Capitalism or Communism? Is communism really that horrible?

[LeftofLeft]

With communism, there must always be a ruling, wealthy elite. In capitalism, there is a wealthy elite but the non elite can always move up and be wealthy. In communism, everything is "fair" while you adorn the elite that made this possible (aka a permanent 1%). Which would you prefer?

 

[regent]

Can anyone name the nations that presently practice Marxian communism or have practiced it in the past?

North Korea, Cuba, USSR, all the Eastern Bloc countries, Vietnam, China, the whole bunch in Africa ( Angola comes to mind as the first)

I would suggest that you acquaint yourself with Marx and communism by doing some scholarship. None of those countries ever practiced Marx. The closest success with Marx, might have been done here in the US, New Harmony Indiana, with Owens but it had to be backed by Owen's money. It is also possible that some religious sect had some success with communism, but no nation.

 

[BobPlumb]

Can anyone name the nations that presently practice Marxian communism or have practiced it in the past?

North Korea, Cuba, USSR, all the Eastern Bloc countries, Vietnam, China, the whole bunch in Africa ( Angola comes to mind as the first)

I would suggest that you acquaint yourself with Marx and communism by doing some scholarship. None of those countries ever practiced Marx. The closest success with Marx, might have been done here in the US, New Harmony Indiana, with Owens but it had to be backed by Owen's money. It is also possible that some religious sect had some success with communism, but no nation.

Human nature is a huge roadblock to the practice of Marxism (socialism) as it is presented in theory. That is why it is destined to failure when tried in anything other than small doses. Capitalism on the other hand conforms to human nature in that individuals act in their own self interests.

 

[daveman]

Can anyone name the nations that presently practice Marxian communism or have practiced it in the past?

North Korea, Cuba, USSR, all the Eastern Bloc countries, Vietnam, China, the whole bunch in Africa ( Angola comes to mind as the first)

I would suggest that you acquaint yourself with Marx and communism by doing some scholarship. None of those countries ever practiced Marx. The closest success with Marx, might have been done here in the US, New Harmony Indiana, with Owens but it had to be backed by Owen's money. It is also possible that some religious sect had some success with communism, but no nation.

Oh, well, then, there's no reason to try it here in the US as a whole, right?

Well, except for those whole doomed-to-failure-because-planned-economies-never-work and it-always-devolves-into-oligarchy things.

Damn history for getting in the way of the Worker's Utopia!

 

[Clementine]

For most of us, communism would mean giving up our current situations and settling for a mediocre existence. I say, "Hell, no!"

For those who have no education, no work ethic or a criminal record, communism looks pretty good. They would have more than they do now and for the same effort they put in- nothing!!

You can see that communism doesn't work unless a portion of the population are willing to give their all even though they will never advance or enjoy the fruits of their labor. They lose their drive and their will to be innovative.

If the government confiscated every penny from the people, forced us all to move into similar homes, paid for all our medical expenses so one person didn't have more obligations that another and doled out the money equally for the next year, you would still see some people advancing because many would either save their money or spend it wisely, while others would be in debt with nothing to show for it. Some would make their homes nicer while others would trash theirs.

It's about personal responsibility and effort. Hand three people each a chunk of metal and tell them to make the most of it. The lazy one sells it as a paper weight. The more sensible one uses it to make nails and makes even more money. The really smart one makes sewing needles and really makes a huge profit. Only a liberal would intervene at this point and ***** about how the needle maker should help out the paper weight guy. All were given the same exact opportunity. Get the picture? The outcome is up to the individual and those not doing so well should look to the successful for inspiration and not to government for more money.

We all have equal opportunity. Communism aims for equal outcomes, which is impossible. The best way is capitalism because it allows people to soar and make life better for everyone in the process.

We have always done our best to care for the elderly and disabled. We've always had a safety net for the downtrodden and it's a damn shame that fewer and fewer even attempt to get away from the liberal plantation.

It's always important to note that no dictators or communist leaders have ever lived the way their people are forced to do. They always engage in capitalism and live like royalty. Never ceases to amaze me how people can believe in leaders who force people to obey oppressive laws while they remain above those laws. Are people so stupid as to believe that some people are GODS and deserve to be better off than the masses or are they too scared to speak up?

 

[thanatos144]

With communism, there must always be a ruling, wealthy elite. In capitalism, there is a wealthy elite but the non elite can always move up and be wealthy. In communism, everything is "fair" while you adorn the elite that made this possible (aka a permanent 1%). Which would you prefer?

The thing is that communists always think they will be the %1

tapatalk post

 

[JakeStarkey]

Communism and Libertarianism are opposite sides of the same coin minted with the slogans "1%" and "we have our" on either side.

Communists rule by cadres, Libertarians by the strongest among equals, the 1% of each society.

 

[ScienceRocks]

Two extremes that we should stay way from...

A good government should regulate and allow a fair market

 

[ScienceRocks]

With communism, there must always be a ruling, wealthy elite. In capitalism, there is a wealthy elite but the non elite can always move up and be wealthy. In communism, everything is "fair" while you adorn the elite that made this possible (aka a permanent 1%). Which would you prefer?

The thing I'd is that communists always think they will be the %1

tapatalk post

Libertarianism is all about A FEW powerful corporations controlling the production. Communism is the opposite with no freedom for people to do anything without the government...

 

[thanatos144]

With communism, there must always be a ruling, wealthy elite. In capitalism, there is a wealthy elite but the non elite can always move up and be wealthy. In communism, everything is "fair" while you adorn the elite that made this possible (aka a permanent 1%). Which would you prefer?

The thing I'd is that communists always think they will be the %1

tapatalk post

Libertarianism is all about A FEW powerful corporations controlling the production. Communism is the opposite with no freedom for people to do anything without the government...

Libertarians are pot smoking hippies not corporate trolls that again is a democrat trait

tapatalk post

 

[Indeependent]

No nation has ever practiced Communism and any witless attempt to dismiss such a fact is exactly that.
Totalitarianism and Authoritarianism are NOT Communism.

 

[Clementine]

No nation has ever practiced Communism and any witless attempt to dismiss such a fact is exactly that.
Totalitarianism and Authoritarianism are NOT Communism.

They tried to force communism on people and only a cruel dictator would do that. They are the ones who would be happy if all the little people could be manipulated however they see fit. If people in this country want communism, they can follow the method of Charles Manson and invite all their friends to live together, share responsibilities and be totally equal. They can skip the killing part.

There are people living in communes and maybe they are happy. It's their choice to live that way and their choice to leave.

Call things whatever you want, but when a tyrant has power and they abuse it, we all lose.

 

[Indeependent]

No nation has ever practiced Communism and any witless attempt to dismiss such a fact is exactly that.
Totalitarianism and Authoritarianism are NOT Communism.

They tried to force communism on people and only a cruel dictator would do that. They are the ones who would be happy if all the little people could be manipulated however they see fit. If people in this country want communism, they can follow the method of Charles Manson and invite all their friends to live together, share responsibilities and be totally equal. They can skip the killing part.

There are people living in communes and maybe they are happy. It's their choice to live that way and their choice to leave.

Call things whatever you want, but when a tyrant has power and they abuse it, we all lose.

When one person or organization forces those outside the circle to give their utmost and take a pittance, it is NEVER intended to be Communism.

I agree that the odds of ANYONE really wanting pure Communism is somewhere near 0%.

 

[thanatos144]

No nation has ever practiced Communism and any witless attempt to dismiss such a fact is exactly that.
Totalitarianism and Authoritarianism are NOT Communism.

Never dawns on your stupid ass that they are all the same ******* thing?

 

[Contumacious]

No nation has ever practiced Communism and any witless attempt to dismiss such a fact is exactly that.
Totalitarianism and Authoritarianism are NOT Communism.

If the state OWNS the means of production then you have communism.

If they REGULATE the means of production you have fascism.


.

 

[thanatos144]

No nation has ever practiced Communism and any witless attempt to dismiss such a fact is exactly that.
Totalitarianism and Authoritarianism are NOT Communism.

If the state OWNS the means of production then you have communism.

If they REGULATE the means of production you have fascism.


.

All of which is socialism

 

[Contumacious]

No nation has ever practiced Communism and any witless attempt to dismiss such a fact is exactly that.
Totalitarianism and Authoritarianism are NOT Communism.

If the state OWNS the means of production then you have communism.

If they REGULATE the means of production you have fascism.


.

All of which is socialism

That is correct, fascism is an offshoot of socialism

In The Communist Manifesto , Karl Mark suggests that power and capital be wrested from the Capitalist by degree.


//

 

[bripat9643]

No nation has ever practiced Communism and any witless attempt to dismiss such a fact is exactly that.
Totalitarianism and Authoritarianism are NOT Communism.

They tried to force communism on people and only a cruel dictator would do that. They are the ones who would be happy if all the little people could be manipulated however they see fit. If people in this country want communism, they can follow the method of Charles Manson and invite all their friends to live together, share responsibilities and be totally equal. They can skip the killing part.

There are people living in communes and maybe they are happy. It's their choice to live that way and their choice to leave.

Call things whatever you want, but when a tyrant has power and they abuse it, we all lose.

When one person or organization forces those outside the circle to give their utmost and take a pittance, it is NEVER intended to be Communism.

I agree that the odds of ANYONE really wanting pure Communism is somewhere near 0%.

Oh Puhleeze. the Soviets tried their damnedest to implement Communism. So did the Chinese, the Cambodians, the Vietnamese, the Cubans and yada, yada, yada. The fact that they didn't succeed doesn't mean communism isn't really bad. They didn't succeed because communism is a logical contradiction. However, it's a great ideology for imposing totalitarian dictatorships. That's why people who spout communist ideology should be feared.

 

[regent]

If the state OWNS the means of production then you have communism.

If they REGULATE the means of production you have fascism.


.

All of which is socialism

That is correct, fascism is an offshoot of socialism

In The Communist Manifesto , Karl Mark suggests that power and capital be wrested from the Capitalist by degree.


//

Originally Marx said nations would go communistic because of dialectical materialism, but nations did not. An interesting essay question in a comparative economic systems class would be why didn't nations follow the Marxian dialectical materialistic route?

 

[Contumacious]

All of which is socialism

That is correct, fascism is an offshoot of socialism

In The Communist Manifesto , Karl Mark suggests that power and capital be wrested from the Capitalist by degree.


//

Originally Marx said nations would go communistic because of dialectical materialism, but nations did not. An interesting essay question in a comparative economic systems class would be why didn't nations follow the Marxian dialectical materialistic route?

The whole concept is anti-human hence pure nonsense.