Forums → WEPR → Communism
| 41 | 18439 |
From my understanding, a communistic country is a country with currency, social status, and everybody is treated equal (sexual orientation, race, and religion doesn't matter, and everybody receives the same amount of food and shelter regardless of how much work they do.
What is the problem with this? Besides the fact that people would have no motivation to work (which could be remedied with prison), and people only doing the minimum amount of work to receive their food (which is what led the fall of communism), I think it would solve multiple problems in the government we currently have.
The only reason I can fathom for such hatred towards communism is that people who currently hold power within the government would no longer be able to keep their positions of power, and all of the rich people in the country would lose a massive amount of their income (leading to massive chaos, most likely).
However, what if we imagine that we could start a new country on an island. This island would have everything we could possibly need for thousands of people if rationed correctly. Communism would be the ideal government in this situation, wouldn't it? Everybody is treated equal, everybody gets the same amount of resources as everybody else, everybody works together to build a thriving country, everybody has a home, etc.. There will always be someone that will try to seize power/become corrupt in order to get more resources, etc.. That's inevitable in any government or society.
Why does most of the world (the United States in general) hate communism so much? There's no reason, other than greed.
- 41 Replies
Well anewbeginning, in communism i think it's everybody's job to defend it's village, no matter it's true job is a farmer, a craftsman, a worker, or a dedicated soldier. Soldiers are just ordinary people trained to be more effective in combat, maybe not a full time work ( his job is only defending the village).
So maybe the person risking his life to defend against a canibalistic natives is rewarded the same as others because it's everyones job.
It would seem it does that in first world countries as well.
^^
Just dropping a handy resource, perhaps: The Marxists Internet Archive (covers more strands of socialism than just Marxism).
Based on the posts I've read, on a smaller scale it seems to be a good system.
You have it all wrong. Communism, in my opinion, is a noble theory. It promotes the equality we strive for, etc. But it is just that, a THEORY, and needs revision. As proven by MANY Communist societies (USSR, NORTH KOREA, and CHINA) Communism becomes a corrupt society where a government that controls all the economy does so for their benefit instead of that of a community.
1984, by George Orwell. Try it.
And why? Because even whole societies can be corrupt. Just because a society isn't a dictatorship, doesn't mean it is corrupt.
Communism, in my opinion, is a noble theory. It promotes the equality we strive for,
You didn't read the thread, did you?
Even in theory, it is still a poor concept.
1984, by George Orwell. Try it.
If I could talk Nurve into getting to show up here, we could go over how this is a truly overrated book
I din't think 1984 showed the nobility of communism, in fact i thought it showed that communism had major flaws. The core idea of 1984 is that the government is not really a group of people but a group of ideas, and ideas are bulletproof.
I din't think 1984 showed the nobility of communism,
1984 had nothing to do with communism. They were far from a communist state.
The core idea of 1984 is that the government is not really a group of people but a group of ideas, and ideas are bulletproof.
It was about government control, mostly.
So you think 1984 wasn't about communism?
com·mu·nism
noun
1.
( often initial capital letter ) a system of social organization in which all economic and social activity is controlled by a totalitarian state dominated by a single and self-perpetuating political party.
The Party is self-perpetuating and controls all social and economic activity.
So basically communism, though it goes by the name IngSoc.
( often initial capital letter ) a system of social organization in which all economic and social activity is controlled by a totalitarian state dominated by a single and self-perpetuating political party.
I hope you kept your recipt for that cold war issue U.S. Ministry of Propaganda dictionary. You've just defined totalitarianism, not communism.
... However, and although I don't care for this entire argument: It is true that Orwell's immediate inspiration for 1984, as rather obviously with his earlier parable Animal Farm ("All pigs are equal, but some are more equal than others", was the deterioration of socialist ideals as embodied in the Soviet Union, and particularly under the course Stalinism was taking. His classic 2+2=5 of course was a direct parody of early Soviet economic "five-year plans," the first of which had conveniently lasted just four years with never a blink of an eye.
Conservative/right-wing/anti-communist or anti-socialist commentators taking that to mean the book doesn't decry totalitarianism as a whole though, or indeed that it would entail just a critique of Communism, obviously have understood very little of it. If anything, Orwell's criticism arose from his being sympathetic to those ideals, and indeed of his standing up for and so being involved with them, not his being against them.
I'm an anti- communist, why? Successful communism must be enforced by bullets. Anyone who opposes its inception must be killed along with the intellectuals, historians, the strong-willed, weak and infirm. Individualism is forbidden. There is no such thing as race, creed or color-- only "the collective." There's no middle class, no creature comforts, no Xboxes or Iphones... only famine, desperation and repression.
It sounds wonderful on paper-- everyone is equal. However it's actually the ultimate form of control-- the loss of humanity for the advancement of the state.
It is a dead ideology, adhered to only by parlour-pinks who have never heard a shot fired in anger, and who would be amongst the first purged were communism ever to get it's boot firmly on the neck of whatever nation they live in.
There has never, in the history of that ideology, been a country successfully governed by it's concepts. Every single country that has described itself as communist has had to build walls and fences, not to keep people out, but to keep it's people in.
So you think 1984 wasn't about communism?
com·mu·nism
noun
1.
( often initial capital letter ) a system of social organization in which all economic and social activity is controlled by a totalitarian state dominated by a single and self-perpetuating political party.
Apart from what Fishie said, here is probably the biggest reason the government in 1984 isn't a communist one:
They have a class system
It sounds wonderful on paper
It sounds horrid on paper as well.
Successful communism must be enforced by bullets. Anyone who opposes its inception must be killed along with the intellectuals, historians, the strong-willed, weak and infirm. Individualism is forbidden.
No. That's still totalitarianism. Successfull communism CANNOT be enforced. This is why it does not, has not, and will not ever exist in actual politics. The political organizations ruling so-called "Communist states" are not communist organizations. They just use the name of communism as a facade and use false promises of equality to obtain control.
It is a dead ideology, adhered to only by parlour-pinks who have never heard a shot fired in anger, and who would be amongst the first purged were communism ever to get it's boot firmly on the neck of whatever nation they live in.
No. It is an impractical ideology promoted by extreme optimists who do not understand that human society cannot be made to follow their idealist designs on any large scale.
You must be logged in to post a reply!