Hello, we have been studying communism in US History lately and I like their style of government. If under the right control communism can be a good government. So, I've recently changed to communism and I would like to get to know other communists.
Communists
- Thread starter MewSkitty
- Start date
while communist works in principal it doesnt really work in real life, why, everything needs to be run the head of state to ensure that everything is 'shared' equally. however that means a dictatorship which also doesnt work as one man has absolute power. now if that man becomes corrupt there is no-one to stop him. then he can control everything, best example of this is the Stalin era of Russia, after reading a lot on stalin i actually believe that he was a worse man than Hitler
'Anti-Communists say that Communist Parties in the USSR, China, Cambodia, and so on have murdered tens of millions of people to attain and keep the power of their totalitarian Communist states because their variant of Marxist Communism requires or justifies this'.
from wiki
from wiki
That doesn't make them communists.
anyway i was talking about the stalinism, trotskyism and maoism types of communism
There is no correct way to run a nation, only that you must keep corrupt leaders out of office.
Mosheh Thezion
Registered Senior Member
I would here by Re-define Communism..: ready?... ok....
Communism: (1) "Pertaining to those who choose to, of their own accord,
form commune's.. designed for mutual support and security, and activily pursues
the efforts to eleviate all suffering, as such are the directives of Love."
(2) "A point of view, or political opinion which dictates that is it better for
people to live and work together, organised as one big family, who shares and
cares, rather than trades and profits off each other."
(3) A phylosophy which dictates : "We need not force the wealthy to become poor
to help the poor... We need only organise the poor together in love, sharing
and compassion, such that with large numbers and continued effort, there shall
be no need for poverty any more, I.e... the reason people are poor and homeless,
is because no one fucking cares about them, and of all people, the Communist does."
(4) Commune-ism is clearly founded in the ideals of forming Communes for mutual
benefit, and in the establishment of, in this way, socialist pockets of paradise,
and which functions to eliviate the suffering and drawback of the free/ fair markets
world.
(5) An ideal wherein people organise themselves for love, security, and long
term survivability. Such as, the basic Tribe mentality.
(6) An ideal that just so happens to be the way Jesus said to live, as well as
many other world religions in many different ways.
-MT
Communism: (1) "Pertaining to those who choose to, of their own accord,
form commune's.. designed for mutual support and security, and activily pursues
the efforts to eleviate all suffering, as such are the directives of Love."
(2) "A point of view, or political opinion which dictates that is it better for
people to live and work together, organised as one big family, who shares and
cares, rather than trades and profits off each other."
(3) A phylosophy which dictates : "We need not force the wealthy to become poor
to help the poor... We need only organise the poor together in love, sharing
and compassion, such that with large numbers and continued effort, there shall
be no need for poverty any more, I.e... the reason people are poor and homeless,
is because no one fucking cares about them, and of all people, the Communist does."
(4) Commune-ism is clearly founded in the ideals of forming Communes for mutual
benefit, and in the establishment of, in this way, socialist pockets of paradise,
and which functions to eliviate the suffering and drawback of the free/ fair markets
world.
(5) An ideal wherein people organise themselves for love, security, and long
term survivability. Such as, the basic Tribe mentality.
(6) An ideal that just so happens to be the way Jesus said to live, as well as
many other world religions in many different ways.
-MT
I also agree with the ideal, but so far the practise has been abysmal. Russia had, at best, a few years of good communism before things started to slide.
I lived under communism for 5 years in Russia. I loved those years, because everyone was part of something as a whole, almost no criminals, people enjoyed life because of different medical, transportational, and job opportunities communism had to offer. But the major problem was people who governed this society had no control overthemselves...Stalin is obvious issue...but how come noone mentions Kruschev? He was indeed the longest communist ruler in USSR...and the best one too. Communism is an awsome way to live life but it requires some third party to operate it, a party that will neither benefit from the society nor loose anything. I thus proclaim that the only way Communism can work is if the rulers of a communist nation were either aliens (not involved in humanly endeavors besides this rule...and not giving advantage to anything specific) or computers.
The socialist ideals are actually more prevalent in the scandinavian social welfare states as in dictatorial regimes mentioned in this thread.
have a look at them. They are doing quite ok on many socialist principles. A hybrid system is probably best anyway, because everybody is just different.
have a look at them. They are doing quite ok on many socialist principles. A hybrid system is probably best anyway, because everybody is just different.
Mosheh Thezion
Registered Senior Member
THE REASON COMMUNISM collapse in russia... is.. it wasnt communist.
it was totalitarian and promoted communist principles.
and it used money... which kept everyone poor...
and allowed others to be rich.
in the west...
we are taught we have a democracy.. and republic...
when what we have is an oligarchy and complicent network of political two faced bastards......
and we still use money as well.... hence the reason we have so many poor.
communism... can only function AS a sharing system... one without money.
-MT
it was totalitarian and promoted communist principles.
and it used money... which kept everyone poor...
and allowed others to be rich.
in the west...
we are taught we have a democracy.. and republic...
when what we have is an oligarchy and complicent network of political two faced bastards......
and we still use money as well.... hence the reason we have so many poor.
communism... can only function AS a sharing system... one without money.
-MT
Mosheh Thezion said:
it was totalitarian under stalin...but after his death...the next 40 years it was communist that slowly merged to democracy. And believe people who worked in USSR...were rich, the propoganda of the west is obviously something that you have been influenced by. yes indeed communist families were much more poor as in having specific items, but russians in USSR also had much more services offered to them for free...these services are very expensive here in USA...I am talking about vocations, medical services, transportation, education. All that which i listed in USSR was almost free. And moreover USSR as a large country had much more freedom for its citizens...in terms of were people could go and travel.
Mosheh Thezion
Registered Senior Member
yah know.. you can have a democratic communist state.
but it is never mentioned... it is only pushed that democracy means freedom and freedom means free market capitalism....
none of which is actually fact.
THE THING IS.. people will vote based on what they want...
thus.. democracy.. is fundamentally ruled by greed.
hence the reason... democracy functions best, in greed based systems such as capitalism.... and is therefor... its inherent flaw.... which no one discusses.
-MT
-MT
but it is never mentioned... it is only pushed that democracy means freedom and freedom means free market capitalism....
none of which is actually fact.
THE THING IS.. people will vote based on what they want...
thus.. democracy.. is fundamentally ruled by greed.
hence the reason... democracy functions best, in greed based systems such as capitalism.... and is therefor... its inherent flaw.... which no one discusses.
-MT
-MT
This concept crops up again and again: Communism is good in principle, but does not work because: People are greedy, or tyrants manage to take over, or what ever. Another claim by those favoring communism is that the USSR was not really an example of communist run country.
The above is bull s**t! Communism is basically evil. It is not good in practice and it is not good in principle.
BTW: I have known a lot of people who left the USSR because they did not like living there. I wonder about the poster who claimed that he was happy there.
Consider the basic principle.
Now consider who benefits under such a system. It looks to me like those who whine the most about what they need are going to get more than they deserve.
You communist lover types talk about greed. Is it greed to want to be rewarded for your best efforts? Is it greed to want to do your best for yourself, your family, and your friends?
The USSR or a similar system is the logical consequence of applying communist principles. You need a vast bureaucracy supported by a police state. to implement those principles.
Such a system has to try to prevent people from leaving and/or force other countries to be part of a world wide communist system, leaving no place for the best and the brightest to go. What highly productive person would want to stay in such a country?
It is interesting to note that communist systems have the same problems as slave based cultures.
BTW: Most people are not aware that slavery was eliminated in technological cultures because it became inefficient
The Scandinavian countries have had some success with communist/socialist methods because those countries are more homogenous than most other cultures. They started with less of a difference between the best/brightest and those with lesser abilities.
BTW: Those who talk about a system running without money have very little grasp of the purpose of money. Without money or the equivalent, you have to rely on barter.
The above is bull s**t! Communism is basically evil. It is not good in practice and it is not good in principle.
BTW: I have known a lot of people who left the USSR because they did not like living there. I wonder about the poster who claimed that he was happy there.
Consider the basic principle.
- From each according to his abilities. To each according to his needs.
Now consider who benefits under such a system. It looks to me like those who whine the most about what they need are going to get more than they deserve.
You communist lover types talk about greed. Is it greed to want to be rewarded for your best efforts? Is it greed to want to do your best for yourself, your family, and your friends?
The USSR or a similar system is the logical consequence of applying communist principles. You need a vast bureaucracy supported by a police state. to implement those principles.
- The bureaucracy is required to determine how to distribute whatever is produced. You cannot expect the producers to know who needs what.
- You need the police state because the best and the brightest are not willing to work for the benefit of needy strangers instead of providing for their family and friends.
Such a system has to try to prevent people from leaving and/or force other countries to be part of a world wide communist system, leaving no place for the best and the brightest to go. What highly productive person would want to stay in such a country?
It is interesting to note that communist systems have the same problems as slave based cultures.
- In a primitive agricultural economy: Slaves plow, plant, harvest, make simple tools, make clothes, do simple construction jobs. The man with the whip knows when the slave is putting out a minimal effort. He knows when to apply the whip.
In a technological culture: Slaves are engineers, computer programmers, accountants, inventors, craftsmen, and others with serious skills and knowledge. The man with the whip does not know when such people are functioning well below their ability level.
Furthermore, in a primitive culture, one man with a whip and a few with weapons can oversee a large number of people doing cooly labor. There is not much overhead. Not so in a technological culture.
BTW: Most people are not aware that slavery was eliminated in technological cultures because it became inefficient
The Scandinavian countries have had some success with communist/socialist methods because those countries are more homogenous than most other cultures. They started with less of a difference between the best/brightest and those with lesser abilities.
BTW: Those who talk about a system running without money have very little grasp of the purpose of money. Without money or the equivalent, you have to rely on barter.
One thing I have learned is that communism looks GREAT on paper, as does a lot of things.. so does the system in which the US is setup. However corruption is all it takes to bring them down. I think communism would work if everyone had the emotional inclination to serve the common good, which as we know is not the case. There are a few people out there like that who will do a lot for little monetary compensation because the rest of the compensation comes from knowing they everyone else benefits. But then you have people who learn they can do little and still get compensated (like me 
).
).Capitalism looks great on paper. Shame that millions have to suffer for the luxury life of a few.
Dinosaur;
you dont need money if you eliminate trade. an ideal system would be one where everything is free. you do your job, and provide your services/goods to others, and in exchange you receive services/goods as you need them. no money ever changes hands.
the only ploblem would be people that abuse the system by not working, however regulators could easily keep an eye on this and issue a 'do not serve' warrant or something similar.
you dont need money if you eliminate trade. an ideal system would be one where everything is free. you do your job, and provide your services/goods to others, and in exchange you receive services/goods as you need them. no money ever changes hands.
the only ploblem would be people that abuse the system by not working, however regulators could easily keep an eye on this and issue a 'do not serve' warrant or something similar.
Dinosaur:
People who left USSR obviously oppose communism, because they left USSR.
In parallel people who once used imacs and then switched to pc's...will oppose imac as the ideal system they desire.
Moreover, I had the experience to be in communism, I am not sure if you did, but it seems like your ideas on this issue come from the media you have been taught to approve and comply without any understanding.
Please understand that any system opposes another system concept, since you are in democracy...democracy opposes communism, if you were in communism you would oppose democracy.
Once again I have been under both communism and democracy...I have said how I felt under these...there are negatives and positives in each system. To truly decided which system suits you, you need to be following that system. In parallel to truly know how chocolate tastes, you have to taste it.
People who left USSR obviously oppose communism, because they left USSR.
In parallel people who once used imacs and then switched to pc's...will oppose imac as the ideal system they desire.
Moreover, I had the experience to be in communism, I am not sure if you did, but it seems like your ideas on this issue come from the media you have been taught to approve and comply without any understanding.
Please understand that any system opposes another system concept, since you are in democracy...democracy opposes communism, if you were in communism you would oppose democracy.
Once again I have been under both communism and democracy...I have said how I felt under these...there are negatives and positives in each system. To truly decided which system suits you, you need to be following that system. In parallel to truly know how chocolate tastes, you have to taste it.