Newgrounds.com — Everything, By Everyone.

Communism doesn't work because it requires one person to be in power. Not only that, but people will get pissed off because of the idea that everyone gets equal goods and services. I guess we have to many greedy and selfish people to put it bluntly. And if you still don't believe me, read 1984 by George Orwell.

At 6/30/08 05:28 PM, sirtom93 wrote:

At 6/30/08 05:25 PM, Dante-Son-Of-Sparda wrote: communism FAILS

Any country that isn't communist fails more.

Strange that non communist nations, even other dictatorships, fare better than communist nations.

At 7/1/08 02:41 AM, PrepareForWar wrote: read 1984 by George Orwell.

That was an excellent book.
Speaking of which, i really ought to read that again... it's been a while and i really enjoyed it.

At 7/1/08 03:09 AM, mythicaljake wrote:

At 7/1/08 02:41 AM, PrepareForWar wrote: read 1984 by George Orwell.

That was an excellent book.
Speaking of which, i really ought to read that again... it's been a while and i really enjoyed it.

No wonder you love Cuba so much. You have a sick obsession with oppressive, authoritarian governments, spawned by your love for 1984. So Cuba right now is the closest you can get to seeing 1984 acted out in real life.

ahah!

This discussion is interesting, not so much for what's been said, but for what hasn't been.

There seems to be a lot of confusion between "Communism" and "Totalitarianism." I'm not singling anyone out. It's a common mistake that lies in placing all political positions on an oversimplified one-dimensional "Left/Right" axis.

The Political Compass Chart people are playing with in the "My Political Standing" thread is a vast improvement over the one-dimensional model, placing economic positions on the X Axis, and social control positions on the Y. One could probably break things down further and add more axes--the graph would become a cube, a hypercube, and so on--but that would blow people's minds. The two-dimensional "Political Compass" is over the heads of most folks already.

If you look at that graph, the system Marx actually envisioned would be placed near the lower left corner: high on the "share the wealth" scale, but very low on the "authoritarian" scale. There's nothing really wrong with that. In Soviet Communism, Chinese Communism and most other real-world systems however, that quickly devolved into authoritarian Totalitarianism. If you want to see how that goes, Orwell's Animal Farm contains a better description of that process than his 1984, which depicts the results.

But, here's the thing: the oft-repeated notion "Capitalism = Freedom, Communism = Tyranny" is false. Apples and oranges. ALL economic systems degenerate into tyranny. Capitalism just takes longer, and what the U.S. has now is no more "Capitalism" as Adam Smith envisioned it than Soviet Communism was what Marx had in mind.

Smith, the Father of Capitalism, hated corporations, and often warned against corporate power getting mixed up with government power. And that, friends, is now exactly what we've got. What's ironic is that most defenders of "Capitalism" are really defending Corporatism: an evil system that should be abolished.

Corporatism is every bit as fascist as Soviet Communism was. In the final analysis it's every bit as unstable too. It's coming apart now, right before our eyes.

This is not intended as a defense of Communism, especially not the Soviet sort. Take a look at the Political Compass again. Any system, whether on the left (Marxist) or right (Capitalist) of that chart can work, just as long as the point stays toward the BOTTOM (which is a gripe I have with the way they drew that chart: the "Authoritarian" position is the abyss, and should be at the bottom).

Stalin, Hitler, Bush, Mugabe... all are at the Authoritarian top half of the chart, and all either have failed, or will fail.

Authoritarianism is a mental disease.

At 7/1/08 03:19 AM, cellardoor6 wrote: No wonder you love Cuba so much. You have a sick obsession with oppressive, authoritarian governments, spawned by your love for 1984. So Cuba right now is the closest you can get to seeing 1984 acted out in real life.

meh, Cuba seems too low tech even for 1984.

there are so many holes in communism that it shouldn't even be considered as a form of goverment.

Communism is not a form of government. It's an economic system. The Soviet and Chinese forms of government were/are the same as ours: Republics.

Hence the names: Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, and the People's Republic of China.

There's so many things to love about this re-occuring debate. Firstly, there's the insistence that the political economy of a country wholly determines their standing in the world - so, for example, the USA is successful because it is a "free-market capitalist economy." It's not to do with resources, or wars or imperial dominance, or any other historical facts, it's the system. Similarly, any countries that fail, such as the USSR, the problem is attributed again to the system, rather than any histoircal facts like the economic devastation of the Second World War, moving into the huge military spending of the cold war era and the continued push to be a superpower, prior to having developed the required economic base for superpower status eroding the Soviet system.

Secondly, I love how all sides argue over the definitions of Communism. You have one side that will exclude any country from being Communist because it didn't follow the Marxist stages of production, you have another side that will argue that no country has been Communist because the states didn't achieve the communist ideals. The best side is the side that sees China's growth and success and decides that China is now no longer Communist. I think my favourite bit about this side is that it's generally supported by people who argue such things as the US's economy is socialist because it involves a level of government control, it's like they want to have their cake and eat it!

Thirdly, I love how people try to attack Communism with ill-defined and much-abused ideas such as Human Rights and Freedom. I mean, the US, and a number of other Western states, violate a number of "human rights" and have economic policies that constrain the freedom of the poorest in society. From where can you get a moral highground to criticise another system for not fufilling these things that you think are so vital?

You know I am actualy related to winston churchill by marriage on my fathers side.
Regardless, Russia were used to win ww2 and then everything that communism stood for was destoryed with such events as france in vietnam and the belgian congo. Capatilists ruin the workers lives.

sirtom93: "Capatilists ruin the workers lives."

Corrupt, incompetent authoritarian sleazebags ruin the workers lives. It doesn't matter whether their name is Joseph Stalin or Bob Nardelli (the CEO of Home Depot, under whom the company made the top of the "worst companies to work for" list).

But, as I said, what we have in the U.S. is not Capitalism; it's Corporatism. We do not have a free-market system. We have a system where the bigger you are, the more politicians you can buy, and you can afford to treat your employees like shit because your friends in high places help make sure you're the only game in town.

At 7/1/08 10:30 AM, simple-but-sandy wrote:

At 6/30/08 07:50 PM, kahncccp wrote: There has never been a communist country.

Did you know that Lenin did not actually want Stalin to succeed him as General Secretary of the Communist Party of Russia as he felt Stalin would destroy the socialist government he had set up in Russia

He wanted Trotsky to.

At 7/1/08 03:19 AM, cellardoor6 wrote: No wonder you love Cuba so much. You have a sick obsession with oppressive, authoritarian governments, spawned by your love for 1984. So Cuba right now is the closest you can get to seeing 1984 acted out in real life.

ahah!

I was not talking to you.
So the fact that the book is well-written, I h ad to read it in History Class and it so coincidentially happens to be about totalitarianism means I'm obssessed with it? :|
Nice move on your part.

When did I EVER say I thought communism was right anyway? As you said, every country that's tried to make it work just gets corrupted. I'm not denying that. I'm just saying the ideologies make sense, but they don't work in our world when it's so full of corruption. Ideology and History are two completely different things.

I have no actual particular stance in politics, either way (whether Communist, Capitalist, Nazi [god forbid] etc...), we're an imperfect race and we're going to screw it up one way or another. In fact, I'd say my political beliefs are more akin to the Monster Raving Looney Party... Screaming Lord Sutch for the fucking win.

Right, now we have that sorted please may you stop following me around? No-ones going to have the exact same one-sided beliefs as you, you'd might as well stop crying that other people have different opinions to yours.

At 6/30/08 04:11 PM, Dante-Son-Of-Sparda wrote: everyone knows communism ends up with human rights violations and corruption thats why it doesn't work COMMUNISM FAILS

and what does capitalism end up in? 1% of the population having 99% of the wealth, and 99% dont have medical service, education, and die of hunger. Of course capitalism is better than socialism!!!!

btw, topic's been done already soooo many times

At 6/30/08 04:11 PM, Dante-Son-Of-Sparda wrote: everyone knows communism ends up with human rights violations and corruption thats why it doesn't work COMMUNISM FAILS

And there are many capitalist countries which haven't ended up violating human rights.
Like... uhm... well... Denmark! Oh, wait, forgot about that time...
Sorry, can't see any.

At 6/30/08 03:28 PM, sirtom93 wrote: And it has been for many years in Laos, people there are happy and the country isn't even that poor. So why do people still say that communism doesnt work, it does >:C

This kid is 15 and probably just heard about communism in his history class. Yes Communism in a whole is all about the group not the individual. Everyone takes care of everyone and everything is shared, making no one better or worse then the neighbor next to them.....ok but IN THE REAL WORLD all communism does is allow corrupt people to hold an advantage over the people that they were supposedly sworn to protect. All you have to do is look up communism dictators and you will see that it doesnt work in modern standings and will never work unless you find someone who doesnt think of themselves not even 1%....good luck trying!

At 7/1/08 11:59 AM, Sajberhippien wrote:

At 6/30/08 04:11 PM, Dante-Son-Of-Sparda wrote: everyone knows communism ends up with human rights violations and corruption thats why it doesn't work COMMUNISM FAILS

And there are many capitalist countries which haven't ended up violating human rights.
Like... uhm... well... Denmark! Oh, wait, forgot about that time...
Sorry, can't see any.

ahaha

You think America is a capitalist country? The people who do the torturing are the government so obviously more government is not the solution.

Communism is bullshit.

Go move to North Korea where people are starving in the streets because their dear leader is spending all the country's money instead of making sure all his people are fed. Then god to South Korea which is a fucking paradise in comparison.

At 7/1/08 01:24 PM, CIX wrote:

At 7/1/08 11:59 AM, Sajberhippien wrote:

At 6/30/08 04:11 PM, Dante-Son-Of-Sparda wrote: everyone knows communism ends up with human rights violations and corruption thats why it doesn't work COMMUNISM FAILS

And there are many capitalist countries which haven't ended up violating human rights.
Like... uhm... well... Denmark! Oh, wait, forgot about that time...
Sorry, can't see any.

ahaha

You think America is a capitalist country? The people who do the torturing are the government so obviously more government is not the solution.

I don't think america is 100% capitalism, but neither has any country been a full communism. However, America strives to be a capitalist country, and it's leaders call themselves capitalists, much like the leaders of the Soviet called themselves communists.
And actually, a communistic society doesn't have any government.

I think the OP puts a little too much faith in mankind. "Oh if Trotsky was in charge things would have been different. You'd see". No. You cannot trust ANY person with the kind of responsibility a communist leader has. Of course Stalin, as Lenin would agree, was NOT the best man for the job, but don't you think eventually a Stalinist leader would have come to power eventually? After all, it is those who want power most that get it, and those kind of people are not afraid to abuse it. You trust a dictator to have total control over allocation of resources? He can fairly apportion everything and make life good for all his people? That is so ideological and Utopian it makes me want to puke.

Its not just Stalin. His rise to power was not some unexpected fluke of nature that would never be repeated. Look at Mao and all the promises me made to his people. He told the peasants he would do all these great things for them, but when he came to power he took their land and enslaved them on it. Then look at Kim Jong Il, North Korea's dear leader who's picture is in every North Korean home. What virtuous deeds has he done for his people out of the goodness of his heart? That's right, while his people were starving, and the economy was decaying he was busy spending money on a nuclear program. Great man.

So is it just Stalin who was some accident that would never recur? No! This is what happens when someone is giving the task of controlling an economy. People starve and the economy decays.

I am not sure if someone brought it up but the remaining communist countries are failing.

Cuba starting to have reforms but still oppressive.

Laos one of the poorest countries in world.

North Korea ran by a Stalinist leader who is insane.

Vietnam becoming capitalist and China is only communist in name only.

The rest like the USSR and others failed so that brings down your theory that it works.

At 7/1/08 02:13 PM, Sajberhippien wrote: I don't think america is 100% capitalism, but neither has any country been a full communism. However, America strives to be a capitalist country, and it's leaders call themselves capitalists, much like the leaders of the Soviet called themselves communists.
And actually, a communistic society doesn't have any government.

I have never heard a politician call them capitalist. Capitalists are the people who are a part of the economic system, not trying to destroy it.

At 7/1/08 04:06 PM, simple-but-sandy wrote:

At 7/1/08 02:35 PM, MrFlopz wrote:

He told the peasants he would do all these great things for them

'Read my lips there will be no new taxes' - That sounds very much like someone promising poor people he will do great things for them.

Politicians lie get used to it. It doesn't matter whether they're communist, fascist, democract, republican, dictator or democratically elected; you can't just lump all those who claim to be communists together and say 'They will betray the people' or that all fascist leaders will kill all the Jews, or even that all democratically elected leaders will follow their people's wishes and rule for the good of the country.

Yes, democracy is not perfect, however a president of the United States or other capitalist nations can lie but it is far less extreme than the case of communist leads. He may break promises by raising taxes or not offering changes he promised, but he is certainly not going to enslave the people and cause the death of millions. Ever heard of the Great Leap Forward? Do you know why that does not happen in the United States? Because we have a system of CHECKS AND BALANCES. This type of leader cannot do such horrible things to his people because THEY CAN DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT! He can, however manipulate his people into trusting him, but this is the case with all leaders. Democracy is not a perfect system, and it leaves room for lying and deception which always exists in politics, but it is certainly better than one person being given the job of controlling the economy. Do you not understand the difference?

"Democracy is the worst form of government. Aside from every other one"
-Winston Churchill

At 7/1/08 01:56 PM, MrFlopz wrote: Go move to North Korea where people are starving in the streets because their dear leader is spending all the country's money instead of making sure all his people are fed. Then god to South Korea which is a fucking paradise in comparison.

Why would I want to move to the shit hole North Korea, in my eyes it isn't even communist. Vietnam seems pretty good though. Seriously though; if anyone can play my air travel ill move when im 18.

At 7/1/08 04:41 PM, sirtom93 wrote:

At 7/1/08 01:56 PM, MrFlopz wrote: Go move to North Korea where people are starving in the streets because their dear leader is spending all the country's money instead of making sure all his people are fed. Then god to South Korea which is a fucking paradise in comparison.

Why would I want to move to the shit hole North Korea, in my eyes it isn't even communist. Vietnam seems pretty good though. Seriously though; if anyone can play my air travel ill move when im 18.

Well I guess you'll come running back when the shackles of communism become too much to bear. Forced, unrewarded labor accompanied by a one-size-fits-all policy is no utopia, especially when you but your balls in the hands of a single leader.

Auf Wiedersehen arschloch!

especially when you but your balls in the hands of a single leader.

Sorry as far as I knew Vietnam was state rulership....

At 7/1/08 05:17 PM, sirtom93 wrote:

especially when you but your balls in the hands of a single leader.

Sorry as far as I knew Vietnam was state rulership....

It still doesn't change the fact that you are putting your balls in the government's hands. Enjoy having all your goods given to you with no choice of what you receive. You cannot get what you personally want, but the standard, poor quality necessities your government chooses to give you.

At 7/1/08 06:08 PM, MrFlopz wrote:

At 7/1/08 05:17 PM, sirtom93 wrote:

especially when you but your balls in the hands of a single leader.

Sorry as far as I knew Vietnam was state rulership....

It still doesn't change the fact that you are putting your balls in the government's hands. Enjoy having all your goods given to you with no choice of what you receive. You cannot get what you personally want, but the standard, poor quality necessities your government chooses to give you.

There not poor quality, you work to make them better. And to be honest - sounds like a better life than I have now.

At 7/1/08 06:14 PM, sirtom93 wrote: There not poor quality, you work to make them better. And to be honest - sounds like a better life than I have now.

Which is what.........?

Do you even work for a living?