ForumsWEPRCommunism

326 68043
Communist
offline
Communist
522 posts
Nomad

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.

  • 326 Replies
Agent_86
offline
Agent_86
2,132 posts
Nomad

...You don't get my point...

Because the government owns everything, he would have no reason to expand his business or excel because there's nothing in it for him...

Communism is a Utopian society. It doesn't account for the fact that people actually want to better themselves in life, not just give most of their salary to the government when they get there...

Agent_86
offline
Agent_86
2,132 posts
Nomad

And who can honestly expect homeless people to know how to spend money in the first place? Chances are they're on the street for a reason. That study's irrelevant because they didn't know what to do with money in the first place.
THAT'S EXACTLY MY POINT!!!

The reason wealth redistribution doesn't work is because the people you give the money to don't really know how to handle it. Jesus once said, "You will always have the poor with you."
Zootsuit_riot
offline
Zootsuit_riot
1,523 posts
Nomad

Communism is a Utopian society.


And so is Free Enterprise. Go figure.
Communist
offline
Communist
522 posts
Nomad

their lives are good because the recieve what they need. they do recieve money that they can save up to buy all of the un-needed goods that we all crave.
AND COMMUNISM EVENTUALLY ELMINATES THE NEED FOR A GOVERNMENT
PLEASE LOOK UP MARXISM TO POST A VALID STATEMENT THAT HASN'T ALREADY BEEN POSTED

Moegreche
offline
Moegreche
3,826 posts
Duke

One thing I typically reject with Communism is the Marxist interpretation of historical events - that class consciousness and strife were the driving force behind war and revolution. The idea that the economy is some sort of self-imposed evolution also is asking a great deal of humanity. But that's fine as long as everything else is cogent - but it isn't.
What's funny is that Marxist Communism still needs people who make decision. Communism is also completely incompatible with any other economic system - especially if one rejects the idea of a commune leadership.
Marxism also relies heavily upon certain presuppositions about the human condition - and those suppositions are pretty major and seem very unsound. Far better than Communism is a Capitalist-Socialist hybrid (which the U.S. and other countries are operating under).

Drace
offline
Drace
3,880 posts
Nomad

Once you give the means of production to the proletariat, they will then become the next bourgeoisie while trying to keep others below them! They will use their new power to rise to the top. There will be no classless, stateless society! It IS a utopia.

Do you know what the proletariat are?
Lol.
They are the workers, who will be 100% of society.
We call it a democracy.

Yes yes Agent, while ignoring that your Great America got its wealth from exploitation of the third world country you also ignore the definition of communism I posted.

And what is life all about, according to Communism?


Living.

@Agent's last post.

Yes, because of his work, his sons are rich. Pretty much the cycle. The rich being born rich.
For those that become rich, its just dam luck. Of course with a population of 300 million a few are going to be rich.

Just how much of Walton's story is reality? Why need to argue why its not, just look at the dam facts.

About wealth distribution.
Firstly, I find that quite bull. Where did you get such statistics?
How could a homeless even spend $100,000 in a year?
Who would even spend $1 billion on such a study?
How would you even reach a homeless? Put tags on them that they use to study animals in the wild?

And considering these homeless can't buy a home with $100,000, have no job, probably can't get a job better then Macdonalds, I don't know what they are going to do.

Also, communism is no much about a wealth retribution. Its a one time thing, to take away the hands of the capitalists off the production of goods. So I don't see how it becomes a cycle.

But tell me this anyway.
If you gave those homeless a home, would you call them homeless?

One man has created thousands, if not millions of jobs around the world, not to mention lower prices for goods... =)


All Wal-Mart did was outweigh the competition and become the best of others. Your point is only relevant to the capitalist system. Its just a process of the capitalist system, not a natural law. The businesses create profit and create jobs. So?

No one person in a communist society could not set up a Wal Mart...
Not to say people would be dying on the street without Wal Mart, it would just be another store >_> When in need of a store, the society can order its construction.

Btw, the lower cost of goods can be explained by one way:
Greater exploitation of its workers.
Drace
offline
Drace
3,880 posts
Nomad

Moe, can you elaborate so I can give a refute?

seize_the_element
offline
seize_the_element
757 posts
Shepherd

Communism has it's good and bad points. I'd say mostly bad points though.

thelistman
offline
thelistman
1,416 posts
Shepherd

Do you know what the proletariat are?
Lol.
They are the workers, who will be 100% of society.
We call it a democracy.


I know who the Proletariat are. But what's to stop them from creating a class system once they take power. Some will rise to the top again and create another elitist system.

Why do you think that the Proletariat will just willingly create a classless society? Humans are inherently selfish and want more for themselves. You would need a sinless world to create a Communist system that works. Most poor people who obtain the means of production (rags to riches) join the Bourgeois class and never look back.

Socialist
offline
Socialist
29 posts
Nomad

ok there's a lot to go through her, but fundamentally, to thelistman and others, human nature isn't static. your behaviour in adulthood is primarily shaped on your experiences growing up, and under capitalism you're taught that you need to compete to do well. Compete for good grades, compete in sport, compete for a job, compete for places at uni and school amongst so many other things. This fosters a competitive self-interest in people which IS NOT THE CASE IN OTHER SOCIETIES. In tribal societies that exist, though few and far between today as capitalism spreads its tentacles throughout the world, there is no concept of possession for example. i'm not advocating a return to tribal cultures, just to make the point that human nature is not static, and that through revolutionary struggle people's whole fundamental outlook on life changes. I recommend everyone read '10 days that shook the world' by American author John Reed.

Also, do you think capitalism is fair? The only real, tangible incentive for people to work is that otherwise they will starve. And they do, every day, yet there is enough existing in the world today to feed everyone, to cure AIDS in Africa, to stop children dying in the third world of curable diseases.

There are 'success' stories of people who rise from middle class to ruling class elite, but these are the exceptions to the rule and ultimately they succeed by keeping their employees' wages down, making them work harder, inorder to undercut competition with rivals. For most people thoough, promotion is a carrot on a stick held in front of people but is unattainable primarily. And also, we have all this 'labour saving' technology, but do we work less than those of a generation previously? no! that is because production tody is not to meet human need but for profit, and this economic crisis that is occurring is not one of underproduction, but OVERPRODUCTION! What the hell is wrong with people supporting this system that forces people to live in tents, caravans and cars, yet houses stand empty!

Moegreche
offline
Moegreche
3,826 posts
Duke

On which point did you need me to elaborate, Drace?

Agent_86
offline
Agent_86
2,132 posts
Nomad

How could a homeless even spend $100,000 in a year?
Well, I saw on TV the stories of a few of them as a camera crew followed them. the first man that they showed spent more than half of it on fully loaded trucks for his friends. The other man bought a house that he eventually couldn't afford the payments on. It actually is pretty easy to spend $100,000 in a year.
Communist
offline
Communist
522 posts
Nomad

thats one of the problems that communism can solve in this utterly aimless arguement.Youmay spend all you want but you will always be able to live a happy life. ( so long as you can still pay taxes, if any.

thelistman
offline
thelistman
1,416 posts
Shepherd

@socialist

The problem is that Communism is a tribal system. It can only work in a tribal system where everything must be shared for survival. But in a world of 6 billion people, the system cannot work.

And I have never said Capitalism is fair. Life isn't fair. Get used to it. All I see from these Western Communists or Socialists is how they complain about life not being fair and not wanting to work to better themselves.

Drace
offline
Drace
3,880 posts
Nomad

@Listman,

A tribal system?
Aren't we already living for survival anyway? I wonder what would happen if people just stopped working. Were just not conscious of the fact. Here, anyways.

Capitalism is life. Capitalism is not fair, therefore life is not fair.
I can make such a statement because a political system is high factor of every day life.

Not wanting to better ourselves? We do much more then just complain.

And your argument pretty much defends feudalism as well. Hell why not go back 10,000 years who while were all actually slaves of our master.


@Moe,

Every point you made Just asking for an explanation.

Showing 46-60 of 326