<p>BllyMc, you’re asking a very touchy question that involves politics in general.
Firstly, lets start with government’s role. What is it? Security? Help the underprivileged? Jobs? Economic expansion?
A full-fledged capitalist would say that government should practice legislative restraint by deregulating industry and cutting taxes. A full fledged communist would say that government should be in control of everything. (I know it seems oversimplified, but remember, I’m talking about full fledged views).
Now, as we all know, Communism/Capitalism falls on the Authoritarian/Libertarian Spectrum, not the left/right spectrum. Therefore, they are incomparable to the current Democrats/Republicans.
Communism is indeed a noble idea, as is capitalism. The idea that government can do all and help all is just as romantic in my eyes as the notion that anyone can work hard and bring themselves up the social class ladder. Both are inconceivably idealistic. Communism doesn’t realize how corrupt people really are, and capitalism doesn’t realize that people step on the very people who made them successful.
Because of that, there is something called a capitalist welfare state, like the USA. We mostly practice capitalism, but after Great Society and the New Deal, we have been providing substantial welfare to our people. Government has drastically grown since the gilded age, and not in a bad way either.
BillyMc, I believe that capitalism and communism can only work in tiny doses. A country like Norway can practice full-fledged socialism, not the ex-USSR. A country like Luxembourg can practice full fledged capitalism, not the USA. No welfare state in large countries means that the poor will be second/third class citizens. Only welfare state in large countries means that the rich and poor will lose. As I quote disturbed, there are “too many men, too many people, making too many problems”.
Essentially, I sympathize with Communism. But logistics make it impossible in substantially sized countries.</p>
<p>Xenophanes, I know too many Libertarians with too many different definitions of the word. What type of libertarian are you?</p>
<p>Toxic, I know but India has improved since 2000, that’s my point. Even though 1 dollar is still worthless in the grand scheme of things, it’s much higher than a cent. beatlesdisturbed, at the moment I am a minarchist leaning towards anarcho-capitalism.</p>
<p>Billy, how many tribes actually practiced communism? I’m just wondering because what I’ve read about early peoples has implied the opposite of what you are claiming. </p>
<p>For example, the Ibo tribe from Things Fall Apart (which is based upon a real African tribe, although the story in the book is a work of fiction) is not very communist at all. One moves up in their society through hard work, but their wealth is not distributed equally. Can you give me a concrete counter-example?</p>
<p>Could you be specific on social issues? I’ve had people who virulently believe that government should stone gays, kill abortion doctors, and impose religion tell me they were “libertarians”. So you lean towards no government at all?</p>
<p>Who dictates where the money gets siphoned in a communist economy? No matter how you answer that question, some people will get angry and devise a means to throw off the yoke. I mean, it’s not as though any “communist” economic policy exists free of those who are required to enforce it.</p>
<p>Nah, I’m not a hypocrite like many republicans (I realize most republicans aren’t libertarians but republicans seem to want small government yet advocate outlawing gay marriage and **** like that). Yes, I seem to be leaning towards no government (probably due to my ridiculously bias reading list although I’m trying to counter it with some Hayek) although I am starting to sympathise with welfare libertarianism as you put given it’s pretty much been tried and tested (e.g. Hong Kong, Singapore, in a way USA etc) seems to be the most practical.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Yeah, you’re basically totally wrong here.</p>
<p>What happens when workers get fed up with performing high-stress high-load jobs for the same pay as everyone else? REVolUCIOn!!!</p>
<p>I want to work in a sweetshop!</p>
<p>The one thing most of us aren’t rational enough to conclude, I think, is that nihilism is the end result of careful ideological examination. None of the other positions are adequately justified.</p>
<p>
Is it better to believe this and resign yourself to doing nothing, or to believe the opposite and work to bringing about a new world?</p>
<p>
The increase in the average Indian’s life in the past ten years is far less dramatic than the increase from $0.01 to $1. Also, I provide a counter-example: On Monday, Stalin orders 20,000 people killed. On Tuesday, Stalin orders 18,000 people killed. Is Stalin now a better person?</p>
<p>
Karl Marx was pressured by religious people to develop communism?</p>
<p>
Because the world works better when people believe that human beings have innate rights, liberties, and dignity. There are other reasons, but I think this is the one that might have a bigger effect on you.</p>
<p>
Incorrect; a full-fledged communist would say that the workers should hold everything in collective. A terminal socialist (who does not see socialism as a transition to communism) believes that the state should hold everything in trust for the people. We are speaking of the former.</p>
<p>
Sorry, this is wrong. Left/right is economic, authoritarian/libertarian is social. Communism is an economic system, and is thus far left economically.</p>
<p>
The Union of Soviet Socialist Republics was as socialist as it was made up of republics; both were points of propaganda. Norway does not practice true socialism; they are a “social democracy,” though their actual form of government is a constitutional monarchy (the number of powers held by the King of Norway is alarming).</p>
<p>
Communism can’t work in just one country, it must exist as a world system.</p>
<p>
Many African tribes had been affected by various civilizing influences (agriculture, the African cities, trade with Arabs), so by the time they could be studied, did not reflect primitive communism. It existed mainly in the pre-agricultural hunter-gatherer societies studied by anthropologists, though Marx also studied several Native American tribes while formulating his historical perspective.</p>
<p>
Money isn’t being “siphoned” anywhere. All resources are owned in collective by the human race, everyone has a claim to all that they need to survive and flourish.</p>
<p>
The world and our lives are better if we follow certain other positions; is this not adequate justification?</p>
<p>Billy, you talk about a world system. Are you really naive enough to believe that people from every corner of the globe will want to spread their wealth evenly amongst themselves? You must understand that people are not willing to give up what they have. There is absolutely zero chance of worldwide cooperation to form some kind of international workers government.</p>
<p>Currently, most of the Middle East hates the United States, Western Europe, and Israel.
India hates Pakistan
China hates India
Russia hates China
African ethnic nations consistently wage genocide against each other</p>
<p>Conflict and hatred between nations has been a part of human history ever since the first caveman picked up a rock.</p>
<p>Now why do you think suddenly everyone will want to get along and share? People all over the world want to keep what they have and get more.</p>
<p>
Most all of the world would benefit; the only people who would lose wealth are the rich. The rest of us are quite able to overpower them.</p>
<p>
Leaders cause these wars, this hate. And see what’s happening to much of the middle east at the moment; Egypt and Libya in revolution, Iran on the brink. Most of the Africans involved in the genocidal conflicts just want it to stop. A world system would give them security.</p>
<p>
And you’re okay with this?</p>
<p>
If they can be convinced that life will be better that way, then they will go for that.</p>
<p>
Most people would get more; a massive majority would get more, and they are enough to make the Revolution happen.</p>
<p>BillyMc, Communism is not just an economic system. If we’re talking about ideal Communism, you are right. If we’re talking about Communism as we know it, it IS an encompassing political system.</p>
<p>BillyMc, it’s obvious you’re an idealist, and I admire and respect you for that. But as someone who has indeed been in the political world, I can tell you that your views are naive. Not wrong, but as I doubt “Revolution” will happen, naive.
You can bash me all you want. I’m out of this thread. This may get heated, and this debate will transform into more heated topics.</p>
<p>
It is an economic system, though it requires a worldwide workers’ republic, which is a political system. Though there is also anarcho-communism.</p>
<p>
The US will eventually fall, there will be many revolutions to come, the world will change dramatically, none of this is surprising. I just want the great Revolution to be communist.</p>
<p>Hey… lets just split the world up. If you support communism, move to Africa, Asia, Europe. If you support capitalism, move to North or South America. Lets see what part of the world will be better off in 100 years. </p>
<p>Seriously, only stupid/lazy people would support communism. They believe that the more intelligent/hardworking people have the duty, or a moral obligation, to support them, to help the poor and unfortunate. While I believe “elite” people do have a duty to support the less fortunate, I do not believe that the “elite” should be the slaves to the masses. In America today, anyone who wants to work hard can pull themselves out of poverty. There are so many forms of assistance available to the poor. The poorest people in America are still lucky, compared to the rest of the world.</p>
<p>
Communism requires a world system, sorry. And if capitalists were completely and totally relegated to one half of the globe, you would see the class divide develop there. Further, communism/socialism is pretty popular in Latin America.</p>
<p>
You have no idea what communism actually entails, do you?</p>
<p>
Wrong. The hardest working people are the poor, they have to be. I know people who work 80/90 hours a week and are still kept in poverty by things like medical debt.</p>
<p>
So what about the world’s poor?</p>
<p>
You could have used your main account to say that; making another is unnecessary and obvious.</p>
<p>
What’s lazy about advocating revolution?
Who believes that?
</p>
<p>This is just wishful thinking.</p>
<p>
And I know people who skate happily by with a part-time job because of food-stamps and other government funding. Don’t get me wrong - I see what you’re saying. My point is that there’s an anecdote for everything, and they’re fairly useless as evidence.</p>
<p>I found [this</a> website on communism](<a href=“http://rationalrevolution.net/war/communism_and_marxism.htm]this”>Communism and Marxism) to be very informative, if anyone is interested. There seem to be a lot of [url=<a href=“http://chzmemebase.files.■■■■■■■■■■■■■/2010/11/b04f78ce-2c1d-4864-8e3f-d82aaf4cb029.jpg]misconceptions[/url”>http://chzmemebase.files.■■■■■■■■■■■■■/2010/11/b04f78ce-2c1d-4864-8e3f-d82aaf4cb029.jpg]misconceptions[/url</a>] in this thread.</p>
![http://chzmemebase.files.■■■■■■■■■■■■■/2010/11/b04f78ce-2c1d-4864-8e3f-d82aaf4cb029.jpg]misconceptions[/url](http://chzmemebase.files.wordpress.com/2010/11/b04f78ce-2c1d-4864-8e3f-d82aaf4cb029.jpg%5Dmisconceptions%5B/url){kind=link}
