What about it? The only thing I can think of saying is that thus far it seems to have failed when attempted. I think that it is useful in small societies only.
Name:
Anonymous2004-12-29 12:32
I wish it would succeed, but it seems man is too greedy for it to work.
Name:
Anonymous2004-12-29 19:47
Communism - join the party
Name:
les aptt2004-12-30 2:44
Two of the central tenents of Communism are absolutely dead on true:
1. All wars are economic.
2. Religion is the opiate of the people.
Name:
FLcracker2004-12-30 9:10
Two points:
1. Human nature will not allow true communism to prevail because the Theory (and that's all Communism is)provides no basis for human initiative or individual progress and/or responsibility. Some call it "greed".
2. Everything (including war) is economic. If you understand supply and demand you realize this.
Name:
Kay2004-12-30 14:55
It's so stupid, I cannot tell in half an hour, but:
1. Not all wars are economic, but many included this factor.
2. But religion is.. ^_~
and
3. Some animals are more equal than the others.
Anarcho-communism is a good idea, but Marxism really isn't. Marx was on the right track, but he made a terrible mistake in advocating a dictatorship of the proletariat. It didn't help that Stalin and to a lesser extent Lenin were quite corrupt and ruined the revolution rather quickly, either. That more or less killed socialism, but then Mao had to make the situation even worse with some spectacular incompetence, like his Cultural Revolution.
The problem with communism isn't that it itself is flawed, but that the most widely used pathway, Marxism, is flawed. Communism itself would work if it were done through anarchist means, organized from the bottom up by willing participants. It is unlikely now for people to attempt it as the capitalists have every advantage.
"Human nature will not allow true communism to prevail because the Theory (and that's all Communism is)provides no basis for human initiative or individual progress and/or responsibility. Some call it 'greed'."
You should read more about communism, particularly anarcho-communism. Alexander Berkman and Peter Kropotkin wrote books about it and explained how the economics would work and the incentive to work would be. Modern anarchists (who are mostly also communist) generally argue that work in the conventional sense can be abolished or greatly minimized.
Name:
Random Anonymous Fucktard2004-12-30 21:52
My political tendency is toward anarchy, but I highly doubt any such system could ever develop. We'll never know until we try it, but unless humanity somehow beats their baser instincts it's probably impossible. Power fills a vacuum.
Look at all social creatures. A heirarchy is obvious in every one. We're no exception.
Name:
Anonymous2004-12-30 22:27
5> No, television is the opiate of the people.
Name:
les aptt2004-12-31 5:51
>>7
But without an economic gain there is no victory.
>>12
For the moment both are correct. As is the "blend".
Name:
Anonymous2004-12-31 7:31
lol America
Name:
Anonymous2004-12-31 9:23
Stalin and Mao ruined everything. If I say I'm an anarcho-communist where I live they would stone me. Too many people do not understand the thoughts behind anarchism.
Name:
Kay2004-12-31 11:41
>>10
Not everything that is told in books is correct. Maybe it's not too bad to read it, but most peeps have "better" things to do. >>15
Then, why don't you explain?
Name:
K_x_uksami2004-12-31 11:41
"Stalin and Mao ruined everything. If I say I'm an anarcho-communist where I live they would stone me. Too many people do not understand the thoughts behind anarchism."
Exactly. It's sad how many misconceptions (some of them deliberate?) there are about anarchism and communism. People seem to have a great deal of trouble seeing outside the conventional political spectrum. At times, I almost wonder whether Stalin was deliberately trying to make communism look bad.
Name:
Anonymous2004-12-31 13:56
It's sad how many misconceptions (some of them deliberate?) there are about fascism and national socialism. People seem to have a great deal of trouble seeing outside the conventional political spectrum. At times, I almost wonder whether Hitler was deliberately trying to make national socialism look bad.
Name:
Anonymous2004-12-31 19:34
>>18 I almost wonder whether Hitler was deliberately trying to make national socialism look bad.
oh.... so that was his goal....
not avenging the honor of the fatherland from the humiliating defeat in the first world war
what better way to prove yourself strongest than to take over the world
the concepts of pride, loyalty and duty are huge in the germanic psyche
*sigh* Let me elighten you on that: there has not been any nation, or state, in this entire world that, at any time during history, has incorporated the principles of communism entirely into it's governmental system.
Russia didn't, China didn't...the only state that has come anywhere near the way communism as an ideology is aimed is Cuba, but their attempt at realizing it was stopped by the sanctions put up by their neighbors in the north, the US.
The reason communism has failed the way it has, when attempts have been made to incorporate it, is the human psyche. To be able to use communism as a governmental measure, one has to ensure that the populace, and infrastructure, of the relevant state is willing to accept that all humans will be equal.
Also, you have to have a leader that will enforce those principles, and make sure all resources and good are divided equally. However, power is corrupting, and thus, we have the reason communism will never be a reality: no such man, or woman, existst. Sooner or later, a totaliterian leader will grasp a bigger share of the communal loot that the others, and the it's done.
However, please do not say that the terror and injustice we saw during the reign of the Soviet Union, or the cultural revolution in China was communism. That would be nothing short of a lie.
Name:
Anonymous2005-01-01 14:32
The reason communism has failed the way it has, when attempts have been made to incorporate it, is the human psyche
lol psychological reduction pf political problem
Name:
Anonymous2005-01-01 16:43
The problem with Communism does not just boil down to greed. Newsflash: People are not equal. They may be equally entitled to basic human rights, but each person certainly isn't capable of making equal contributions to society. The kinds of abilities people have vary greatly. We're not homegeneous like insects. It doesn't make sense to force one superior person to get less than his deserved share just to cover for another. It could be the "moral" thing to do, but you can't force something like that. How can you expect equality among the naturally unequal?
"From each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs."
lol Karl Marx. Nothing to see here, just another opinionated retard enjoying his own voice. Move along, move along.
Name:
Anonymous2005-01-01 21:05
It's pretty easy to superficially dismiss or believe in communism. Probably nobody in this thread has even read /Das Kapital/ in its entirety. Nobody has the slightest idea of what the subject is. Meaningless phrases like "human nature is against it" are being slung like the dull sermon of an alcoholic priest. You all disgust me.
Name:
JDigital2005-01-01 21:31
Greed is a basic human nature, and as civilised people it's up to us to overcome that and work for the good of all people, not just ourselves. However, not everyone can overcome it. When this happens among members of the general populace we have crime, but when it happens among powerful government members, we have corruption.
A capitalist system works because individualism and owning things have been important to people for a long time now, and money, which provides both security, entertainment and neat things to own, also provides an incentive to contribute to society in the form of work.
Thus, when devising a system of government, three things must be kept in mind. One, the government must exist only to benefit the people. Two, people are, by their nature, selfish, and exist to further their own ends above all else. Three, people's nature is to join together with others of their kind, whether that means people of their race, their clan, people of similar interests, or merely their neighbours, for mutual support.
I know a true communism is about as impossible as a successful world government.
Name:
HTD2005-01-03 13:22
I know that if you vote for me, there will be titties and alcohol for all.
Name:
Anonymous2005-01-03 14:47
>>31
Das Kapital was never implemented. For all purposes in modern political theory, "Communism" is the silly Communist Manifesto that Engels ghostwrote.
Name:
Martin Random2005-01-03 15:02
>> 35
Pray tell, what "implementation" could there possibly be in a purely predictive roadmap?
Name:
Frost2005-01-04 17:28
No, I have not read "Das Kapital" in its entirety, but I do see myself unfit to comment on communism because of that. What I was commenting on is the basic, and by that I mean basic, outlines of communism, not the detailed facts described in "Das Kapital". And I still do not think my thesis on the failiure of communism is a very poor assumption. I have seen worse, from people who HAD read the Book.
However, I do not like people sitting on their high horses, telling me that I'm wrong, without an explanation. What is "Das Kapital" all about, apart from hanging capitalists from light poles by their intestents? ~.~ Show me the knowledge!!
Name:
Anonymous2005-01-04 23:03
You are wrong because you describe "communism" as a form of government. Communism is a predictive theory which describes three stages, the third of which, the post-revolutionary era, is one without any government at all, nor any need for one.
You are also wrong because you seem to think that there is some particular communist "implementation" possible. Communist theory is a prophetic prediction, a roadmap of the future if you will, which is described as absolutely inevitable. There is no "implementation" to do except to expediate the process and ease the "birth pangs" between stages. Contd.
Name:
Anonymous2005-01-04 23:06
There has never been a communist government on this earth at any point in history, except as theorized by poincare'. There is no such thing as a communist government. This is an oxymoron.
There is no "implementation" described in communist theory. All of the original sources are extremely vague about just how a communist post-revolutionary state is to be administrated. This vagueness caused the massive utopian engineering experiments in the post revolutionary russian government. There was no "implementation" to be found in communist philosophy. There was only useless prediction.
It is a common misconception that a communism is "everything is owned by everyone because everything is owned by the people which is everyone." This is just as common as those who would mistake a "Democracy" for meaning "a rule by the people."
Name:
Anonymous2005-01-04 23:12
So in short, it is not that nobody here knows what communism is because they haven't read Das Kapital and I have. I said nobody here knows what communism is because it is obvious from what they are saying about communism that they do not know what communism is. No amount of reading Das Kapital on my part will fix that. If pointing out that nobody here knows what communism is puts me on a high horse, then I am on a high horse. That doesn't change anything.