Capitalism or Communism? Is communism really that horrible?

[TakeAStepBack]

The U.S. Constitution defines a political system, not an economic system. It has nothing to do with capitalism or communism one way or the other. Funny how people can't seem to understand this distinction.

wrongo.....you can't have communism under our Constitution....unless you bastardize the Constitution.....(like the lefties are trying to do)

Correct, Eagle! The constitution is designed to allow for true capitalism in its most unperverted state (with a few exceptions) to keep govt power in complete check and allow the people to run their own lives (a true free market) by creating a rule of laws, rights and liberties to be followed to meet this end for everyone.

Unfortunately, the course of time will always create authoritarian thinkers who would prefer to centrally plan the lives of the people, based on how these thinkers believe it should be. That's where the perversions have occurred and continue to occur.

 

[Katzndogz]

You could ask people who live in communist countries what they think? Valdimir Putin once told obama communism doesn't work, Russia knows it.

What we are left with is that communists who live in capitalist countries and have never lived under communisim think that communism workd.

 

[Dragon]

The U.S. Constitution defines a political system, not an economic system. It has nothing to do with capitalism or communism one way or the other. Funny how people can't seem to understand this distinction.

wrongo.....you can't have communism under our Constitution....unless you bastardize the Constitution.....(like the lefties are trying to do)

You can't have communism under any constitution, first because anarchy is a prerequisite and secondly because it's impossible anyway.

You can, however, have socialism under the U.S. constitution. If you think otherwise, tell us what provisions in that document would foreclose it? Even assuming (which I don't) that it's outside the federal government's enumerated powers, there's still nothing to stop it being done at the state level.

 

[Mr.Nick]

Correct! However, communism is the direct of government to centrally control ALL of the means and ends of production, most notably through force.

Communism, properly so called, is anarchistic. It has no government; it's the end-stage of Marxist theory in which the state has withered away. You're thinking of Marxist-Leninist socialism, which (supposedly) would lead to communism.

Of course, a communist economy in a civilized context is totally impossible, at least as much so as a perfect free market, which is why I say both these economic philosophies are reality-challenged, ivory-tower stuff without practical validity.

Communism is authoritarian...

Karl Marx was an anarchist and socialism is an economic model.

Interestingly enough it takes authoritarian methods to employ socialism - hence communism.

 

[TakeAStepBack]

Correct! However, communism is the direct of government to centrally control ALL of the means and ends of production, most notably through force.

Communism, properly so called, is anarchistic. It has no government; it's the end-stage of Marxist theory in which the state has withered away. You're thinking of Marxist-Leninist socialism, which (supposedly) would lead to communism.

Of course, a communist economy in a civilized context is totally impossible, at least as much so as a perfect free market, which is why I say both these economic philosophies are reality-challenged, ivory-tower stuff without practical validity.

A perfect free market? Nothing in this world is perfect except perhaps nature. However, a free market did occur and it ran quite well from around 1870 - 1907-ish (give or take).

 

[Mr.Nick]

Karl Marx was the most psuedo of psuedo intellectuals that has disgraced the surface of the Earth with his presence.

He extols the virtues of socialism, he tells us that we should be more giving, more willing to share, he tells us we need to change our social, political and economic systems because -- Tehy're not fair.

But nowhere does he tell us how to run such a system once we kill everybody we don't like. Which seems to be about the only thing communists, socialists, fascists (whatever), et al are good at.

What gets me is how can the people of today, in an educated society, in an informed society, WILLINGLY wish for a dictatorship?!?!?!

That's what true socialism MUST be for it to work. An absolutist, statist, totalitarian dictatorship.

And OBTW, Hitler was a socialist, not a Fascist. Mussolini was a Fascist. As was Franco. And probably Pinochet.

But Hitler was a socialist. Period. End of debate.

Have you ever actually read Marx?

Economic Manuscripts: Capital: Volume One

Before criticizing, one should have knowledge of WHAT they are criticizing.

Ohhh yes. I've read Marx. And Bauer,and all the rest of them.

You wanna talk about boring? You wanna talk about circular stupidity at its finest?

Here's one for you, if you haven't already read it. It was practically the Bible for all good Marxists back in the day.

It's still EXTREMELY applicable today. I recommend it even though it was by a Marxist for Marxists.

The Two Souls of Socialism

(1966)

You ever read about Li Da and Chinese Marxism??

Li Da was Mao before Mao..

 

[Dragon]

A perfect free market? Nothing in this world is perfect except perhaps nature. However, a free market did occur and it ran quite well from around 1870 - 1907-ish (give or take).

So you think a free market is compatible with railroad and mining subsidies, government-approved monopolies, competition-busting corporate laws, high tariffs, and state-approved private violence (and sometimes direct state violence) against striking workers?

That's an unusual concept of the free market. I don't think I've heard that one before.

 

[Uncensored2008]

the Constitution of the United States....!

American exceptionalism is why we are No.1 in the world....in many, many ways....

But Obama says there is no American exceptionalism, that America is no more important than Zimbabwe?

The specific term "American exceptionalism" was first used in 1929 by Soviet leader Joseph Stalin chastising members of the Lovestone-led faction of the American Communist Party for the heretical, according to Stalin, belief that America was independent of the Marxist laws of history "thanks to its natural resources, industrial capacity, and absence of rigid class distinctions."

American exceptionalism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[/QUOTE]

I wonder what Uncle Joe would have thought of our Dear Leader?

 

[Avatar4321]

The U.S. Constitution defines a political system, not an economic system. It has nothing to do with capitalism or communism one way or the other. Funny how people can't seem to understand this distinction.

wrongo.....you can't have communism under our Constitution....unless you bastardize the Constitution.....(like the lefties are trying to do)

You can't have communism under any constitution, first because anarchy is a prerequisite and secondly because it's impossible anyway.

You can, however, have socialism under the U.S. constitution. If you think otherwise, tell us what provisions in that document would foreclose it? Even assuming (which I don't) that it's outside the federal government's enumerated powers, there's still nothing to stop it being done at the state level.

So basically, your asking if socialism is incompatible with the republican form of government? (and im not talking about the Republican party here).

Im not really sure it is. Forced redistribution, whether in the form of communism or socialism is nothing but robbery. I dont think it's compatible with a Republic.

 

[TakeAStepBack]

No, I do not. I also just got through saying nothing is perfect. That time period also gave the world the largest increases in the standard of living we've ever seen across the board. So while it was not fault free, it worked far better than what people today like to call capitalism and free market enterprise.

 

[Mr.Nick]

You could ask people who live in communist countries what they think? Valdimir Putin once told obama communism doesn't work, Russia knows it.

What we are left with is that communists who live in capitalist countries and have never lived under communisim think that communism workd.

The idea of self sustenance in a collective fashion is loony at best...Not to mention I don't believe any nation would have any benefit from the US flipping socialist/communist.

Hell, even China (albeit still authoritarian) has become more capitalist than ever..

Even the communists know socialism is an epic failure...

 

[Uncensored2008]

Ohhh yes. I've read Marx. And Bauer,and all the rest of them.

You wanna talk about boring? You wanna talk about circular stupidity at its finest?

Here's one for you, if you haven't already read it. It was practically the Bible for all good Marxists back in the day.

It's still EXTREMELY applicable today. I recommend it even though it was by a Marxist for Marxists.

The Two Souls of Socialism

(1966)

Thanks, no I have not read that. The first few pages are just Marxist whining about how misunderstood they are - could have been written by Dragon...

 

[bripat9643]

Hitler wasn't a socialist, but he played one on TV.

The Nazi party initially did have socialist elements in its platform and there were a fair number of Nazis (most of them Party members before Hitler joined) who took that seriously. To find out what happened to them after Hitler assumed emergency powers in 1933, look up the "Night of the Long Knives."

After that, the Nazi party was socialist in name only.

The Night of the Long Knives was where Hitler eliminated a threat to his power. Hitler eliminated Ernst Roehm and the Brown Shirts because they were getting too big for their britches and started thinking they were going to run things. It had nothing to do with their views on socialism.

Once again, the liberal view of history is based entirely on a fictional understanding of the facts.

Not very credible for someone who claims his opinions are "fact based."

The Nazi Party was socialist to the end.

 

[Edgetho]

One of the great American writers of all time wrote an article 12 years ago about this for Harper Magazine.

It didn't get a lot of play because it's not what the elitist snobs on the left and in the FILTH of the LSM want to hear.

But if you haven't read this, then you're way behind in the discussion --

IN THE LAND OF THE ROCOCO MARXISTS

Why no one is celebrating the Second American Century

by Tom Wolfe

 

[TakeAStepBack]

The most damning book Ive ever read oon Socialism was written by Ludwig von Mises.

Socialism: An Economic and Sociological Analysis

He pretty much body slams the entire concept right through th efloor. Good read.

 

[francoHFW]

Socialism is always democratic, nationalizes only indusries that are necessities, where profit should not be the motive, like health care and energy- water, the military are already gov't run. Holland, Switz, and the USA have mainly private insurance for health care, except for the poor- only the USA has a stupid, cruel, incredible expensive, corrupt insurance system, thanks to greedy pubs and moron dupes. Real communism has never been tried, is impossible given human nature...

 

[ScreamingEagle]

The U.S. Constitution defines a political system, not an economic system. It has nothing to do with capitalism or communism one way or the other. Funny how people can't seem to understand this distinction.

wrongo.....you can't have communism under our Constitution....unless you bastardize the Constitution.....(like the lefties are trying to do)

You can't have communism under any constitution, first because anarchy is a prerequisite and secondly because it's impossible anyway.

agreed...(unless they bastardize that constitution)

You can, however, have socialism under the U.S. constitution. If you think otherwise, tell us what provisions in that document would foreclose it?

this very question is pretty much being voted on right now by our Supreme Court Justices....the very fact that the question got this far tells you how much the lefties have made inroads....

Even assuming (which I don't) that it's outside the federal government's enumerated powers, there's still nothing to stop it being done at the state level.

states rights.....per the Constitution....

.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Communism, properly so called, is anarchistic.

That's like saying that Christianity, properly so called, is heaven.

It has no government; it's the end-stage of Marxist theory in which the state has withered away. You're thinking of Marxist-Leninist socialism, which (supposedly) would lead to communism.

Marxism is the only communism possible in this world. The dictatorship of the proletariat.

Of course, a communist economy in a civilized context is totally impossible, at least as much so as a perfect free market, which is why I say both these economic philosophies are reality-challenged, ivory-tower stuff without practical validity.

Your attempt to create equity is a logical fallacy.

That communism cannot work is not evidence that a free market cannot exist.

I agree that there will always be men with a lust for power who will seek to subvert the market for their own ends, but a free market exists with every swap meet and yard sale that springs up, on Craigslist and among free peoples on message boards.

Free markets are the natural state of economics.

 

[Dragon]

The most damning book Ive ever read oon Socialism was written by Ludwig von Mises.

That would only be true if one were to take von Mises seriously, which no one who understands economics would ever do. Even Marx makes more sense than von Mises.

 

[francoHFW]

Hitler wasn't a socialist, but he played one on TV.

The Nazi party initially did have socialist elements in its platform and there were a fair number of Nazis (most of them Party members before Hitler joined) who took that seriously. To find out what happened to them after Hitler assumed emergency powers in 1933, look up the "Night of the Long Knives."

After that, the Nazi party was socialist in name only.

The Night of the Long Knives was where Hitler eliminated a threat to his power. Hitler eliminated Ernst Roehm and the Brown Shirts because they were getting too big for their britches and started thinking they were going to run things. It had nothing to do with their views on socialism.

Once again, the liberal view of history is based entirely on a fictional understanding of the facts.

Not very credible for someone who claims his opinions are "fact based."

The Nazi Party was socialist to the end.

Roehm, etc, absolutely right. After, total idiocy. The "socialist" in "National Socialist" was pure propaganda, socialists were the first in the concentration camps. Read a history book.