Communism. can it work?

[Slurp]

I think that if there wasn't a crazy leader in charge and the Americans weren't so damn aggressive it could work
apologies about the short opening post

[shinytheelf]

I think you know very little about communism and should probably put a little more detail into your posts.

USE WIKIPEDIA.

edit: Crazy leaders? I know he may be a socialist, but Fidel Castro is one of my heroes. I say this as he is generally called a "commie" for no reason.

[doctor_fruitbat]

Name me three national communist societies that haven't stifled liberties and freedoms well beyond the amount our democratic society has.

[sirch]

Well just on Saturday I was told I would be a good Communist! Mainly because of how I think the world and countries should be run, but as I have already received a Neg Today (Apparently being 'Officially racist') I will not post my views!

[Enmity]

I'll put this in the most simple possible way.

Command Economy is not good. Where's the incentive to take a risk? How will the economy grow? So long Adam Smith... Hello council flats for all!

[Broche]

Communism could work. Of course, depending on the group, the environment etc it would be more or less likely to work, but still it is in my mind the fairest system of government. I think Marx's quote "from each what he can, to each what he needs" is brilliant. If the world worked like that it would be a much better place.

Also, the American stance towards Communism is disgraceful. I can't see how they can get away with such censorship. (well, they are America, but that isn't a good reason)

[Enmity]

Communism could work. Of course, depending on the group, the environment etc it would be more or less likely to work, but still it is in my mind the fairest system of government. I think Marx's quote "from each what he can, to each what he needs" is brilliant. If the world worked like that it would be a much better place.

Also, the American stance towards Communism is disgraceful. I can't see how they can get away with such censorship. (well, they are America, but that isn't a good reason)

No, it could not. It's a phenominally inefficient use of resources as it's not relying on DD (Demand) and SS (Supply) for production. That said, a entirely "Free Economy" (Which America claims to be *snickers*) could not work either. I think you can only really be a well functioning society with a Mixed Economy, Gov't intervention is neccessesary in some aspects (I'm a firm advocate of Supply-Side Economics) but on the same hand things need to be left to their own devices too.

[Broche]

But surely isn't the basic idea of everyone having what they need good? I mean, it would eliminate poverty (if it was truely Communist, and the economy was good). And if everyone was treated equally it would stop snobbery and such.


(bear in mind how late it is, so I apologise for the lack of coherence)

[Enmity]

Oh sure, the idea of everyone having what they need is lovely. But people are greedy by nature. It could never work, it's a naïve concept really. And even if it could, we'd stay the same in terms of economic growth. Do you really not want to progress?

Yes, it's late. I'm going to bed.

[shinytheelf]

I would FAR prefer to live in a economically regressive, truly communist country than I would in America or China.

[Meadow]

Sadly Communism can never work, no. At least not in the ways it has been implemented before. Marx and Engels said communism would work best on a small scale over a long period. Russia, China, Vietnam, North Korea etc have all tried to implement it on a huge scale (look at the USSR) in the space of a few years, in some cases months!

It is because of the impatience in our human nature that communism cannot be properly implemented. So yes, and no. It could work in the perfect situation, but as the perfect situation cannot arise, it cannot work.

[Nicodemus]

America doesn't claim to be a free economy. America claims to be a capitalist country. Small, privately owned companies becoming large, publicly owned companies never owned but certainly regulated by the government. The term "free economy" is just one more misconception that people (mainly non-US residents) use to snicker at America. Like the term "democracy." We are not a pure democracy.

That being said, Enmity is correct about communism not working. It is the definition of working in theory but not in practice. Humans are social creatures, but as has been said, we're also inherently greedy (not all of us obviously, but by and large). Until that changes, communism will never work in practice.

[Slurp]

[/QUOTE]
edit: Crazy leaders? I know he may be a socialist, but Fidel Castro is one of my heroes. I say this as he is generally called a "commie" for no reason.[/QUOTE]

I wasn't talking about Castro! I think he's done wonders for Cuba! I was talking about Stalin

[carpefula]

As has been said before and will be said again...

It's great in theory, but the fact is, there will always be people willing to stamp on the necks of others if they get to the top if they have to.

I have some Slovakian friends who talk about the 'Socialist days' quite alot. They are about 26/27 now and consider themselves lucky. This is because they considered themselves lucky to grow up as children in a Communist country... they had great community centred upbringings with a great education (albiet a censored one) and their parents were never without jobs. However, Communism collapsed when they were coming up for their teens, so when they were old enough to decide what they wanted to do with their lives, they realised they had the freedom to travel and took full advantage of it.

They say that they miss the security of Communism, as no one was ever unemployed and everyone had food on the table etc etc... but they say they like the freedom of the capitalist Slovakia. But capitalist Slovakia comes with a price.. that price is drugs, unemployment and crime.

[Roxsie]

However what Stalin did was not communism. The C.C all agreed that what they were doing was part of the progression towards communism and part of that progression involves the party taking control. What Russia was was a leninist marxist society on the way to communism, indeed one of Khrushchevs biggest mistakes was allowing the presidium and C.C to pressure him into setting a date when communism would be achieved (ironically this was the year the U.S.S.R collapsed)

Until human nature evolves then there can be no communism as true communism requires us to set aside physical concerns for the greater good of society. Even in Israel where the kibbutz are supposed to be socialist there are people selfishly selling things for personal gain. Everyone is out for themselves as we live in an individualistic society with everyone out for their own goods.

If we could change our natures, then Yes we could have a true communistic society, just not now.

[PatatoeMassacre]

I think we humans are too crappy for communism.

Besides, I don't want janitors and mailmen to have the same salary as me! D:<

[Roxsie]

Why not? I'm sure they work just as hard if not harder (physically) and without them our society might collapse or develop a disease from unsanitised phone handsets and die out.

[Enmity]

A number of you say that's it's good in theory. It's not, why should someone who works harder, innovates and takes risks not reap the benefits over someone who's a layabout? Why do none of you like growth? Or resource efficience? Even in principle it falls down.

Mixed economy is the best way to go.

And yes, many americans do claim to have a free market economy.

[Slurp]

isn't helping people better than selfishness?
sorry that sounds a bit childish

[Amasis]

A number of people have argued against communism on the basis of wanting economic growth, but to what end? Surely you only need to reach a stage whereby society can provide for all of its members and then just remain at that stable point. Then, growth serves no further purpose.

<Please note, I'm not claiming that communism can work in this world, just questioning this single arguement. And in fact, might this not be relevant even in a mixed economy? In a world of finite resources do we not at some point have to stop growing and try and reach sustainability?>

[Discodoris]

Communism doesn't work in reality because it removes incentive from the individual. There is no personal gain to be made, other than the satisfaction of doing your part in the machine. But the truly free market economy also fails to take into consideration human nature. It assumes that people make rational decisions and balance social and economic considerations, which is also completely untrue. Most people make purchasing decisions based on emotions, hence using advertising as an influencing tool. If you think that is untrue, think about all the descriptions of new consoles/ gadgets/computers as 'sexy' and 'desirable' - hardly the vocabulary of reason and logic, is it? Even food shopping you don't think - I'll buy that because it will keep me alive and it is nutritionally ok - you think that will be tasty, I'll enjoy eating it.

This is why the argument about a mixed economy arises. Having a welfare system addresses looking after those members of society who are most vulnerable, however flawed the system is. Having a market economy allows people to choose how to exploit their talents and attain what they want in life. Having a democratically elected government or even a benevolent dictatorship facilitates the decsions which affect nations to be made - what rules and limits to set for markets and individuals. The shape of government can change - I include monarchy and feudalism as part of the benevolent dictatorship model.

I've yet to meet a social theory which works perfectly in reality. This is mainly because humans and their ways of thinking are so diverse. Theories always have to be advanced with a set of assumptions, which just don't bear out reality. Amongst any population, there seems always to be exception to generalisation. And theories are also advanced with a particularly personal perspective, some are just better observed than others.

[Slurp]

Thats a hard post to follow up, you're obviously very knowledgable and for that, i thank you for gracing my topic

[ZekeyLizard]

Good job making yourself look like an utter dunce with that first post, Slurp.
And its nice to see that you clearly put a whole 5 minutes of thought into making this topic with your one whole sentence.

by the way:
http://www.weebls-stuff.com/forums/showthread.php?t=38732&highlight=communism
http://www.weebls-stuff.com/forums/showthread.php?t=37752&highlight=communism
http://www.weebls-stuff.com/forums/showthread.php?t=32771&highlight=communism
http://www.weebls-stuff.com/forums/showthread.php?t=21883&highlight=communism
http://www.weebls-stuff.com/forums/showthread.php?t=20502&highlight=communism
http://www.weebls-stuff.com/forums/showthread.php?t=18705&highlight=communism
http://www.weebls-stuff.com/forums/showthread.php?t=15928&highlight=communism
http://www.weebls-stuff.com/forums/showthread.php?t=10368&highlight=communism
http://www.weebls-stuff.com/forums/showthread.php?t=7357&highlight=communism
http://www.weebls-stuff.com/forums/showthread.php?t=7190&highlight=communism
http://www.weebls-stuff.com/forums/showthread.php?t=5859&highlight=communism
http://www.weebls-stuff.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1108&highlight=communism
http://www.weebls-stuff.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1332&highlight=communism

those are all topics about communism. better than yours, too.



The Search Option at the top of the forum. Use it.
Good day.

[Glitch]

This is a tricky ones. It works in theory as long as everyone keeps to the rules, but it practice it all falls apart IMO. That said, it may not be a good idea to make the whole world capitalist, or socialist or communist. It's up to each individual country how they are run.

I might just be talking out of my own arse on this though...

[Slurp]

Ok apologies to everyone who is offened by my lack of expertise or knowledge, i just wanted to make a thread to find the more politically minded people, but clearly i'm not deemed smart enough to even attempt it, and for that i apologise again

[Nicodemus]

A number of you say that's it's good in theory. It's not, why should someone who works harder, innovates and takes risks not reap the benefits over someone who's a layabout? Why do none of you like growth? Or resource efficience? Even in principle it falls down.

Mixed economy is the best way to go.

And yes, many americans do claim to have a free market economy.

Because in theory, everyone contributes to communism equally. There are no layabouts. Layabouts only happen in a market or capitalist economy. In theory.

And no, many Americans don't claim to have a free market economy. I don't know who you've been talking to, but I live here, and I've talked to a fair few.

[Stealth Chimp]

another Communism thread? Hurrah. Communism is designed to work in German city states in the industrialism of the 1800s blah blah, needs to be redesigned to work in modern nation states etc etc. Marx was right about epochs in my opinion. Lots of people disagree, some people agree with communism, everyone seems to hold very strong views about it, arguments follow. I'm a socialist so I'm biased. Hurrah.

[Enmity]

Because in theory, everyone contributes to communism equally. There are no layabouts. Layabouts only happen in a market or capitalist economy. In theory.

And no, many Americans don't claim to have a free market economy. I don't know who you've been talking to, but I live here, and I've talked to a fair few.

If everyone contributes to communism equally then where's the incentive to do more than the bare minimum? No one will want to take a risk and, for example, invest in a new product becuase they won't benefit from it and as a result the economy will remain static. The greed of humanity is a good thing, it gets things done. This is why 'Poverty is a neccessary evil'. How can a theory account for human nature, you can't go around saying that everyone will work equally as hard and then try to put that into practise but people won't. So among all the nitty gritty we get down to one sentence. It can't work.

I'll put my hands up to the free market bit, I think I'd interpreted the term 'Free World'.

[Nicodemus]

How can a theory account for human nature, you can't go around saying that everyone will work equally as hard and then try to put that into practise but people won't. So among all the nitty gritty we get down to one sentence. It can't work.

In reference to the bolded section: it can't. Exactly.

Um, you do know that I agree with you here, right? I mean, this was exactly what I was saying.

[Flex Buffchest]

Greed is simply human nature, therefor communism will never work. A Conservative (or Republican) government works.

[doctor_fruitbat]

But capitalist Slovakia comes with a price.. that price is drugs, unemployment and crime.

And communist Slovakia didn't? Criminals, stoners and layabouts aren't going to suddenly clap their hands and say "fantastic! Let's all work for the greater good of the nation!" They will continue to layabout, slack off and thieve, mug, rape and murder. To think that this will vanish any time soon is a complete fantasy.

[Enmity]

In reference to the bolded section: it can't. Exactly.

Um, you do know that I agree with you here, right? I mean, this was exactly what I was saying.

Ya. That's good, but I was just giving my reasons why it's not good in theory as well as reality.

Greed is simply human nature, therefor communism will never work. A Conservative (or Republican) government works.

Oh yes, I love the republican administration in the US... They need a Democrat in my opinion.

[PatatoeMassacre]

Why not? I'm sure they work just as hard if not harder (physically) and without them our society might collapse or develop a disease from unsanitised phone handsets and die out.

Then we might as well all be janitors. There's no need for education or whatever, we all get the same anyways. We might as well sleep on the job.. it wouldn't change the salary.

[Comrade Smith]

Mr. Massacre, that is a huge generalisation.
If somebody was an absolute useless twat he would be fired and he would have to look for a job that he can actually do, no employer, state or private, communist society or current, would keep such a lazy ass hole.

And why does every body here think that a communist society would let a janitor get an equal salary to say, a road consultant. Communism strives for abolishment of private industry, not property, It also strives towards lowering the huge difference between High and low income jobs.

Name me three national communist societies that haven't stifled liberties and freedoms well beyond the amount our democratic society has.

Well Mr. Fruitbat,
I want you to tell me right now, RIGHT NOW! the names of three communist governments, and don't just list off "democratic peoples republic of ..." because I want to see countries that have fully achieved communism, not just attempted weaker forms such as socialism, or adopted a later version that was written by some bald russian called Lenin, nor do I want to see revisionist governments. I want to see Full force, solid and achieved Communism.

Also Many people speak calims of Terrible slave labour and sex industrys that make japan blush. Well Again I say that as to date no country has achieved communism, China at one point, to my limited understanding was tantilizingly close, but still no chesse, but these days, and even a few decades ago, I regard China to be in the finishing stages of "Capitalisation". all these terrible things we hear of communism are not the fault of communism, we hear of despotic governments that control every aspect of their citizens lifes, shady deals behind the closed doors of huge imposing governments, but these are not communist governments, and most of the time these deals, slaughters and regiemes are due to either the leaders or uncontrolable circumstances, such as, this folowing example.

E.G A supposed 50 million deaths in russia during stalins reign, well, ten years ago that numbers was at 2.5 million, and the year before even less, don't bull shit me about "newly found sources", because these sources have been out in the open for years before the began to be blowen out of proportion. also at the same time as the deaths, there was a potatoe famine in the ukraine, the USSRs farming land, and Nazi germany had just started to invade, in the middle of a very harsh winter. and the further the buggers advanced the more farming land the USSR lost.

Well its been nice talking to you capitalist pigs and all but I must rush

[doctor_fruitbat]

Fine, then - name me three countries that have attempted to bring about communism in a way that didn't stifle liberties and freedoms well beyond the amount our democratic society has.

[Roxsie]

E.G A supposed 50 million deaths in russia during stalins reign, well, ten years ago that numbers was at 2.5 million, and the year before even less, don't bull shit me about "newly found sources", because these sources have been out in the open for years before the began to be blowen out of proportion. also at the same time as the deaths, there was a potatoe famine in the ukraine, the USSRs farming land, and Nazi germany had just started to invade, in the middle of a very harsh winter. and the further the buggers advanced the more farming land the USSR lost.

Ok i had to do this for History so ...

A) until the collapse of the USSR all information sent to the west was 'official information' so it was doctored if needed
b) after the collapse of the USSR the russian leaders kept the actual records of what had happened under lock and key because they did not need the problems of sorting it out whilst trying to stabilise Russia
c) the USSR was a bureaucratic society so everything was written down including the NKVD's records and assignments (NKVD until near to Stalin's death not KGB)
d) The West have only been allowed in these archives for the past five years so of course there is going to be a wealth of information.
:eng101:


Also Communism doesn't work in one country - there is a need for a global revolution for it to survive.

[Slurp]

Also Communism doesn't work in one country - there is a need for a global revolution for it to survive.

very true, surprised your the first one to point it out

[PatatoeMassacre]

Mr. Massacre, that is a huge generalisation.
If somebody was an absolute useless twat he would be fired and he would have to look for a job that he can actually do, no employer, state or private, communist society or current, would keep such a lazy ass hole.

I'm not saying janitors sleep on the job. I said we COULD sleep on the job.
And I'm saying that you don't need a fancy education for being a janitor.

Sure, being a janitor is hard work, especially if something needs to get fixed or something. But it's not really something that you worked your whole life for. Sure you could think: "I want to be a janitor" but you don't need a high education for that.

K, perhaps "sleeping on the job" went a little bit too far, but if I lived under communism I wouldn't do my best for anything! I wouldn't give a fuck if I got promoted! I might as well skip school! And the government does everything for me, and then I would certainly loose allot of freedom.

Sure, there should be some equality. The government should take care of the poor and all that stuff. But I also believe that people need to do stuff for themselves, and not let the government breast-feed them. Capitalism with some social laws is what I prefer.

[~Crazy Penguin~]

Sure, there should be some equality. The government should take care of the poor and all that stuff. But I also believe that people need to do stuff for themselves, and not let the government breast-feed them. Capitalism with some social laws is what I prefer.
I quite agree. I think that the government should do SOME of the things that Communism suggests. Equal education, health care, take care of the poor and underprivledged. Other than that, it's only a good theory, because as it's been stated before, someone always breaks "the rules" and it never works like people had planned it to.

[Slurp]

[QUOTE=But I also believe that people need to do stuff for themselves, and not let the government breast-feed them.[/QUOTE]

you have a valid point, but do you only think that because it has been drilled into you for all your life? is it infact fine to help the needy? i'm not accusing you, or saying that this is my opinion, just pointing it out

[PatatoeMassacre]

you have a valid point, but do you only think that because it has been drilled into you for all your life? is it infact fine to help the needy? i'm not accusing you, or saying that this is my opinion, just pointing it out

Scientists recently discovered that evolution is like economy, capitalist economy.
Just like people try to make better and better products, or try to copy other products, animals tried to be better and better than other animals, or they copied other animals.
And then there is afcourse the rule of the jungle, the survival of the fittest, if you are weak (and in these days, weak in a monetary way) there's a big chance you would die in a 100% capitalistic environment.
So I think it is a little bit natural. I'm not saying that we should let those who are poor freeze in the cold or anything, and I understand that we humans do need to take care of our brethren, but I don't think "capitalism" is something that is drilled into someone's head by the media or by the capitalistic environment.

But on the other hand communism could be called quite natural too. Taking care of others among your species helped us allot during evolution. I just think some humans fight for themselves, and others fight for others. And I think the mix of those two kind of people is what made us such a succesful breed.

But I just don't think communism would work, it's just too far to the left. Governments that are too far to the left or too far to the right caused allot of trouble in the past. I personally think it is healthy to stay in the middle. People should take care for themselves AND for others.

[Splush]

This 'human nature' stuff is pretty dodgy. Personally, I think human nature is largely a social construction rather than an intrinsic trait of our species; we've developed a certain greedy, selfish "nature" because all the modes of production humanity has been involved in thus far have rewarded that. While I think it will definitely be a long, hard process to change 'human nature' it would by no means be impossible. The 'average' person's values of a certain class, sex, ethnicity in this country clearly haven't stayed the same over the last 100 years, and the average human's values in one part of the world will often differ greatly from those in another society. Human nature, to me, is inherently transient and socially created.

On the issue of economic growth, while I appreciate how some features of a collective economy could retard economic growth, how do these explain the utterly bloody huge growth in the USSR's economy, outpacing the growth of western superpowers despite facing trade restrictions imposed by the west. With the USSR growing like it was, people weren't working without reward; they could experience their quality of life improving on a daily basis (unless they happened to wake up in a Gulag, I guess). It was external events (American pressure, World War 2) rather than internal factors that caused that growth to stop. Something people often don't realise about Marx is that the core of his work is about increasing industrial efficiency rather than any warm and fuzzy humanitarian issues. It's not like he was suggesting we sacrifice economic growth in favour of social equality, there was no compromise implied.

Personally I believe communism could work, and is worth striving for more than ever now that western capitalist democracies like the UK have openly abandoned any intention of equality. Sadly, I seems pretty clear that is would have to happen through worldwide revolution, which would need such drastic social changes on such a large scale that it's impossible to imagine it happening in the next couple of centuries.

I have some Slovakian friends who talk about the 'Socialist days' quite alot. They are about 26/27 now and consider themselves lucky. This is because they considered themselves lucky to grow up as children in a Communist country... they had great community centred upbringings with a great education (albiet a censored one) and their parents were never without jobs. However, Communism collapsed when they were coming up for their teens, so when they were old enough to decide what they wanted to do with their lives, they realised they had the freedom to travel and took full advantage of it.

They say that they miss the security of Communism, as no one was ever unemployed and everyone had food on the table etc etc... but they say they like the freedom of the capitalist Slovakia. But capitalist Slovakia comes with a price.. that price is drugs, unemployment and crime.This seems familiar to me. One of my father's colleagues is a Russian architect working for a prestigious international firm, regularly travelling the world on work, with a home in Moscow and a holiday home in Kaliningrad. But when I talk to him about the Soviet Union he seems to deeply despise what happened to his country. It's really hard to understand how he could feel that way when he's reaping the benefits of capitalism so nicely, but when he talks about the decollectivism of Russia he describes it as their country being stolen from them, he sounds bloody mortified.

[Roxsie]

Yes if you can call nightly mob shot-outs on the street a benefit.

The fact is the soviets kept law and order and once they left it went too.

[eleanor]

Yes if you can call nightly mob shot-outs on the street a benefit.

The fact is the soviets kept law and order and once they left it went too.
How do you think the Soviets kept this law and order? By offering sweets to people who behaved? :-/ Any country which has experienced a sudden change in regime is going to take some time to adjust - currently Russia has no middle class, for example, but this will change as time passes and things settle.

[Roxsie]

However i was trying to put across the attitude of the people who live in Russia, especially the 75% who want Stalin (or at least his system) back.

[InstaCpu]

One thing I am missing here is a definition of communism, are we all talking about the same thing? Anyone? People seem to focus on some negative aspects of states that called themselves "communist" as necessary attributes of communism. I dispute that. Would like to see what some of you think and will weigh in with my own idea.

[SPACKlick]

Communism as an idea only works if everbody withtin the society is communist. It doesn't need a ruling government. As people have said communism removes incentive. If i am a provider for a large nation, my small contribution doesn't make a huge difference to everybody else once it is spread out between them and if i didn't work so hard the society would still provide for my needs so why should i work hard? Unless your entire society is of the opinion, I should work hard to provie for the society which provides for me, then communism fails. Which is why communism, as a theory, only works in small communes and is best in islands or areas with impassable borders.