Do I have to choose? I'll go for capitalism then, things were better when we followed U.S. as an economic model instead of Cuba.
Poll: Capitalism or Communism?
- Thread starter Jak23
- Start date
Recommended Videos
I haven't done any formal study on Russian history, but I did do three years of formal study on politics. And you are right, socialism and communism are not the same thing, but they are on the same scale.Jimmybobjr said:
Its worth pointing out that Marxist-Leninist Socialism and communism were terms retroactively applied to ideas or states. Prior to the October revolution the driving force was simply socialism. Over time it was bastardized into Marxist Leninist Socialism which became what most people know as communism.
And yes I agree that Russia never approached a proper socialist state, but what they became was known as Communism (after all, I am pretty sure we only have the word because of what the USSR turned into, if its socialist experiment actually worked we would just call it socialist).
But back on topic. I simply cannot believe so many people voted for communism. In a communist system you have no free will, and if the authors of soviet literature are to believed no free though. I could understand people voting for socialism, because at its heart it does have a few liberal ideals.
Socialism... socialism... now, what does that remind me of. Is that diet communism? Relabelling things just like "People's republic of you all need to shut up and die now", commie countries calling themselves "democracies"? The either or question is a bit off, since the termwordthing "capitalism", right now, seems mostly shaped by the critics and haters of it (and they usually don' extend their graceful hatred onto freedoms, achievements and legal securities offered), and communism tends to be defined by... well, the very same bunch of clowns.
If there's any communism around, kill it with fire. Thank you.
<youtube=hQvsf2MUKRQ>
If there's any communism around, kill it with fire. Thank you.
<youtube=hQvsf2MUKRQ>
It's about a thousand years too early for Communism, simple fact is we don't want to be equal, we all want to be better then others.
So for now we cling on to our old jungle law, or the politically correct term Capitalism.
So for now we cling on to our old jungle law, or the politically correct term Capitalism.
Communism is based on the idea that people, at heart, are all good and aren't going to tear the system apart trying to get theirs.
Capitalism is based on the idea that the flow of money is self regulating. Companies aren't going to screw over their customers because that's bad for the bottom line. Or that customers are going to have the intelligence and self control enough to stop buying from companies that fuck them over. If either of these were true then EA, Walmart, and many banks, would be out of business. Instead companies are rushing to emulate them hoping to copy their profit margins because, people *****, but they wont actually do anything. Those that do try to do anything are mocked because caring about anything is SOOO 1960. Government attempts to step in because we're too self serving and apathetic for the system to work are fought by those who are bought and paid for by said companies.
Let's use an example hmmm... The sub prime lending debacle. In most countries, sub prime lending is illegal. But that was government interfering in business so it was fought against here and allowed flourish. Then after it was all said and done, the banks who took part in it are still in business because the customers either don't care or aren't informed. So they are free to move onto the next perfectly legal scam. The economy will, eventually recover, people will stop watching them so closely, and they'll find another loop hole to exploit and we'll all be back here again.
Capitalism is based on the idea that the flow of money is self regulating. Companies aren't going to screw over their customers because that's bad for the bottom line. Or that customers are going to have the intelligence and self control enough to stop buying from companies that fuck them over. If either of these were true then EA, Walmart, and many banks, would be out of business. Instead companies are rushing to emulate them hoping to copy their profit margins because, people *****, but they wont actually do anything. Those that do try to do anything are mocked because caring about anything is SOOO 1960. Government attempts to step in because we're too self serving and apathetic for the system to work are fought by those who are bought and paid for by said companies.
Let's use an example hmmm... The sub prime lending debacle. In most countries, sub prime lending is illegal. But that was government interfering in business so it was fought against here and allowed flourish. Then after it was all said and done, the banks who took part in it are still in business because the customers either don't care or aren't informed. So they are free to move onto the next perfectly legal scam. The economy will, eventually recover, people will stop watching them so closely, and they'll find another loop hole to exploit and we'll all be back here again.
What is think is happening is that people who support communism are supporting MARXIST communism- Complete freedom of speech, race, gender, religon, and freedom from poverty and control.Tooshay said:
Communism, at its base, BASE, element, is complete freedom from EVERYTHING. (Obviously, not achiveable, but we can -in theory- get quite close)
People who voted against it, have no real idea what communism is, and think immediatly of the purges and terror Stalin used under the name "Communism"...
I didnt explain that well, heres another way;
If people knew what "Communism" meant, they would vote for it. People dont know what "Communism" means, and vote against it.
In honesty, we need a better name for the two policys. Communism doesnt mean Communism...
Marxism and Stalinism would be better terms, i think.
And i think that there is a reason people are voting for "Communism" - I mean, look at the Wall St Protests; This could EASILY be seen as the start of a Communist revolution. I mean, in 100 years, if communism had come to power, would it be too far-fetched to say that the Wall St protests were the first in a series of protests and uprisings?
Edit: And good on ya for studying politics, it makes my head spin.
Im 17 and i STILL dont know HOW the Australian govenment works.
(Presuming, for once, Julia shuts up and something actiualy happens)
I've read my fair share of Mein Kampf and Das Kapital to state that yes, indeed, both made me think and rethink and reconsider some of the statements and claims of history books or people's accounts of first-hand experiences.Jimmybobjr said:
Pure marxist theory, to me, is just that: theory. Not only that, but Marx really easily comes off a frothing, angry madman foaming at the mouth. The way I currently understand things is this: Without Marx, without socialism, we would never have had Schicklgruber become Elvis pompous Hitler in the first place. Then again, if evil capitalist notions are the number one reason for having stomped on Germany over more than a century now,
what do you think becomes of, say, Iraq now? Iraq hasn't had a potential anywhere near Germany in the last, say, two-thousand years. Iraq is pretty much a hell-hole. While Germany after WWII managed to become yet again the motor of some artifical European "Union", Iraq is just about to explode, big time, incessantly, with no happy end in sight. Would Communism help? Can socialism, capitalism, democracy really fend off the threat of what has falsely been dubbed the "Islamist" threat?
I think socialism is something that grows on the fertile soil of democracies. Yes, being "social" is big in my books, but that doesn't mean I'm a fan of "socialism". Communism can never be productive or safe, as it grows on capitalist or religious or otherwise "free" societies like mold, or cancer, seeking to destroy it and replacing everything with just a new strain of asshattery. It's never been more than experiments so far. Human experiments, seeking to make people turn into something they're not, something they'll never be.
my fault I think I accidentally mentioned two good things about Capitalism.Big_Willie_Styles said:
free market and workers helped by the government.
This is a dumb thread and a dumb question.
Very few people actually understand what Communism is, evidenced by their mention of "China" or some such. Not to mention that there's no such thing as a 'Communist' or 'Capitalist' market or country, every country practices some amalgamation of both free markets and controlled markets. This is also ignoring the varying other marketing ideologies.
Read up on these things before asking inane questions.
Very few people actually understand what Communism is, evidenced by their mention of "China" or some such. Not to mention that there's no such thing as a 'Communist' or 'Capitalist' market or country, every country practices some amalgamation of both free markets and controlled markets. This is also ignoring the varying other marketing ideologies.
Read up on these things before asking inane questions.
Here is the basic idea:
Communism: since everyone gets the same benefit- no matter how much or how little they produce or work- there is no motivation except 'why, of course everyone will work as hard as they can!' Communism is practically *designed* to be abused, and it has been every single time it's been introduced.
Capitalism: The harder or smarter you work, the more you benefit. Period. If you cannot or (and this is important) choose *not* to work, you don't benefit. The system is harder for the lazy or entitled to abuse. The downside, however, is that the successful capitalists gain power and use it to perpetuate themselves, and destroy perceived threats.
Unfortunately, 'Communism' has been proven not to work. 'Capitalism' has proven *to* work. That's the science.
The reason I used the Quotes, though, is to make a point- no political system is ever Pure anything. There is no pure Capitalism, there is no pure Communism.
Communism: since everyone gets the same benefit- no matter how much or how little they produce or work- there is no motivation except 'why, of course everyone will work as hard as they can!' Communism is practically *designed* to be abused, and it has been every single time it's been introduced.
Capitalism: The harder or smarter you work, the more you benefit. Period. If you cannot or (and this is important) choose *not* to work, you don't benefit. The system is harder for the lazy or entitled to abuse. The downside, however, is that the successful capitalists gain power and use it to perpetuate themselves, and destroy perceived threats.
Unfortunately, 'Communism' has been proven not to work. 'Capitalism' has proven *to* work. That's the science.
The reason I used the Quotes, though, is to make a point- no political system is ever Pure anything. There is no pure Capitalism, there is no pure Communism.
Capitalism with stronger restraints the richer you get.
Hell, the whole economic crises in America was caused by the government not letting capitalism, run its course.
Communism: Fast and good results at first, catastrophe later.
Capitalism: Balances itself out in the long run and lasts a long time. Slower results.
Hell, the whole economic crises in America was caused by the government not letting capitalism, run its course.
Communism: Fast and good results at first, catastrophe later.
Capitalism: Balances itself out in the long run and lasts a long time. Slower results.
I don't quite understand why you think I should receive an infraction when you're behaving just as bad, if not worse. You're posting off topic, and being unreasonably sarcastic. Honestly, I couldn't care less if some mods deem the act of calling dumb things dumb a bannable offence.Paladin Anderson said:
However, I do foresee you winning your bet when some random tells me just how Communist North Korea really is.
spartan231490 said:
i dont think you quite understand it, Marx thaught that the workers were not being paid for all the houers of work they put into the thing they were making, they would get paid for 4 houers of work when in fact they had put in 8 houers of work, so your work is woth something but more than your boss pays you. And the idea that you would get something for nothing is not in marxisme either, it says in one of the text where marx is defending communisme that the property of the richest 1/10th of the population would be tazed heavily to the advantage of the other 9/10ths of the population, because they had nothing compared to the richest 1/10th. so getting the money to equalize the riches of the people would come from the rich to the poor, so that everyone had equal property for the good of most of the population.
his theory was formed in Europa during the industrialization, were things were very very bad for the poor and very very good for the rich.
by the way i am sorry if i misspelled anything. happy hollydays^^
Communism is a much better ideal, but sadly even the best examples of a communist society working (Cuba) have major downsides. It just cannot exist alongside individual liberty, as true communism relies too much on total consensus of the people.
Capitalism appears better and on the surface appears to give greater freedom to the people, however the reality is that the power is held by a very rich minority of the population. The system is beginning to display its instability, but I don't think we'll see a true fall to our capitalist society for a while.
Capitalism appears better and on the surface appears to give greater freedom to the people, however the reality is that the power is held by a very rich minority of the population. The system is beginning to display its instability, but I don't think we'll see a true fall to our capitalist society for a while.
