What's Wrong With Communism?

[Hellz_Barz]

the problem with it is its always hijacked by a greedy midgets.

 

[pliusmannn]

Communism

LOL excellent!

i even got 3day ban for this

 

[gorfias]

Agema: I liked your reply. It was well thought out and gave me some insights that I think will be helpful in other debates.

Here is another view:

http://books.google.com/books?id=eTve6XEUbYIC&pg=PA120&lpg=PA120&dq=hayek+no+difference+between+facism+and+socialism&source=bl&ots=zNPOUDJLbm&sig=OI_PRu0DP3ZLJSYft6Du5HKeapU&hl=en&ei=5Q64SvuhHsjclAePwcnQDg&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=2#v=onepage&q=&f=false

From Hayek's "Road to Serfdom".

 

[Flying Dagger]

communism worked fine on small scales... the logistics are too much on larger scales.

 

[Mcface]

Communism will never work.
Its a great idea on paper, but impossible to sustain.

 

[Chunko]

People won't work if they're given stuff for free. Additionally if communism worked China wouldn't be reverting back to capitalism.

 

[Flying Dagger]

Hitler was a facist. Arguably, there is no difference between facism and socialism. The word facism has been demonized. It is merely a political/economic term. They are both leftist ideologies that tend to fail to actually improve the human condition.

I will give you this: he was also a nationalist, which, can be attributed to right wing ideologies as well as left. NAZI meant National Socialist.

arguably fascism and democracy are the same thing, they both are systems of government.

 

[Arsen]

Because it is stupid and based on helping those who never took the time to improve themselves as human beings.

 

[Canadamus Prime]

Nothing, in theory. The key words there being "in theory".

 

[101194]

Hey Whats wrong with X
X vs Y
Why all the hate on X
What are your thoughts on X
I hate X
I love Y

Great ways to start flamewars...Good job!

 

[gorfias]

The fact is, fascism is a leftist ideology, not of the right. The right wants to be left alone. The left wants to control you.

 

[Agema]

The fact is, fascism is a leftist ideology, not of the right. The right wants to be left alone. The left wants to control you.

Hayek is free to have his opinion that fascists were socialists - however, many philosophers, political scientists and economists disagree strongly. With such a lack of consensus, there is no safe way to argue one way or the other. Except, perhaps, the obvious middle way that it truly belongs to both or neither the left or right.

It's worth pointing out that the only parties that struggled to preserve democracy by opposing Hitler's power grab in the early 30s were the left-wing ones, the SPD and the Communists (although the Communists had been forcibly ejected from parliament by then). The entire right and centre-right of German politics at the time ultimately backed Hitler.

* * *

"Left" and "right" wings are variable terms, and hence lack a lot of accuracy. The terms originally refer back to the French Revolution, where the "right wing" represented the status quo, monarchy and aristocracy, and the "left wing" the progessives and radicals. Later on, right wing became associated with capitalism and nationalism, and left wing with socialism.

Neither "right" nor "left" meaningfully discusses totalitarian government. Vast numbers of brutal, repressive dictators (Franco, Pinochet, Syngman Rhee etc.) have been undeniably right wing, and you couldn't say they were interested in leaving people alone. Equally, the left has had plenty of totalitarian states (USSR, China, Cambodia). Many left wing organisations have defended people's freedoms and democracy, as have many right wing ones. Similarly, in terms of international interference, both right and left have at times and in varying ways left their neighbours alone, been actively isolationist, started wars or aggressively meddled in other nations' affairs. There is nothing to choose.

Then also consider social freedoms. If you look back historically, the parties that have tended to oppose discrimination and and egalitarianism have often been left wing. It was generally left or left-leaning parties that enfranchised women, legalised homosexuality, fought against discrimination of racial minorities, etc. Time after time it has generally been the right wing, or large sections of the right wing, that have fought hard to maintain a socially unjust status quo - arguably as is the case in the US currently.

When you say the right wing wants to be left alone, and the left wing wants to control, you would need to view "control" purely in economic terms - yes, the left wants more of an individual's money for the society as a whole. The left wing views empowerment of the individual in ways other than financial.

 

[gorfias]

Age, very well written and thoughtful response. You have made me think more clearly about a couple of things, mostly, that left and right are very large, vague terms.

I am sure you know, in the US, until Hitler attacked the USSR, American Communists backed him. I guess I am easily baited by 50 years of people reflexively referring to the Nazis as right wing, and even blaming Christianity for the holocaust (I think that started to end by the 1990s, with the rise of alternate media). Hitler had openly stated his end goal was to end Christian concepts of right and wrong, and the annihilation of the Jews was a step towards that end. He was NOT a Christian.

I'll have to look up this "Syngman Rhee" guy, but, those you reference on the "right", I doubt, caused anywhere in the same universe the amount of death, tyranny and destruction monsters of the totalitarian left have caused.

 

[Agema]

Age, very well written and thoughtful response. You have made me think more clearly about a couple of things, mostly, that left and right are very large, vague terms.

Thank you. It's good to have a constructive discussion.

I am sure you know, in the US, until Hitler attacked the USSR, American Communists backed him. I guess I am easily baited by 50 years of people reflexively referring to the Nazis as right wing, and even blaming Christianity for the holocaust (I think that started to end by the 1990s, with the rise of alternate media). Hitler had openly stated his end goal was to end Christian concepts of right and wrong, and the annihilation of the Jews was a step towards that end. He was NOT a Christian.

No, I didn't know the US Communists supported Hitler - that's very interesting. I agree with what you say about Christianity not causing the Holocaust, and that Hitler was clearly not Christian.

I'll have to look up this "Syngman Rhee" guy, but, those you reference on the "right", I doubt, caused anywhere in the same universe the amount of death, tyranny and destruction monsters of the totalitarian left have caused.

Syngman Rhee was the post-WW2 leader of South Korea. Hardly the worst offender when compared to the likes of Franco, but not beyond more than a spot of heavy-handed oppression and the odd massacre.

Yes, it's probably true that the mass slaughter managed by the totalitarian left far outstrips that of the totalitarian right. However, that may partly a factor of the fact that the totalitarian left managed to take control of two of the three highest-populated nations on Earth at the time (China, USSR), with the latter also dominating Eastern Europe. More population under their thumbs, more people to massacre. I suspect they were worse as well because they were, substantially, popular movements. In contrast, your average right wing dictator is rarely liked and often forced out of power relatively quickly.

 

[Hybrid Sight]

Communism doesnt work. It only works in a idealist society and cant really function because of human nature(greed).

 

[Superhyperactiveman]

See, here's the thing. Communism is great as an idea, but we see in history that any society that actually adopts it goes to Hell and a Hand-basket. And sure, communists like to say "Oh, this is what went wrong. Without this, Communism would've worked," but this is political/economic science here, and science is all about recognizing patterns. The pattern recognized here is that communism screws everything up, and anyone who thinks communism would do any better in their country than anywhere else is being WAY too optimistic.

 

[Arkhangelsk]

See, here's the thing. Communism is great as an idea, but we see in history that any society that actually adopts it goes to Hell and a Hand-basket. And sure, communists like to say "Oh, this is what went wrong. Without this, Communism would've worked," but this is political/economic science here, and science is all about recognizing patterns. The pattern recognized here is that communism screws everything up, and anyone who thinks communism would do any better in their country than anywhere else is being WAY too optimistic.

The thing is, that what communism does wrong, is that it can't handle the economics properly. What happens when everyone gets the same salary, is that everyone gets poor rather than decent paid, due to bad spending on products. Just like with Stalin's 5 year plan, economics don't work that way. (No, I'm not saying that communism only is like Stalin's dictatorship, but his handling of the economics is one example of how it could go with strict organized economics).

I'm no expert at this, and I don't know the real good political system, cause honestly, every system has it's extreme flaws, and what makes us argue over which system that is best, is the opinion on what is worthy sacrificing. Every system comes with it's own sacrifice, it's all about what the individual is willing to sacrifice for the good of him and/or the people.

 

[gorfias]

I regret to write, I don't know much about Franco, outside SNL happily announcing that he was still dead on evening update!

Interesting point about monsters of the left taking over very large populations... a study of a percent of population killed/exploited by their ruler's would be interesting. Pol Pot seems to be about as bad as it gets, killing 1/3 of his nation.

The Shah, arguably a right winger, was particularly brutal, but, I don't know what kind of percentage he attacked. Worth looking into.

 

[captainordo]

THe main problem is that if people don't have a reason to work, they won't work as hard. People need motivation, eithor you put a gun to back or give them a chance to rise up and prosper

 

[oppp7]

You're thinking of Socialism. Communism is where the government does what it wants.
"Power corrupts. Absolute power corrupts absolutely." -Some author against Totalitarianism