who thinks communism is good, bad , or misunderstood? i think communism was currupt by that monster Stalin an therefore, it became hard for that form of government to be truely used as Marx had intended it.
Well Parsat, what Mao did wrong was he tried to brain-wash an entire generation of people with his huge public campaigns ment to destroy the old ways of China. He should have lead a more friendly example by actually making everyone everywhere equal without killing people because they liked an old picture of a chinese king from the 1800's.
However, Mao should be credited with leading China to a far more modern country. Although I disagree with some of his tactics and how he went about doing it.
Well Parsat, what Mao did wrong was he tried to brain-wash an entire generation of people with his huge public campaigns ment to destroy the old ways of China. He should have lead a more friendly example by actually making everyone everywhere equal without killing people because they liked an old picture of a chinese king from the 1800's. However, Mao should be credited with leading China to a far more modern country. Although I disagree with some of his tactics and how he went about doing it.
How could he make everyone equal when the very act of revolution by the proletariat must overthrow the bourgeoisie? To make things equal is invariably subjective, and basically impossible to do. In addition, Mao, as with many other communist leaders after their initial revolutions, needed to consolidate his power, and what better way to do so than with fear? The Cultural Revolution, the Great Leap Forward, and the Anti-rightist Movement had little effect on China's modernization; had Deng Xiaoping not come around with his reconstruction, China probably wouldn't achieve the same greatness that it has today.
One reasons his outcomes to be the best situation. "Best" is determined by what the person values. Because this human 'nature' is flexible, it can be said to come from a capitalist society in which you are reminded so very often that what you should value is yourself.
This is by all means not simply limited to a capitalist society. It is the internal drive to keep alive and preserve oneself that persists in any culture, Chinese, Russian, or American, capitalist or communist. People work for their self-interests; it is all too rare to find someone who will actually sacrifice for the good of the society or the state.
I was just saying that there could have been FAR less bloodshed and FAR less fear, Hitler for example did not control his last followers in Berlin by fear, they loved what he stood for so much, they would die for it. Yet he killed over six million Jews. If a monster as Hitler could convince people to work because of love and not fear, why can't Mao? And i'm NOT supporting Mao btw, he is a disgrace to communism and a monster in more than a few areas.
I'll partialy agree with Drace, Russian "communism" was a failure, but so far there hasn't been a true communism anywhere in the world, at any time ever.
Technological advances do not happen under the market economy. These things come from advancements in science. What the market economy does produce is a billion useless items with the available technology
Thjat is not true. In fact the exact opposite happens. In a capitalist society in many markets companies gain monopolies. This leads to an increase in economies of scale, ie as a company gets bigger its average total costs are reduced. This money can then be spent on research and development into that technology, the one common theme of monopolies in ca[pitalist societies is that they nearly always produce technological advancements as they can afford to allocate a lot of their capital to research and development for example in the car and computer industries. In a communist state this would not happen.
I have written on human nature and to conclude it all... Human nature does not exist. It cannot, as the driving force of action is reason. A law cannot exist unless you are to say reason is limited, but I say it runs free.
What if years of evolution reasoned that the best way to keep humans alive is to create in-born behaviors? (e.g Aggression by hormones)
I do agree that human nature is pretty flexible, but it would take massive amounts of influence to unify the people and make them see themselves as a whole (which would allow them to happily help each other).
The CEO's of companys in capitalism end up only concerned with making profits and therefore don't really care much for the well being of the little guy. So we all (the proletarians)suffer during an economic crisis while they play with their little sqaubbles and send factories to countries such as China or India, thus making the economic situation even worse for all of us because there are simply fewer places to work. And it's all because a small elite wants more and more money.
I like socialism, I think people like doctors deserve more money than the people who work at mcdonalds, and (correct me if I'm wrong) communism would destroy that.
Yet why should an actor get paid more than the fireman who has saved dozens of lives?
I agree with that, but I still have a problem with doctors who save more peoples lives, getting the same amount of money as people how work at mcdonalds making poeple sick from all the chemicals and fat.
I agree with that, but I still have a problem with doctors who save more peoples lives, getting the same amount of money as people how work at mcdonalds making poeple sick from all the chemicals and fat.
any-who.... A good doctor doesn't work for money, he works because he loves his practice. Any man 30 and above working at Mcdonalds either still lives with his parents or is very very desprate to make a living.
