Communism

Discussion in 'Business & Economics' started by Anarcho Union, Feb 15, 2011.

  1. John99 Banned Banned

    Messages:
    22,046
    Communism works out great, when it involves one person.
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. Emil Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,801
    I agree! Done! :yay:
    But wait a second, who will work? :scratchin:
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. jmpet Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,891
    I like having over a dozen different types of paper to wipe my ass with- this is where communism in any form fails.
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. cosmictraveler Be kind to yourself always. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    33,264
    But leaves will be just fine comrade.
     
  8. keith1 Guest

    Communism is a newer model of basic civil and philosophic principles, written down and published to paper, successfully implemented to practice, in some arenas of failed governments of the turn of the (20th) century, where some corrupt, capitalist monarchies had ruined the markets, reducing their agriculture and lower middle classes to poverty.

    The model was an experiment, that may have been compromised from it's initial written goals and intent, as no clear outcome can be guaranteed, with abrupt paradigm shift changes, and that the angry focus of replacing utter failure can have a skewing effect on new leadership, thrust into making quick seat-of the-pants decisions.

    One would perhaps gain insight here, if passages from the original Marx documents were analyzed for the amount of the original intent that was not able to be realized, and not explored, in the testbed of real application, because of the special circumstances faced with those early startup events.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Feb 18, 2011
  9. Anarcho Union No Gods No Masters Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,048
    Anyone who wants society to countiune in a progressive and orderly manner.
     
  10. Anarcho Union No Gods No Masters Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,048
    Well maybe you should reconsider the fact that; so you can have YOUR dozen different types of paper to wipe your ass with, but people of lower econamic classes dont even have food to eat...
     
  11. Anarcho Union No Gods No Masters Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,048
    Acctualy in a communistic society you wouldnt use leaves... God the ignorance
     
  12. cosmictraveler Be kind to yourself always. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    33,264
    What I was implying is that anything in a communistic society would be considered useful no matter what you had to use. If leaves were the norm then everyone would be handing them out since they were the only thing that was there at the time. Not asking why there's only leaves to use but just accepting them as the way it is.
     
  13. Anarcho Union No Gods No Masters Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,048
    Not exactly true... well not true at all. They would instead ask what would be more beneficial
     
  14. cosmictraveler Be kind to yourself always. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    33,264
    So instead of trying to have paper to use the state tells them leaves is all they need and the people are satisfied because they all now use leaves? Sounds a little backwards to me because if paper is available but not allowed then I'd think there's a big problem with that system, don't you?
     
  15. Anarcho Union No Gods No Masters Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,048
    ANARCHIST communsim is AGAIN, what I am proposing. Elimanation of the state. See, authority has been the lethal flaw in all communistic societys.
     
  16. Emil Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,801
    You're an idealist.
    Maybe we can think to communism when we will not need a referee in sports competitions.
    I understand by this that our consciousness, our "fair play" will be so developed that we will not need a referee.
    Until then, communism is a utopia.
    But there are and other problems ...
     
  17. cosmictraveler Be kind to yourself always. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    33,264
    Then if you were hurt in an automobile accident in which you were permanently disabled who would provide you with the income and housing needed for you to survive if there was no "state"?
     
  18. chimpkin C'mon, get happy! Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,416
    I used to think people might be able to do away with government...but then I realized we're all a bunch of evil little monkeys, and I often wonder what I was thinking.
    The thing is, there's a distinct subpopulation of sociopaths. Most of them aren't serial killers...most of them just lack empathy. They will therefore use and destroy people. They would take over in an authority vacuum.

    Considering we seem to have sociopaths in charge now...meet the new boss.

    (Adverse environments-think Sweden, Iceland, Norway-seem to produce a culture that is much more collectivist...maybe we ought to all go on vacation in the Arctic for a year as a rite of passage.)
     
  19. birch Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,077
    i've noticed something about communism that the general population doesn't usually. very few people are idealistic or truly collectivist but many are quite "communistic" in the negative understanding and definition that we know of it as well as there are those who practice the positive aspects such as donating what they aren't using or superfluous, recycling etc.

    these "communists" don't exist just in so-called communist countries (of course they aren't even communist anyways) but they exist in every society and in greater numbers or even a greater majority than most would like to see or admit.

    anytime one has a sense of entitlement, believes others are having advantages that are their right as well, believe things are not 'fair' monetarily, are even competitive to the point of bringing others down to rise to the top etc are all practicing or holding values of communism or the negative definitions of communism (no good dirty communist). interestingly, that is how a capitalist thinks as well which can motivate them for their self-gain. are they really a capitalist or communist? what kind of capitalist or communist? there really are inherently a lot of communists even in so-called capitalistic systems. also, communism and capitalism meet full-circle when they are both extreme and are virtually the same. i've noticed so often how much people resent or are jealous of other people's possessions, jobs, money etc and want to 'equalize' (or that is their initial plea) by either bringing others down or raising themselves up. in capitalistic systems, this is not referred to as communism but the spirit of it is actually as well as capitalistic. this is the problem with capitalism or communism. it's when just the individual only cares for itself but pretends that it's for the benefit of the whole when it complains of what is 'unfair' especially if their true motivation is simply that they don't want to see anyone in a higher station in life or enjoying a better station in life than they BUT wouldn't give two cents if it was others who were in the unfortunate position. basically, no one should be getting ahead of them or getting more of a share than them, no matter what the circumstances are, this is the values of the "dirty" communist or even capitalist. i remember telling a person that i was planning on buying something they deemed i didn't deserve simply because everyone else didn't have it as well (the excuse was using others as if they were concerned but it really was about them, by pretending they are speaking for others they veil their selfish motivation or interest) and she literally railed on and on about how she can't afford that and how unfair it all is, how it must be nice etc literally berating me for something even so petty. i am not even anywhere rich or even extravagant. that is how awfully and suspiciously greedy, resentful, jealous or constantly worried about making sure they are as equal or better than others are (western society calls this capitalism but it's just as communistic as well). the resentment and jealousy was palpable. of course, this western person in a capitalistic and democratic society would never think of themself as a communist but essentially that's what they are. they were essentially complaining that things are not 'equal' according to thier desires. they're not happy with the idea of unequal status or unequal possessions, abilities or money or access to them. that is how most people are.

    contrary to popular belief, there are more "dirty" communists but they don't call themselves that or see themselves that when that is exactly the values they live, breathe and think.

    it goes like this: when the chips are down, most are communists as they are the ones who are going to be asking that they are included as well as their needs being met. but when the chips are up, they are capitalists as then they don't need to beg or ask as they are calling the shots or have more leverage. what does this mean? most people are both dirty communists and capitalists depending on the situation, no matter what 'labels' a country, government or society has.

    the idealized version of communism would be ideal because it addresses what is fair at the root of it as well as considers everyone's unique traits and abilitites.
    as for true communists, most aren't. those would be people who really believe in a utopia and value compassion, meeting as well as respecting everyone's legitimate needs and a sense of humanity.
     
    Last edited: Feb 19, 2011
  20. Read-Only Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    10,296
    In a way, this thread is amusing - but also very sad. That's because I've seldom seen such a display of gross ignorance, lack of education and non-thinking as shown by the people here who support this insane idea.

    I've said it before but I'll say it again - primarily for the benefit of the OP who is apparently too thick-headed to recognize everything that surrounds him: The whole concept is doomed to failure because it fails to take into account ordinary, common human nature.

    It's only natural in a group of people that some of them will be lazy. And without a government, just who is going to FORCE them to do their fair share of work? There will also naturally be those who are greedy and will TAKE more than their fair share of goods and services. Also, there will be some who's desire for power and prominence will cause them to take advantage in controlling others.

    Anyone who fails to recognize these common simple truths about humans isn't just idealistic - they are just plain stupid!! Sorry, but there's no other word that describes them more accurately. But I suppose "immensely foolish" might come close.
     
  21. birch Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,077

    you are also the one who is foolish. this is because with the right combination of technology and policies, some form of communism which would still incude incentives as well as some measure of punishment could possibly work. that is still taking into account human nature as well. it's just that we are not at that point for everything to come together. that doesn't mean it never can. after all, just about all societies use a combination of capitalism and communism. after all, even many people who are capitalists call for less government for obvious reasons. they can't stand any type of authoritarian body though some of that is necessary as a rather non-biased center for a people. one extreme or another (capitalism or communism) doesn't seem to work well or ends up being exploitive.
     
    Last edited: Feb 19, 2011
  22. Me-Ki-Gal Banned Banned

    Messages:
    4,634
    You are all over this one. I agree. It comes from societies in general. Human behavior of pack mentality. The general thought is " I can make my self better by lowering the other groups. So I put down my neighbor to elevate my self. Humans still think they are the center in there bubble world of self. So you come up with a great Idea that benefits Humanity as a whole and the first words out of the naysayers mouth is , Yeah but what is in it for Me! Yet when it comes time for doling out services in a community fashion the first thing you hear is " I want my share" Takers is what I call the general public . It is prevalent in every society. There are a few type people that live out side the social norm. They would be the ones at the back of the line waiting for everyone else to get there share , or the person that waits for everyone else to eat first. I do this sometimes, but I do it so I can pile up all the rest of the food on my plate to the sky Alice to the sky. I like food Yum Yum cookies too. Eat Me
     
  23. Read-Only Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    10,296
    Nope, you've just proven my point. Despite technology - or anything else, for that matter - humans are still HUMANS and their nature will never change to suit your nonsensical idealism. Greed and laziness will be around as long as there are people.
     

Share This Page