Poll: Capitalism or Communism?
- Thread starter Jak23
- Start date
dont mix communism with socialism, please. socialism, to a certain extent is needed, but it needs capitalism to get money for it.
and dont mix communism (ideology) with communism(reality known from china, ussr etc-proletariate dictatorship)
anyhow, communism as ideology has a gigantic flaw in its basis. it assumes people are equal, which is an obvious lie; furthermore it assumes people want to be equal, which is another lie. besides, everything needs to be governed, because we aint perfect and rulers always tend to get corrupted by power. maybe not the first administration, but the tenth will at some point try to make themselves be better. just my ten cents.
and dont mix communism (ideology) with communism(reality known from china, ussr etc-proletariate dictatorship)
anyhow, communism as ideology has a gigantic flaw in its basis. it assumes people are equal, which is an obvious lie; furthermore it assumes people want to be equal, which is another lie. besides, everything needs to be governed, because we aint perfect and rulers always tend to get corrupted by power. maybe not the first administration, but the tenth will at some point try to make themselves be better. just my ten cents.
Communism is pretty close to an ideal world. However, no country ever got it running properly and it doesn't have a lot going for it either.
At this stage mainly capitalism works better. Once humanity develops to the point where anything can be produced at no cost it will be communism. One shouldn't stick ideologically to either however, we get the best solution by applying what is shown to work.
I recently found something that's somewhat relevant to the topic at hand:
XD
OT: Again, since I was raised in a country that supports Capitalism, I feel inclinded to vote for it.
XD
OT: Again, since I was raised in a country that supports Capitalism, I feel inclinded to vote for it.
Communism is morally unjustifiable. So no matter how hard I work, no matter what I invent, create, imagine, I get no more than the guy hitting stuff with a hammer? I call BS on that.orangeban said:
Yes the man with the hammer is necessary for society (Though much easier to replace with a machine), but what about those who dream big and create? Under Communism, there is no incentive to build a better car, a faster plane. Why have a TV? You don't NEED a TV comrade! Your internet is not necessary comrade! All you need is bread, water, sleep comrade!
I'm not saying we need laissez-faire capitalism, certainly there is a level of regulation required (how much regulation is the main debate as far as I'm concerned). But saying that Communism is morally superior to Capitalism is a sign of very odd morals or a complete misunderstanding what what Communism means.
Exactly. I live in Poland, so I know how everything works in communism. It was truly terrible. I really am disappointed when many otherwise intelligent people think that communism was okay, or that, for example, both sides of cold war were just as bad (for example Escapist's own Yahtzee). It just sounds much more intelligent to say that both sides are bad, there weren't any "baddies", just people with different beliefs, but it in this case it's not true. In communistic countries people were repressed, everyone lived in a constant fear of getting jailed just for saying something that wasn't okay with the communistic doctrine or just being in a wrong place at the wrong time, and the country itself was falling apart because communistic governments usually work very badly and are filled with bureaucracy and corruption.Jak23 said:
Please, Americans, English people and others who live in a normal country - think before you support communism. You really have no idea how it is to live in a communistic country. The grass always seems greener on the other side, but believe me, it is not.
Both are terrible if left unchecked. See, the question is bad. Laissez-faire Capitalism is doomed to fail. And everything cannot be controlled by the state. The best solution is a mixed economy. But no communism. A healthy mix of capitalism and socialism is what a state needs.spartan231490 said:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_market_economy
Communism doesn't even work in theory. All people aren't equal. Some people will work harder, and some people will work less. I refuse to live under a system that pays equally to everyone, regardless of what you put in. A janitor working 40 hours a week scrubbing toilets gets the same allocation of resources as a neurosurgeon? Hell no.
Keep your communism, but don't give me pure capitalism. The idea that a free market will balance itself out through supply and demand isn't good either. Example...the great depression.
Give me a middle ground. A nice mix of Keynesian and Classical economic systems.
Keep your communism, but don't give me pure capitalism. The idea that a free market will balance itself out through supply and demand isn't good either. Example...the great depression.
Give me a middle ground. A nice mix of Keynesian and Classical economic systems.
I voted capitalism.
I'm sorry, but I simply don't possess the imagination required in order to imagine a classless society, where people contribute according to ability and consume according to need.
I'm sorry, but I simply don't possess the imagination required in order to imagine a classless society, where people contribute according to ability and consume according to need.
Communism looks nicer on paper, but as Russia and China cheerfully demonstrate, it's horrendous in practice, mostly because people with power tend to be gaping dick holes, and often reason that when they're the only ones with it, there's nothing stopping their dickery.
Capitalism is as horrendous in practice as it is on paper, and those ruling the United States are doing everything in their power to amass as much wealth as possible in their lifetimes before they die and their actions have fucked everyone else over.
The moral of the story is that both suck, and you need to find a happy medium, but too many people are more interested in their own wealth than the common good, and that's when we run into extremes. Until enough of those people realize they can still live ridiculously well off without being massive twats, everyone who isn't them is going to continue to be punished for it, until they decide to screw or asskiss their way to a similar position.
Capitalism is as horrendous in practice as it is on paper, and those ruling the United States are doing everything in their power to amass as much wealth as possible in their lifetimes before they die and their actions have fucked everyone else over.
The moral of the story is that both suck, and you need to find a happy medium, but too many people are more interested in their own wealth than the common good, and that's when we run into extremes. Until enough of those people realize they can still live ridiculously well off without being massive twats, everyone who isn't them is going to continue to be punished for it, until they decide to screw or asskiss their way to a similar position.
Exactly. People should stop adhering to just one of these things and taking the good from both.TestECull said:
True Communism/Marxism?:
People work not for themselves but for society. Everything is communally owned and distributed according to need - clearly needs are subjective and evolve and the system evolves accordingly.
True, unadulterated Capitalism/free-markets:
Cyclical, and relegates majority of the population to poverty. This is what has been happening in most of society in most of history till the Great Depression.
So if you had to choose between the two societies, you'd inevitably choose Communism (unless you had serious confidence in yourself... but then that's the crux of it, isn't it?).
But in the real world, neither exist.
Communism as idealised cannot and will never exist in an acceptable form.
It is totally incompatible with reality - i.e. greed, jealously, corruption and so on.
Capitalism has been proven to be much more compatible and workable. Some socialism desired, obviously. Note socialism is not communism, and such a mix is not 'in the middle'; it is capitalism.
SUMMARY: Communism cannot exist, capitalism does exist and can be improved on greatly. I voted on that basis.
Side point:
People work not for themselves but for society. Everything is communally owned and distributed according to need - clearly needs are subjective and evolve and the system evolves accordingly.
True, unadulterated Capitalism/free-markets:
Cyclical, and relegates majority of the population to poverty. This is what has been happening in most of society in most of history till the Great Depression.
So if you had to choose between the two societies, you'd inevitably choose Communism (unless you had serious confidence in yourself... but then that's the crux of it, isn't it?).
But in the real world, neither exist.
Communism as idealised cannot and will never exist in an acceptable form.
It is totally incompatible with reality - i.e. greed, jealously, corruption and so on.
Capitalism has been proven to be much more compatible and workable. Some socialism desired, obviously. Note socialism is not communism, and such a mix is not 'in the middle'; it is capitalism.
SUMMARY: Communism cannot exist, capitalism does exist and can be improved on greatly. I voted on that basis.
Side point:
That just sounds like a highly socialist society (very big government)? I find it hard to establish what people mean by a communist society, so if you could clarify that would be great.Anoni Mus said:
None. We need a need system that offers balance. I'm saying balance, not equality. Not all humans are the same. We are different and we were born under different circumstances, with varied skills and opportunities. What I dislike about communism is that we all lose our individuality in that system and it is that that makes us humans and unique.
What I like about capitalism is that it allows some people to achieve materialistic wealth. What I don't like about it is that in order to obtain that many must suffer. Only a few can live well under capitalism, but for that it is necessary to destroy nature resources and to exploit other people.
What we need is a system where differences are accepted and respected, where everyone can have their needs supplied, but if they want to become wealthy, they're free to do so, as long as in the path for that they don't exploit and they agree to share with others what they earn.
We need a system that promotes wealth, not greed and a system that encourages us to be individuals.
What I like about capitalism is that it allows some people to achieve materialistic wealth. What I don't like about it is that in order to obtain that many must suffer. Only a few can live well under capitalism, but for that it is necessary to destroy nature resources and to exploit other people.
What we need is a system where differences are accepted and respected, where everyone can have their needs supplied, but if they want to become wealthy, they're free to do so, as long as in the path for that they don't exploit and they agree to share with others what they earn.
We need a system that promotes wealth, not greed and a system that encourages us to be individuals.
Reward or adequate return is necessary for most people. Be that return friendship, money, or some other item or service, people do things for something back.Anoni Mus said:
Communism doesn't work, and if I ever found myself in a Communist society I'd be the first to take up arms. Communism economically doesn't work, we've seen that repeatedly. Even Lenin was forced to introduce elements of private industry early on in the USSR just to keep it from collapsing in it's beginning. Using thousands of bureaucrats to determine prices instead of the free market is criminally inefficient. But if you're a communist, it's clear that you have refused to learn from both history and economic theory and I doubt I can do anything to convince you that communism doesn't work. But communism is the idea that everyone gets what they NEED, not "frivolous" things beyond that. Communal farms were hardly luxurious. It's the idea that nobody should be above anybody else no matter what, and that idea is what I am so against. If somebody works harder or creates something people want, they deserve more. They deserve something for their time, effort, and creativity.
Corporations aren't perfect, but one must understand that the administration of a company is made up of people just as much as the non-administrative staff. Corruption should be addressed on an individual basis, as that is how at least western society works, individualism, individual rights.
I won't even get started about trade unions asking for more money and benefits when the entire industry is in a downturn and nobody is getting raises.
Also, Youtube is hardly a valid source. I'll take my econ textbooks over any youtube video any day.