Communism Is The Only Way Forward

[Bill3000]

You can't really say something as vague, undefined, and disputed as "communism" to have failed - you're giving leftists a cheap shot to say "BUT THAT'S NOT TRUE COMMUNISM." You can, however, say that command economies have failed.

 

[Ajidica]

And I will whole-heartedly agree with that. They may have a few sucesses, but the failures outweigh the benefits. Mixed economies on the other hand....

 

[Bill3000]

And I will whole-heartedly agree with that. Mixed economies on the other hand....

That's still too vague, as pretty much any economic system between a command economy and the non-existent full-blown laissez-faire capitalism can be called a mixed economy. Even Hong Kong can be rightfully called a mixed economy to some extent - 50% of its people live in public housing, for example.

 

[Ajidica]

That's still too vague, as pretty much any economic system between a command economy and the non-existent full-blown laissez-faire capitalism can be called a mixed economy.

Fair point.

Even Hong Kong can be rightfully called a mixed economy to some extent - 50% of its people live in public housing, for example.

Do you have a link for that? I'd like to use it next time somebody brings up Hong Kong as a 'triumph' of laissez-faire capitalism.

 

[Zhukov17]

I agree, but cummunism as an ideology is almost inpossible... work as mutch as you can and take how much you need... sonnd's hard doesn't it? But socialism is good...

 

[insaneweasel]

Communism only killed 100 million people...

why not give it another shot!

 

[ParkCungHee]

So how many times has Capitalism failed now?
1914, 1929, 1939-41...

 

[Ajidica]

Communism only killed 100 million people...

why not give it another shot!

All ideologies go through their proving grounds. Furthermore, the USSR was never Communist. Socialist, barely.
For many of the SEA countries and the guerillas in Africa and SA, the only real connection to communism was name only.
English Civil War:

Counting in accidents and the two Bishops' wars, an estimate of 190,000 dead is achieved.[114]

And that is for just one country over a relatively short time period. Does that invalidate Liberalism?
Add to that the Great Terror in the French Revolution, the Vendee revolt, the 'Bloody June Days' in the Revolution of 1848, and need I go on?

 

[Bill3000]

1637, 1720, 1772, 1796, 1813, 1819, 1825, 1837, 1847, 1857, 1866, 1873-1896, 1907, 1929 - 1939, 1973, 1986 - 2003, 1987, 1994, 1997, 2007 - 2010

 

[Ajidica]

Whats that list for?

 

[Bill3000]

recessions and depressions across the world

not all are global, though

 

[cardgame]

Periods of economic trouble

 

[bhsup]

Communism, in the real world, was the USSR and other like States. Couldn't care less what ivory tower egghead theories say it should be. The real world calls it what it is. The USSR were commies, the PRC...commies, Cuba...commies, et cetera.

Most times any nation has tried commie route to success, it's become a bloodsoaked unmitigated failure.

 

[insaneweasel]

English Civil War:<snip>
And that is for just one country over a relatively short time period. Does that invalidate Liberalism?

Why would that invalidate Liberalism?

Add to that the Great Terror in the French Revolution, the Vendee revolt, the 'Bloody June Days' in the Revolution of 1848, and need I go on?

Yes, please do. You're still far from the 100 million mark.

Thing is, capitalism has brought great wealth and opportunity to millions upon millions of people. It's also brought great poverty. Communism has done the EXACT same, except in Communism, everyone is supposed to be equal. Capitalism doesn't have that hypocrisy. It maintains, from the start, that people are greedy and want more, which is true. Capitalism, with slight regulations and a free market, is the best way to run an economy.

 

[insaneweasel]

Being a liberal, industrialized, democracy is a prerequisite to Socialism and Communism. How many of those countries were liberal, industrialized democracies? This still applies to the former Soviet satalite states.

There's your problem...why would a liberal, industrialized democracy switch to Communism? Enough people would likely be happy, and would want to change to a system where big daddy government tells you what you can and cannot do.

Communism thus tends to occur in the places that will most likely ruin it, and therefore is untenable.

 

[civver_764]

Communists really shouldn't be in the business of defending the Soviet Union.

 

[Ajidica]

Why would that invalidate Liberalism?

Because in its first trial it failed miserably leading to a dictatorship where the two most notable aspects of it was banning fun and persecuting Irish.
(Yes, I know they did more than that.)

Yes, please do. You're still far from the 100 million mark.

Where is the 100 million mark from? Is it just from the USSR, or is it from all of the vaguely communist revolutions around the world?

Thing is, capitalism has brought great wealth and opportunity to millions upon millions of people. It's also brought great poverty. Communism has done the EXACT same, except in Communism, everyone is supposed to be equal.

Not nescesarily. Lassalle argues for Socialism precisely because we are not all equal.

 

[ParkCungHee]

Because in its first trial it failed miserably leading to a dictatorship where the two most notable aspects of it was banning fun and persecuting Irish.
(Yes, I know they did more than that.)

You do realize the War of the Three Kingdoms had nothing to do with Liberalism, correct?

 

[Ajidica]

Huh? Isn't that in China?

 

[ParkCungHee]

And Korea. And Britain.