Communism

[FreeTerminus]

I've only been on these forums for a couple of days, but I've seen a couple people have various communist-leaning signatures or whatnot. I will admit that I'm not as educated as I could be on the matter, so I ask: Why are you ("you" being the hypothetical communist) a communist?

From what I understand, communism would mean that everyone gives everything to a central organization, who then distributes it based on need. The government is made up of a Communist Party, who stifles dissent in any form (like the Soviet Union or China did). Nobody owns anything, and we all theoretically work for the good of society (though in reality the Communist Party tends to be "more equal" than everyone else)
Such societies are paranoid and tend to forsaken human development and improving the quality of life in favor of militarism and such. Why would anyone support that? Capitalism has its flaws, but its done a lot to improve the standards of living of people all over the world.

So please, educate me

 

[ybbor]

well I'm far from a communist/socialist supporter, but I'd guess the first thing they'd say is that you're confusing and mixing the economic system of socialism with the political system of communism. It is possible to have a democratic socialist government

 

[Xenocrates]

Stifling opposition, either by means of force or by media control or dumbing down the news and the population is not limited to Communist countries. In fact the most effective way to prevent dissent is the subtle approach adopted in the US and UK.

Communism can be democratic, and it could have a weak central government but the most quoted examples of it aren't, but some would argue that communism developed in the way that it did in the USSR because of the fear of invasion.

As other will no doubt say, there are many advantages of Communism, once you peel away the propaganda against it. These include infrastructural progress and societal progress. Taking the USA as a counter- example, there's no doubt that crime, inequality and fear of one's countrymen are evidence that societal progress has ceased (gone backwards?) as Capitalism has gained supremacy. From what I 'm told the US infrastructure hasn't improved for many decades and you have poor quality health care, schools, transport networks and energy infrastructure.

Having said that, under Communism the people would probably be less creative, so there are postives about US style capitalism too. Others may add to the list, because I can't see any more right now.

Like in Civ 4 perhaps the answer is to switch civics according to your needs and not to be evangelistic about one set?

 

[FreeTerminus]

I'll admit that things in the US aren't as good as they could be...but as far as I can tell, Europe is doing pretty well when it comes to development, and they are capitalist.

 

[ybbor]

From what I understand, communism would mean that everyone gives everything to a central organization, who then distributes it based on need. The government is made up of a Communist Party,

first, what part are you critical of? the economic redistribution of wealth, or a single party controlling the government?

who stifles dissent in any form (like the Soviet Union or China did). Nobody owns anything, and we all theoretically work for the good of society (though in reality the Communist Party tends to be "more equal" than everyone else). Such societies are paranoid and tend to forsaken human development and improving the quality of life in favor of militarism and such.

just because that's what those countries did doesn't mean it's intrinsic to communism, or what posters here are promoting

 

[FreeTerminus]

first, what part are you ctirical of? the economic redistibution of wealth, or a single party controlling the government?

I think both, really. They both stifle innovation, don't they?

just because that's what those countires did doesn't mean it's intrinsic to communism, or what posters here are promoting

I suppose not, but the experience of capitalist nations (from the viewpoint of the people within them) seems to just be so much better than those of communist nations. It seems as if there is something wrong with communism itself that is causing it to fail.
I mean, even for all its faults, the US has always been better off than the Soviet Union was, hasn't it?

 

[CIVPhilzilla]

Take a look at my sig and you'll see its not exactly communist supporting so I'll just watch the other responses.

 

[Xenocrates]

Such societies are paranoid and tend to forsaken human development and improving the quality of life in favor of militarism and such. Why would anyone support that? Capitalism has its flaws, but its done a lot to improve the standards of living of people all over the world.

So please, educate me

This comes down to definition; neither the US nor Europe is Capitalist (immigration controls, subsidies etc), but Capitalism is the dominant ideology and it's being used to control of influence developing countries and make it difficult for them to develop. In some cases Capitalism has improved living standards in the third World but I think that that mostly Capitalism requires the third world to remain poor as a source of cheap resources and labour.

I'd say that the US is the most paranoid country at the moment! It's also currently spending 49% of its budget on the military. The Soviet union's spending is debatable, but in absolute terms, it was peanuts compared to the US.

 

[Yuri2356]

I mean, even for all its faults, the US has always been better off than the Soviet Union was, hasn't it?

There were a lot of factors that lead to the overall disparity between the Soviets and the USA, amoung them the fact that the US had an economic leg up from the beginning over the Russian Empire, which in turn lost a lot of its territory in WWI. (Land they wouldn't get back until after WWII.) They then had to deal with Civil war, conflicts with sucessor states, and the second world war. Through all of which the the US and it's industries remained physicaly isolated from the battlefields.

I'm not saying the acts of the government didn't play a role, but there was more to it than just the way the management handled things.

I think both, really. They both stifle innovation, don't they?

Well, if the state's distrubution of wealth only deals with necesities, (Food, education, healthcare, baseline employment) but room is still left for improvement of one's life, things should balance out. Sure, you could coast through life, going in the breadline to the factory to your one-person appartment and then on to annother day, but as long as there is some reward attached to doing more, people will push for it.

Have a mandated level which is enough to get by in a dull, monotonous way, but give those with the will to advance a light at the end of the tunnel other than "it's good for the people".

That, and it would really help to not have any crazy nation halfway arround the world breathing down your throat with their armies...

 

[CaptainF]

Communism sucks, my signature notwithstanding.

 

[ybbor]

I suppose not, but the experience of capitalist nations (from the viewpoint of the people within them) seems to just be so much better than those of communist nations. It seems as if there is something wrong with communism itself that is causing it to fail.

and the records of European nations seems to be so much better than those of African nations. It seems as if there is something wrong with Africa itself that if causing them to fail.

just because the socialist societies so far (and there's only been a handful of them worth talking about) haven't done too well, doesn't mean there's a problem with the concept of socialism. just the way those ideas were implemented.

OT @Yuri: your avatar almost looks like stratego's out of the corner of my eye

 

[Commie #4522]

Communism is the best form of government. Every1 is equal. When I look at america today and I see rich people in their multi million dollar houses living on the hill looking down on Oakland where children are starving and people are crying I can not do anything but ask myself "why?". Why would anyone be so self centred to build such extravagant things like mansions and buy multi million dollar sports cars when there are so many poor people who are going to die? Not to mention president bush has turned me away from the capitalist system, and for many others this si the same story. Im so sick of this corrupt system of governemtn of the united states it's amazing, what they have done with noble ideas of government andt turned them into.

 

[Kozmos]

Communism is a relic of the past. Technocratic Demosocialism is the way to go.

 

[FreeTerminus]

Thats another question: Whats the difference between communism and socialism? They seem to be used interchangebly

 

[Cheezy the Wiz]

The thing about capitalism is that everyone can be anything they want to be, the hard work you put out is reflected in your status in life. In a Communist system, there is no personal benefit for one's labors, so where is the ambition to work hard?
My example I cite, as I'm sure this post will draw much whining to which I offer you tasty saltines, is General Colin Powell. He was born and rasied in Harlem, and attended a school where the percentage of students entering prison was higher than those who graduated. Through his own personal ambition and hard work, he graduated high school and went on to college, eventually becoming a Leutenant in the Army just as we were entering Vietnam, where he made a name for himself, and rose through the ranks to General. Then, as we all know, he became head of the Chiefs of Staff, and then Secretary of State, this man who came from one of the poorest districts in the country

 

[Godwynn]

Thats another question: Whats the difference between communism and socialism? They seem to be used interchangebly

Socialism is the stepping stone to Communism.

For example it would practically be impossible for the United States to jump to communism in one day, or even five years. So instead of having a 100% tax rate right off the bat and re-distributing the wealth equally to all of its members, it would start by raising taxes on all classes or just the rich.

In short Communism is the great utopia, while Socialism is communism 'lite'.

BTW, it does not work, nor will it ever in communities with a population over 10.

I gotta rush so someone who is educated and has more time than me can fill in the rest. We have some remarkable people that are educated on both sides of this argument.

 

[amadeus]

The theory of socialism can be summarized as follows: you're stupid and the government knows how to run your life better than you do. If you don't obey, you get thrown in jail.

The forum's fellow travelers will try to convince you otherwise, but it works the same every time it's tried.

 

[tomsnowman123]

A lot of people generalize me as a communist, but that's not exactly true. For instance, I have a very left wing stance on economics, but also on social issues, I believe the power should be given to the individual. However, I do believe in equality; fair trade, taxing the weatlhier more, etc. Unlike leaders like Stalin, I do not believe that one party should have control over everything, where the government not only controls the economy, but also the freedoms of the individual.

The thing with communism is that it has not been implemented succesfully yet. Communism in the sense that most people know it (i.e., Stalin, U.S.S.R) is seriously flawed. Green-anarchy, what I support, could be broadly labeled as communism, but giving power to the individual instead of the state (please don't use that though, that's generalizing my stance extremely).

Communism doesn't neccesarily have to be militarisitc in nature either, I am completely opposed to that. Again, much of this belief stems from the U.S.S.R.

Finally, you mention that Capatalism improves the lives of people around the world. There still is poverty however, and, theoretically, communism would end poverty because of shared wealth and such.

 

[amadeus]

The thing with communism is that it has not been implemented succesfully yet.

This again?

 

[BasketCase]

From the standpoint of equal distribution of wealth, CFC itself gave the thumbs-down to Communism a while back:
Poll: Equal Distribution of Wealth?

The central question of the poll was: would you be willing to accept a "fair share" of the world's GNP as your lifetime salary? (At the time of the poll, this was around $11,000)

A strong majority of CFC'ers answered "no".