Why does Communism keep failing?

[Jawz II]

as many have mentioned, communism has never been tried

but if you think the people of russia are better off now under a mafia like, "democratic" government than they were under the rule of the mafia like "communist" government, you are sadly misstaking

russians are as poor now as they were then, if not poorer
with the diffrence that a handfull of russians are extremly rich, and the poor ones are no longer guarnteed free schooling, or food, or jobs, or anything else for that matter

 

[Gelion]

Thank you Jaws.... [insert sad smile here]

 

[Jawz II]

Thank you Jaws.... [ ]

youre welcome, i have some russian blood in me (1/8) , and i like russia and russians, and specially the way ussr kicked the nazis ass in ww2

i think after all russians have gone through, you deserve a good governemnt, and not Putin and his crew

 

[Mise]

It depends what you mean by "Success" and "Failure". I'd call capitalism a success in some areas, and a failure in others. Same with Communism. Just that Communism failed at more things than it succeeded.

You could conceivably define Communism such that the USSR was a "success". That you have defined it as a failure is an opinion; it is up to you to decide why it has failed, given that you have decided that it has failed.


(EDIT: This is, of course, in addition to your definition of the USSR as "communist", which is already being debated. This smacks of rhetorical questioning. You've already made up your mind and just want to piss people like North King off.)

 

[nonconformist]

Okay, here comes moderate noncon.

Premises:

A-communism is destined to fail
B-Communism was implemented many times

Answers?
A-True
B-False


A-Communism is absolutely destined to fail. "Communism" being the communism described my Marx in the manifsto. Why? Too impractical, and Marx didn't really know what he was on about. Economically, no way.
So Marx says the workers will all unite to throw off their "chains"?
False. A number if them are happy (or at least indoctrinated), and therefore it won't happen.
Secondly, he's gonna get rid of police, economy, religion, countries, war etc. Whoah! Idealistic or what?
But completely falliable. You're assuming everyone's gonna bucke down and work, for greater good, and noone's gonna commit crimes, or go back to religion.
Basicvally, without a police force, or an army, we'll be back in the stone ages. Some guy whacking people and stealing. A gang of warlords.
The only way this is gonna work is some form of Stalinist system
Which brings me to:

B-A true communist system has never been put in place. BECAUSE IT'S IMPOSSIBLE! People don't want to be indoctrinated, earn the same as the next guy for harder work, not recieve money, or not ave certain luxouries that the capitalist can afford (metaphorically).
So the best way to do so?
Stalinism. You're gonna have dissent, so you need an iron grip. You need prison camps, you need death squads, you need a cult of personality.
However, despite the USSR around, say, 1988, not being too bad a place, the cement of fear, and respect of the state, that held the USSR together, had crumbled.

Saying that, capitalism is evil as well. Therefore, we must strive to attain a suitable balance, a balace of a social-security state, that rewards people., a social democratic state.

 

[~Corsair#01~]

Communism in Cuba would be a success, if it ended right now. It raised quality of life a fair bit, and boosted literacy rates from sonething lke 30% to 95%.
To those who say Cuba was a far richer and happier place under Batista, I can't quite see how people that can't even read can have much of a quality of life...

Of course, the US embargo (as well the fact that communism is just not good for economies) has led to empoverishment and general economic non-existence.

 

[Gelion]

Okay, here comes moderate noncon.
Secondly, he's gonna get rid of police, economy, religion, countries, war etc. Whoah! Idealistic or what?

The only way this is gonna work is some form of Stalinist system

I am not going to answer the whole of your post, but don;t you see a contradiction here?

 

[Red Threat]

The only way I see a "real" communist society happening is through a natural evolution of the economy, the way Marx predicted (not that I actually think this will happen.) I believe one of his ideas was that advanced capitalism would turn into socialism, which would eventually become communism. In order for this to happen, the entire world would have to take part in this transition. From what I have heard from some communists, this is a reason all the communist revolutions have failed. None have come from an advanced capitalist society, and obviously there has yet to be a worldwide revolution.

This is my belief, but IT IS NOT COMMUNISM, IT'S JUST MARXISM.

P.S. I agree with Corsair. Cuma is far mor richer than the average american believes (due to propaganda) and it could be still richer without the US embargo. Obviously, I can't suffer dissidents execution.

 

[Red Threat]

What did Communism do right? What good did it accomplish?

Communism, as an ideal, has given a hope for a better life and a fair world to live in for millions people around the world. It has given (and still gives) a reason to fight against poverty and exploitation and to support justice in the human society.

 

[thestonesfan]

Because not everyone is as dumb as the dumbest guy on the planet.

 

[punkbass2000]

I can't believe this thread is still around, it's a blatant troll. If I were to start a thread "Why does Bush keep screwing up the world?" or "Why does the Catholic Church promote pedophilia?", it would be shut down immediately. It is clear the the original poster is not interested in the subject, just in putting down the entire concept, you can see that in his OP and his first response.

 

[Joeb WK]

I came up with this thing about Communism the other day. Remember you heard it here first.

Communism is utopia.
Utopia is communism.
Utopia is impossible.
Communism is impossible.

 

[Gelion]

I can't believe this thread is still around, it's a blatant troll. If I were to start a thread "Why does Bush keep screwing up the world?" or "Why does the Catholic Church promote pedophilia?", it would be shut down immediately. It is clear the the original poster is not interested in the subject, just in putting down the entire concept, you can see that in his OP and his first response.

I can't think why I didn't think/wrote about this....

 

[carniflex]

Why does communism keep failing ?

Communism has never been reached.

 

[nonconformist]

One thing I"d like to know is if Fox actually knows what communism is, rather than spewing a lot of rhetoric that seems to be drummed into American kids from birth nowadays.

 

[Richard Cribb]

Curiouser and curiouser...

Because it by its very nature supresses people. Communist societies destroy freedom as it's neccesary to fit a state planned life.

:shakehead Communist society and state is an oxymoron. There are no state in the communistic society.

Don't give me that b/s! Communism has been tried, AND IT FAILED!

Calm down, please.

Soviet Union was Communist---

Absolutely not. The Soviet Union was basically Tsar Russia with some red painting paying lip service to socialistic ideas.

Communism attempts to change the basic nature of man.

And what is this basic nature of man?

Communism does not reward those who work hard. You could pick your nose all your life and still get the same rewards as someone who works a 70 hour week. No incentive.

Capitalism does not reward those who work hard. You could pick your nose all your life and still get much more than someone who works a 70 hour week if you are lucky enough to be born wealthy. No incentive for the poor.

The only way I see a "real" communist society happening is through a natural evolution of the economy, the way Marx predicted (not that I actually think this will happen.) I believe one of his ideas was that advanced capitalism would turn into socialism, which would eventually become communism. In order for this to happen, the entire world would have to take part in this transition. From what I have heard from some communists, this is a reason all the communist revolutions have failed. None have come from an advanced capitalist society, and obviously there has yet to be a worldwide revolution.

I am neither a marxologist nor a marxist, but basically you are right! Marx himself wished a socialistic society to appear first in England, the most advanced industrial society in his time.

Sorry, no time to consult Marx. Anyways, the last few folks who have consulted Marx seem to have majorly screwed things up...

I can assure you that there is still a big interest of Marx. Even in business circles many adore him as a prophet and an ideologist of capitalism.
Marx was not infallable by any means, but he has had a huge impact on many intellectual disciplines, not the least in my field.

And who makes the decision to the value of a person's talents? What about personal choice?

What about all those underprivileged in today's capitalistic societies?

Marx advocated implementing it via a an armed revolution. Are you in agreement with him?

Marx is a bit dualistic about this. It is true that he did consider revolutions, but also that he was open for using the existing political system to obtain a socialistic society. As I already mentioned above, Marx is a difficult thinker who wrote a lot and also participated actively in the political life in his time. I don't think Marx, if he had been living today, would have advocated any violent revolution.

Well, if there never has been a "real" Communist nation, then the question can be asked: if Communism is such a great system, why has it never been tried???

I can repeat my tip from another thread: there are elementary history books to be found in most bookshops.
Feudal lords asked the same question about capitalism when they ruled.

Coz human are basically Lazy and greedy, if u noticed, this 2 traits does not really get together, so human is an animal fill with irony. For once we want to get as much as possible, but on the second all of us dont want to work..

Another authority on human nature ...
I don't recognize neither myself or most people I know in how you describe us.

Hmmm if you wait a couple of days I will finish my article on Communism (reality and theory) designated specially for this board. So far I agree with the first North Kings post.

I think that will be interesting reading!

This is, of course, in addition to your definition of the USSR as "communist", which is already being debated. This smacks of rhetorical questioning. You've already made up your mind and just want to piss people like North King off.)

Nope.

It smacks of ignorance.

Communism, as an ideal, has given a hope for a better life and a fair world to live in for millions people around the world. It has given (and still gives) a reason to fight against poverty and exploitation and to support justice in the human society.

Very good point. Many of the polical, economical and social rights which people in democracies enjoys was indeed granted because radical movements and individuals struggled for it. I wish more young people would read some labour history...

I can't believe this thread is still around, it's a blatant troll. If I were to start a thread "Why does Bush keep screwing up the world?" or "Why does the Catholic Church promote pedophilia?", it would be shut down immediately. It is clear the the original poster is not interested in the subject, just in putting down the entire concept, you can see that in his OP and his first response.

And right you are about all that!

One thing I"d like to know is if Fox actually knows what communism is, rather than spewing a lot of rhetoric that seems to be drummed into American kids from birth nowadays.

Well obviously he doesn't .
But anybody who writes about ants and states and calls the Soviet Union communistic can't have that much clue either..

Read this below carefully and learn it by heart so you know it until the next anti-communist thread opens (estimatedly 72 hours from now):

Communistic societies are stateless.
Public ownership is not the same as state ownership.
Communistic and socialistic societies are not the same.
The Soviet Union wasn't communistic.
Human nature is very complicated.
The Communist Manifesto is not the intellectual peak of Marx' production.
Marx did not invent the GULAGs.

 

[Vladyc]

Actually, sometimes there are shortages of librarians in the U.S.--just as now and then there are shortages (or surpluses!) in any other field.

The key point I'm making is that the number of people who choose to be librarians never precisely matches the number of librarians actually needed. Allowing the People to make their own career choices is not going to serve the Greater Good properly.

I guess my point is that a small variation from the needed number of librarians isn't going to create a bigger problem in communist society than a capitalist one. Although you might be right that if people were allowed to choose their jobs it couldn't be considered communism anymore.

Communistic societies are stateless.
Public ownership is not the same as state ownership.
Communistic and socialistic societies are not the same.
The Soviet Union wasn't communistic.
Human nature is very complicated.
The Communist Manifesto is not the intellectual peak of Marx' production.
Marx did not invent the GULAGs.

excellent
I would like to see a debate based around these ideas. It would be much more interesting than the average communism debate, with the false arguments removed.

 

[Pikachu]

There are only two ways to do it: the carrot, or the stick. But the carrot isn't permitted; you can't offer bigger paychecks (or a company car or other incentives--those are simply other forms of pay) in a Communist society.

Capitalist societies don’t seem to use that kind of carrot much either. If that was the case attractive jobs like CEOs and such would have been low wage jobs while terrible jobs that nobody wants to do, like cleaning toilets and such things, would be high wage jobs. For some reason it is the opposite way in capitalist societies. Clearly high wages isn’t the only way to make people do jobs they hate. Even capitalist countries are able to make people take such lousy jobs, and we don’t even have to pay them decent wages to do it. Why should that be harder to pull off for a communist society?

 

[CIVPhilzilla]

Simply put it goes against human nature, and no true communism has ever come about.

 

[Perfection]

:shakehead Communist society and state is an oxymoron. There are no state in the communistic society.

Maybe in your hypothetical seemingly paradoxical niave and impossible "communist utopia" it is. When I refer to communism I refer to every form that's vaguely implementable/realistic

And what is this basic nature of man?

It's different for every man, that's one of the many reasons why communism doesn't work.

Capitalism does not reward those who work hard. You could pick your nose all your life and still get much more than someone who works a 70 hour week if you are lucky enough to be born wealthy. No incentive for the poor.

No incentive? There's plenty of incentive for the poor! Money certainly is an incentive. As for the rich, I say if a parent wants to provide for their children let 'em!

I can assure you that there is still a big interest of Marx. Even in business circles many adore him as a prophet and an ideologist of capitalism.
Marx was not infallable by any means, but he has had a huge impact on many intellectual disciplines, not the least in my field.

I don't disagree, but that still doesn't give me time to read him.

What about all those underprivileged in today's capitalistic societies?

There's a certain level of social responsibility toward them sure, as pure capitalism is not that beneficial, but that doesn't negate the fact that communism is pretty much by nature fascist.