"Communism would work if..."

[Ranger2]

No! No! Communism has not worked in the past, and it will not work "if..." No buts about it. Communism is a stupid system that's rooted in theory, but not practice, and that's why it will never work.

"Communism would work if the people in charge were good."
In communism, you hand all of your property to the government. The state owns the means of production. It's like you're a farmer and you have two cows. The state takes the cows and provides you with milk. By giving your property to the government, you're asking to be oppressed.

Communism is a stupid idea, because it does not have a market-based economy, and because it does not promote competition and work.

In the USSR, every so often, the government would have meetings, deciding what amounts of what would be manufactured and produced. They'd say things like, "50,000 pantyhose, 45,000 treadmills, and 63,000 wool socks." They didn't let the market decide what would be popular. And what happened? Let's say that wool socks were fashionable that year, and dieting, not exercising, was popular. Well, you'd have major shortages of socks (this same principle is why it took years to get a car in Russia) and surpluses of treadmills, except this would apply to far more products. Without letting the market decide what you should make more or less of, the communist market failed miserably.

In the USSR, you did not have to work. The government gave what you needed no matter what you worked. You could pretty much do no work at all, give almost nothing to the government, and they'd still give you what you needed. Sounds good? It wasn't. People starved because they did not grow enough food, and since they could not give anything to the government, the rations that the government provided them would go down. People also felt a loss of purpose in life since they didn't have to work, and that's why alcoholism was rampant in Russia.

And in communism, true to its anti-capitalist views, abolished religion. To atheists, this seems like a good thing, but it made any other religions punishable by law, prohibiting freedom of worship. Since religion also taught people that the government was not perfect, (religion's always taught that,) it gave the government allowance to stamp out freedoms of speech. Does that sound like a place you want to live?

So, in essence, communism kept everybody equal by keeping them all poor, while the rich government was happy. That sounds a lot like what the Soviet people fought against.

So no, communism will not work. I see a lot of these threads saying that it would work, but it will not. People say, "oh look at China, they're doing great," but THEY'VE done a ton of reforming. Their economy is becoming more and more market-based like America's, and that's what's making it prosperous. That and cheap labor, but that's a different story.

So no, communism will not work. I've seen plenty of threads saying it would work, but it won't.
Better dead than Red!

Although the latter makes you the former.

[Timi]

Any Communist that tells you Communism works, is false.
There are two types of Communists: The Naive and the Realistic.
The Naive Communist believes that Communism really works and that it's a great idea, however the Realistic Communists realize that Communism does not work, and many Realistics use that to take power in nations that are leaning toward Communism.

However, those who don't believe this may say "Oh you're just brainwashed from the school system" That is entirely false. How can you tell me everyone owns everything is good? The nature of some would try to take more than their share and would upset the balance, then others trying to get their share would result to crimes and such. However this is just a theory of my own understanding and may not seem very logical.

Communism involves annihilating of the Bourgeoisie, which would be considered a evil act. Annihilating a class because of what they have is unacceptable in my book, therefore I cast down Communism right then and there. However Communism also involves a creation of a man, a New Perfect man. However human nature is not perfect, nor will it ever be. We all make mistakes, everyone knows that.

Communism would work if human nature was perfect, but it's not. Therefore Communism is always doomed to fail...every single time.

[morefngdbs]

The ideology of communism works...if your an ant...or a termite.
Seeing we are neither of these & are on a completely different evolutionary branch. We'll just go on doing what we can for ourselves & ignore the cost to others, like child laborers, slave/prisoner labor as long as the price of a pair of sneakers or other so called necessity can be kept as low as possible. Not too mention we will just carry on killing each other as our world wide favorite sport,

[White-hole]

Anybody else think that these vast amounts of communism threads should be amalgamated into one a la the video thread?

[Grizzli]

At 7/24/09 09:51 AM, White-hole wrote: Anybody else think that these vast amounts of communism threads should be amalgamated into one a la the video thread?

communism usually works well in small societies, like finland. it just catastophically fails in large places like Russia

[RubberTrucky]

I don't think any extreme left/ extreme right ideology works.
But I do feel that it is good if we take some aspects from them. At some aspects we would do good to abandon capitalism and engage in a fairer distribution of the wealth. (like lighter taxation of people who make less money and heavier on the rich people or minimising the profit made on necessary products like medicine)

[White-hole]

At 7/24/09 10:06 AM, Grizzli wrote:

communism usually works well in small societies, like finland. it just catastophically fails in large places like Russia

It never happened in Finland, are you sure your not thinking of socialism?

[Elfer]

Communism would work if we lived in a fantasy world specifically set up to allow communism to work.

So um, yeah.

[AapoJoki]

Finland has never been a communist country, nor has it ever been a socialist one.

[scarneck]

Extremes never work and this applies to most things. Communism is the extreme where goverment owns EVERYTHING, thats bad. Free markets dont work either, its really just the opposite extreme. The best solution, in my opinion, is a good medium slightly leaning towards socialism.

[Karlock]

Communism would work if people weren't assholes.

[moose3642]

True that.
Communism would work if people knew what Communism actually was. It is not, as the Russians thought it was, where the government plans and owns everything. It's where the people, collectively, own everything. That can't happen by cause of a central force saying, okay, our elected leader wants us to go Communist. It would have to be a gradual decay of government, coupled with a gradual lack of faith in money. Eventually, there would be no State, no Government, no Property, and hopefully, no Assholes.

http://www.google.com/search?q=define%3A communism&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org .mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a

[KeithHybrid]

Communism could work. The main problem that prevents Communism from being successful is that our world's resources are so limited. Theoretically, if we had infinite resources, Communism could work (of course, provided the leadership isn't corrupt), but in this day and age, it doesn't work so well.

[SeraphimFalling]

At 7/24/09 12:35 PM, White-hole wrote:

At 7/24/09 10:06 AM, Grizzli wrote:

communism usually works well in small societies, like finland. it just catastophically fails in large places like Russia

It never happened in Finland, are you sure your not thinking of socialism?

Socialism ftw

[zephiran]

At 7/24/09 05:46 PM, AapoJoki wrote: Finland has never been a communist country, nor has it ever been a socialist one.

But we have (or at the very least HAD, grumble) a universal healthcare system! Our society is largely based on the scandinavian model! Secret leftists, we are!

Perhaps he was more getting at that a geographically smaller state with low population might give a communistic government a better chance to allocate resources more efficiently?

[Frozenchaos-Nimda]

I kinda agree. Communism works only in villages or really small societys. but thats it.

[ThePretenders]

At 7/23/09 09:10 PM, Ranger2 wrote: In the USSR, you did not have to work. The government gave what you needed no matter what you worked. You could pretty much do no work at all, give almost nothing to the government, and they'd still give you what you needed. Sounds good?

If you knew anything about the USSR, you would know that social parasitism (not working) is an offence because it was a seen as a neglection of a person's duty to work for the state and that's how they officially "abolished" unemployment. Their national anthem, the Internationale refers to social parasitism in these lines:

Only we, the workers of the all-world
Great army of labor,
Have the right to own the land,
But parasites - never!

[GLaDOSKitten]

The only problem with Communism is that people are power mongering bitches. The government is meant to take control of everything and get the nation into an socialist economic state. After that, everything needs to be returned to the state, with everyone equal. Thus, a socioeconomic paradise is formed :)

....Its just no one is ever that keen on giving their complete control and power back....

[Conspiracy3]

You all are making the mistake of associating communist economic ideals with totalitarian dictatorships.

Communism has, and does work when it is used in a democratic society. Take Sweden as the perfect example of a successful socialist nation.

[RubberTrucky]

At 7/27/09 02:35 PM, moose3642 wrote: True that.
Communism would work if people knew what Communism actually was. It is not, as the Russians thought it was, where the government plans and owns everything. It's where the people, collectively, own everything. That can't happen by cause of a central force saying, okay, our elected leader wants us to go Communist. It would have to be a gradual decay of government, coupled with a gradual lack of faith in money. Eventually, there would be no State, no Government, no Property, and hopefully, no Assholes.

Still, a society without government would not work.
There would be no-one to plan great communal projects or decide for everyone. If there is a conflict, each indivudual is likely to go his own way and you get a society with everyone their own house and own bussiness but little interaction.

To me, communism means that there is no social status with big effects. The cleaning personel would have the same social benefits as a manager. Goods would be accessable for everyone.
It would require a government to make this happen, but I think soviet russia under stalin was less communism and more dictatorial, since stalin thought himself a million times bigger than anyone else.
Like said before, communism is naive to a government having that much responsibilities to be a fair judge in everything.
But then again, if you expect people to do this by themselves is equally as naive.

[Kenzu]

At 7/23/09 09:10 PM, Ranger2 wrote: No! No! Communism has not worked in the past, and it will not work "if..." No buts about it. Communism is a stupid system that's rooted in theory, but not practice, and that's why it will never work.

"Communism would work if the people in charge were good."
In communism, you hand all of your property to the government. The state owns the means of production.

Communism is a stupid idea, because it does not have a market-based economy, and because it does not promote competition and work.

there is no state and no government in communism, there never was one.
Property belongs to the people
State doesnt exist

Understand?

[Tri-Nitro-Toluene]

At 7/24/09 09:18 AM, morefngdbs wrote: The ideology of communism works...if your an ant...or a termite.

Or live in a small community where the amounts being produced is easy to regulate handle, control and predict.

There's no reason why communism can't work on a small scale at a local level in terms of basic neccessities. You start moving beyond that and it starts to fall apart, but the blanket generalisation that ' communism doesn't work for people, period', isn't really accurate...

It can work in certain situations, just not on the national level, and certainly not the international level as the amount of resources and products produced is too great for the government to maintain and regulate.

[Tony-DarkGrave]

At 7/28/09 10:48 AM, Kenzu wrote: there is no state and no government in communism, there never was one.
Property belongs to the people
State doesnt exist

Understand?

no it doesn't it should go to those who deserve it ( bought it) and no matter what there will be a state because communsim fails look at all the historical attempts: Russia China North Korea Cuba and Laos.

[zephiran]

At 7/28/09 08:53 AM, Conspiracy3 wrote: You all are making the mistake of associating communist economic ideals with totalitarian dictatorships.

Does the term "dictatorship of the proletariat" ring a bell? "Communist" revolutionaires have a bad habit of installing yet another oppressive SOB in place of the one that was overthrown. Not always the case though, just my two cents here. Keep also in mind that the dictatorship of the proletariat doesn´t mean that the proles elect a dictator when they´re done revolutionizin´. It´s more of an unvoluntary trend, if I may put it that way...

Communism has, and does work when it is used in a democratic society. Take Sweden as the perfect example of a successful socialist nation.

Gosh darn it, now I´m just embarrassed. The Nordic model. The welfare state. That´s what you are referring to. Not socialism. Not communism. Redistribution of wealth with an open market is most scandinavian countries in a nutshell. But yes it does work fine. No nordic country owns all the production means in the state, they do however own a large amount of stock in a broad diversity of companies, I do believe. Finland might be the major shareholder in Finnair, an airline company, but that´s really all there is to it. Well alright, then there´s Alko and Altia in Finland, Systembolaget in Sweden and vinmonopolet in Norway, these are state owned companies that have monopolies on the production and retailing of alcohol, but that´s it, honestly.

Oh, and I also have another bone to pick here.

I´d like to point out a few differences between a communist STATE and a communist SOCIETY.

A communist society is a classless, egalitarian and stateless society based on common ownership that Marx theorized to be the "best" and most evloved form of society, seeing as everyone would be equals and happy and stuff. It´s an utter utopia however, an unachievable dream, and on top of this it seems quite flawed to me. There are many benefits to having SOME form of state, SOME form of governmental body (natural monopolies, guise?).

A communist state is a different matter altogether, seeing as instead of complete anarchy you often see the communist state concentrate all or much of the political power in the state to a dictator and a single political party. Why this practice was instituted in the first place kinda baffles me, but I´ll just assume some power-hungry profiteer thought it was a swell, or even necessary idea. Anyhow, a communist state is also characterized by a high degree of centralization and bureaucracy. Essentially, miles and miles of red tape. The governing body has to control so many aspects of the state (production, anyone?) that a nation of the larger kind will drown in tasks. A smaller nation might theoretically have a better chance at succeeding here, simply because it is smaller (I mean both geographically smaller and population-wise smaller) and thus might have "less" tasks to perform (less factories to control, less population to look after, closer distances etc.). Although, even taking size into account, the governing body cannot entirely avoid a certain degree of rigidity and unadaptability. This, especially, was the downfall of the Soviet Union - five year economical plans just don´t cut it, demand is subject to fluctuations! I believe the shortcomings of this kind of system became painfully evident to China at some point, so therefore they switched to a more open and privatized market. Provided I´m not extremely mistaken here of course.

So, in short: "Communist" states are bad, communist societies are not necessarily all that bad - they are just more of a fantasy than anything else.

Funny footnote: By the definitions I´m using, China is a communist state but NOT a communist society!

[zephiran]

At 7/28/09 12:03 PM, zephiran wrote: Keep also in mind that the dictatorship of the proletariat doesn´t mean that the proles elect a dictator when they´re done revolutionizin´.

Are SUPPOSED to elect a dictator. There´s a slight difference, and the way I put it wasn´t quite the way I meant it :P

Carry on, lads! Note the change, but other than that there´s nothing to see here!

[Harry-Slaughter]

The basic theory of communism is pretty good but it puts the government in a place of too much power. If the government didn't get corrupt then it would work out okay but powerful governments generally become corrupt.

[GoddamnMadDog]

It is rather charming to watch as capitalists (especially those of the laissez-faire flair) beat the dead horse that is communism despite their own economic ideology not being so much of an innocent newborn lamb itself.

[TheDaemonicPoet]

Rational Anarchy that is the solution, no-one can say what we got to do and that is all.

[Wonderful]

At 7/30/09 08:41 AM, TheUnwisePoet wrote: Rational Anarchy that is the solution, no-one can say what we got to do and that is all.

If Communism doesn't work, then Anarchy definitely doesn't work.

[Lorkas]

Haha I love it when americans talk about communism. Here in Lithuania we were actually a part of the Soviet union 20 years ago. It wasn't that bad!