Capitalism or Communism? Is communism really that horrible?

[The T]

What tenet of communisim is it that supports a dictator and the oppresion of the people?

The tenant of history where it happened, like it? MOVE THERE.

When did it happen?

Have a search function? USE IT. Stop asking incipid crap you know to be true.

 

[The T]

What tenet of communisim is it that supports a dictator and the oppresion of the people?

Ask the millions that died at the hands of tyrants that thorough no fault of thier own were deemed 'enemies of the state' and disappeared?

and you find 'tyrants' where in the tenets of communism?

Communism is not unfettered Liberty. Deal with it Commie.

 

[Nic_Driver]

Before Rhodesia became Zimbabwe, it was the bread basket of Africa. The people were well fed, well educated and pretty happy.

Then a socialist took over at the urging of the UN and the radical chic douche-nozzles in New Yawk.

SLIME, er, er, Time mag/rag even did a BIG article on him. It was on the Front Cover titled: "Mugabe: A Practical Marxist"

Many years ago.

Now? Now the people of Zimbabwe are literally starving to death. They're Inflation Rate was literally 1,000,000,000,000%. Literally. I'm not being a prick. literally over One Trillion percent.

And unemployment was over 85%.

I could post pictures of the starving people in Zimbabwe, but what would be the point?

Seriously. Our Board libtards would make some excuse or another. Or, more likely, a lot of excuses.

Just like they make excuses for Hitler, "The very man who name the Party 'National socialist German Workers Party' wasn't really a socialist. He was faking you guys out".

Or that the USSR and their communist murders -- It wasn't really the fault of communism. Or....

Think what you will. This is why you can't trust socialists (aka; democrats) with ANYTHING.

These are seriously stupid people, folks.

socialism, communism, fascism -- Whatever, has a 100% FAIL rate.

And these idiots want to try it again?

If I were in charge, I'd give them some land and build a giant wall around it. Shoot ANYBODY that tries to get back into the US. No mercy.

They'd all be dead, they'd all starve to death in a couple generations.

KIL, KILL, KILL!...the mantra of the right.

Apparently ignorance really does breeds comtempt.

And the lefty idiots heroes are stalin, castro, soros, and the socialist failed leaders of the past.

No their not, this is just more ignorance.

You and the other right-wing warmongers make too many blanket over-generalizations to be taken seriously. You make the statement "Obama is bad" but when pressed for examples you start using words you obviously don't even understand like communism.

 

[Nic_Driver]

Ask the millions that died at the hands of tyrants that thorough no fault of thier own were deemed 'enemies of the state' and disappeared?

and you find 'tyrants' where in the tenets of communism?

Communism is not unfettered Liberty. Deal with it Commie.

Is that the best answer you can come up with?

Really?

Wow...too bad you can't even answer such a simple question but still have such strong beliefs.

 

[Nic_Driver]

The tenant of history where it happened, like it? MOVE THERE.

When did it happen?

Have a search function? USE IT. Stop asking incipid crap you know to be true.

I made the claim that there hasn't been a communist government in history.

You said there has been.

Whomever makes the positive assertion bears the burden of proof so I'll wait for you to link to an actual communist government before your point can be considered.

 

[The T]

KIL, KILL, KILL!...the mantra of the right.

Apparently ignorance really does breeds comtempt.

And the lefty idiots heroes are stalin, castro, soros, and the socialist failed leaders of the past.

No their not, this is just more ignorance.

You and the other right-wing warmongers make too many blanket over-generalizations to be taken seriously. You make the statement "Obama is bad" but when pressed for examples you start using words you obviously don't even understand like communism.

Case Study:
Stalin's Purges

BACKGROUND: 100 million deaths under communism

Communism doesn't work. Human nature will never allow it as it's designed.

Communism is an anethma to Liberty.

 

[The T]

When did it happen?

Have a search function? USE IT. Stop asking incipid crap you know to be true.

I made the claim that there hasn't been a communist government in history.

You said there has been.

Whomever makes the positive assertion bears the burden of proof so I'll wait for you to link to an actual communist government before your point can be considered.

Communism can't work. Human nature won't allow it.

 

[Dick Tuck]

I think doctors and hospitals would identify the illness and not Publice Health Service.

Yeah right. Doctors and hospitals are now trained epidemiologists, and would devote the time and money to identify the source of e-coli outbreaks. In your dreams.

 

[Katiegrrl0]

Yes look at Jonestown. It is an excellent example of how socialism can work in a small setting. In a small setting the governing body does not get hungry for power like in big settings. In small settings it is always safe.

Jonestown was not Communist or Socialist. It was a community based on some strange religious belief. The problem with debate on a topic like this as the examples people chose to use never fit the comparison. Many aboriginal tribes and the Native Americans are the prime examples. Of small community working in a Socialistic or Communistic nature. They provided for that tribe. They made clothes and grew crops and hunted. This was for provisioning for their own.
The setting you have chosen was driven by a totally different motive and does not fit. Waco would be a similar example to what you suggest and this was not at all like the comparisons I have used.
As I said on a large scale it would be very difficult to maintain as it would lack innovative incentive.
There are communities as i stated all over the world and they work within the confines of the larger nation state. They can be self-sufficient in many ways, providing food, clothing, schooling, and power. Some even have outside business interests where extra food and other manner of things are bartered or sold. These have existed for many years.

And what would happen to members of the said tribe if they did not do their part?

Well the general rule of thumb in a Socialist society is that if you do not work you do not eat. Elderly would be cared for as would those disabled and could not do a days work. That is actually the way a Socialistic society should work. In the community setting I am speaking of people would be there because they chose this for them self. So it would be hard to imagine someone not doing their part to make things work.
Socialism is not at all a welfare state. There would be no handouts for those who chose not to participate in the community. Many in the US believe that Socialism represents welfare to those that don't work by choice.

 

[Dick Tuck]

Capitalism or communism? Are those our only choices?: God help us! Either a system of organized greed with a systematically-underperforming economy and widespread poverty, or one that aims for an anarchistic utopia where everyone shares, devoid of natural human motivation, putting lead weights on anything fun between here and there. The ruthlessly horrible or the reality-challenged.

What's behind Door No. 3?

What virtually all first world economies have found to work, i.e. mixed economies. Most things are best done by the private sector, but others can only be seriously addressed by government. Most of Western Europe has found that 60-40 mix works for them, and (if you add up all local, state, and federal services and taxes), we're closer to a 67-33 mix.

Yes that has worked well hasn't it? I think America was a great nation. In fact America was the greatest nation on the planet. It is the attempt to go to a mix that is killing this nation.

It worked better than the two extremes under discussion. We're much greater now than we were 140 years ago, when were closest to laissez-faire. Those were the days when corporations and trusts owned the government. Many dogmatic goofballs think that was a good thing, and the people prospered.

 

[Nic_Driver]

And the lefty idiots heroes are stalin, castro, soros, and the socialist failed leaders of the past.

No their not, this is just more ignorance.

You and the other right-wing warmongers make too many blanket over-generalizations to be taken seriously. You make the statement "Obama is bad" but when pressed for examples you start using words you obviously don't even understand like communism.

Case Study:
Stalin's Purges

BACKGROUND: 100 million deaths under communism

Communism doesn't work. Human nature will never allow it as it's designed.

Communism is an anethma to Liberty.

Ok, so tyrants and dictators are bad, we agree.

What does that have to do with communism?

 

[Dick Tuck]

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.

Is that because the socialist don’t want to be associated with Hitler so people don’t realize when you give government power anything can happen?

What a poor understanding of history. Once Hitler used the SA to achieve power, he purged them and disbanded them, assassinating most of their leadership. The SA were then replaced by the SS, Hitler's Storm Troopers.

 

[The T]

No their not, this is just more ignorance.

You and the other right-wing warmongers make too many blanket over-generalizations to be taken seriously. You make the statement "Obama is bad" but when pressed for examples you start using words you obviously don't even understand like communism.

Case Study:
Stalin's Purges

BACKGROUND: 100 million deaths under communism

Communism doesn't work. Human nature will never allow it as it's designed.

Communism is an anethma to Liberty.

Ok, so tyrants and dictators are bad, we agree.

What does that have to do with communism?

Again? Communism cannot work dure to Human nature.

In a nutshell?

1. classless political system: the political theory or system in which all property and wealth is owned in a classless society by all the members of that society

That is until those running the system think themselves higher class and deserve mor share of the pot of resoucres than everyone else in the society.

It doesn't work. There's no incentive to srtive for excellence other than becoming one of the oppressors.

Oh, and uhmm? I forgot to mention? Until someone else thinks themselves better than YOU, and you disappear in the middle of the night never to be seen again.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Ideal communism, Most or all communism is corrupted. And i dont belive ideal capitalism exist either.

There's no such thing as "ideal" anything, for the simple reason that any system that involves human beings CAN'T be ideal.

 

[Dick Tuck]

Yes look at Jonestown. It is an excellent example of how socialism can work in a small setting. In a small setting the governing body does not get hungry for power like in big settings. In small settings it is always safe.

Jonestown was not Communist or Socialist. It was a community based on some strange religious belief. The problem with debate on a topic like this as the examples people chose to use never fit the comparison. Many aboriginal tribes and the Native Americans are the prime examples. Of small community working in a Socialistic or Communistic nature. They provided for that tribe. They made clothes and grew crops and hunted. This was for provisioning for their own.
The setting you have chosen was driven by a totally different motive and does not fit. Waco would be a similar example to what you suggest and this was not at all like the comparisons I have used.
As I said on a large scale it would be very difficult to maintain as it would lack innovative incentive.
There are communities as i stated all over the world and they work within the confines of the larger nation state. They can be self-sufficient in many ways, providing food, clothing, schooling, and power. Some even have outside business interests where extra food and other manner of things are bartered or sold. These have existed for many years.

And what would happen to members of the said tribe if they did not do their part?

Banishment is the ultimate punishment for those who didn't follow the tribal rules. Most cases were solved by ostracism. But the tribe took care of the elderly, disabled, widows, and orphans.

 

[The T]

Ideal communism, Most or all communism is corrupted. And i dont belive ideal capitalism exist either.

There's no such thing as "ideal" anything, for the simple reason that any system that involves human beings CAN'T be ideal.

Indeed. Statists would have to admit that the individual human does exist, and they can't deal with that fact.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Going into this i would like to say that i am more on the capitalist end of the spectrum. Though going into this i am generally capitalist knowing the pros and cons of them both may change your own mind. Even though communism was originally a social thing it has also found itself as a government with one man in control. So lets try and picture it with a U.S or near that style democracy.
In essence capitalism is smaller government and communism is huge government. Now before your western instincts tell you to instantly choose capitalism think of the benefits of huge government control in your life.
In communism ideal/original communism everyone is equal. Though it almost never happens that a nation goes completely on the guidelines of a known social policy. Everyone is equal and therefore have the same things to live on and lean on their whole lives. Everyone once again must be equal in society and as a result you lose the right to earn. So in exchange for a lifetime safety net given by the government you give up the ability to earn your way up the ladder. This is because only one social class exist and that is common working class. So you have nothing to look foward to besides that life forever.
It is up to you to decide whether that is a bad or a good thing for you. As a result of this innovation potential is silenced. So is a lifelong safety net really worth losing earning rights and silencing so much potential for innovation?
Now knowing the main gains and losses of communism lets talk about capitalism.
Essentially capitalism is the exact opposite of communism in its original and purest form. In ideal/original capitalism they're is pretty much no government interference in your life. Of course they still have laws as any other nation but if you follow them you are left alone for all of your life. Capitalism is that sweet freedom you taste, love and learn about. In ideal capitalism you can go out and earn it all. You can dream big and dream about the journey there. You can be a bigshot nobody will ever forget. But with that ability to dream big and earn it all you lose that security you had with communism. And if someone earns too much capital they can decide to make everyone else work for dirt cheap money if they choose. They can dominate or without a law from it a monopoly can occur. And if you fail you have nothing to fall back on unless a generous citizen with decent capital decides to help you up.
So is the freedom of capitalism worth the possibility of ending up with nothing?
In conclusion i would like to share my opinion. I belive the risk involved with capitalism is worth the big dreams and potential unlocked that comes with it. People have bigger things to live for and more fuel to live on. Because "the dream" actually exist. In addition to the fact that the world/nation could innovate so much faster.
I would like for you to build an opinion of your own and for you to give me your feedback and for you to discuss amongst youselves.

Ask the victims of Mao, Lenin, Stalin, Kim Il-Sung, Kim Jong-Il, Pol Pot, Castro etc that question...

Yes, communism is really that horrible...

I mean in its original form. Like i said, Picture it with democracy, Of course we all know modern communism is absolutely horrible and victimizing. I wouldnt dream of that any day.

What is this "original form" you keep talking about? You sound like you think there has, at some point in history, been an experiment in communism that DIDN'T end up that way, and if so, I'd like to know when that was.

 

[Cecilie1200]

There's a reason that first world countries have ALL chosen mixed economies. Neither extreme is workable, and neither does a real service to the masses.

OE: This post receive a neg rep by Diamond Dave

Actually, that reason would be because every civilized country in the world has a share of spoiled, halfwitted dipshits who push for communist goals out of their own ignorance and hubris. (Take a bow, Sparky, because I most certainly am referring to you and those like you.)

 

[Katiegrrl0]

Case Study:
Stalin's Purges

BACKGROUND: 100 million deaths under communism

Communism doesn't work. Human nature will never allow it as it's designed.

Communism is an anethma to Liberty.

Ok, so tyrants and dictators are bad, we agree.

What does that have to do with communism?

Again? Communism cannot work dure to Human nature.

In a nutshell?

1. classless political system: the political theory or system in which all property and wealth is owned in a classless society by all the members of that society

That is until those running the system think themselves higher class and deserve mor share of the pot of resoucres than everyone else in the society.

It doesn't work. There's no incentive to srtive for excellence other than becoming one of the oppressors.

Oh, and uhmm? I forgot to mention? Until someone else thinks themselves better than YOU, and you disappear in the middle of the night never to be seen again.

I have pointed out that it does work but only on a small scale. The largest similar type governments were aboriginal and Native American tribes. On a large scale you are correct in trying to get the masses to be total equals would be a hard concept for many to follow.
The problem is there is nothing recent that gives a track record of a purely Socialist of Communistic society available.
They have never been tried. The CCCP was Totalitarian Stalinism and run with an iron hand. China under Mao was the same. Both of these governments had to control the people as they did because the hold on power was weak. There was a great deal of fear at the top. These government designs were forced on the people.
In a true society the governance would never be as tight fisted.
It would be one of participation and unity. This is why the small scale communities can survive and flourish but I would question whether a large society could do this without being controlling to a degree.

 

[The T]

Jonestown was not Communist or Socialist. It was a community based on some strange religious belief. The problem with debate on a topic like this as the examples people chose to use never fit the comparison. Many aboriginal tribes and the Native Americans are the prime examples. Of small community working in a Socialistic or Communistic nature. They provided for that tribe. They made clothes and grew crops and hunted. This was for provisioning for their own.
The setting you have chosen was driven by a totally different motive and does not fit. Waco would be a similar example to what you suggest and this was not at all like the comparisons I have used.
As I said on a large scale it would be very difficult to maintain as it would lack innovative incentive.
There are communities as i stated all over the world and they work within the confines of the larger nation state. They can be self-sufficient in many ways, providing food, clothing, schooling, and power. Some even have outside business interests where extra food and other manner of things are bartered or sold. These have existed for many years.

And what would happen to members of the said tribe if they did not do their part?

Banishment is the ultimate punishment for those who didn't follow the tribal rules. Most cases were solved by ostracism. But the tribe took care of the elderly, disabled, widows, and orphans.

And at one time? OUR Society did that unfettered...it was called Private Charity...WHY did government take on that role when it is NO WHERE to be found in the Constitution?