What countrie would communism work?

[coaliscool42]

Recently I looked at this chart. The height of the USSR was about 290 million. The US has a population of about 316 million source. Keep in mind, the USSR number is inflated because it is not just counting Russia.

Communism didn't work to well in the Soviet Union. Capitalism worked (and still does) in the US well.

Communism doesn't work in large groups because someone needs to decide how to spread the resources. It devolves into dictatorship often because of this. Capitalism works because individuals can make decisions for themselves. Therefore making democracy a easy option.

Yugoslavia had a population of 22 million source.

Yugoslavia acted differently than other communist establishments. It had democratic elections and monarchy was abolished, had local governments, and had quality standards of living.

Now for a capitalist example.

Switzerland has a population of 8 million source.

It has one of the best governments in Europe with many of the same qualitys of Yugoslavia (they arguably did them better). As you can see it is a small state which lays on the down low.

What do you think? Does communism work in small countries? Keep in mind correlation doesn't mean causation. The USSR and Yugoslavia also had different communism types (Marxist and Tito). Take this with a grain of salt.

EDIT: I meant to say countries in the title. Not country.

[SadisticMonkey]

Which countries would National Socialism work in? Large countries with powerful militaries may risk having an expansionist foreign policies, but what about smaller ones whose defense forces are useful only for basic defense?

[leanlifter1]

Real Communism has never been practiced as it has always been corrupt communism in practice. Communism is a classless, Governmentless, MONEYLESS system.

[SadisticMonkey]

At 11/12/14 11:36 PM, leanlifter1 wrote: Real Communism has never been practiced as it has always been corrupt communism in practice. Communism is a classless, Governmentless, MONEYLESS system.

Yeah but every time someone has tried to implement it, it's turned to shit. Why risk it for the sake of """real communism"""?

I mean even Lenin himself created a system that turned into a tyrannical dictatorship (which was in fact his own fault) and the ideology of most communists is marxism-leninism.

Maybe you need to consider the possibility that "real" communism hasn't been practised because it can't be practised.

[leanlifter1]

At 11/13/14 12:53 AM, SadisticMonkey wrote:

At 11/12/14 11:36 PM, leanlifter1 wrote: Real Communism has never been practiced as it has always been corrupt communism in practice. Communism is a classless, Governmentless, MONEYLESS system.

Yeah but every time someone has tried to implement it, it's turned to shit. Why risk it for the sake of """real communism"""?

I mean even Lenin himself created a system that turned into a tyrannical dictatorship (which was in fact his own fault) and the ideology of most communists is marxism-leninism.

Maybe you need to consider the possibility that "real" communism hasn't been practised because it can't be practised.

Communism has never been practiced because of the monetary systems existence. Once again if money is involved then it;s no longer Communism.

“The few who understand the system will either be so interested in its profits or be so dependent upon its favours that there will be no opposition from that class, while on the other hand, the great body of people, mentally incapable of comprehending the tremendous advantage that capital derives from the system, will bear its burdens without complaint, and perhaps without even suspecting that the system is inimical to their interests.” The Rothschild's banking dynasty

[SadisticMonkey]

At 11/13/14 01:02 AM, leanlifter1 wrote: Communism has never been practiced because of the monetary systems existence. Once again if money is involved then it;s no longer Communism.

You think communist countries become dictatorships because they had money? hahaha

Good luck maintaining an advanced economy of any type without the use of money. I'm sure a bureaucrat will be good at determining the value of commodities himself.

[leanlifter1]

At 11/13/14 03:03 AM, SadisticMonkey wrote:

You think communist countries become dictatorships because they had money? hahaha

Unfortunately I did not say that no. However in Communism there is no dictatorship/dictator so you have it mixed up. Perhaps you watched George Orwells 1984 to many times.

[SadisticMonkey]

At 11/13/14 05:04 AM, leanlifter1 wrote: Unfortunately I did not say that no. However in Communism there is no dictatorship/dictator so you have it mixed up. Perhaps you watched George Orwells 1984 to many times.

Moneyless economies make no sense.

[leanlifter1]

At 11/13/14 12:16 PM, Korriken wrote:

I always find it amusing that you never try to provide a counterpoint to the fact that communism can only work if human ambition is suppressed.

Well that is your opinion. I don't know why you have a problem with ambition. Many Many Many Many millions of Fat assed Americans have lost all ambition a long time ago so what's your point ? It's up to the individual to summon ambition not Government LOL.

You would end up with a small farming community with no way of obtaining many of the things they need.

Very presumptuous of you.

And of course, it would just be a matter of time before someone goes around saying, "Screw this, follow me and I'll lead us to a better future!" and you got an instant dictator.

So why has someone not done this already ? Oh right because of money you say LOL. Your stories are not making much logical inferences.

All I am saying is that Communism has never existed.

[DoctorStrongbad]

Communism would never work in a large nation. It may work in a city-state.

[Warforger]

At 11/12/14 08:26 PM, coaliscool42 wrote: What do you think? Does communism work in small countries? Keep in mind correlation doesn't mean causation. The USSR and Yugoslavia also had different communism types (Marxist and Tito). Take this with a grain of salt.

The Communism of Yugoslavia wasn't that different from that of the USSR. The main difference was that Tito wanted more independence when before the USSR dominated Eastern Europe. If it was drastically different the USSR would've invaded, just like they did to Czechoslovakia in 1968 (to which Tito approved of). You see in Czechoslovakia they had called for democratic and free speech reforms, they had still said they were going to be loyal to Communism and the Warsaw Pact (Yugoslavia had said they wouldn't be loyal to the Warsaw Pact) but they wanted these reforms. This changing of the system was more dangerous to the Soviets than a Communist state that spit in their face but maintained the same system, like Romania, Poland, China and Yugoslavia and so they felt compelled to crush the Prague Spring. Had the Communism of Tito been that different (it was just the same thing but with more interaction with the West) the USSR would've invaded.

But I think in the vast majority of human history Communism would work. Like in tribal structures and people who are untouched by modern technology, mostly because that is how their societies worked. Foraging societies work on sharing. If you killed a wild boar you would distribute it evenly to everyone. Keeping it to yourself is wrong and ultimately suicidal. In essence they are already living in Communism. What's different about modern society is that the culture has gotten to the point where everyone is taught that greed is essentially good, that people own things and that they should want. People are manipulated in modern society constantly, everything is tied in to sell something and produce want. People are taught that having a big house, a fast car and a whole assortment of electronics will make them happy. Essentially when you have people who were raised in a consumerist society they're not going to conform to Communism very well.

What's interesting though is that in Eastern Europe people don't necessarily hate Communism. There are people who do but there are a good portion of others who like it. Most people give an answer as to what they think about Communism vs. Capitalism to be "it depends, some people are better off some are worse off, farmers for example have it much worse than before but some entrepreneurs are very happy". People like Socialism, it's just what they didn't like was totalitarianism. That's a point I'd like to clarify because if they hated Communism it wouldn't explain why the Communists/former Communists made huge electoral gains in the 90's in places like Russia or Poland.

[SadisticMonkey]

At 11/13/14 04:36 PM, leanlifter1 wrote: All I am saying is that Communism has never existed.

all we're saying is that it can't be achieved, and that attempting to achieve it is too dangerous

[leanlifter1]

At 11/14/14 03:21 AM, SadisticMonkey wrote:

At 11/13/14 04:36 PM, leanlifter1 wrote: All I am saying is that Communism has never existed.

all I am saying is that it can't be achieved, and that attempting to achieve it is too dangerous

It's natural to be afraid of change and of the unknown.

[leanlifter1]

At 11/15/14 01:45 AM, Korriken wrote:

At 11/14/14 05:21 PM, leanlifter1 wrote:

It's natural to be afraid of change and of the unknown.

It's also natural for humans to not want to be made into mindless machines.

Why such wild claims ? Can you back this opinion up ?

[Ranger2]

A moneyless system is ridiculous. You'd have to do a massive amount of bartering just to get basic goods, and who would determine the exchange rate? Currency was invented for a reason.

[leanlifter1]

At 11/15/14 02:11 AM, Korriken wrote:

Riddle me this. How does a system with no one controlling it function? The people in the system would have to come together to figure things out. So the people get together. This day happens to be Worker 1460's coming of age. His father is a doctor and his mother is a seamstress. Problem is, the community has enough doctors and enough tailors/seamstresses. Worker 1460 has to be placed somewhere in the work force to do a job because there is no need for him to do a redundant job that someone else is already taking care of.

Worker 1460 has been laid off PERMANENTLY. Worker 1460s old job has been fully automated because of efficiency so his labor is no longer needed. Worker 1460 is free to peruse whatever you chooses. Worker 1460 has the option to draw up a business plan and present it to the local resource allocation officer to begin his dream of running his own computer repair service. Worker 1460 has a name and it is Tomas.

Since there is no competition and no wages, there is no reason for Worker 1460 to carry on as a doctor since Worker 390, Worker 1090, and Worker 412 are already doctors and the community just isn't big enough to support another doctor.

Worker 1460 ... "Tomas" wants to pursue his passion and not what his father wanted of him. The Resource Allocation Officer has approved Tomases application for resource acquisition to start up his own Computer Repair service but first he must complete a small business owners course and 6 months on the job training before the resources will be released.

Of course, a system with no government would just be anarchy. Even the townspeople getting together would be a form of government.

look up the root word of "Govern"ment please.

[AxTekk]

Government planning inherently makes systems more fragile, so while some level of regulation/ redistribution can have a massive payoff in terms of improving overall opportunity and living standards AND be worth the fragility that comes with it, total government planning is never going to be the best idea.

The more power you give to any one body and the more power it will be able to abuse - the state needs some power to keep order, and if the state has access to a decent amount of capital it can do some great things for its people. However, governments are made up of human beings and corruption is a fungus that will grow wherever you allow it to grow.

SO I don't think communism would work anywhere but tiny communities without a military for dictators to hide behind, where everyone's voluntarily engaged in serving the communal good anyway.

[SadisticMonkey]

At 11/14/14 05:21 PM, leanlifter1 wrote: It's natural to be afraid of change and of the unknown.

I guess that's the reason why you don't want Nazis to take over America then, hmm?

[SadisticMonkey]

At 11/15/14 04:13 PM, kanef wrote: lefties have a lot to look up to for east germany anyways

yes communism did wonders for east germany

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/worldviews/wp/2014/10/31/the-berlin-wall-fell-25-years-ago-but-germany-is-still-divided/

[leanlifter1]

At 11/15/14 08:43 PM, SadisticMonkey wrote:

At 11/14/14 05:21 PM, leanlifter1 wrote: It's natural to be afraid of change and of the unknown.

I guess that's the reason why you don't want Nazis to take over America then, hmm?

Nice argumentative Fallacy LOL.

[SadisticMonkey]

At 11/15/14 08:50 PM, leanlifter1 wrote:

At 11/15/14 08:43 PM, SadisticMonkey wrote:

At 11/14/14 05:21 PM, leanlifter1 wrote: It's natural to be afraid of change and of the unknown.

I guess that's the reason why you don't want Nazis to take over America then, hmm?

Nice argumentative Fallacy LOL.

It's no more fallacious than the post of yours which i was replying to.

[leanlifter1]

At 11/15/14 09:14 PM, SadisticMonkey wrote:

It's no more fallacious than the post of yours which i was replying to.

See the problem here is that what I am stating is based in quantified scientific fact and your just a fucking troll.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fear

[SadisticMonkey]

At 11/15/14 10:38 PM, leanlifter1 wrote:

At 11/15/14 09:14 PM, SadisticMonkey wrote:

It's no more fallacious than the post of yours which i was replying to.

See the problem here is that what I am stating is based in quantified scientific fact and your just a fucking troll.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fear

you've got to be kidding me

[Camarohusky]

At 11/15/14 11:30 PM, Korriken wrote: Dude, it's leanlifter. The only reason anyone talks to him is... hmm. I have no idea why anyone talks to him.

To his credit, he does set up very good counter arguments. If you can handle the crazy, you can make some pretty good tip in responses off his nonsense.

[leanlifter1]

At 11/15/14 11:01 PM, Korriken wrote:

At 11/15/14 02:32 AM, leanlifter1 wrote:

Worker 1460 is free to peruse whatever you chooses.

A communist system where the people can pursue what they want and not have to give up their dreams because their labor is needed elsewhere? The issue with that is that in a system with no compensation, no competition, AND being able to freely choose what you wish to do is that many jobs will simply be abandoned because they're not desirable. Who would shovel the shit from the animal pens? No one because that's a nasty as hell job and it doesn't matter what you do in life, you'll eat just as well. The people would have to eventually force someone to take up many jobs that no one wants to do. Worker 1460 isn't doing much these days, so chances are he'll be given a shovel and told to clean the pens.

The problem is that you think in terms of what you have been commanded to think. Open your mind and think for yourself.

Worker 1460 ... "Tomas" wants to pursue his passion and not what his father wanted of him. The Resource Allocation Officer has approved Tomases application for resource acquisition to start up his own Computer Repair service but first he must complete a small business owners course and 6 months on the job training before the resources will be released.

Problem is, if there is no currency, how are the townspeople obtaining computer equipment? They can't. With no currency, it's impossible to trade for the things you need and if you knew what all went into making a computer, you'd quickly realize that very few if any places on Earth would have ALL of the materials needed to assemble one.

Ok so how the hell does the Military function ? Do the solders have nothing to eat because they did not pay for the food LOL ?

look up the root word of "Govern"ment please.

Even if the people come together in the local resource warehouse to discuss the town, it's still a government. It's a direct democracy.

People communicating together for the betterment of the future of the people seems like it's working to me. Obama telling you guy's what will be passed into law is a dictatorship not a community working together for the betterment of the community.

[leanlifter1]

At 11/16/14 12:20 AM, Korriken wrote:

What you fail to realize is that this would only be able to work on a small scale. You could not do this on a national level, unless your nation is the size of a small farming town.

Because you say so that means it will never happen. You have the attitude of a person defeated and you government loves that ... people whom don't think and just accept things as they are. Hail Obama right !

Obama telling you guy's what will be passed into law is a dictatorship not a community working together for the betterment of the community.

[Ericho]

Well, the smallest country is Vatican City, so that would probably be the closest. Then again, it has no birth rate, so it's not much to begin with. The new pope really has changed it, so we don't need it there. Smaller Scandanavian countries are doing fine on their own.

[leanlifter1]

At 11/16/14 10:26 AM, Ericho wrote: Well, the smallest country is Vatican City, so that would probably be the closest. Then again, it has no birth rate, so it's not much to begin with. The new pope really has changed it, so we don't need it there. Smaller Scandanavian countries are doing fine on their own.

Ya I am sure ... "The Pope" would like to have all his riches rendered moot. That POS should be hung ... IN PUBLIC !

[SadisticMonkey]

At 11/16/14 05:51 PM, leanlifter1 wrote: That POS should be hung ... IN PUBLIC !

And why is that?

[leanlifter1]

At 11/17/14 03:46 AM, SadisticMonkey wrote:

At 11/16/14 05:51 PM, leanlifter1 wrote: That POS should be hung ... IN PUBLIC !

And why is that?

I don't know which POS you are talking about that should be hung in poblic ?