private property and the freedom to conduct my buisness as I see fit so long as I do not coerce others or cause damage to their things (without their permission)
Go libertarianism!
thcbongman
08-22-2006, 09:11 AM
Eeek heavens no!
I believe in private property and the freedom to conduct my buisness as I see fit so long as I do not coerce others or cause damage to their things (without their permission)
Go libertarianism!
Pure form of libertarian thinking is the concept of "caveat emptor" or let the buyer beware. Flat tax, or no tax, survival of the fittest.
To apply the concept of the differences between capitalism and socialism simply:
You have 10 workers being paid $10 an hour, working 10 hours a day for a 5 day period. $5000 is the weekly budget to pay those 10 workers. Let's say revenues drop and the budget is reduced to $4000. In a more free-market economy, you would lay off 2 of them. In a more socialistic economy, you would retain 1 or all workers, but reduced their salaries as well as their happiness, and those released would be let-go with all kinds of social protection, such as unemployment benefits, or job-placement. Also the government plays a bigger role in managing the entities.
However I think bong is a little misunderstanding when he says socialism doesn't work, since concepts of socialism is used in America. Subsideries, worker-protections, welfare, providing roads & services, military, even your bank account up to $100,000 is insured by the FIDC. These are socialistic protections.
More socialistic countries with a hybrid free-market thrive everywhere in the world. France, Germany, The Netherlands, Sweden, China are just a few examples.
Free market isn't necessarily the best thing, because the extreme of that would be economic anarchy. That means you have to provide for your every need with no government assistance. It wouldn't be such a bad thing if there weren't socialistic controls, but imagine economic anarchy with social suppression. The world hasn't seen this extreme yet, but with the world embracing the power of the free-market, it is bound to happen.
The best is to have a mix of the two, like America, and Switzerland.
graymatter
08-22-2006, 02:47 PM
We have a long, long way to go before we all "know the rules" and play by them... that's why communism isn't ready for the general population. If you want to see a working form of communism (albeit, with divine authority), look no further than some of the pacifist religious sects.
Fengzi
08-22-2006, 11:44 PM
Communism has been tried and it simply doesn't work. At least not on a large, nation wide, scale. It could be done with a small group of like minded people, such as in a '60's style commune, but everyone participating would have to not only agree to the principle, but also agree 100% to what everyone in the society should or shouldn't have. Not many couples can achieve this goal let alone an entire country.
Contrary to what Oneironaut ,and his anarchistic dreams, believes it does go against human nature. People work in order to satisfy their wants and their needs. Those who work harder have more of those needs satified. It only makes sense. Why should person a work his ass off if he gets the same thing as person b who slacks off all day. Why should someone go to school, get an advanced degree, and become a technological innovator if, when all is said and done, he's going to get the exact same thing as the guy selling hot dogs on the street? He/she won't, it's that simple. Eventually everyone will just slack off and the society will collapse.
Unlike most of you I have actually lived in a "communist" country-China. Although in modern day China bears very little resemblance to true communism, when I lived there 10 years ago you could still see some of the negative effects. I would go into any of the state run department stores and see hundreds of people working there, and I mean hundreds. Funny thing, even with all those employees it was hard to get help. Most just sat around chatting with each other and would ignore you if you asked for help. Some would literally shoo you away. If you did manage to get someone to help they did it with a frown and as little effort as possible. Why? Because it didn't matter. If they acted that way they'd get their pay. If they busted their ass, had the best customer service, and the top sales they'd still get the same pay. Go to China now, however, and walk into any of the privately owned stores and you'll see something entirely differnt. You'll see employees jumping over each other to get to you and willing to do whatever it takes to get the sale. Why? Because there's an incentive to do so.
Bottom line: inanimate objects roll downhill. Unless there's some reward at the top of the hill, people will do the same.
Bong30
08-22-2006, 11:59 PM
THank you Fengzi.............. you put it pefect.
Why do kids these days think it can work?
They have no Idea about a free market system...........NONE.
dopesmoker
08-23-2006, 02:17 AM
I would go into any of the state run department stores and see hundreds of people working there, and I mean hundreds. Funny thing, even with all those employees it was hard to get help. Most just sat around chatting with each other and would ignore you if you asked for help. Some would literally shoo you away. If you did manage to get someone to help they did it with a frown and as little effort as possible.
Sounds like todays Wal-Mart, Canadian Tire, Zellers, and every other big box store.
graymatter
08-23-2006, 03:04 AM
Fengzi, granted, human motivation and behavior is skewed toward external rewards and reinforcement, more money, more recognition etc. I suspect that even the large scale communist experiments caved to the simplicity of getting people (some) to do something through such devices. Capitalism resorts to the incentives bag of tricks to get people to do more, do it better, faster, and cheaper, and then do all of it all over again by outsourcing everything to capitalist start-up countries.
For what it's worth, communism and capitalism share a common problem with regard to human behavior: Neither system has figured out how to get people to do something for the intrinsic good of doing it while being a good person doing it.
Fengzi
08-23-2006, 04:10 PM
For what it's worth, communism and capitalism share a common problem with regard to human behavior: Neither system has figured out how to get people to do something for the intrinsic good of doing it while being a good person doing it.
Agree 100%. If governments had figured that out we wouldn't have any need for religion. Then again, religion hasn't really figured that one out either.
Fengzi
08-23-2006, 04:11 PM
Sounds like todays Wal-Mart, Canadian Tire, Zellers, and every other big box store.
LOL how true. Ironically, I've gotten better service in the Xiamen, China Walmart than any here in the U.S. Go figure:confused:
Transition Force
08-24-2006, 11:22 PM
You have 10 workers being paid $10 an hour, working 10 hours a day for a 5 day period. $5000 is the weekly budget to pay those 10 workers. Let's say revenues drop and the budget is reduced to $4000. In a more free-market economy, you would lay off 2 of them. In a more socialistic economy, you would retain 1 or all workers, but reduced their salaries as well as their happiness, and those released would be let-go with all kinds of social protection, such as unemployment benefits, or job-placement. Also the government plays a bigger role in managing the entities.
In a truly free market (one where you can make any choice you wish), that is only one scenario that is possible. But thousands of other scenarios are possible. It would be equally possible for the latter to happen. On the other hand, perhaps the managment would work on reducing workplace efficiency in other areas instead of laying off or reducing the salaries of some of their workers. And depending on who owns the place (and yes, I know this isn't realistic in the majority of situations), the owner could even decide to cut his profits in order to keep his employees well paid.
Free market isn't necessarily the best thing, because the extreme of that would be economic anarchy. That means you have to provide for your every need with no government assistance.
Yes, I agree. That is what I am striving for.
Besides, as Katrina proved very, very well - Private Charities are far more effective (and generous) than the government is.
It wouldn't be such a bad thing if there weren't socialistic controls, but imagine economic anarchy with social suppression. The world hasn't seen this extreme yet, but with the world embracing the power of the free-market, it is bound to happen.
Free-Staters (http://www.freestateproject.org/) like myself are working to get rid of those as well :rasta:
Oneironaut
08-25-2006, 02:51 AM
...but...
...power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely. May not be a factual quote, but it applies none the less.
Uhh, exactly, that's the whole point of communism. Communism is a stateless, classless society in which nobody has the power to enforce their ideas on other people. Decisions on how workplaces and societies should be run are made democratically by their members. Under capitalism you are subject to governments and bosses with the power to write the rules and tell you what to do, hence all the corruption we see.
Ozarks
08-25-2006, 04:09 AM
Communism is a stateless, classless society
Do you honestly believe that ?
in which nobody has the power to enforce their ideas on other people.
Do the millions upon millions who have been killed under communist's Governments count ?
Decisions on how workplaces and societies should be run are made democratically by their members.
That is called Democracy, not communism.
Under capitalism you are subject to governments and bosses with the power to write the rules and tell you what to do, hence all the corruption we see.
Government that you can vote on, bosses that PAY you money, for a job you can quit if you want too. Can you point to 1 communist Government in history that wasn't corrupt ? As already posted power corrupts, putting more of it in fewer hands which is exactly what (in reality) communism does only makes things worst.
Communism has killed 10's of millions, and all I got was this lousey T-shirt, maybe we should give it one more try.
mrdevious
08-25-2006, 07:19 AM
Ozarks, you seemed to have missed that he wasn't talking about communist nations or their success, he was talking about communism.
Transition Force
08-25-2006, 07:49 AM
Under capitalism you are subject to governments and bosses with the power to write the rules and tell you what to do, hence all the corruption we see.
Uh, capitalism doesn't neccessarily mean government. I know quite a few capitalists who are anarchists.
Capitalism is all about freedom. The freedom to hire, the freedom to fire. The freedom to choose how you want to run your buisness. The freedom to quit a job if you don't like it, and run a buisness your own way.
insaen1
08-25-2006, 08:02 AM
Iâ??ll have more to say on this subject later (a post Iâ??ve been meaning to get to for a month), but let me whet your appetite: In Star Trek, there is no money. People work at what they want to, as much as they wish to. In exchange all their needs are taken care of...
In Star Trek, energy can be converted into matter at seemingly minimal cost. This matter can be any form from a rock, to a steak sandwich, to a warp nacelle...
Therefore we can see: communism can only work if you violate the laws of physics...
Also, the Ferengi, Romulans, and Dominion all have capitalist economies to some extent. And each of them has a better tech. base than the Federation...
Hamlet
08-25-2006, 10:41 AM
You callin' Spock a commie?! Now I'm really offended.
Ozarks
08-25-2006, 01:01 PM
Ozarks, you seemed to have missed that he wasn't talking about communist nations or their success, he was talking about communism.
Yes, I did focus on the politics of it. I think it's imposable to separate the economic tenant of Communism from the political, except in the most theoretical of debates.
Russia/eastern Europe proved that and China is going to prove it again in the years to come, now that they have let the economic genie out of the bottle.
Socially, Communism looks good on paper, but it never turns out that way in practice.
The people are not happy and leave/overthrow the system 1ST chance they get, and I can't blame them. :thumbsup:
graymatter
08-25-2006, 02:34 PM
Uh, capitalism doesn't neccessarily mean government. I know quite a few capitalists who are anarchists.
Capitalism is all about freedom. The freedom to hire, the freedom to fire. The freedom to choose how you want to run your buisness. The freedom to quit a job if you don't like it, and run a buisness your own way.
Capitalist history has more than a few blemishes. I don't admire groups with money that hire militias, and eventually lawyers, to kill unions and workers rights movements. Capitalism is predatory. It seeks to get people to do a service or produce a product for the lowest, or no wage.
I have quite a few software and electronic engineer friends that would attest to that. :cool:
Transition Force
08-25-2006, 02:44 PM
Capitalist history has more than a few blemishes. I don't admire groups with money that hire militias, and eventually lawyers, to kill unions and workers rights movements.
Once a person is forced to do something you leave the area of capitalism and enter the area of facism. This is equally true of Socialism and Communism, which force people to keep workers they don't want to. I am personally against homophobia, for example, but wouldn't force a homophobe to keep homosexual workers.
Capitalism is predatory. It seeks to get people to do a service or produce a product for the lowest, or no wage.
That's half-true. But proper competition keeps everything reasonable. If you don't like how one company acts, you can create your own company and pay better if you want to. Naturally, many of the workers from that company would migrate to yours. The other company, thus faced with losing its workers, would have to increase its employees wages in order to stay in buisness.
Fengzi
08-25-2006, 05:36 PM
Uhh, exactly, that's the whole point of communism. Communism is a stateless, classless society in which nobody has the power to enforce their ideas on other people. Decisions on how workplaces and societies should be run are made democratically by their members. Under capitalism you are subject to governments and bosses with the power to write the rules and tell you what to do, hence all the corruption we see.
This is where communism is self defeating. "Decisions on how workplaces and societies should be run are made democratically by their members." So, if a decision is to be made it is put to a vote. It is unlikely that all will agree everytime. What about those who have a dissenting opinion? Do they have to go along with what the majority has agreed to? If so, isn't that having someone else's ideas enforced on them? If not, what was the point of the decision in the first place?
If you're really interested in seeing communism at work I suggest you study Chinese history from 1949 to the early '80's. Once you get beyond Mao and his atrocities you will see an intersting perpective on communism at work. And I'm not talking about the political side of communism. I mean the actual attempt to make a go of something resembling true communism.
When the communists took over in China those who had possessions were stripped of them. This was in the attempt to make everyone equal. In doing so, however, those without possessions were enforcing their rules on those who did. Instead of making everyone equal, it simply reversed the roles. Now the poor were in power instead of the rich. It wasn't long before those under the one's who now had power started saying "hey, what's up? I thought we were supposed to be a classless society" and the process was reapeated. This happened many times over a 30 year period. I should also point out that this wasn't just happening at the top government level but in the small villages in the middle of nowhere. Often the results were disastrous and in the name of "preserving true communism" many, many people died.
That's a pretty simplified summary of the situation but you get the idea. The bottom line is that many in China did really try to make a go of true communism and it simply didn't work. I haven't even touched on the effects communism had on China's economic, intellectual, and technological development. For example, the situation faced by many doctors and teachers. During the Cultural Revolution doctors, teachers, and many others that were educated were suddenly considered to be of the "upper class" because of their knowledge. Next thing you know they were being dragged out and beaten by the "classless" masses. When I was going to school in China the dean of the University I was attending walked with a serious limp. Why? because, as a teacher she was tossed out of a second story window by "classless" students during the Cultural Revolution.
Oneironaut, I'd recommend you watch the movie "To Live" also called "Lifetimes". Although slightly exaggerated, it is an excellent portayal of communism in action.
graymatter
08-26-2006, 03:27 AM
Once a person is forced to do something you leave the area of capitalism and enter the area of facism. This is equally true of Socialism and Communism, which force people to keep workers they don't want to. I am personally against homophobia, for example, but wouldn't force a homophobe to keep homosexual workers.
Forced labor equals fascism? That's kind of limiting the extent of tools at capitalism's history, including slavery. The latter part of your comment begs the question, who makes a good capitalist? I'll go along with the gist that a capitalist, according to Reisman, "is anyone (from a janitor to a millionaire) who lives solely by his own effort and who respects the rights of others." I couldn't agree with that more. But it's also a broad and ammoral principle; it applies as much to the indentured servant, or slave, as it does the highly skilled artisan.
That's half-true. But proper competition keeps everything reasonable. If you don't like how one company acts, you can create your own company and pay better if you want to. Naturally, many of the workers from that company would migrate to yours. The other company, thus faced with losing its workers, would have to increase its employees wages in order to stay in buisness.
Or, the other company can call out their corporate lawyers and remind everyone of the non-compete clauses... and there goes my dream of slaying the corporate Goliath.
Transition Force
08-26-2006, 08:44 AM
Or, the other company can call out their corporate lawyers and remind everyone of the non-compete clauses... and there goes my dream of slaying the corporate Goliath.
If you agree to something like that, it's your own fault - you agreed to it! I, for one, will (most likely) never agree to something like that.
anycraic
08-26-2006, 07:28 PM
well of course communism doesnt work, most marxist theories have been disproved as simply incorrect, especially (lol) his model of social stratification. excessive capitalism doesnt work either, as there are no state provided public goods, the poor simply starve and cant afford medicine or doctors due to lack of social provisions, everyone has to pay for everything, regardless of income.
in a perfect world, the very rich would take some of the burden off the very poor. a rich mans vote is the same as a poor mans vote. all schooling and medicare would be free. the police would have limited powers, only enough to protect and serve in a proper sense of the word. the government would be truly democratic, there would be true freedom of speech. drug sentences would be small, while violent crime sentences would be high. this world exists: its called socialism. and bong30, if ur looking for someone 'clever' enough to argue the point with, bring it on...
Ozarks
08-26-2006, 08:01 PM
.
in a perfect world, the very rich would take some of the burden off the very poor. a rich mans vote is the same as a poor mans vote. all schooling and medicare would be free. the police would have limited powers, only enough to protect and serve in a proper sense of the word. the government would be truly democratic, there would be true freedom of speech.
:thumbsup: Not all "college's" are free and there's not universal health care in America yet but we're working on it.
I don't like communism at all, to be blunt. People see it as a means of becoming more able and free. What is freedom if you can't be the best you can be? If people punish you for excelling. Life is not fair, but don't put insane amounts of power in the government to save you from that.
Life is about struggle. Victory. Defeat. What's the point if you're told where to work, how much money you can make, and what products to buy? That's freedom? I can't choose to spend my money how I want? I'm forced to buy shitty product A or B?
Fuck that man, I wana watch the FUNNIEST movie smoking the BEST weed with money I'll spend of my own choosing; not the governments.
Psycho4Bud
08-27-2006, 02:58 AM
Iâ??ll have more to say on this subject later (a post Iâ??ve been meaning to get to for a month), but let me whet your appetite: In Star Trek, there is no money. People work at what they want to, as much as they wish to. In exchange all their needs are taken care of...
In Star Trek, energy can be converted into matter at seemingly minimal cost. This matter can be any form from a rock, to a steak sandwich, to a warp nacelle...
Therefore we can see: communism can only work if you violate the laws of physics...
Also, the Ferengi, Romulans, and Dominion all have capitalist economies to some extent. And each of them has a better tech. base than the Federation...
Actually I'd call it like this:
Federation: Democracy, different levels of success
Ferengi, Romulans, Dominion: Dictatorships, conquest for profit
The Borg:Communism, all working for the state, do difference in status, the state provides all
Should get Torog on this one.......he's a Trek freak too. Not saying thats bad...Live Long and Prosporous:D
Have a good one!:thumbsup:
graymatter
08-27-2006, 05:08 AM
If you agree to something like that, it's your own fault - you agreed to it! I, for one, will (most likely) never agree to something like that.
So, would you agree that capitalism is somewhat (more than half) predatory, since you've agreed that not agreeing to a non-compete clause is something you wouldn't agree to?
What happened to doing things with your heart instead of your pocketbook?
In my opinion, that's the only way one should strive to make money. Capitalism allows you to follow your heart and do the best you can while doing it.
You don't have to become a souless, greedy zombie. You can start your own business selling bird-houses. Sell your paintings. Be a rockstar. An astounding novelist.
When one thinks of capitalism they think of big greedy corporations, but that's only part of the picture. It's an ideology that says I'm going to follow my heart and my dreams as far as they'll take me. Some quantify that drive in dollars, others in how good it feels to create something and make profit off of what you've given to the world.
thcbongman
08-28-2006, 04:52 PM
In my opinion, that's the only way one should strive to make money. Capitalism allows you to follow your heart and do the best you can while doing it.
You don't have to become a souless, greedy zombie. You can start your own business selling bird-houses. Sell your paintings. Be a rockstar. An astounding novelist.
When one thinks of capitalism they think of big greedy corporations, but that's only part of the picture. It's an ideology that says I'm going to follow my heart and my dreams as far as they'll take me. Some quantify that drive in dollars, others in how good it feels to create something and make profit off of what you've given to the world.
That is only the tip of the iceberg of capitalism.
We do not live in a truly capitalistic society. If we did, all roads would've be owned and maintained by private corporations, so would the military, so would every bit of infrastructure, because government intrusion would be limited. The government's only role would be to set up laws, and enforcement could be relied on a private company.
Capitalism can go too far. It's hardly about "selling your paintings" that can be done in any society. It's the restriction of what the government regulates.
4teenyellow
08-28-2006, 08:11 PM
Communism is a tremendous idea.
graymatter
08-29-2006, 01:55 AM
Communism is a tremendous idea.
Communism is the greatest threat to freedom the world has ever known, and the last refuge of Godless Humanism...
OK, things are changing... Terrorism is the last refuge of freedom haters.
Oh, but wait! This just in, in a dramatic turn of events, Washington, D.C., has declared Iran's nuclear ambitions as the last refuge and threat against freedom...
Oh, but there's more, the Jonbonet Ramsey dude (Michael Jackson wannabee) is not her killer...
DoctorCubensis
08-29-2006, 03:55 AM
Democratic Socialism FTW. I know my avatar implies I'm a communist, but it exists to show my solidarity with many of Marx's beliefs.
Oneironaut
08-29-2006, 01:11 PM
Then why are you using a distinctly Leninist symbol? The hammer and sickle wasn't invented until long after Marx was dead, by an authoritarian party of bureaucrats who, instead of seizing the means of production for the people, violently crushed attempts at popular ownership of the means of production through democratic worker's councils, and imposed bureaucratic state ownership of the means of production, run by dictators outside the people's control, essentially allowing class society to continue albeit in a different form.
Why you would want to associate yourself with such an anti-proletarian and brutal régime is beyond me.
Oneironaut
08-29-2006, 03:27 PM
This is where communism is self defeating. "Decisions on how workplaces and societies should be run are made democratically by their members." So, if a decision is to be made it is put to a vote. It is unlikely that all will agree everytime. What about those who have a dissenting opinion? Do they have to go along with what the majority has agreed to? If so, isn't that having someone else's ideas enforced on them? If not, what was the point of the decision in the first place?
So, you're against democracy? :confused: Sure, democracy's not perfect, but it's the best damn form of social organization available. Society should be controlled by the people, and its policies chosen by those who are affected by them. Having one person or a small bureaucracy in charge of decisions, historically, has led to some pretty grim consequences, and I would like to see it avoided as much as possible, which means advocating democracy in all avenues of human affairs, so that we may be in charge of our own destiny. Just because people don't always reach 100% unanimously supported decisions doesn't mean that democracy can't work, or that a small elite should be authorized to enforce their decisions on everybody else.
Why is it that so many people who praise the principles of democracy in some areas of life are completely apathetic to the fact that virtually all workplaces are organized in a rigid, top-down, totalitarian hierarchy with no democratic input from the workers whatsoever in how their own workplace should be run?
If you're really interested in seeing communism at work I suggest you study Chinese history from 1949 to the early '80's. Once you get beyond Mao and his atrocities you will see an intersting perpective on communism at work. And I'm not talking about the political side of communism. I mean the actual attempt to make a go of something resembling true communism.
Through authoritarian institutions like the state...I'm not that kind of communist, and I do not see how a failed attempt at Maoism is proof that all currents of communism are incapable of success. Take some time to actually study the different strands of socialism sometime, the different conflicting theories involved and how their different views on class struggle and revolution could shape the practical outcomes of their ideas.
Oneironaut
08-29-2006, 03:33 PM
P.S. Communism is always political; there is no non-political side to communism, since communism is a political ideology. The attempt at achieving the classless, stateless society known as communism is a political action by definition.
Mark Bryan
08-29-2006, 03:35 PM
COMMUNISM! THE RED HORSE OF THE APOCALYPSE!
Fengzi
08-29-2006, 04:49 PM
So, you're against democracy? :confused: Sure, democracy's not perfect, but it's the best damn form of social organization available. Society should be controlled by the people, and its policies chosen by those who are affected by them. Why is it that so many people who praise the principles of democracy in some areas of life are completely apathetic to the fact that virtually all workplaces are organized in a rigid, top-down, totalitarian hierarchy with no democratic input from the workers whatsoever in how their own workplace should be run?
.
No, you miss my point. I am all for democracy and the democratic process. My point is that we are not all thoughtless clones who will agree on everything everytime. You pointed out that "Communism is a stateless, classless society in which nobody has the power to enforce their ideas on other people. Decisions on how workplaces and societies should be run are made democratically by their members" Well, that's fine and dandy but someone is bound to disagree. And that person who disagrees will be forced to go along with the majority decision or that decision is meaningless. It makes no difference if that decision is made by the people, the Boss Man, or the government. Once "The People" are put in a position to make these decisions they become no less of an institution than the government is. Sooner or later you end up with two classes: "The People" and those who disagree with "The People". Thus the goal of a "classless society in which nobody has the power to enforce their ideas on other people has failed.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2025 vBulletin Solutions Inc. All rights reserved.