Thread: Your View Om Communism

Originally Posted by Intended

Universal Mind, you've showed your ignorance. Sorry, but I have no desire to waste time and discuss such things with someone who only caught their names in one-sided propaganda and keeps repeating propaganda sentences without listening to you.
That's just a little proof:

How many times do I have to say, communism never existed on this Earth?
It's just one of the facts you can't understand (because of being too brainwashed?) even though I've said it already. And they're vital, you can't discuss such topics if you have no idea of them and how they function. Sorry, but it's not my idea to argue with ignorant people full of propaganda cliches. A bit rude, perhaps, but such is the sad truth.

I repeat what is not even close to being successfully countered. So I will repeat it again. The United States has the greatest system in history. Our capitalism, which results from our democratic-republic system, fights poverty better than any other system there has ever been. And you can't say that China, the U.S.S.R., Cuba, North Vietnam, North Korea, and Eastern Europe were never communist to any extent. I guess you know and the rest of the world doesn't. If it were true that communism has never existed on any level, might it be because it is such a dumbass idea? And not one socialist country has come even close to the success of our system. I know you despise that fact, but your despising doesn't make it not a fact. And like I said, let me know some day when there is a real world national example of the major success of communism or socialism. Until then, I will disagree with your speculations regarding how there can be large scale incentive without greed.

Originally Posted by Universal Mind

I repeat what is not even close to being successfully countered. So I will repeat it again. The United States has the greatest system in history. Our capitalism, which results from our democratic-republic system, fights poverty better than any other system there has ever been. And you can't say that China, the U.S.S.R., Cuba, North Vietnam, North Korea, and Eastern Europe were never communist to any extent. I guess you know and the rest of the world doesn't. If it were true that communism has never existed on any level, might it be because it is such a dumbass idea? And not one socialist country has come even close to the success of our system. I know you despise that fact, but your despising doesn't make it not a fact. And like I said, let me know some day when there is a real world national example of the major success of communism or socialism. Until then, I will disagree with your speculations regarding how there can be large scale incentive without greed.

Intended will always label what you say as "propaganda". I dont know why, because i dont see posters on the side of the road high-lighting the benefits of capitalism.

Intended, i dont understand your arguments. History has proven that communism doesnt work, just as history has proven capitalism works. I've seen people in our soup kitchens with cell phones. Im pretty sure you like communism because, in theory, it supports its people better. You have failed to point out how this will EVER work.

Originally Posted by Half/Dreaming

Intended will always label what you say as "propaganda". I dont know why, because i dont see posters on the side of the road high-lighting the benefits of capitalism.

Intended, i dont understand your arguments. History has proven that communism doesnt work, just as history has proven capitalism works. I've seen people in our soup kitchens with cell phones. Im pretty sure you like communism because, in theory, it supports its people better. You have failed to point out how this will EVER work.

What's interesting is that after all of those long posts, he never really explained the mechanics of how communism or socialism could work. We explained the mechanics of how capitalism works well and has in fact worked very well. He said that communism has never existed and called me patriotic a hundred times along with some other intended insults, but he never did explain the details of how communism or socialism could possibly work. As for my being "patriotic", it doesn't matter if I wear American flag underwear, sing the American national anthem every time I take a shower, and have American flag draped shrines to George Washington and George Patton. It wouldn't negate the fact that capitalism is a proven success and socialism is a proven failure. If he wants to say that communism has never existed, he still can't negate the fact that it has not been proven to be a success. Capitalism has proven to be a success.

I want to know what draws people to communism or socialism. Is it fear of not being able to earn money? Inability to control their own life? I have no clue, but to me, leaving my fate up to me seems better than being issued a government check.

Isnt capitalism awesome? Dude, if i work extra hours, and at the end of the week i can afford a new addition to my XBOX 360 collection. If i save up for a few weeks, i can put a freegin DVD player in my car, AND IVE DONE IT!! Im pretty sure extra hard work in a communist society would not permit this. So really, there is no reason to work OT in communism, so productivity is stagnant.

Thats what makes capitalism so awesome. Greed. We directly see the results of hard work. Capitalism works with human nature for the greater good, while communism works against it. Again, this is proven.

What a silly argument, a bunch of anti-commies arguing with some staunch communists.

Lets look at it proeprly and give some substance to our opinions.
First of all dont keep going on about the failures of Communism in the past, as these ahve not been communism.
Stalinism in the USSR, and any country under its control during that time was therefore part of the Stalinist Soviet Bloc.
Cuba is not true Marxism, its an authotarian, Soviet Bloc style state.
China is tied up in Chinese ideologies, not Communism as advocated by Marx and later adapted by Lenin.

Lassiez-Faire capitalism and communism are both just as bad as eachother.
Socialism is the key.
Basically whats on the left of the centre.

What the democrats used to stand for in the US.
What Labour used to stand for over here.
Old school British socialism is what reukts in the NHS, a service that no other country in the world can compare to.
A rather great educational system. Obviously with Tony Blair and the birth of New Labour this has all changed.
But it was there before.

Captialism is one of the greatest evils this world has ever produced, and communism (as a theory) one of the most beautiful ideas, which is why it attracts so many idealistic people. But ive come to realise Utopia is not possible.

Originally Posted by imran_p

What a silly argument, a bunch of anti-commies arguing with some staunch communists.

Lets look at it proeprly and give some substance to our opinions.
First of all dont keep going on about the failures of Communism in the past, as these ahve not been communism.
Stalinism in the USSR, and any country under its control during that time was therefore part of the Stalinist Soviet Bloc.
Cuba is not true Marxism, its an authotarian, Soviet Bloc style state.
China is tied up in Chinese ideologies, not Communism as advocated by Marx and later adapted by Lenin.

Lassiez-Faire capitalism and communism are both just as bad as eachother.
Socialism is the key.
Basically whats on the left of the centre.

What the democrats used to stand for in the US.
What Labour used to stand for over here.
Old school British socialism is what reukts in the NHS, a service that no other country in the world can compare to.
A rather great educational system. Obviously with Tony Blair and the birth of New Labour this has all changed.
But it was there before.

Captialism is one of the greatest evils this world has ever produced, and communism (as a theory) one of the most beautiful ideas, which is why it attracts so many idealistic people. But ive come to realise Utopia is not possible.

Let me get this straight. Britain as a former socialist nation fought poverty better than the current U.S. system? Nope. Britain has a great capitalist system today, but it could be even more capitalistic and therefore much better. You can't give me an example of where a socialist system produced homeless people as fat as the ones the U.S. has now or a poverty class with the relatively luxurious lifestyles our poor people have. And I am still not seeing anything from your side in this discussion about the mechanics of how socialism or communism can result in the hard work or anything else that creates the extreme wealth everyone benefits from in nations. Can you explain the details of it? Also, read the last few sentences of Half/Dreaming's last post and tell me your counterarguments to them. Disagreement with those points is something I have yet to understand. Communism and socialism are both systems that result in a whole lot of half ass efforts on the parts of workers and therefore do not create national wealth like capitalism does. You obviously disagree with that point, so please explain the details of why. Keep in mind how fat our "poor" people are and how much they love their DVD players and X Boxes.

Its shame that your thinking on such a domestic scale, Capitalism is one country causes poverty in another.
US capitalism relies on the so called "free" market. When countries try to nationalise there resources, this equals a reduction in the size of the free market. The Us don't like that, and we are left with a superpower rampaging around the world "liberating".
Did it to Iran
Did it to Iraq
Did it to Congo


I am in no way a communist, but i am however anti-capitalist.
I dont truely believe Marx was a Marxist. He did not explain really how the sytem of communism would work, he merely explained the great injustice that capitalism is. I agree with his summation that capitalism is indeed a robbery system.
The reason : The Labour Theory of Value.
I dont have the time or the inclination to explain such a lengthy theory
however, if you ahve time to read
http://www.marxism.org.uk/pack/economics.html

Originally Posted by imran_p

Its shame that your thinking on such a domestic scale, Capitalism is one country causes poverty in another.
US capitalism relies on the so called "free" market. When countries try to nationalise there resources, this equals a reduction in the size of the free market. The Us don't like that, and we are left with a superpower rampaging around the world "liberating".
Did it to Iran
Did it to Iraq
Did it to Congo


I am in no way a communist, but i am however anti-capitalist.
I dont truely believe Marx was a Marxist. He did not explain really how the sytem of communism would work, he merely explained the great injustice that capitalism is. I agree with his summation that capitalism is indeed a robbery system.
The reason : The Labour Theory of Value.
I dont have the time or the inclination to explain such a lengthy theory
however, if you ahve time to read
http://www.marxism.org.uk/pack/economics.html

Our capitalism screws other countries? Maybe, maybe not. Do you have any idea how much America out-sources? We give jobs to thousands of japanese, chinese, indians, etc. in the name of saving money. Those people take those jobs because they pay better than alternative jobs, or because there are no other jobs available. What about American tourism? Some countries only exist because our people like pretty flowers and remote beaches. Then we buy foreign goods and take them home. No, i would say America plays a huge part in supporting the world.

Corporations are awesome. They became corporations because they kick ass at what they do. They are better than everybody else.

Jealosy of the rich is what draws people to communism. I guess some people cant handle being inferior. Capitalism is THE BEST. I dont care if it is your definition of "evil". Capitalism created a land of opportunity. We have Mexicans tripping over their shoe laces to get into the land of opportunity.

I am not an American and I like socialism (or at least some aspects of it), but not communism. For me its the difference between supporting people and controlling people. Human nature inevitablely means that any sort of control would be abused as we have seen in very communist country so far.

Originally Posted by Sybot

I am not an American and I like socialism (or at least some aspects of it), but not communism. For me its the difference between supporting people and controlling people. Human nature inevitablely means that any sort of control would be abused as we have seen in very communist country so far.

You misaunderstand what communism is and you seem to carry negative connotations installed by subtle anti-propaganda all over TV, newspapars and books. Sorry for being this straight
Communism is supposed to be a system of total justice so that even money wouldn't be necessary. And that means, there can be no tyranny! No country has been communistic so far, it isn't possible in modern world. Some parties call themselves communistic: it doesn't mean they're going to create communism at once, it merely means that it is their distant goal. Communism is supposed to be a development of socialism, so all these parties are actually socialistic.

Half/Dreaming

We give jobs to thousands of japanese, chinese, indians, etc. in the name of saving money. Those people take those jobs because they pay better than alternative jobs, or because there are no other jobs available.

All these countries -- Japan, China, India, etc -- suffer from their inhabitants leaving them. Less people = less workers = less production. Every country's government fights hard against this.

I'd like to remind you what awards of socialism people in capitalistic countries have.
Free education of excellent quality? Free medicine? The amount of jobless people a zero? Nobody at all in the whole country dying from hunger? No homeless people? No awfully fat people? People with high moral values? Quicker industry development? Any immunity to total zombification by the mass-media? Self-dependant production of goods that warranties that in hard times you won't die out in a week?
What IS the US that you take as an example producing? Look around, most of the products are shipped in. You can say that computers are produced in the US, but it isn't true, they're getting physically made in China or Taiwan. You depend on others in everything. If something happens there'll be a lack of something in the country... and this can be paralyzing or even deadly for millions of lives. Things are cheaper in countries like China, so the government prefers to import almost everything rather than care for its own factories, etc. So factories are ruined. All the physical production system is ruined. This is money-saving for the government, of course, but it's a great danger to the country. The country wouldn't survive a month if it became unable to import from other countries: either by being engaged in a hard war, or by dollar losing its world money value.
A long hard war can be avoided nowadays, but if the dollar value collapses, the US will collapse! How much more insecure the economical system can be?

If you're able to step back from the picture given by the single-voiced mass-media, try to...
What about this?
Right now the government is trying to ensure they could do something in case the dollar drops (since sooner or later it will happen). So they're attacking Iraq for oil, trying to impose their influence on Venezuela (oil again, etc.) and any other country that can be useful as a donator of goods. They're using a terrorism threat to install their military bases all over the globe to gain military monopoly. They're actually provoking more anti-terrorist hysteria on purpose, to have a reason to gain influence... Look at how they want to separate a Muslim Kosovo, which will effectively create an agressive Muslim state in Europe!
It's logical that a country that produces nothing and lives off the value of "paper", needs to expand and make other countries its unofficial colonies. It needs to steal all you eat and comsume from somewhere, because you don't produce it...
Now that the dollar is losing its value, it makes the US ever more aggressive towards other countries. I won't be surprised to hear about new horrible terrorist acts in the US soon: it's great to have people scared and have them morally justify criminal aggression of their own government towards other "terroristic" countries. We can also wait for new attempts to install military bases in Europe and wherever else, to have the governments of other countries scared of the US. We can await for new mass murders in the name of the "exported democracy", which will provide the US with new colonies of goods. We can await for more aggressive attempts at "globalization", which actually means stealing national culture and destroying borders of other countries, making them mere resource countries for just one country.

So what proves that capitalism is better than socialism? Capitalism that is unable to sustain itself and has to rob all others.

Intended, your system would require way too much structure. You are talking about the government taking control of every aspect of life. It could potentially lead to this utopian society, but why would you want it? That sounds dull and boring. No obstacles to overcome? No problems to work out? No fat people to protect the quarterbacks? It sounds to me like you are trying to purify humanity. Eliminate our differences.

I fully believe in survival of the fittest. America is the best at what it does. I still dont know if you deny this or just refuse to accept it. And i dont know what you're talking about. America was semi-isolationist, and it sustained itself just fine without "stealing" from other countries. Please, explain this "robbing" that we are doing. It seems to me like our money supports the world.

Capitalism may be the most intelligent system of economocis, but that doenst matter. Its a robbery system and is downright immoral. Its merely a question of wether we believe in success or equality.
I vouch for the latter.
Obviously you do not.

Read the link explaining The Labour Theory of Value, and counter it. Capitalism robs the workers, its no better than the system employed in fuedal times. Its proved on a page.

Imran

Originally Posted by imran_p

Capitalism may be the most intelligent system of economocis, but that doenst matter. Its a robbery system and is downright immoral. Its merely a question of wether we believe in success or equality.
I vouch for the latter.
Obviously you do not.

Read the link explaining The Labour Theory of Value, and counter it. Capitalism robs the workers, its no better than the system employed in fuedal times. Its proved on a page.

Imran

You come off sounding pretty smug when you portray me as someone who hates equality. I believe in success and equality, and that it should be left up to me and not the gov.

i find the idea of communism to be the one of the most unattractive economic ideas to me. i know that if i were to be in a communist state i would become stagnant and produce nothing. to me there is nothing to shoot for when you are living in a commune. i can just imagine that as soon as country switches to communism there would be no more advancements or new ideas. i know that view is flawed, but i just can't shake that idea.


in short, i'm not necessarily a pro-capitalist but i am for sure an anti-communist.

We made Japan more capitalist after World War II, and now their economy kicks ass. China has become more capitalistic, and their economy is improving as a result. The countries that lose citizens to capitalist countries are countries that are too socialist or communist to have the good economies that keep people. Countries keep losing their citizens to the United States because our economy is so good. Those countries need to become more capitalistic.

I am still not seeing anybody say how socialism or communism can create the hard work or any proposed factor that results in strong economic stimulation that makes a country prosper enough to make good wealth conditions for the masses. I don't see how it is supposed to happen. Greed creates economic stimulation for the nation as a whole, and it lifts the level for the entire nation. Half ass attitudes in government guarantee situations don't seem to be too effective. Can somebody please finally explain what is supposed to make the big machine work so effectively in a socialist or communist nation? What is it that supposedly does that better than greed?

Also, I would still like for somebody to give me an example of where communism or socialism has ever worked. Two of you have said that communism has never existed. Then what in the world is your explanation for why you think it would be so effective? At least tell me about a socialist nation that has had an incredible economy. Is there one that has had a majorly humongous illegal immigration problem?

But capitalism breeds inequality, surely you can see that.
In a socialist state, regardless of what family you are born into and what standing of education you receive you can do well.
Surely you are valuing the ability to become succesful and wealthy above the equality of all?

Imran

Originally Posted by imran_p

But capitalism breeds inequality, surely you can see that.
In a socialist state, regardless of what family you are born into and what standing of education you receive you can do well.
Surely you are valuing the ability to become succesful and wealthy above the equality of all?

Imran

No, I said that capitalism raises the level for everybody, despite the fact that some people are raised higher than others. All innocent people have the same value in terms of humanity, but not in terms of economic standing. Some people are worth more money than others. That is a fact of nature, and trying to force that fact out of existence is unnatural, counterproductive, and dangerous. It is like saying everybody in a class should be given a test where all of the grades will be averaged and every person in the class will receive that average. The class is not going to work as hard in that situation. Some students do better than others, and trying to force equality on the whole class kills the drive to work hard and therefore the tendency to stack up the collective knowledge.

And again, please explain the mechanics of socialism and communism. I keep asking for that. Did you read all of my last post? What is the major fuel for the machine? What is it? I have asked for that about ten times now, and nobody can tell me what it is supposed to be. I am asking the most important question that can be asked. What is the answer?

Plus, please tell me all about when socialism has ever been extremely effective.

Originally Posted by imran_p

But capitalism breeds inequality, surely you can see that.
In a socialist state, regardless of what family you are born into and what standing of education you receive you can do well.
Surely you are valuing the ability to become succesful and wealthy above the equality of all?

Imran

Equality has to be earned. You dont just get it for being alive. Why should slackers have the same status as people who bust ass?

If somebody's dad busted his ass for years to have a good income, why shouldnt he be able to give his kids a better education? Heres a quick note about education. Some kids just arent going to try as hard as others. This is a fact, i know, because i spent some time in public school. These kids just drag on the system. They dumb it down and slow it down for the rest of the kids. In socialism, your idea, the exact same thing would happen. Except, since everybody would have the same education, the ENTIRE population of kids would be attending a dumbed down system. I take comfort in knowing that my hard work can open doors for my children, grandchildren, and their children, assuming they also do what it takes.

Your system will NEVER work. Capitalism is the ONLY solution. For your system to work, every single person would have to care just as much as the next guy. In this country, we realized that will never happen, so we let those people fail without bringing the country down with them. If they arent going to help the greater good, then screw them! Why not reward the people who do work hard? We know how to cut our losses and get rid of weak links. Really, we dont get rid of them. Somebody has to serve me my McDonalds.

When people dont see the results of hard work, they dont work hard. Then socialism fails.

Originally Posted by imran_p

But capitalism breeds inequality, surely you can see that.

No, it doesn't. With a quality education, which is easy to obtain in this country, and a little hard work, you can change your breeding pretty quick.

Originally Posted by imran_p

In a socialist state, regardless of what family you are born into and what standing of education you receive you can do well.

Oh, yea? Some examples of the underprivileged rising to whatever it is you consider doing well?

Originally Posted by imran_p

Surely you are valuing the ability to become succesful and wealthy above the equality of all?

If we're all equal under the law, which is all anyone can hope for, yes.

Originally Posted by Half/Dreaming

Intended, your system would require way too much structure. You are talking about the government taking control of every aspect of life. It could potentially lead to this utopian society, but why would you want it?

I have actually not described what COULD be, I described what DID happen in some of the socialistic countries...
No total control required, too. Just another economical system. Total control comes from anti-propaganda. Socialism is not about destroying human rights, it's just a system of economy. Democracy, totalitarism, monarchy, tyranny, these are different things, they aren't economical systems!
See, the fruit of anti-propaganda is that you think socialism=totalitarism, or that you think communism=socialism... but it isn't true! If you repeat these things, it means you don't understand them, you're merely repeating what you've heard.
How can one have a truthful opinion of things he's been misinformed about to such a point that he says absolutely incorrect things about them?

America was semi-isolationist, and it sustained itself just fine without "stealing" from other countries. Please, explain this "robbing" that we are doing. It seems to me like our money supports the world.

I have explained, maybe you'd care to read before asking me to do it again?

Originally Posted by imran_p

Read the link explaining The Labour Theory of Value, and counter it.

Don't waste your time, I've already wasted mine and it's no good, but I have a lot of time to lose . He'll never be able to counter it, he won't understand this Marx's theory. At least I've explained many things already, and people here behave as if they haven't even read my posts... It's zombification, they read the letters but can't realize what is written. I guess it's a mechanism of defense, too: they're scared that you can turn out to be right and they wrong. But mostly it's just zombification. Well, they live in a "democratical" world where only a single truth is allowed to be thought, so it's no surprise.

Originally Posted by Moonbeam

No, it doesn't. With a quality education, which is easy to obtain in this country, and a little hard work, you can change your breeding pretty quick.

You need to get this education first, and for that you need your parents to be well off. And... quality education in capitalistic countries? That's a good joke. Well, maybe in private school where only kids of rich people can enter...
In socialism you get all opportunities if you're smart enough, without any conditions that don't depend on you.

Oh, yea? Some examples of the underprivileged rising to whatever it is you consider doing well?

A lot. Social mobility is fully working in socialism.

Originally Posted by Intended

You need to get this education first, and for that you need your parents to be well off. And... quality education in capitalistic countries? That's a good joke. Well, maybe in private school where only kids of rich people can enter...

Not true, and not a joke. Anyone can get an education if they can do the work. The universities in countries where you pay for them are far superior to those where they are free, and not just the private schools.

com = good idea

com with people in charge = almost always bad

com with A.I = if you dont screw with the A.I. is could work

Originally Posted by Moonbeam

Not true, and not a joke.

You're wrong.
I had a chance to compare. Not me personally, but people who actually went abroad to teach students at different "good" foreign universities -- and not some trifle subjects, but math, physics, etc. The difference of the quality of education is so big you can cry over it.

Anyone can get an education if they can do the work.

Normally you get education first, and then you do the work. Your current financial status shouldn't be an obstacle to getting the best education you're fit for. Otherwise many smart people will lose a chance to get best education, and many dumb people will be accepted in universities just because they had money. That's the fallacy of the educational system.

The universities in countries where you pay for them are far superior to those where they are free, and not just the private schools.

This is wrong, see above, and I'm not making that up. They're far inferiour.

Originally Posted by Intended

You're wrong.
I had a chance to compare. Not me personally, but people who actually went abroad to teach students at different "good" foreign universities -- and not some trifle subjects, but math, physics, etc. The difference of the quality of education is so big you can cry over it.


Normally you get education first, and then you do the work. Your current financial status shouldn't be an obstacle to getting the best education you're fit for. Otherwise many smart people will lose a chance to get best education, and many dumb people will be accepted in universities just because they had money. That's the fallacy of the educational system.


This is wrong, see above, and I'm not making that up. They're far inferiour.

I don't have personal experience of foreign universities either; I'm just going by things I've read comparing US universities to the free ones in European countries and China; describing over-crowded classroom and apathetic teachers in Europe, and a majority of very substandard schools in China. This is due to a lack of competition between schools for students. Also the fact that a lot of foreign students want to come to the US to study; there must be a reason for that.

I meant if you can do the school-work you can go to school. There are so many grants and loans available for people without money, if you are academically able to get into some school, you will be able to pay for it. (Yes I know the grants and subsidized loans are a form of socialism; US is a socialist country.) Believe me, this is true--anyone who isn't able to get an education in this country doesn't want one. You may not go to the best school in the country, but that won't matter later (based on a study of salaries comparing graduates of ivy league U's vs. state schools).

I'm not arguing against the fact that dumb people get accepted into good schools based on their names (W).