Democratically Elected Communism.

[King]

I've often wondered this, but what happens if a communist party is elected democratically? In the Russian election, what if the Communist party was elected? Or, to make it even more confusing, if a Communist party in Canada or the UK won a minority government? o.O I think the fourth wall would break and the Earth would asplode.

[Tony-DarkGrave]

it wouldn't work because communism failz

[The-General-Public]

I think the earth exploding is a hell of a lot more likely to happen than a communist party coming into power peacefully in a western nation. In the incredibly unlikely chance it did however, I can't really see much happening, at least in the US. A communist leader in the US would not only have to deal with the constitution, but public opinion and special interest groups as well.

[cellardoor6]

Meh, it's kind of an oxymoron in ways.

People could vote a Communist party into power in an already democratic country. However, they'd be a party in power that doesn't really emphasize democracy or personal freedom, even if it claims to.

Look at Venezuela. When Chavez was reelected people were saying it's proof that communism can be democratic... but then you see that Chavez and is "socialist revolution" is turning Venezuela into dictorship, a police state. The moment he got power, he started to try increase it, he silenced the opposition, took away rights, tampered with the constitution etc..

Communism, and its "socialist" cousin is the antithesis of democracy. The platform is supposedly about equality and equal distribution of the fruits of the economy, however in order to achieve this promised equality, the government needs enormous power. Once the power is consolidated, they rarely if ever maintain democracy and fulfill their promises.

Communism is essentially fascism wrapped in a facade of benevolence, it's smarter that way. They use the image of being for the people to exploit them to get into power. Then when the power is certain, when they put in place all their controls over the society, they have absolutely no incentive to fulfill their promises because they don't have to any more... the people gave them all the power.

[King]

I realise that, I'm not wondering IF it would happen, but how it would physically work since democracy and communism are two very different ideoligies. Once they were in power, how would they go about demolishing the bill of rights, constitution, whatever. Is it even possible? Is it even really democracy if the people can't choose to vote it out?

My mind wonders...

[King]

Didn't see cellardoors post.

I'm not a fan of communism, I know all about it and it's failings. I don't think communism, at least how Marx invisioned it, has ever really existed. Like you said, it's really just been facism with a different name.

I have a real problem with Chavez, Castro too, because to me, they are not socialists. At least in my view, which you are free to argue with, a socialist party is along the lines of the NDP here in Canada. They are entirely democratic, a huge proponnent of human/civil rights, and generally focus on making the average person's life better. It bugs me that these dictators label themselves as socialists when really they are the farthest thing from it. Hell, Chavez is actively trying to create a classes society, the Chavistas and the non-Chavistas. That's not socialism, that's much closer to fascism.

Bleh, I hate people.

[Imperator]

It IS possible for a perfectly legitimate, Constitutional Democracy to elect itself out of power.

You need a very desperate situation where people would be willing to do so, but it CAN happen.

Athens voted itself out of a democratically elected government itself, and the Roman Senate voted to give power to Octavian.

There are periods of US history where we've voted to give more powers to the executive branch as a means of solving a crisis. Most recent is the Patriot Act, where Congress gave a little too much power to the Exec branch. Unfortunately our Supreme Court was a little slow in saying "hey WAIT just a gol durn minute" and fixing that.

[jcorishas]

At 12/2/07 02:58 AM, cellardoor6 wrote: Communism, and its "socialist" cousin is the antithesis of democracy. The platform is supposedly about equality and equal distribution of the fruits of the economy, however in order to achieve this promised equality, the government needs enormous power. Once the power is consolidated, they rarely if ever maintain democracy and fulfill their promises.

I agree with you 99%. The only thing is I would have said Communism is the retardation of socialism. Socialist democracies can and do exist but I guess it hinges on what you'd call socialist.

[Lindione]

Well if a communist party were elected only at most half of congress and the presidency would be in control and it takes more than half of congress to change the constitution. This would slow things down for the communists and over the time of 4 years people would see the changes they are making are not working and vote them out hopefully. Also, local and state governments would still haave their powers assuming they are not communist.

[animehater]

I remember there is one State in India ( West Bengal I believe) that has had a democratically elected Communist government. Although I do hear every once in a while bad shit going on there so I guess it's not all milk and cookies.

[animehater]

I remember there is one State in India ( West Bengal I believe) that has had a democratically elected Communist government. Although I do hear every once in a while bad shit going on there so I guess it's not all milk and cookies.

[Drakim]

I don't see how communism crash with democracy. Can people not vote when the government owns businesses?

[Twitch31]

dude that wouldnt happen anyway people are too smart to let some retarded russians take over an american country...if the us allowed a communist party run for elections then everyone would riot...

[animehater]

At 12/2/07 01:20 PM, MickTheChampion wrote: Bitching

You see we were fighting a cold war....

[gumOnShoe]

As far as I'm concerned I don't see the issue. True communism, I'm not talking Russian "distorted" communism could only come about by a democratic vote, and communism really is democracy incarnate. The only thing communism clashes with is the economic philosophy of capitalism. Capatilism does not equal democracy.

Democracy is each individual have a voice and voting. Communism is that every person is equal and there is no property. These two ideas, to me seem like they would fit well. Don't confuse democracy with capitalism. Two entirely seperate philosophies.

[oligarch]

Many communist governments were freely and democratically elected during the cold war but almost all of them were deposed by the U.S. and replaced by ruthless dictatorships.

[Empanado]

At 12/2/07 02:24 PM, animehater wrote:

At 12/2/07 01:20 PM, MickTheChampion wrote: Bitching

You see we were fighting a cold war....

Oh, I see! Well, that makes me feel better. And I thought it was just an average brutal dictatorship. But hey, it was a cold war, so it's all good! I'll spread the good news around here and then maybe we can stop hating each other to death. Boy, I can't believe I hadn't realized this!

[LordJaric]

It is possible, look at the Netherlands, the 3rd strongest party is socialist.

[therealsylvos]

At 12/2/07 03:26 PM, gumOnShoe wrote:

Democracy is each individual have a voice and voting. Communism is that every person is equal and there is no property. These two ideas, to me seem like they would fit well. Don't confuse democracy with capitalism. Two entirely seperate philosophies.

I love you gum but i got to wholeheartedly disagree with you. Comunism is the idea of a collective, and that even if you Mr. really rich person would like to keep your wealth the 90% of us who aren't rich want it so we are going to take it. Capitalism and Democracy are intertwined in that they both hold high the idea of individual self determination, Capitalism in what each individual does with his money, and democracy, that each individual tries to vote in his own best interests and we decide based on the policies that will help the most individuals.

[gumOnShoe]

At 12/2/07 05:08 PM, therealsylvos wrote: I love you gum but i got to wholeheartedly disagree with you. Comunism is the idea of a collective, and that even if you Mr. really rich person would like to keep your wealth the 90% of us who aren't rich want it so we are going to take it. Capitalism and Democracy are intertwined in that they both hold high the idea of individual self determination, Capitalism in what each individual does with his money, and democracy, that each individual tries to vote in his own best interests and we decide based on the policies that will help the most individuals.

Capitalism and Democracy don't have to go hand in hand at all. Just because they do in this nation doesn't mean anything for any other nation or posible society. Democracy says that the people should have a voice, not that they should have property. If a democratic society chooses to have property, that's a democratic decision, but they could just as easily have a majority vote to share everything. Perhaps democracy and capitalism work will togeather, but that does not imply on any level that the only thing that works with democracy is capitalism.

Don't get me wrong, I like capitalism as much as the rest of you. It makes sense on a level, but that doesn't mean that there isn't some potential for a communistic democracy. In fact, if it was a communistic democracy, I believe it would work much better than the dictorial "communism" we've seen in the past. Feel free to disagree with me, it makes you a good democrat/communist. A communist is simply a member of a community in which everyone is treated entirely as an equal.

Also, please don't confuse socialism with communism. They arent the same thing at all.

[The-evil-bucket]

Well the government would have to be almost totally communistic for a takeover of a strong democracy, and even then, it probably wouldn't work. But having some communistic traits in a democratic government could be a good thing.

[King]

Gum has pretty much nailed my feelings on the head in regards to communism/socialism. I don't have much else to add to that, except to say that communism=/=socialism. Ignorance ftl.

[The-General-Public]

At 12/2/07 06:01 PM, gumOnShoe wrote:

:Perhaps democracy and capitalism work will togeather, but that does not imply on any level that the only thing that works with democracy is capitalism.

But history has shown that communism and democracy rarely work well together. I can't think of any industrialized society consisting of more than a few dozen individuals that has ever successfully combined communism with democracy. Socialism, yes, and to a degree in almost every western nation,but not communism.

[The-General-Public]

crap, screwed up the ...quoting thing

[fahrenheit]

I would imagine they would bring in a lot of socialist changes.

[TonyTostieno]

At 12/3/07 03:02 AM, fahrenheit wrote: I would imagine they would bring in a lot of socialist changes.

Not for long buddy, that would probably be the most quickly annihilated political party in the history of the world. Guinness would have to write up a book for JUST that event.

[The-General-Public]

At 12/3/07 03:14 AM, TonyTostieno wrote:

At 12/3/07 03:02 AM, fahrenheit wrote: I would imagine they would bring in a lot of socialist changes.

Not for long buddy, that would probably be the most quickly annihilated political party in the history of the world. Guinness would have to write up a book for JUST that event.

Exactly, even if the public did elect communists into power, there is absolutely no way they'd put up with them long enough to let them do anything.

[Chickidydow]

At 12/2/07 06:01 PM, gumOnShoe wrote:
Capitalism and Democracy don't have to go hand in hand at all. Just because they do in this nation doesn't mean anything for any other nation or posible society. Democracy says that the people should have a voice, not that they should have property. If a democratic society chooses to have property, that's a democratic decision, but they could just as easily have a majority vote to share everything. Perhaps democracy and capitalism work will togeather, but that does not imply on any level that the only thing that works with democracy is capitalism.

Don't get me wrong, I like capitalism as much as the rest of you. It makes sense on a level, but that doesn't mean that there isn't some potential for a communistic democracy. In fact, if it was a communistic democracy, I believe it would work much better than the dictorial "communism" we've seen in the past. Feel free to disagree with me, it makes you a good democrat/communist. A communist is simply a member of a community in which everyone is treated entirely as an equal.

Also, please don't confuse socialism with communism. They aren't the same thing at all.

Glad to see someone who knows the difference, anyway all that means is you'll be able to understand my opinion all the better. A perfect Marxist Communism where everyone lives like the smurfs could never be supported by a government because then someone would have power. In communism everyone is supposed to be working and singing and sharing and having a great time being completely equal and there isn't supposed to be a government regulating them since then the administration wouldn't be equal/ That single reason is enough to say that democracy, and even a perfect Athenian Republic wouldn't mix with Perfect Communism. But if you meant a sort of toned town socialism then that may be a different story...

[Sajberhippien]

At 12/2/07 02:58 AM, cellardoor6 wrote: Meh, it's kind of an oxymoron in ways.

People could vote a Communist party into power in an already democratic country. However, they'd be a party in power that doesn't really emphasize democracy or personal freedom, even if it claims to.

Look at Venezuela. When Chavez was reelected people were saying it's proof that communism can be democratic... but then you see that Chavez and is "socialist revolution" is turning Venezuela into dictorship, a police state. The moment he got power, he started to try increase it, he silenced the opposition, took away rights, tampered with the constitution etc..

Although there are some problems with lack of human rights in Venezuela, there are such things in all countries. "Tampering with the constitution" isn't in any way undemocratic as long as it is done in a democratic way, which it has been so far.

Communism, and its "socialist" cousin is the antithesis of democracy. The platform is supposedly about equality and equal distribution of the fruits of the economy, however in order to achieve this promised equality, the government needs enormous power. Once the power is consolidated, they rarely if ever maintain democracy and fulfill their promises.

Although communism uses dictatorship of the proletariat (which isn't really dictatorship in the usual way, but which does give the government enormous power), I don't see why democratic socialism is undemocratic. The government is elected, and even though it has great power over for example the market, I don't see how that is undemocratic if they have that power because the majority wants them to. Care to explain why money is a more democratic voter than people?

Communism is essentially fascism wrapped in a facade of benevolence, it's smarter that way. They use the image of being for the people to exploit them to get into power. Then when the power is certain, when they put in place all their controls over the society, they have absolutely no incentive to fulfill their promises because they don't have to any more... the people gave them all the power.

^.- If you haven't noticed, communism is the opposite of fascism, just as capitalism is the opposite of left-wing anarchism.

That there are fascist (or capitalists or anarchists or green-skinned aliens) claiming to be communists doesn't mean that communism = fascism (or capitalism or alienism).

I know that there are at least one socialist who doesn't just want to get what's best for themself (myself), can't know sure about communists though since I'm not one, but I'm pretty sure quite many wants what's best for the community and humanity.

These steps are what you used, right?
1. Communism is an ideology.
2. Some people claiming to believe in this ideology act is if they believe in fascism.
3. By 1 and 2, communism are equal to fascism.

Removing the specifications of it, we get this:
1. X is a belief.
2. Some people claiming to believe in X act as if they believe in Y.
3. By 1 and 2, X equals Y.

My chain of thought must then be this:
1. Christianity is a belief.
2. Some people claiming to believe in Christianity acts as if they have a hate in America.
3. By 1 and 2, Christianity equals hate in America.

Using your logic, it would be all well to say that all Christians hate America since Westboro Baptist Church does and they claim to follow Jesus' message. So you're a little anti-patriot, aren't you Cellar?
Or would you care to explain the excact difference in the logic used?

[Sajberhippien]

At 12/3/07 02:54 AM, The-General-Public wrote:

At 12/2/07 06:01 PM, gumOnShoe wrote: Perhaps democracy and capitalism work will togeather, but that does not imply on any level that the only thing that works with democracy is capitalism.

But history has shown that communism and democracy rarely work well together. I can't think of any industrialized society consisting of more than a few dozen individuals that has ever successfully combined communism with democracy. Socialism, yes, and to a degree in almost every western nation,but not communism.

It's all in the definition of democracy (and of communism and capitalism, of course). I can't think of a single democratic country throughout history at all, actually. Either you have a representative democracy where all people don't have the excact same ability to affect society (since, for example, in most western country a guy with fifty millions can affect the society much more than a homeless guy with 3 bucks), or you have a lack of freedom of speech (such as in Cuba, Soviet, or China).