Can Communism Work? page 21

594 posts

Flag Post
Originally posted by mosemizrahi:

Why can’t communism work: It is simple. In capitalism, you are forced to expand your business, think something new, perform very well to be rich. In a communist country, why would I work hard? I’d work in easy,relaxing jobs, not trying hard. Everyone gets approximately the same thing, right?

No not necessarily. In most communist systems the only thing they get an equal part of are the capital gains of community/union owned and controlled businesses.
Sometimes the State also offers basic necessities but more commonly those that don´t work and don´t have an socially expectable excuse don´t even get that.
The pay of the workers from Janitor to Top executive Manager can and will be different.

 
Flag Post

Bill Gates: capitalism means male baldness research gets more funding than malaria

 
Flag Post

Communism has his ups and downs, in democracy we fight for things that in the end we never do. In communism the governor, king etc. decides what he does, good or bad. Either way, if communism is used at countries it may work, depending on the needs.

 
Flag Post

Hmm… Every single time somebody tried it (and I say “somebody”, not “they”, as EVERY communist country has been and/or is ruled by a dictator [Dennis Rodman doesn’t mind]) it failed and killed more people than the amount of people who die in the average war. It has also already managed to kill over 100,000,000 people in about 100 years.

It did not work, it does not work, it never has worked, and it never will work among humans.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by epicdude3:

Communism has his ups and downs, in democracy we fight for things that in the end we never do. In communism the governor, king etc. decides what he does, good or bad. Either way, if communism is used at countries it may work, depending on the needs.

Democracy and Communism are not exclusive. Quite actually for communism to function only Democracy or a Techno-/Meritocracy come in question. Monarchy and Dictatorship generally make Communism impossible.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by epicdude3:

In communism the governor, king etc. decides what he does, good or bad.

If communism is achieved there is no governor, king etc.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by EPR89:
Originally posted by epicdude3:

In communism the governor, king etc. decides what he does, good or bad.

If communism is achieved there is no governor, king etc.

Which proves that it can’t work as every wannabe communist country that has ever existed has had a dictator and/or an autocratic government and/or false elections where the dictator got “100% of the vote”.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by PatriotSaint:
Originally posted by EPR89:
Originally posted by epicdude3:

In communism the governor, king etc. decides what he does, good or bad.

If communism is achieved there is no governor, king etc.

Which proves that it can’t work as every wannabe communist country that has ever existed has had a dictator and/or an autocratic government and/or false elections where the dictator got “100% of the vote”.

Which means that it’s not Communism.

Also, what you’re describing with “100% of the vote” is a one-party government.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by tenco1:
Originally posted by PatriotSaint:
Originally posted by EPR89:
Originally posted by epicdude3:

In communism the governor, king etc. decides what he does, good or bad.

If communism is achieved there is no governor, king etc.

Which proves that it can’t work as every wannabe communist country that has ever existed has had a dictator and/or an autocratic government and/or false elections where the dictator got “100% of the vote”.

Which means that it’s not Communism.

Also, what you’re describing with “100% of the vote” is a one-party government.

Which proves that communism cannot exist. Every dictator who tried it failed and is failing at achieving communism.

They failed at “real communism” so they got stuck with “real-life communism”, the type of communism that is the only type that can exist in the real world and not the dream world.

And every communist communist country is technically a one-party government, as the Communist Party always rules. You might disagree that they are communist… but the Communist Party itself does not. If they did they would call themselves the “Not Really Communism Because This Sounds More Politically Correct Party”

 
Flag Post

Take a six-sided die and roll it four times. Whatever numbers you have not yet rolled, are now impossible to roll ever.

Flawless logic.

 
Flag Post

Sigh, what a surprise to find a thread about politics dominated by the use of strawmen, and the random mixing of economic and political systems to ‘prove’ something. Saying “I want your house/shoes/money/wife without working harder” somehow is supposed to refute communism. Just as ridiculous as saying “I am going too build a dam above your property and take your water” or “I am going to buy all the available milk” refutes capitalism. Marxist theory suggests the most efficient path to “communism” starts with a productive capitalist that ‘evolves’ (perhaps through revolution) through increasing socialist policies to ‘state capitalism’. For example of country on that road, see the United States, which does not practice “real” capitalism (or democracy). A few examples of where laws enforce economic policies ‘for the good of the state’: eminent domain, regulatory agencies, anti-trust, bankruptcy protection, commercial transaction laws, banking regulation (regarding both banks and customers), copyright laws, union laws (and labor laws in general), forced participation in governmental usurption of personal choices (Social Security, Medicare), manipulation of currency/market/inflation by quasi-government Fed, price and wage controls including minimum wage, and my fingers getting tired or I could go on until I run out of space. This makes no judgemnt on whether any or all of these are good or bad, merely that the United States is far from the laissez-faire economy with minimum required oversight required. And the push seems to be toward more government efforts to promote social (and economic) equality, or at least mobility. Compare this to interviews with Chinese leaders that commonly refer to their belief and application of Adam Smith’s invisible hand, and the waters of ‘pure’ economic systems and country trends gets very muddied.

 
Flag Post

yes, it can
but people wouldnt get used to it anytime soon if it is offered
unless its put in by force, it will force people to accept it
also anything can work, even abandoning currency at all and working for the welfare of all

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by NaturalReject:

Take a six-sided die and roll it four times. Whatever numbers you have not yet rolled, are now impossible to roll ever.

Flawless logic.

Yeah, we’ll get it right after we’ve killed another few hundred million people.

Flawless logic.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by PatriotSaint:

Yeah, we’ll get it right after we’ve killed another few hundred million people.

Flawless logic.

Yeah, (deliberately) misunderstand and take offence from his point, that’s how you continue a discussion.

Also, every government had people die under it, but we shouldn’t think about that because that would make your point unimportant, wouldn’t it?

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by PatriotSaint:
Originally posted by NaturalReject:

Take a six-sided die and roll it four times. Whatever numbers you have not yet rolled, are now impossible to roll ever.

Flawless logic.

Yeah, we’ll get it right after we’ve killed another few hundred million people.

Flawless logic.

See, you’re making a huge logical fallacy here by assuming that the reason these countries performed massive genocides is because they’re communist (which, as stated earlier, they weren’t). It’s not. It’s because they were ruled by brutal dictators willing to kill millions of people to maintain control. You can ind countless examples of the same things happening in other countries that weren’t communist. It was because they police state dictatorships, not because they were communist. Besides, these countries weren’t actually communist anyways- most of the “communist” countries of the world were actually socialist. The USSR had “socialist” in its name, after all.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by Pokarnor:
Originally posted by PatriotSaint:
Originally posted by NaturalReject:

Take a six-sided die and roll it four times. Whatever numbers you have not yet rolled, are now impossible to roll ever.

Flawless logic.

Yeah, we’ll get it right after we’ve killed another few hundred million people.

Flawless logic.

See, you’re making a huge logical fallacy here by assuming that the reason these countries performed massive genocides is because they’re communist (which, as stated earlier, they weren’t). It’s not. It’s because they were ruled by brutal dictators willing to kill millions of people to maintain control. You can ind countless examples of the same things happening in other countries that weren’t communist. It was because they police state dictatorships, not because they were communist. Besides, these countries weren’t actually communist anyways- most of the “communist” countries of the world were actually socialist. The USSR had “socialist” in its name, after all.

They were definetly not socialist in anything but name. Sociaslisme is a way to reach the communist goals by democracy rather then by revolution. These countries weren’t democracies so they weren’t socialist.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by thijser:
Originally posted by Pokarnor:
Originally posted by PatriotSaint:
Originally posted by NaturalReject:

Take a six-sided die and roll it four times. Whatever numbers you have not yet rolled, are now impossible to roll ever.

Flawless logic.

Yeah, we’ll get it right after we’ve killed another few hundred million people.

Flawless logic.

See, you’re making a huge logical fallacy here by assuming that the reason these countries performed massive genocides is because they’re communist (which, as stated earlier, they weren’t). It’s not. It’s because they were ruled by brutal dictators willing to kill millions of people to maintain control. You can ind countless examples of the same things happening in other countries that weren’t communist. It was because they police state dictatorships, not because they were communist. Besides, these countries weren’t actually communist anyways- most of the “communist” countries of the world were actually socialist. The USSR had “socialist” in its name, after all.

They were definetly not socialist in anything but name. Sociaslisme is a way to reach the communist goals by democracy rather then by revolution. These countries weren’t democracies so they weren’t socialist.

There are many types of socialism, democratic socialism is just one of them.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by tenco1:
Originally posted by PatriotSaint:

Yeah, we’ll get it right after we’ve killed another few hundred million people.

Flawless logic.

Yeah, (deliberately) misunderstand and take offence from his point, that’s how you continue a discussion.

Also, every government had people die under it, but we shouldn’t think about that because that would make your point unimportant, wouldn’t it?

Communism (as it can only exist in real life) has killed more people in a shorter amount of time than any other modern government system in the world. Excluding ALL conflicts communist countries engaged in, meaning excluding combat casualties, this means that all communist countries have EXECUTED a collective (over) 100,000,000 people of their own nation in only 100 years. Their only crime was not being a slave to the Great Glorious Masters, the Glorious Leader that is always present with communism, and Big Brother, which is also always present under communism.

Governments always have people die under them, but communism is basically a people disposal system.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by Pokarnor:
Originally posted by PatriotSaint:
Originally posted by NaturalReject:

Take a six-sided die and roll it four times. Whatever numbers you have not yet rolled, are now impossible to roll ever.

Flawless logic.

Yeah, we’ll get it right after we’ve killed another few hundred million people.

Flawless logic.

See, you’re making a huge logical fallacy here by assuming that the reason these countries performed massive genocides is because they’re communist (which, as stated earlier, they weren’t). It’s not. It’s because they were ruled by brutal dictators willing to kill millions of people to maintain control. You can ind countless examples of the same things happening in other countries that weren’t communist. It was because they police state dictatorships, not because they were communist. Besides, these countries weren’t actually communist anyways- most of the “communist” countries of the world were actually socialist. The USSR had “socialist” in its name, after all.

You may disagree that the communists are communists, but the Communist Party disagrees with you.

By the way communism is opposed to capitalism, but welcomes socialism with open arms anywhere in the world, as communism is expansive, seeing as you can watch idiots with Communist Party flags parading down the street while communist refugees walk up to them and confront them.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by PatriotSaint:
Originally posted by tenco1:
Originally posted by PatriotSaint:

Yeah, we’ll get it right after we’ve killed another few hundred million people.

Flawless logic.

Yeah, (deliberately) misunderstand and take offence from his point, that’s how you continue a discussion.

Also, every government had people die under it, but we shouldn’t think about that because that would make your point unimportant, wouldn’t it?

Communism (in the form it has been used in countries most prominently so far, which is not actually communism) has killed more people in a shorter amount of time than any other modern government system in the world.

Fixed.

 
Flag Post

EPR is right, as communism both exists and does not exist.

Communism as it was meant to be has never existed, does not exist, and never will exist.

Communism, as it is in real life, and can only be, has existed, does exist, and always will exist as long as somebody else takes a go at reaching “communist utopia” and fails again, killing more people in a shorter amount of time than any other government system in the history of mankind in the process.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by PatriotSaint:

Communism as it was meant to be has never existed, does not exist, and – I think – never will exist.

Fixed again.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by EPR89:
Originally posted by PatriotSaint:

Communism as it was meant to be has never existed, does not exist, and – I think – never will exist.

Fixed again.

Thanks for that.

Yeah, it will work “eventually” (a.k.a. after a few more hundred million people have become “necessary sacrifices” for “the cause”).

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by PatriotSaint:

(a.k.a. after a few more hundred million people have become “necessary sacrifices” for “the cause”).

Citation needed.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by NaturalReject:
Originally posted by PatriotSaint:

(a.k.a. after a few more hundred million people have become “necessary sacrifices” for “the cause”).

Citation needed.

http://www.kongregate.com/forums/9-serious-discussion/topics/324577-profiles-in-communism

Notice any pattern in the data? For example, a lot of people die EVERY TIME someone else tries it again?