Poll: Capitalism or Communism?
- Thread starter Jak23
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Communism in the sense of "the form of government and economy practiced in the USSR, China, Cuba, etc." (state-controlled capitalism) is obviously a complete disaster, just like any other form of capitalism.
Communism in the sense of "the form of socio-economic organisation described by Karl Marx" (democratically self-organising communities with little or no central government) is IN NO WAY related to the above, and could be fantastic if only people would realise it. Too many people saying it's too idealistic is exactly why it is too idealistic. If only people would think "actually, this could work" then it might work. It has never been tried. The USSR and others were doomed from the beginning, as they did not have mass popular support.
Most scholars estimate that the USSR was responsible for about 20 million deaths throughout its existence, with most of those occurring during the Stalin era (1922-53). So if we are so critical of the Soviets for this, should we not be equally if not more critical of ourselves for that same number of people who die every five years due to poverty, which is a necessary component of the system of global capitalism that we have imposed? Should we not seek an alternative, and reject any need for a system of money in organising our society, as Marx suggested? (Note that all so-called "Communist" countries so far have still used money, this being just one of the many factors that automatically disqualifys them from actually being communist in any way.)
Communism in the sense of "the form of socio-economic organisation described by Karl Marx" (democratically self-organising communities with little or no central government) is IN NO WAY related to the above, and could be fantastic if only people would realise it. Too many people saying it's too idealistic is exactly why it is too idealistic. If only people would think "actually, this could work" then it might work. It has never been tried. The USSR and others were doomed from the beginning, as they did not have mass popular support.
Most scholars estimate that the USSR was responsible for about 20 million deaths throughout its existence, with most of those occurring during the Stalin era (1922-53). So if we are so critical of the Soviets for this, should we not be equally if not more critical of ourselves for that same number of people who die every five years due to poverty, which is a necessary component of the system of global capitalism that we have imposed? Should we not seek an alternative, and reject any need for a system of money in organising our society, as Marx suggested? (Note that all so-called "Communist" countries so far have still used money, this being just one of the many factors that automatically disqualifys them from actually being communist in any way.)
I believe my great-grandfather said the same thing about it being the 20th Century in 1911. We are still no closer to breaking the plutocracy.SnakeoilSage said:
In communism, there are no "people in charge".bluegate said:
It really doesn't. (See my 3rd paragraph above.)theheroofaction said:
Are you seriously? Capitalism invented the words peasant and aristocrat!UltraHammer said:
It would be my honour to be allowed to hold a mirror up to you right now.
That's capitalism. Person B is the capitalist class.
There is so much nonsense going around about both that it's impossible to separate them anymore; everyone has a different idea of what they think the theories are, despite never having read a single word of Marx.Tooshay said:
Communism is all about individual rights. If there is a dictator, it's not communism.
I abhor the ritual worship of "growth" as an end in itself, rather than as a means to an end. As if growth is a panacea for all our problems. Growth just means that things get bigger. It doesn't imply that any kind of progress or improvement is being made. It just means that things carry on as they always have done.
^thisomicron1 said:
capitalism may not be perfect, but it inspires and incentivizes people to work their hardest and try their best. they do this out of their own selfish want for more money, but as a consequence it helps better the society.
Capitalism. It's shown to be a bit more successful than communism. You don't see any starving Americans.
Are you serious? No starving Americans? There are probably no homeless people either and everyone has free healthcare.Broady Brio said:
America is still kickin'. Granted it's in a rough spot, but Capitalism has lasted us this far. USSR didn't even reach it's 100th birthday.trooperpaul said:
No State Communism is pretty inherently prone to authoritarianism simply because of the degree of power it places in the hands of the state.Puzzlenaut said:
The more power your government has over you the more likely it is to become corrupt and/or authoritarian, simply because it has the means to enforce tyranny more easily.
In the case of Communism the state not only controls the laws; but effectively owns everything in the society as well. You get only what the state allows you to have.
Communism looks nicer on paper but relies on the fact that one person is not going to be a dick and try and take over and form a dictatorship.
Capitalism looks nice on paper but relies on the fact that everyone is not going to be a dick to each other or that a single conglomerate of people acquire so much power(money) that they gain enough power as to the point where they can form a dictatorship in the shadows.
One has a longer incubation period then the other to have a bad end result and I believe you can see which has that and has had that period so that we are in the state that we are now.
Capitalism looks nice on paper but relies on the fact that everyone is not going to be a dick to each other or that a single conglomerate of people acquire so much power(money) that they gain enough power as to the point where they can form a dictatorship in the shadows.
One has a longer incubation period then the other to have a bad end result and I believe you can see which has that and has had that period so that we are in the state that we are now.
A little bit of both would probably work best with a mild leaning towards the capitalism.
Even though I've often thought that a communist government might work if it was placed in the hands of someone who was NOT a total psychopath, say someone would maybe CARE if millions of their people were starving to death, I'll stick with capitalism.
Even though I've often thought that a communist government might work if it was placed in the hands of someone who was NOT a total psychopath, say someone would maybe CARE if millions of their people were starving to death, I'll stick with capitalism.
