Totally Transparent Communism

[Sultan Bhargash]

Recently it seems communism is pretty much written off in this forum -- with good reason, as having to preface your defense with "well, it works in theory and they never tried it in reality". But do you think this alternative form of communism I'm about to describe catch on in countries where we seek to reverse chronic corruption?

Transparent Communism reduces or eliminates the corruption and despotism inherent in the worst examples of pseudo communist regimes and puts everything there is to know about each person's financial status and proprietary holdings. What you lose in privacy to your fellow citizen under such a system you would make up for in wealth of services and quality of living. These last two are especially important - because that is how the success or failure of party members or policy would be judged democratically by that criterion.

Could it work?

 

[Tsukemono5]

I'm not sure if I understand what you're saying. Basically, it's communism, but every financial, public, and criminal record on everyone is made public?

 

[Toasty]

And who's to say that the person(s) who is/are in control of this public domain won't alter it to their advantage ?

 

[addiv]

This seems practical impossible to me. So, no, I don't think this would work.
No form of communism will work anyway, it's against human nature.

 

[Toasty]

Originally posted by addiv
This seems practical impossible to me. So, no, I don't think this would work.
No form of communism will work anyway, it's against human nature.

So's vegetarianism, and some might argue it works well than the human's natural diet.

 

[thestonesfan]

I don't even think communism works in theory.

 

[addiv]

Originally posted by Toasty


So's vegetarianism, and some might argue it works well than the human's natural diet.

I don't know if vegetarianism is against human nature or if it's better than the natural human's diet.
But the difference with communism is that in communism everyone is forced to go along with the communist ideals while not everyone is forced to be a vegetarian.

 

[CivCube]

I remember reading about this in Conversations with God. If people weren't paranoid for their stuff, it could work.

 

[thestonesfan]

I think paranoia is why people like communism. They don't like the fear of someone having more than they do.

 

[Toasty]

Originally posted by addiv


I don't know if vegetarianism is against human nature or if it's better than the natural human's diet.
But the difference with communism is that in communism everyone is forced to go along with the communist ideals while not everyone is forced to be a vegetarian.

"Love it or leave it" .

 

[Tsukemono5]

Vegetarians > all.

 

[DvR]

I don't realy get it, what would be the use of making all that stuff public?

 

[newfangle]

Its not that communism is against 'human nature' that makes it fundamentally impossible. It is because it is fundamentally wrong. Communism relies on people to determine how wealth should be destributed. At what point does taxation become correct? 5%? 50%?

Then again, the modern manefestations of capitalism (If one can say that communism has never been implemented but it works in theory, the same can be said for capitalism) haven't been entirely successful, or else we wouldn't have had any commie revolutions in the last century.

Sultan, it would be great if you could elaborate on the definition of transparent communism. All I got from your definition is that somehow corruption and despotic elements are removed.

 

[luiz]

Of course not! Artificial distribution of wealth cant and will never work(in small extents, such as in european social-democracys, is different).
As Toasty said, those in power would have access to all information and use it as they please. They would only declare a fraction of their true wealth. Their enemys would be accused of trying to hide wealth.
Communism doesnt work even in theory and frankly I think Karl Marx was not very bright.

 

[Pontiuth Pilate]

Sometimes artificial redistribution of wealth is necessary, cf Julius Caesar's land reforms.

But I don't think we've got that much of a patriciate yet. [aside from Undisclosed Dick and his chums from Texas].

 

[bobgote]

It's an interesting idea Sultan, but I would imagine that it would take little effort to fake or fudge the records or make them difficult to access and then we'd be back to where communism was to start with. The only way it'd make a difference was if you had people in power who truly wanted the system to work for the people, and not just for their own benefit, and if you had that, then communism would work fine without being transparent.

 

[Anti-EUA]

I like your idea also Sultan, but as mentioned before from a fellow brazilian friend, those in power would do what they wanted...
Although I disagree with Karl Marx being not a bright person. I think the concept is perfect, but won't work due to our nature...

 

[Greadius]

Which would make the concept deeply flawed since the method of ruling humanity is incompatible with humanity. Its like saying I have the perfect tire, but it doesn't work on any cars.


I don't see what difference it would make without a method of accountability. You'd be shocked, just shocked, to find out how much we know about our public officials financial dealings and holdings, which as a matter of law are public record as is. The transparency fails because it still doesn't account for the fact that 99.9% of people don't care what their leaders do/own as long as their life is pretty good.

 

[Pongui]

I think you're suggesting, Sultan, surveillance (sloppily said) of government and citizens, by citizens through government. It all hinges on the quality of democracy this theoretical country enjoys.

In a democratic country hijacked by those who would seek to terrify the people , it would never work. In such a country, government powers aren't the people's powers.

 

[Veers]

Communism is another form of monarchy and we all know how well that worked out - - -