What's Wrong With Communism?

[mrcomment]

The problem is, why the political elities in industrilized countries would want to give away their power to the people?

I know I wouldn't.

 

[MajoraPersona]

Now for something completely different; a brief look at human behaviour.

Maslow's hierarchy of needs.

As a person becomes secure in their physical needs, they begin to seek fulfillment in the higher levels of the pyramid. The second level is safety, when a person attempts to make the world predictable. Social needs can sometimes overcome the first two levels, but are, as a whole, higher on the pyramid. The fourth level is esteem, where people want respect and acknowledgement. The highest part of the pyramid is self-actualization, which is when a person does something for its own sake.

There's also a transcendent level, which consists of a person who is selfless.

Make of this what you will; I have no real opinion of politics. I also have no idea where I am on there.

Also, keep in mind that this theory/model is over sixty years old. Other sociologists have looked into alternative models.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maslow%27s_hierarchy_of_needs

 

[RAMBO22]

Communism never works in the most ironic way possible. The goal of communism is to turn the state into a setting where every man, woman, and child are equal but it always turns into a state that instead represses its own people and puts a certain few government officials and upper class citizens ahead of the bulk of its people. Communism is never really communism but actually an oligarchy that practically enslaves its lower and middle classes

 

[CannibalSmith]

Nothing is wrong with communism. Everything is (was) wrong with communists (Stalin: "Hey, let's ship everyone with IQ above 50 to labor camps!") The overwhelming majority of the "communist" regimes actually were tyrannies.

Similar things can be said of nationalism and Nazis, Christianity and Christians, soccer and its fans, and so on. People tend to go crazy.

 

[SpAc3man]

The main problem with communism is that in theory its the greatest thing since sliced bread with chocolate on it. in practice it doesnt work and doesnt allow enough freedom.

and dont get the idea that socialist ideas are all bad. the best governments seem to be the ones based largely in the center of the political spectrum. ie communism = bad AND fascism = bad

 

[Kair]

Yes, I'm talking about YOU, mindless consumers.

News Flash! Individuals who are on the intarwebz are consuming electricity, therefore polluting the atmosphere as well as binging on precious materials such as mountain dew and cheetohs that could be used to feed the hungry in Zimbadowbobshouseway! More news at 11!

By using your electricity that has been rationed you by your government to post in a video game forum, you have wasted your quota and no longer have enough electricity to run your fridge, please eat all your food in the next 3 hours to avoid spoiling, as you will not be getting your next ration of food for another 2 days. Thank you.

[sub]This has been a public service announcement of Oxyclean![/sub]

All joking aside, Communism may have a chance to work in a small society, such as a town, family or even a small city. Unfortunately it will not work in a large environment. The more individuals you add to the mix, the more corruption you introduce, and communism can not exist with any form corruption.

In order to force Communism to work, you will either have to stifle people's free thought, because it is 100% assured that not everyone will agree with you, by mental enslavement or by elimination. Tell you what, you try to brainwash me for disagreeing with you or try to take away my ability to disagree with you by force, and you'll meet the business end of my boomstick.

I probably consume about as much as a human living in a world where resources are distributed fairly. I am not a hypocrite. The western model will dry this planet out of resources, and I will not take part in it.

Also, when a nation such as USA can produce a population wherein 90% believe there is a god, a Socialist nation can produce a population wherein 90% believe something rational, like the fact that ethics isn't just something you are taught at school.

 

[Borrowed Time]

Furthermore, I would like to point something out.

According to his claims, throughout a lot of the territory he controlled everyone lived in efficient and peaceful Anarcho-Communist communes, that, unlike the Soviet system actually worked. (IE: no transitional dictatorship, no corruption, proper unity etc)

I am almost positive that that is not how Anarchy works.
I am not sure about anarcho-communism.

But the point is, anarchy can never work - people are just not suited for it.
And even if he did manage to keep everything running perfectly...
What happens when he dies?
Maybe, maybe, you would have two or three people after him who agreed with his methods and kept it up...
But eventually, someone who disagreed would come into power.

Exactly, how can someone control territory, yet call the government in said territory anarchy. Oxycleanmoron! It hurts mah brain!

 

[obex]

He's Ukrainian so I think its Multiple Choice Spelling.

But yes, he didn't succeed greatly, although in his defense he had to fight off the Germans, the Nationalists, the Bourgeois, the counter revolutionaries and eventually even the Soviets, so the odds were stacked quite heavily against him.

According to his claims, throughout a lot of the territory he controlled everyone lived in efficient and peaceful Anarcho-Communist communes, that, unlike the Soviet system actually worked. (IE: no transitional dictatorship, no corruption, proper unity etc)

Possibly.

Well, if that's the case, he should've won - everyone knows when the odds are stacked against you dramatically, you can't lose.

Furthermore, I would like to point something out.

According to his claims, throughout a lot of the territory he controlled everyone lived in efficient and peaceful Anarcho-Communist communes, that, unlike the Soviet system actually worked. (IE: no transitional dictatorship, no corruption, proper unity etc)

I am almost positive that that is not how Anarchy works.
I am not sure about anarcho-communism.

But the point is, anarchy can never work - people are just not suited for it.
And even if he did manage to keep everything running perfectly...
What happens when he dies?
Maybe, maybe, you would have two or three people after him who agreed with his methods and kept it up...
But eventually, someone who disagreed would come into power.

The thing about communism and anarchy is that they both leave a gap for a worse government to take over however communism reach that state through political debate so its easy for a dictator to remove the rights of the people, however anarchy reach that point because it over threw the last government so if a new more corrupt dictator takes power they would just revolt again.

 

[InsertWittyName]

Communism = Poor people get the same amount of money as the rich who are fortunate enough to have good jobs. < motherfucking great idea. BUT poeple can just say, fuck it someone else will do the work for me and ill still be able to eat, bam, major flaw.

 

[Warwolt]

it is impossible for everyone to be equal because all people are different, and communists have realized this so there is a general class and a ruling class this creates discontent and jealousy among the general class. also communists are generally fucking crazy like north korea

Because North Korea is a communism how?

 

[Brett Alex]

According to his claims, throughout a lot of the territory he controlled everyone lived in efficient and peaceful Anarcho-Communist communes, that, unlike the Soviet system actually worked. (IE: no transitional dictatorship, no corruption, proper unity etc)

My mistake. By controlled, I meant territory he was able to defend against invasion, not territory he ruled with an iron fist.

 

[Danzaivar]

Commumism doesn't work because people are bastards. Btw, free health care isn't really a communist ideal. We've had free health care in britain for decades. A lot of other capitalist countries have it as well.

I'd hardly call the NHS free. It's about 20% of public spending, which is about 40% of our GDP. The NHS costs about £120 Billion a year which divided by 66 million people means it costs each of us £1791 a year, roughly. I actually looked at how much you can expect to pay for healthcare in America and for most people it's a damn sight cheaper than £1800 (Roughly $2980 for the yanks reading). Ofcourse they have to pay extra for doctors visits but then we have to pay for prescriptions and the dentist too.

You can argue that because it's tax-based then only those who can afford to pay for it actually pay anything, while those who can't afford it don't...but it's still costing our economy a fortune. And to say how bad (and not to mention bureaucratic it is, I know cos my Mum's a nurse who never stops comaplaining when I see her) the service is, it's a completely wasteful operation.

This is kinda my argument against Communism too. Politicians can promise you the world but chances are they'll bugger it up and it will get done really badly. Communism means giving the state power over everything, and when you think how greedy and power-hungry politicians usually are...Well it's just a recipe for disaster.

 

[D.C.]

So really, what's wrong with Communism?

For Communism to work everyone has to be perfect and nobody is perfect.

It's a shame really

 

[Borrowed Time]

Yes, I'm talking about YOU, mindless consumers.

News Flash! Individuals who are on the intarwebz are consuming electricity, therefore polluting the atmosphere as well as binging on precious materials such as mountain dew and cheetohs that could be used to feed the hungry in Zimbadowbobshouseway! More news at 11!

By using your electricity that has been rationed you by your government to post in a video game forum, you have wasted your quota and no longer have enough electricity to run your fridge, please eat all your food in the next 3 hours to avoid spoiling, as you will not be getting your next ration of food for another 2 days. Thank you.

[sub]This has been a public service announcement of Oxyclean![/sub]

All joking aside, Communism may have a chance to work in a small society, such as a town, family or even a small city. Unfortunately it will not work in a large environment. The more individuals you add to the mix, the more corruption you introduce, and communism can not exist with any form corruption.

In order to force Communism to work, you will either have to stifle people's free thought, because it is 100% assured that not everyone will agree with you, by mental enslavement or by elimination. Tell you what, you try to brainwash me for disagreeing with you or try to take away my ability to disagree with you by force, and you'll meet the business end of my boomstick.

I probably consume about as much as a human living in a world where resources are distributed fairly. I am not a hypocrite. The western model will dry this planet out of resources, and I will not take part in it.

Also, when a nation such as USA can produce a population wherein 90% believe there is a god, a Socialist nation can produce a population wherein 90% believe something rational, like the fact that ethics isn't just something you are taught at school.

Then I recommend you stop using electricity for your computer to post on forums, seeing as around only 1.1 billion people have access to the internet. (From the looking around I did, the numbers about the same for people who own a computer, ranging from 500 million to 900 million.)

http://www.guardian.co.uk/money/2007/jun/14/internetphonesbroadband.digitalmedia

Let's assume your computer has at least a 350W power supply, that means for every hour, you're computer is sucking around the same as 35 10w LED light bulbs that could be providing an hour's worth of light to 5/6 of the world's population! Not to mention the power being used for your monitor and perhaps the speakers you may have.

 

[manicfoot]

Commumism doesn't work because people are bastards. Btw, free health care isn't really a communist ideal. We've had free health care in britain for decades. A lot of other capitalist countries have it as well.

I'd hardly call the NHS free. It's about 20% of public spending, which is about 40% of our GDP. The NHS costs about £120 Billion a year which divided by 66 million people means it costs each of us £1791 a year, roughly. I actually looked at how much you can expect to pay for healthcare in America and for most people it's a damn sight cheaper than £1800 (Roughly $2980 for the yanks reading). Ofcourse they have to pay extra for doctors visits but then we have to pay for prescriptions and the dentist too.

You can argue that because it's tax-based then only those who can afford to pay for it actually pay anything, while those who can't afford it don't...but it's still costing our economy a fortune. And to say how bad (and not to mention bureaucratic it is, I know cos my Mum's a nurse who never stops comaplaining when I see her) the service is, it's a completely wasteful operation.

This is kinda my argument against Communism too. Politicians can promise you the world but chances are they'll bugger it up and it will get done really badly. Communism means giving the state power over everything, and when you think how greedy and power-hungry politicians usually are...Well it's just a recipe for disaster.

Very good points. Thanks for the education The one thing I would say though is at least our health service is available to everyone. No matter how shit it is. You're right about dental too. I've not been to the dentist in over 5 years. The same can be said for all my friends. I guess the english bloke with shit teeth stereotype is going to ring true soon haha.

 

[LockHeart]

Commumism doesn't work because people are bastards. Btw, free health care isn't really a communist ideal. We've had free health care in britain for decades. A lot of other capitalist countries have it as well.

I'd hardly call the NHS free. It's about 20% of public spending, which is about 40% of our GDP. The NHS costs about £120 Billion a year which divided by 66 million people means it costs each of us £1791 a year, roughly. I actually looked at how much you can expect to pay for healthcare in America and for most people it's a damn sight cheaper than £1800 (Roughly $2980 for the yanks reading). Ofcourse they have to pay extra for doctors visits but then we have to pay for prescriptions and the dentist too.

You can argue that because it's tax-based then only those who can afford to pay for it actually pay anything, while those who can't afford it don't...but it's still costing our economy a fortune. And to say how bad (and not to mention bureaucratic it is, I know cos my Mum's a nurse who never stops comaplaining when I see her) the service is, it's a completely wasteful operation.

This is kinda my argument against Communism too. Politicians can promise you the world but chances are they'll bugger it up and it will get done really badly. Communism means giving the state power over everything, and when you think how greedy and power-hungry politicians usually are...Well it's just a recipe for disaster.

I like this post, high five good sir.

Not to mention the fact that patients in Scotland and Wales get their prescriptions and dental charges subbed by the English taxpayers - they get it for free, English patients have to pay. Nice equal system, eh?

I wish people would stop going on about how Socialism/Communism provides free healthcare and education. There's no such thing as a free lunch...

 

[CrashBang]

Well, I like being an individual. I like being able to go to the grocery store and decide what I'm having for dinner. I like being able to create artwork and play music with the things that I own. I like being on the internet.

In short, I like being able to decide my quality of life.

If I really thought that humanity could just drop everything and coexist, than I would be for it. The fact that I know it can't makes me quite sad.

I agree. People want the opportunity to rise through the ranks, reach the top and be the best they can be.
Giving every person the chance to be equal is not fair to those that work hard to better themselves

 

[Agema]

I'd hardly call the NHS free. It's about 20% of public spending, which is about 40% of our GDP. The NHS costs about £120 Billion a year which divided by 66 million people means it costs each of us £1791 a year, roughly. I actually looked at how much you can expect to pay for healthcare in America and for most people it's a damn sight cheaper than £1800 (Roughly $2980 for the yanks reading). Ofcourse they have to pay extra for doctors visits but then we have to pay for prescriptions and the dentist too.

You can argue that because it's tax-based then only those who can afford to pay for it actually pay anything, while those who can't afford it don't...but it's still costing our economy a fortune. And to say how bad (and not to mention bureaucratic it is, I know cos my Mum's a nurse who never stops comaplaining when I see her) the service is, it's a completely wasteful operation.

To be slightly more precise, the NHS costs £95-100 billion, and the population of the UK is only 60million, so it's just over £1,500 per person. According to the WHO, the USA is estimated to spend 15% of GDP on healthcare (public and private), in total that's actually nearly 3 times as much per person, over £4,000.

However, in the US that money is disproportionately spent. The richer you are, the better treatment you receive, the poor have healthcare provision that's usually either terrible or even nonexistent. It systematically fails a large proportion of the population, that's why the WHO ranks the US healthcare system below virtually every other developed country on average.

The UK NHS might be inefficient in areas (I agree there, my gf works in it) and might screw up occasionally, but at least it doesn't institutionally disadvantage people.

 

[Social Pariah]

Socialism maybe be what you're going for, rather than communism.

 

[AWC Viper]

the thing is communism supposedly make everyone equal like no rich and no poor, the state ownership of manufacturing and so on. Communism works in theory but then again everything works in theory. it doesn't work because there is greed that it the reason for the GFC and why communism don't work is the same thing. basic Greed. feel free to correct me as my info came from my grandfather (he is a reliable source on most things)