Ive noticed that most americans are quick to condem communism and socialism... But if you ask them to explain what either is they never seem to get further then "well, china and the soviet republic are/where communist countries!".
If you do not actuly know what something is then you have no right at all to condem it.
Damn it people...I bet none have you guys have researched Socialism or Communism....There CANNOT be an oppression for socialism because the PEOPLE themselves rule. NO KING NO PRESIDENT NO FASCIST LEADER!
Stalin and Mao, USED socialism and communism for their own gain. That is called STATE socialism and Hitler was a damn Fascist which is the path of capitalism where the rich elite take advantage of us good citizens!
I am absent of knowledge from communism but I do know Socialism. Socialism is the economic and political system that uses of mass of production are publicly or commonly owned. It gives relatively equal power-relations and ELIMINATES hierarchy and gives DIRECT DEMOCRACY to the people. However, the SOCIALISM that most of us Americans know are false. Soviet Russia and Communist China are actually STATE socialism or State communism....I do not agree with STATE Socialism.
How is the rich butt raping you and your family and taking advantage of you not immoral? MAY I REPEAT, STATE SOCIALISM STEALS YOUR STUFF AT GUN POINT...not Libertarian socialism or left libertarianism or anarchy-socialism.
@bobomcgraw Mao killed more than Hitler as well. Khrushchev brutally crushed the Hungarian revolution. The Yugoslav communist leader committed genocide on the Croats. The Romanian communist leader also committed genocide on his people as well. Stalin is not the only oppressive communist leader, they all were.
@kingwilliam14 Mao killed more than Hitler AND Stalin combined. Though numbers are not quite acurate, 33-35 million parished under Mao's regime verus 20 million under Stalin and 10-12 million under Hitler. Doesn't matter if it either fascism, communism or socialism. It is all form of dictatorship.
@ScorpioBornIn69 Norway is a socialized democracy with a parliamentary system in place. Norway has a higher standard of living than that of the U.S. or any other country in the entire world.
Their healthcare system provides care for its citizens, something that this day and age should be guaranteed by all governments. If your car brakes down, the governments helps you with that too. All while giving its citizens the same basic rights as here in the US.
When Fascists commit war crimes the lefties blame it on the evil ideology but when commies commit war crimes the lefties blame it on the individual....mmm interesting tactic.
@JohnPurchaseArt the reason for that is because fascism is ideologically evil it exploits peoples ignorance and intolerance but when it comes to communism the individual is committing the crime because communism is about social and economic equality unlike fascism
Communism is an evil ideology which exploits peoples ignorance, takes away personal freedom and uses violent revolution to destroy the cultural and national identity of ethnic groups. Communism is not about equality at all,it's about control. Just look at the wall street bankers who funded communism.
@JohnPurchaseArt that is just flat out wrong the basis of communism is to have a society where all people share goods without having to discriminate because of ethnicity or social status and no wall street bankers dont want communism because in a communist society everyone shares goods thus no need for money the bankers fund capitalism and are trying to bring about a libertarian state (not to be confused with progressive liberals) were government has no control over corporations
Depending on your level of evil, communism seems to me fairly evil. My boyfriend has a Russian family so he explains all the unfair morals that make up Communism. You have everything provided for you but you might as well be a slave. Also it's a bit of a bitch when you work hard for you whole life to buy land, then have it all taken away from you when the government feels like it. Is it evil to take away freedom? I'd say yes. (I'm Australian)
Communism/socialism is seen as evil in the US only because of the propaganda thought up by those who stand to lose their oh so perfect life style, I.e. the profit mongering whores of wall street who do nothing but sap the life out of everything they touch for their own personal gain.
A dictatorship could be in a capitalist economy actually. A dictatorship is merely an individual or group of individuals who takeover the responsibility for governance of a country, usually by force.
Also socialism is just less private enterprise and more public ownership.
Alot of people are scared of Socialism, but is is really just an ideal compromise between communism and capitalism which fundamentally aims at a more equitable society. Capitalism has no such goals
Thank you! I am so glad there's someone in the world with a brain. I've been shocked by the number of people who have nothing more to say about Communism and Socialism than that they're "evil". I think that in my country (America) the irrational hate of any form of government unlike our own comes from our excessive hubris. I can't count the number of times I've heard someone say that any country not democratic of republican should be "liberated". We have to save them from themselves!
problem is we're increasingly becoming capitalist but the media paint it otherwise that whats happening is for socialist or a for more egalitarian reasons, truth is socialism has been dieing ever sense trade unions began to lose there powers or it was taken off them by thatcher added to continious deregulation of state industries, we've come to a point because of the bankin crisis that governments are facing deregulation themselves, handing state finances over to the banking capitalists!
It is my conviction that the idea of Pure Communism is implausible in all definitions, The reasons are indefinite, for the reasons are all because of our very nature as humans. We can not sustain the very presence of a Utopia in which every one is in all definitions equal and in turn the deciders are themselves human, Imperfect. Imperfect deciders, for a perfect Utopia is simply impossible. The idealist of communism is doomed to always fail, creating something that is not what they envisioned.
ok ill give that, but too tell you the truth i personally wouldn't want the government in control of how much money I get I want the people to control how much money a person can get like in france they all got relay pissed off when when they hired the age of retirement because of there economy what im tring to say is if your in a socialist country and that country falls you fall with it. country has no money=you have no money.
@PesiCool i was speaking on the terms that if a government used socialism, and i find it hard to believe that communism creates a moneyless Utopia it just wouldn't be sustainable in today's world, there would be no economy.Also being stateless is a horrible idea because with communism there is 1 Supreme rule there is no way for THE PEOPLE to say what they need or what they want. Marx even said that the rulers are to make decision in the best interest of the public yet there is no voting.
@PesiCool you must not have understood all the words in my latest comment or you wouldn't be laughing so hard i would like to see any flaw you can come up with from my latest comment instead of I quote you "* literally bursting with laughter from your latest comment*"
Another example of how socialism does not equal stalinism : in 1981, Mitterand was elected President of France : his party, the Socialist Party, had allied with the communists in order to win against the Right. A lot of idiotic right-wing people became terrified that France was going to become another Russia. WRONG. Socialism does not equal Communism, and Communism does not equal Stalinism.
Here in France, communism and socialism are extremely different : the Socialist Party is the main opposition party, whereas the Communist Party is a small but strong party that has nothing to do with Stalin. And there is also another small but strong party called the New Anti-capitalist Party, which is NOT communist AT ALL. And since 2008, there is a new Republican Socialist Party, admired by the Gaullist Republicans, and which broke from the main Socialist Party because it is now too right-wing
People here in America generally don't know the difference between oppressive authoritarian communism/socialism of the USSR and the libertarian socialism of European nations today. It is all lumped into one category. It IS from Cold War propaganda, but it is also the immense power of corporatist conservatives here: Mega-corporations own all textbook publishers, and they make sure to carefully rewrite history, linking leftist ideas with what are actually right-wing beliefs (authoritarianism).
Bangladesh continues to face a number of major challenges, including widespread political and bureaucratic corruption, economic competition relative to the world, serious overpopulation, widespread poverty, and an increasing danger of hydrologic shocks brought on by ecological vulnerability to climate change. Libya has a poor record of human rights and In 2005 Freedom House rated political rights in Libya as 7 and civil liberties as 7 and gave it the freedom rating of Not Free (7 ws da wrst rate
Syria has a poor record on human rights. The Assad government has been criticized for arresting democracy and human rights activists, censoring websites, detaining bloggers, and imposing travel bans. Arbitrary detention, torture, and disappearances are widespread.Some of the most serious human rights violations, according to HRW's 2006 report , are routine torture, arbitrary detentions and trials before military and state security courts.
bobomcgraw i believe that you are mistaken here is some proof. The National Socialist German Workers' Party commonly known in English as the Nazi Party was a political party in Germany between 1919 and 1945. It was known as the German Workers' Party (DAP) prior to a change of name in 1920. also to your comment that hitler was never a communist he still became a dictator, he pretty much just skipped the communist stage. also i would like to hear the names of these countries that were never commys
socialism is wrong for the very reason that it has all ways lead to a communism and a communism has always lead to the ruler becoming corrupt from so much power and can guess what happens then? the communist ruler ends up either becoming a dictator (for example Hitler or pin pol or whatever his name is the Cambodian guy) or stays a communist ruler (technically) but still rules the country like a dictator ( for example Stalin, xia xax or that Chinese guy or here's another good one kim jong-il.
@Oxeos "socialism is wrong for the very reason that it has always lead to communism"
Denmark, Sweden and Norway are all essentially socialist and are some of the best countries in the world to live in by almost any measure. They have also not spontaneously turned communist.
@Oxeos Socialism is NOT Communism, and it does not necessary lead to Communism. Socialism, Capitalism, Communism are great on paper. Throw in greedy Corporatist, or a Dictator, and it all goes to shit. Take the U.S system as an example. You have 2 parties to choose from, they both get paid by special interests/lobbyists to pass laws in their favor. You have no say. The rich run the government while the middle class disappears, and the poor pick up the slack.
@CommunismRulez Communism is for retarded people. They make you work and get compensated meagerly. Not enough for your family. They take away your freedom to choose what you like. COMMUNISM IS FOR ASSHOLE like you
You know whats funny to me. Alot of people shun communism/socialism because of the deaths caused to its own people.--well leaving out the fact there is no difference between your people and the opposition (except mere biologicaly compartmentalized thought) American capatalism (as a sad example) usually funds the opposition (through their free market) years in advance--and then demonize the group of people THEY trained and gave the means and motive for war.-I think society breeds seperation--war.
Communism is slavery to the goverment. No property and distrebution of wealth leads too a fall in insntive to work leading to poor economy leading too poverty.
@thearmyofgreatness CAPITALISM IS SLAVERY. YOU RICH BASTERDS ARE TOO CORRUPT TO GIVE THE POOR SOME GODDAMME MONEY. THATS WHY MANY PEOPLE IN 3RD WORD COUNTREYS DIES BECAUSE OF CAPITALISM.
@CommunismRulez MORON... DON'T BE TOO BITTER MORON. COMMUNISM DOESN'T MAKE YOU RICH EITHER ASSHOLE and IT MAKES ALL PEOPLE POOR THAT'S A SICKO IDEOLOGY FOR SICK PEOPLE LIKE YOU ASSHOLE
I hate to sound rude, but please calm down. You will not convince anyone if you are going on a hostile rant. In fact, you are driving people away from capitalism.
The man in the video made his statement in a calm, logical way. He did not make hostile insults and he argued his point in an intelligent manner. Please try to understand that.
I completely disagree with the entire premise of this video. A political system can inherently be "evil" if the results of the implementation of that system are invariably evil.
There are systems that will result in suffering 100% of the time. Different systems have different results. I don't see how anybody could possibly argue differently. If the systems have different results then they cannot possibly be considered morally neutral or equivalent.
Sure, I can give you examples, although it should be self evident.
For example, in the politico-religious system of the Aztecs ritual human sacrifice was performed. The erroneous belief that this was necessary resulted in human suffering.
Other political or religious systems also invariably result in human suffering. I have studied socialism and I am convinced that if fully implemented it will result in human suffering and misery on a grand scale without fail.
@avshaman RETARD don't live in a fairy tale land ASSHOLE. It's a big FAIL in SOVIET UNION. Killed millions of people by famine. Is that not enough reason for you to believe that it's a BIG FAIL. ASSHOLE
In America, Communism and Socialism are bad because people who are more successful don't think poorer people should be helped by their government to be as successful as they are. Oh, and because 'I DONT GET MAI GUNZ'.
@CommunismRulez RETARD... COMMUNISM ALSO TAKES MONEY FROM BOTH NOT ONLY THE RICH ASSHOLE and THEY ALSO KILL PEOPLE NOT ONLY IN USING A WEAPON BY ALSO BY FAMINE. COMMUNIST LIKE YOU ARE ASSHOLE!
America doesn't look into things and stereo types everything. They think everyone else is bad but the U.S. government is very very much corrupt and dirty, the U.S. needs a 2nd revolution.
Communism is evil because it destroys the rights of the individual. It forces everyone to be equal in the sense that everyone must be the same, so they are easily controllable. You don't have the right to become successful by your own merit, the state decides everything you do. you have no right to a personal life because you may stray from dictates of communism.
Imo you cannot have a "full" Communist state without blood shed and cultures being destroyed.
@UnyieldingDefiance Why is everyone so intent on having one or the other? why can't we have a mix? I do think Communism/Socialism is still worse than Capitalism though.
(cont'd) However, I think a fear of communism and socialism stem not from the cold war but from America's basic anti-authoritarian presumptions--significantly diminished though they were during the 20th century, we like to think we're still opposed to government.
Being a libertarian myself, I may well be biased. This video does ask a fair question, though, in a way that doesn't bash Americans. That's increasingly rare, so thanks for that.
@SeventhHanyou Communism sounds like such a noble enterprise, what with its desire for equality and fairness, but it fails to realise that humanity is not a very noble species.
What's sadly ironic is I made a video about how people shouldn't bash Americans and people thought I was bashing Americans.
I agree that judging communism by the worst historical examples is not fair. It must be judged on its own merits. Having read communist literature, however, I am absolutely convinced that it is a destructive idea grounded in the wrong presumptions about morality.
True capitalism must be grounded in peace and liberty--freedom of contract, freedom from government intervention, etc. Socialist elements in a partly capitalist government don't modify the definition of capitalism. (cont'd)
Communism is immoral. It denies the best the result of their intellectual and physical labor, (private property). Its subsidizes incompetence. It is coercion and it everything wrong with government. It is intellectually stiffing and legalized robbery. And G Bush is hardly a capitalist/.
@WilliamDillOnPatrol I agree on the incompetence part. Have you ever read the book Wild Swans by Jung Chan? It tells the story of the authors family as they grew up in Communist China. It's an interesting insight into how the system affected the lives of (relatively) normal people.
It's not complicated, socialism concentrates power very quickly and efficiently, which creates evil. Sure it happens in some capitalist countries too, but not 100% of the time as with socialist countries.
That said, no country is or could be "purely" socialist or capitalist, and arguing about "isms" is a game the elites made up to keep relatively intelligent people busy while they take all the land/resources and set up a control grid for us.
It is an uphill battle to get people to understand that economic theory and method of governance are 2 separate issues. And that any form of governance will always distort otherwise true economies (both socialist and capitalist).
It boils down to this question: Do you support the concept of property rights, beginning with self ownership (or more properly self sovereignty)? Next is the question of ownership of things, like the fruits of your labor. Most conflict arises from these questions.
You will have to look up direct democracy yourself ... it's a big subject...
but basically.. the workers form their own councils and go along and debate and vote themselves, rather than electing an MP every 5 years to do it for them.
For more strategic/national policies... the councils send a representative to speak for each council..
.. but this individual can be instantly recalled if they don't do what the council wants.
What we have is a bit closer to a republic, as Plato described it at least, with people trained in politics making the decisions rather than everyone no matter what they work at.
You talking about those selfish rich bastareds who pretend to represent us?
True socialists are proposing a dramatic constitutional change...
.... revolution!
Btw.. revolution doesn't mean violence... it simply means the removal of power from the ruling class and putting it into the hands of ordinary people.
No, people who are actually trained for it from birth, it would be their one purpose in life, not a 'job'.
Like how in some Empires and Kingdoms the heir to the throne might have been trained and prepared his entire life for when he assumed power, so that he could do the job properly.
I thought we were talking about the real world??? ??
Actual real politicians in this day and age are all out of Oxford and Cambridge and Eton...
.. these days, very few do it out of a sense of duty or vocation.. mostly it is just another career choice for rich people.. We need to put power into the hands of real ordinary people...
... not some imaginary group of people groomed from birth to be leaders.. why would anybody want that anyway???
We were talking about democracy, though you seemed to be talking about Greek democracy so I brought up Plato's Republic as it is the closer to what we currently employ.
I then explained further how Plato's republic would actually work.
For some reason you assumed my explanation was an endorsement.
Actually I never mentioned Greek democracy and I wasn't talking about Greek democtracy... it was you that brought up Greek democracy.
I don't see why you felt the need to explain the current system and it's similarity to Plato's republic .. I was only talking about communist democracy, nothing else.
I hadn't tried to start a discussion about democracy in general...
You asked about democracy in communism... and so I explained it...
The CPSU became very influential when other struggling socialist states had no other support... so they ended up adopting the CPSU/Stalinist model...
... but Socialism is much older than Stalin... and inseperable from democracy... to potray it as otherwise is unfair.. and dangerous... and just what the capitalists want you to do.
The 'similar bits' are a planned economy..
the 'different bit' is having power in a central bureaucracy instead of workers councils.
One of the tenets of Marxism is that there are only two "revolutionary" classes in human history- the bourgeoisie (the middle class/nouveau riche) and the proletariat (urban, industrial laborers.) According to this logic, peasant farmers (such as the leaders of the Zapatista rebellion in Mexico, or the MST in Brazil) cannot be true revolutionaries. Neither can college students (like SDS in 1960s America).
Marx's definition of "revolutionary" classes was informed solely by the historical context of 19th century Europe; it took into account none of the situations in Africa, Asia or America. Capitalism according to Marx was not the antithesis of communism; it was a necessary prerequisite for utopia.
According to Marx, proletariat is the class of people that 'sells' it's labour in order to earn a living! So, the peasant farmers are in a fuedal society what factory workers are in Capitalist society!!
They're right, communism most definitely did "suck", especially in the form it took in the "Soviet Union"- which was really a mechanism that enabled Russia to dominate its Eastern European neighbors and deny their people the right to self-determination- all under the guise of a worker's utopia.
Of course, the capitalist powers of that era were just as brutal. The USSR had "satellite states"; Western Europe had "colonies", "protectorates" and "zones of influence."
but two wrongs don't make a right. Communism and capitalism *both* perpetuate inequality- capitalism by allowing corporations to grow rich through exploitation, and communism by creating an undemocratic *elite* among members of the Communist Party- the so-called "dictatorship of the proletariat", which ends up being just as EVIL as any other dictatorship.
Well, any suggestions.....any way we can prevent this formation of elite class and also not to allow the exploitation of human beings by fellow human beings? Always somone comes up with such a comment against Communism without any hint about how the things could be corrected! We keep harping upon the democracy of the West and USA, is it really the democracy? Is there a level playing field for rich and poor as far as politics is concerned?
Well, any suggestion to prevent the formation of elite class? Every time someone would come up with this statement about *Undemocratic Elite* etc. about communism, but I wonder if there is democracy or oligarchy in Capitalist countries?
The Capitalist powers after ww2 where not as brutal. Most gave up there formal colonies. There was a rerason why East Germans risked there lives to live in West Germany and not the other way around.
Stalin killed millions upon millions because communism does not facilitate the population with an option to replace their leadership. Communist leaders therefore must strike fear into the people as they hold there power only with brute force. This leads to... guess what... Millions of people being killed...
People can commit acts of evil despite the presence of potential obstacles.
I still maintain that to judge a political system based on the people that took advantage of it makes no sense.
There are plenty of democratic nations whose governments periodically bypass the democratic method when it suits them, that kind of action is not unique to Communism, Fascism or anything else.
No it isn't. But When a democracy suspends democratic practices this is the exception to the rule. These exceptions are usually in times of national emergency. And these suspensions are facilitated in a democratic constitution as are the accepted circumstances under which such an emergency can be declared. Yes, democracy is far from perfect, but it aspires to be. Yes Bush screwed up, but he can only screw up for at the most 8 years, why? because of democracy.
First off, I never mentioned suspension of democratic practices I said their are nations who bypass the democratic process when it suits them, those are two different things.
Second, Bush's term limit is as a result of the constitution, it has nothing to do with democracy.
Im american, and im pro communism. And you are exactly right, the stigma attached to communism is spawned from the way we are raised, were raised to think that socialism is evil. Lenin had the right idea, and despite his warnings after his death stalin came to power and reformed the goverment taking out the essential parts that kept the goverment from being a dictatorship.
The US constitution is the cornerstone of its Democracy, it is evolved by democracy, it was framed to preserve and embody the priciples of democracy and the ammendment which limits the duration of a presidency was put in place by a process called... Democracy.
Could it not be argued that what is or what isn't an emergency is merely a matter of personal interpretation? But we are going round in circles here... The Millions of Stalins political opponents as well as the 6 million+ Jews of the third reich would not have died had they enjoyed truly democratic government. Feel free to cite a truly successful communist or Facist state and prove me wrong.
I would imagine a hurricane that almost destroys a city, a famine, an earthquake, a wild fire, a terrorist or any otherwise unprovoked attack (on a reasonably large scale) could all be described as emergencies without people worrying about the term 'personal opinion'.
As for stable Communist states, I don't know of any, but then I am not here to defend or promote the practice of Communism, or Fascism either.
All those horrible things you mentioned would be unquestionably disastrous. And of course are emergencies in the Humanitarian sense. but not typically in the political sense. None of the above for example would neccessitate the assembley of a co-aligned war cabinet such as Churchill's Government of National Unity. The GNU was assembled along with the suspension of the General election.
Was I wrong to think you were trying to obsolve Communism from any part in the horrors of soviet Russia?
Is it a surgeon paid the same as a sweeper or a sweeper paid the same as a surgeon, or is it even either?
I know that Communism does have a class system of its own, at least it did in China, those higher up in the party could expect to be granted a few more perks than their subordinates.
The Communism practiced in the USSR was essentially a form of fascism; it was the *state*, and not the "proletariat", that was given complete control of "capital", natural resources, and people's private lives. Nationalization, as practiced by Communist states, did not return resources to the people or the workers, but transferred them from wealthy "capitalists" to the even wealthier State.
The US constitution was written by delegates chosen solely by white men- who at that time composed only a fraction of the residents of the "united states of America." Hence the "founding fathers" were not elected by any truly democratic process, and their decisions were not representative of the will of the American people.
A teenager who never worked to provide for himself; lives in his comfortable parents' house; posts pro-communist manifestos about redistributing his parents' wealth using broadband connection they pay for. Owns an iPhone, listens to gangster rap and refrains from walking through neghbourhoods populated by deprived proletarians whose rights he stands for and authors of his favourite songs.
lenons idea of communism was different then the soviet unions communism... and no government is perfect but in my opinion if you made a compromise between all the governments you'd have a better government for everybody.. another thing that people dont really talk about is a global government... if we had a global government we would have a lot less problems like war and poverty but we'd have a lot of problems deciding what government that would be
also why do people assume 99% of the taxes u pay go to the welfare state? a lot of goes into infrastructure, education, military etc. (or atleast it should!)
I can see why some people believe socialism is evil because its thet in some ways..IE its taking money from some people and giving to others. However, it would be also evil to not take care of the weak as well. So which is more evil? If you were healthy and had a loaf of bread and I took a quarter of your bread and gave it to a starving person, which act would be worse, ignoring the starving person or taking a small portion of your bread?
No actually it's not. You people dont understand that the system isint itself corrupt. Both capitalism and socialism can either work for against the people. There are oppurtunities for corruption in both.
But from what i have seen from living in america is that capitalism is a horrible thing. Us in the middle class are basicly done for here and the republicans do not care at all. Sure both can be corrupt and both can be bad but I beleave Capitalism = Fail. Its just rich people makeing millions while paying others below them 7-10 bucks an hour. If your in school and trying to keep up with a job and bills and ask for help, they tell you to drop out and work full time. thats not right.
No, your witnessing corrupted capitalism. The U.S Govt is corrupt if hadn't noticed. And you would have seen the same with socialism in 1930's Germany. Whats the bigger failure to you? the rich making a couple more bucks? or the death of tens of millions of Jews and Russians under Hitler and Stalins rule? People are corrupt. Not their system. Capitalism just makes it harder for the government to murder people. Private coorperations arent interested in millitary enforcement...they just want the $
??? werent the allied forces fighting to stop the communist regime??? i.e Germany. Maybe Hitler didint like it but he still implemented it in his countreis system of government. My point is that communism is an easier route to corruption than capitalism. The Iraq argument dosent come close to the holocaust, and they are pushing for the arrest of Cheney for lying.
No, Hitler was a fascist dictator, Stalin was the Communist.
Hitler hated Communism so he would not have used it, hell the closest he got to it was in the name of the Nazi party, The National Socialist German Workers Party.
However Hitler's idea of Socialism was very different from Marxists Socialism and was definitely not Communism.
In America the word socialism doesn't really have a bad stigma to it anymore. But republicans think it still does so they still use it like a bad word, to no affect.
I agree with you it's dumb to condemn a economic system based on the actions of a politcal figure.
its fear.. people are afraid of change.. even if it means it benefits of the hole of society..people fear change.
jackthelad101 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Communism isn't evil. It's not great, but not evil.
MiSzxCHRiSTY 3 months ago
Ive noticed that most americans are quick to condem communism and socialism... But if you ask them to explain what either is they never seem to get further then "well, china and the soviet republic are/where communist countries!".
If you do not actuly know what something is then you have no right at all to condem it.
Zulandar 5 months ago
Damn it people...I bet none have you guys have researched Socialism or Communism....There CANNOT be an oppression for socialism because the PEOPLE themselves rule. NO KING NO PRESIDENT NO FASCIST LEADER!
Stalin and Mao, USED socialism and communism for their own gain. That is called STATE socialism and Hitler was a damn Fascist which is the path of capitalism where the rich elite take advantage of us good citizens!
RebelManCam 6 months ago
I am absent of knowledge from communism but I do know Socialism. Socialism is the economic and political system that uses of mass of production are publicly or commonly owned. It gives relatively equal power-relations and ELIMINATES hierarchy and gives DIRECT DEMOCRACY to the people. However, the SOCIALISM that most of us Americans know are false. Soviet Russia and Communist China are actually STATE socialism or State communism....I do not agree with STATE Socialism.
RebelManCam 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
HEY COMMUNIST PEOPLE!.. Please ANSWER THESE QUESTIONS.
What do you think about 'cult of personality?
What do you think about PUNISHING people because of THINKING DIFFERENT?
What do you think about FORCING people to be a soldier of THE GREAT LEADER?
What do you think that STALIN KILLED HIS OPPENENTS?
What do you think about the human right called 'FREEDOM OF SPEECH'?
What do you think about OTHER IDEOLOGIES are FORBIDDEN in totaliterian-socialist countries?PLEASE ANSWER ME !
freandwhickquest 7 months ago
I live in america and yes, we have a stigma against socialism. I greatly disagree with it,.
chocolatesprite 8 months ago
How is stealing your stuff at gunpoint NOT immoral you gigantic fucking retard?
BrettDunbar 8 months ago
@BrettDunbar Care to elaborate?
Or try to?
bobomcgraw 8 months ago
@BrettDunbar
How is the rich butt raping you and your family and taking advantage of you not immoral? MAY I REPEAT, STATE SOCIALISM STEALS YOUR STUFF AT GUN POINT...not Libertarian socialism or left libertarianism or anarchy-socialism.
RebelManCam 6 months ago
Commies killed more than Hitler. Let's leave it at that
kingwilliam14 8 months ago
@kingwilliam14 No, let's get it right.
STALIN killed more.
bobomcgraw 8 months ago
@bobomcgraw Mao killed more than Hitler as well. Khrushchev brutally crushed the Hungarian revolution. The Yugoslav communist leader committed genocide on the Croats. The Romanian communist leader also committed genocide on his people as well. Stalin is not the only oppressive communist leader, they all were.
kingwilliam14 8 months ago
@kingwilliam14 Mao killed more than Hitler AND Stalin combined. Though numbers are not quite acurate, 33-35 million parished under Mao's regime verus 20 million under Stalin and 10-12 million under Hitler. Doesn't matter if it either fascism, communism or socialism. It is all form of dictatorship.
ScorpioBornIn69 8 months ago
@ScorpioBornIn69 Norway is a socialized democracy with a parliamentary system in place. Norway has a higher standard of living than that of the U.S. or any other country in the entire world.
Their healthcare system provides care for its citizens, something that this day and age should be guaranteed by all governments. If your car brakes down, the governments helps you with that too. All while giving its citizens the same basic rights as here in the US.
chocolatesprite 8 months ago
@ScorpioBornIn69 well at least we can agree that communism, socialism, and fascism are all bad. Same shit, different oppression.
kingwilliam14 8 months ago
When Fascists commit war crimes the lefties blame it on the evil ideology but when commies commit war crimes the lefties blame it on the individual....mmm interesting tactic.
JohnPurchaseArt 7 months ago
@JohnPurchaseArt the reason for that is because fascism is ideologically evil it exploits peoples ignorance and intolerance but when it comes to communism the individual is committing the crime because communism is about social and economic equality unlike fascism
graydog3971 7 months ago
@graydog3971
Communism is an evil ideology which exploits peoples ignorance, takes away personal freedom and uses violent revolution to destroy the cultural and national identity of ethnic groups. Communism is not about equality at all,it's about control. Just look at the wall street bankers who funded communism.
JohnPurchaseArt 7 months ago
@JohnPurchaseArt that is just flat out wrong the basis of communism is to have a society where all people share goods without having to discriminate because of ethnicity or social status and no wall street bankers dont want communism because in a communist society everyone shares goods thus no need for money the bankers fund capitalism and are trying to bring about a libertarian state (not to be confused with progressive liberals) were government has no control over corporations
graydog3971 7 months ago
@JohnPurchaseArt wall street bankers funded communism?please tell that story.
darknight651 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@kingwilliam14 but capitalisim killed more than commies
killertaco97 5 months ago
Depending on your level of evil, communism seems to me fairly evil. My boyfriend has a Russian family so he explains all the unfair morals that make up Communism. You have everything provided for you but you might as well be a slave. Also it's a bit of a bitch when you work hard for you whole life to buy land, then have it all taken away from you when the government feels like it. Is it evil to take away freedom? I'd say yes. (I'm Australian)
heff4heather 8 months ago
Communism/socialism is seen as evil in the US only because of the propaganda thought up by those who stand to lose their oh so perfect life style, I.e. the profit mongering whores of wall street who do nothing but sap the life out of everything they touch for their own personal gain.
DominionEnterprise 1 year ago
Both communism and socialism are a form of 'dictatorship.
ScorpioBornIn69 1 year ago
@ScorpioBornIn69 Well that's not true.
bobomcgraw 1 year ago 2
@ScorpioBornIn69
A dictatorship could be in a capitalist economy actually. A dictatorship is merely an individual or group of individuals who takeover the responsibility for governance of a country, usually by force.
Also socialism is just less private enterprise and more public ownership.
Alot of people are scared of Socialism, but is is really just an ideal compromise between communism and capitalism which fundamentally aims at a more equitable society. Capitalism has no such goals
thefalz 11 months ago
@ScorpioBornIn69 Socialism/ communism are economic systems, they are not a form of leadership.
Socialism =/= Totalitarianism or Fascism.
The US has many socialized elements (e.g. Schools,roads and other basic needs for a civilized society.)
Saying that the United States is a purely capitalist nation is an outright fabrication born out of ignorance.
Please do independent studies on the subject before blurting out lies.
chocolatesprite 8 months ago
@chocolatesprite We are now in a path to socialism as our government gets ever more control.
ScorpioBornIn69 8 months ago
@ScorpioBornIn69 You have clearly not read my article.
chocolatesprite 8 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@ScorpioBornIn69 and you have never read a book on either subject...
metamaggot 3 months ago
@ScorpioBornIn69 not democratic socialism
aaaaZa100 2 months ago
Thank you! I am so glad there's someone in the world with a brain. I've been shocked by the number of people who have nothing more to say about Communism and Socialism than that they're "evil". I think that in my country (America) the irrational hate of any form of government unlike our own comes from our excessive hubris. I can't count the number of times I've heard someone say that any country not democratic of republican should be "liberated". We have to save them from themselves!
BlkKatt13 1 year ago
Communism is the very definition of failure.
coldfront999 1 year ago
i agree with you budd keep in touch and keep up the postings
AndrejStudent3116590 1 year ago
problem is we're increasingly becoming capitalist but the media paint it otherwise that whats happening is for socialist or a for more egalitarian reasons, truth is socialism has been dieing ever sense trade unions began to lose there powers or it was taken off them by thatcher added to continious deregulation of state industries, we've come to a point because of the bankin crisis that governments are facing deregulation themselves, handing state finances over to the banking capitalists!
39Auldkellier 1 year ago
It is my conviction that the idea of Pure Communism is implausible in all definitions, The reasons are indefinite, for the reasons are all because of our very nature as humans. We can not sustain the very presence of a Utopia in which every one is in all definitions equal and in turn the deciders are themselves human, Imperfect. Imperfect deciders, for a perfect Utopia is simply impossible. The idealist of communism is doomed to always fail, creating something that is not what they envisioned.
Oxeos 1 year ago
ok ill give that, but too tell you the truth i personally wouldn't want the government in control of how much money I get I want the people to control how much money a person can get like in france they all got relay pissed off when when they hired the age of retirement because of there economy what im tring to say is if your in a socialist country and that country falls you fall with it. country has no money=you have no money.
Oxeos 1 year ago
@Oxeos Communism has no currency. It is pure Utopia and you should definitely study it further from a neutral point of view.
Communism is stateless and government is anti-communist.
PesiCool 1 year ago
@PesiCool i was speaking on the terms that if a government used socialism, and i find it hard to believe that communism creates a moneyless Utopia it just wouldn't be sustainable in today's world, there would be no economy.Also being stateless is a horrible idea because with communism there is 1 Supreme rule there is no way for THE PEOPLE to say what they need or what they want. Marx even said that the rulers are to make decision in the best interest of the public yet there is no voting.
Oxeos 1 year ago
@Oxeos You haven't even read the communist manifesto, have you?
*I am literally bursting with laughter from your latest comment*
PesiCool 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@PesiCool you must not have understood all the words in my latest comment or you wouldn't be laughing so hard i would like to see any flaw you can come up with from my latest comment instead of I quote you "* literally bursting with laughter from your latest comment*"
Oxeos 1 year ago
They can call their country communist all day long...it wont make it true.Not one country was communist.
Nightmeare 1 year ago
@poopyloopster How does that equate to socialism?
bobomcgraw 1 year ago
Another example of how socialism does not equal stalinism : in 1981, Mitterand was elected President of France : his party, the Socialist Party, had allied with the communists in order to win against the Right. A lot of idiotic right-wing people became terrified that France was going to become another Russia. WRONG. Socialism does not equal Communism, and Communism does not equal Stalinism.
Graoutine 1 year ago
Here in France, communism and socialism are extremely different : the Socialist Party is the main opposition party, whereas the Communist Party is a small but strong party that has nothing to do with Stalin. And there is also another small but strong party called the New Anti-capitalist Party, which is NOT communist AT ALL. And since 2008, there is a new Republican Socialist Party, admired by the Gaullist Republicans, and which broke from the main Socialist Party because it is now too right-wing
Graoutine 1 year ago
People here in America generally don't know the difference between oppressive authoritarian communism/socialism of the USSR and the libertarian socialism of European nations today. It is all lumped into one category. It IS from Cold War propaganda, but it is also the immense power of corporatist conservatives here: Mega-corporations own all textbook publishers, and they make sure to carefully rewrite history, linking leftist ideas with what are actually right-wing beliefs (authoritarianism).
sheepburn 1 year ago
Bangladesh continues to face a number of major challenges, including widespread political and bureaucratic corruption, economic competition relative to the world, serious overpopulation, widespread poverty, and an increasing danger of hydrologic shocks brought on by ecological vulnerability to climate change. Libya has a poor record of human rights and In 2005 Freedom House rated political rights in Libya as 7 and civil liberties as 7 and gave it the freedom rating of Not Free (7 ws da wrst rate
Oxeos 1 year ago
Syria has a poor record on human rights. The Assad government has been criticized for arresting democracy and human rights activists, censoring websites, detaining bloggers, and imposing travel bans. Arbitrary detention, torture, and disappearances are widespread.Some of the most serious human rights violations, according to HRW's 2006 report , are routine torture, arbitrary detentions and trials before military and state security courts.
Oxeos 1 year ago
bobomcgraw i believe that you are mistaken here is some proof. The National Socialist German Workers' Party commonly known in English as the Nazi Party was a political party in Germany between 1919 and 1945. It was known as the German Workers' Party (DAP) prior to a change of name in 1920. also to your comment that hitler was never a communist he still became a dictator, he pretty much just skipped the communist stage. also i would like to hear the names of these countries that were never commys
Oxeos 1 year ago
@Oxeos You do realise this is not actually proof right?
I know what the Nazi party called themselves socialist, but that did not make them so.
They were fascists, not socialists.
Hitler didn't skip any steps, he was never a socialist to begin with.
Socialist countries that are not communist; Bangladesh, Egypt, Syria.
The list goes on.
bobomcgraw 1 year ago
@bobomcgraw Fascist is a form of socialism.
BrettDunbar 8 months ago
socialism is wrong for the very reason that it has all ways lead to a communism and a communism has always lead to the ruler becoming corrupt from so much power and can guess what happens then? the communist ruler ends up either becoming a dictator (for example Hitler or pin pol or whatever his name is the Cambodian guy) or stays a communist ruler (technically) but still rules the country like a dictator ( for example Stalin, xia xax or that Chinese guy or here's another good one kim jong-il.
Oxeos 1 year ago
@Oxeos Hitler wasn't a communist, he wasn't even a socialist.
I haven't seen every socialist country turn to communism, so I'm afraid I'm going to have to call bullshit on that claim.
bobomcgraw 1 year ago
@Oxeos "socialism is wrong for the very reason that it has always lead to communism"
Denmark, Sweden and Norway are all essentially socialist and are some of the best countries in the world to live in by almost any measure. They have also not spontaneously turned communist.
elco9791 1 year ago
@Oxeos Communism is stateless with a direct democracy, i.e. in communism there is no ruler.
PesiCool 1 year ago
@Oxeos Socialism is NOT Communism, and it does not necessary lead to Communism. Socialism, Capitalism, Communism are great on paper. Throw in greedy Corporatist, or a Dictator, and it all goes to shit. Take the U.S system as an example. You have 2 parties to choose from, they both get paid by special interests/lobbyists to pass laws in their favor. You have no say. The rich run the government while the middle class disappears, and the poor pick up the slack.
grendel1013 1 year ago
youre from america you republican assholes dont understand communism.
Capitalism is nothing more than slavery for the poor.
CommunismRulez 1 year ago
@CommunismRulez Communism is for retarded people. They make you work and get compensated meagerly. Not enough for your family. They take away your freedom to choose what you like. COMMUNISM IS FOR ASSHOLE like you
InUrFce 1 year ago
@InUrFce You're making the classic error of mistaking the Soviet Union of being communist. Read some Marx, then try and oppose it.
charlottesetsu 1 year ago
You know whats funny to me. Alot of people shun communism/socialism because of the deaths caused to its own people.--well leaving out the fact there is no difference between your people and the opposition (except mere biologicaly compartmentalized thought) American capatalism (as a sad example) usually funds the opposition (through their free market) years in advance--and then demonize the group of people THEY trained and gave the means and motive for war.-I think society breeds seperation--war.
TheGreatDeciever55 1 year ago
Communism is slavery to the goverment. No property and distrebution of wealth leads too a fall in insntive to work leading to poor economy leading too poverty.
thearmyofgreatness 1 year ago
@thearmyofgreatness CAPITALISM IS SLAVERY. YOU RICH BASTERDS ARE TOO CORRUPT TO GIVE THE POOR SOME GODDAMME MONEY. THATS WHY MANY PEOPLE IN 3RD WORD COUNTREYS DIES BECAUSE OF CAPITALISM.
CommunismRulez 1 year ago
@CommunismRulez MORON... DON'T BE TOO BITTER MORON. COMMUNISM DOESN'T MAKE YOU RICH EITHER ASSHOLE and IT MAKES ALL PEOPLE POOR THAT'S A SICKO IDEOLOGY FOR SICK PEOPLE LIKE YOU ASSHOLE
InUrFce 1 year ago
Comment removed
Nezzytheawesome 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@InUrFce
I hate to sound rude, but please calm down. You will not convince anyone if you are going on a hostile rant. In fact, you are driving people away from capitalism.
The man in the video made his statement in a calm, logical way. He did not make hostile insults and he argued his point in an intelligent manner. Please try to understand that.
Nezzytheawesome 1 year ago
Can anyone explain to me how socialism solve the problem in human life.
mrboycom 1 year ago
I completely disagree with the entire premise of this video. A political system can inherently be "evil" if the results of the implementation of that system are invariably evil.
There are systems that will result in suffering 100% of the time. Different systems have different results. I don't see how anybody could possibly argue differently. If the systems have different results then they cannot possibly be considered morally neutral or equivalent.
avshaman 1 year ago
@avshaman Can you provide examples of these systems?
bobomcgraw 1 year ago
@bobomcgraw
Sure, I can give you examples, although it should be self evident.
For example, in the politico-religious system of the Aztecs ritual human sacrifice was performed. The erroneous belief that this was necessary resulted in human suffering.
Other political or religious systems also invariably result in human suffering. I have studied socialism and I am convinced that if fully implemented it will result in human suffering and misery on a grand scale without fail.
avshaman 1 year ago
@avshaman Never assume that anything is self evident.
You make a claim then you provide examples or evidence otherwise why should anyone accept your statements as fact?
So their ignorance made them evil?
They did what they did because they thought they had to.
Necessity does not equate to evil.
Again I have to ask for evidence, reasoning, anything.
bobomcgraw 1 year ago
@avshaman RETARD don't live in a fairy tale land ASSHOLE. It's a big FAIL in SOVIET UNION. Killed millions of people by famine. Is that not enough reason for you to believe that it's a BIG FAIL. ASSHOLE
InUrFce 1 year ago
In America, Communism and Socialism are bad because people who are more successful don't think poorer people should be helped by their government to be as successful as they are. Oh, and because 'I DONT GET MAI GUNZ'.
MaoiMeowi2 1 year ago
@MaoiMeowi2 i agree. i hate rich people. for centuries they tooked the money from the poor.
CommunismRulez 1 year ago
@CommunismRulez RETARD... COMMUNISM ALSO TAKES MONEY FROM BOTH NOT ONLY THE RICH ASSHOLE and THEY ALSO KILL PEOPLE NOT ONLY IN USING A WEAPON BY ALSO BY FAMINE. COMMUNIST LIKE YOU ARE ASSHOLE!
InUrFce 1 year ago
America doesn't look into things and stereo types everything. They think everyone else is bad but the U.S. government is very very much corrupt and dirty, the U.S. needs a 2nd revolution.
jameswx09 1 year ago
Communism is evil because it destroys the rights of the individual. It forces everyone to be equal in the sense that everyone must be the same, so they are easily controllable. You don't have the right to become successful by your own merit, the state decides everything you do. you have no right to a personal life because you may stray from dictates of communism.
Imo you cannot have a "full" Communist state without blood shed and cultures being destroyed.
UnyieldingDefiance 1 year ago 2
@UnyieldingDefiance Why is everyone so intent on having one or the other? why can't we have a mix? I do think Communism/Socialism is still worse than Capitalism though.
UnyieldingDefiance 1 year ago
(cont'd) However, I think a fear of communism and socialism stem not from the cold war but from America's basic anti-authoritarian presumptions--significantly diminished though they were during the 20th century, we like to think we're still opposed to government.
Being a libertarian myself, I may well be biased. This video does ask a fair question, though, in a way that doesn't bash Americans. That's increasingly rare, so thanks for that.
SeventhHanyou 1 year ago
@SeventhHanyou Communism sounds like such a noble enterprise, what with its desire for equality and fairness, but it fails to realise that humanity is not a very noble species.
What's sadly ironic is I made a video about how people shouldn't bash Americans and people thought I was bashing Americans.
bobomcgraw 1 year ago
I agree that judging communism by the worst historical examples is not fair. It must be judged on its own merits. Having read communist literature, however, I am absolutely convinced that it is a destructive idea grounded in the wrong presumptions about morality.
True capitalism must be grounded in peace and liberty--freedom of contract, freedom from government intervention, etc. Socialist elements in a partly capitalist government don't modify the definition of capitalism. (cont'd)
SeventhHanyou 1 year ago
Communism is immoral. It denies the best the result of their intellectual and physical labor, (private property). Its subsidizes incompetence. It is coercion and it everything wrong with government. It is intellectually stiffing and legalized robbery. And G Bush is hardly a capitalist/.
WilliamDillOnPatrol 1 year ago
@WilliamDillOnPatrol I agree on the incompetence part. Have you ever read the book Wild Swans by Jung Chan? It tells the story of the authors family as they grew up in Communist China. It's an interesting insight into how the system affected the lives of (relatively) normal people.
bobomcgraw 1 year ago
You scum.
KASP1 2 years ago
How lucky are most of us to be in a free society and not a socialist communist. We shouldnt take it for granted.
titans797979 2 years ago
lol a free society? lol
halofornoobs93 1 year ago
It's not complicated, socialism concentrates power very quickly and efficiently, which creates evil. Sure it happens in some capitalist countries too, but not 100% of the time as with socialist countries.
That said, no country is or could be "purely" socialist or capitalist, and arguing about "isms" is a game the elites made up to keep relatively intelligent people busy while they take all the land/resources and set up a control grid for us.
thebreadcake 2 years ago 2
I fail to understand your argument.
Socialism is not a political ideology or a system of government, it is an economic model.
It really has nothing to do with distribution of power and everything to do with distribution of wealth.
And there are quite a few socialist countries that are not evil
bobomcgraw 2 years ago
It is an uphill battle to get people to understand that economic theory and method of governance are 2 separate issues. And that any form of governance will always distort otherwise true economies (both socialist and capitalist).
It boils down to this question: Do you support the concept of property rights, beginning with self ownership (or more properly self sovereignty)? Next is the question of ownership of things, like the fruits of your labor. Most conflict arises from these questions.
rmcdaniel423 2 years ago
Just because almost all communist governments were fascistic totaliarism, doesn't say that communism is about that.
Because the list of capitalistic dictators is far to long.
And you don't seem to know something about communism; moneys aren't supposed to exist in a communist society.
Many communist's doesn't look at soviet russia as an communist state, but as state capitalism.
roberth1990 2 years ago
If there's no money how do you acquire goods?
I mean they must have some way of keeping track.
That and people must get benefits for working harder or something.
bobomcgraw 2 years ago
No, the state distributes goods equal to everyone, and every person do their best in the society.
roberth1990 2 years ago
That's a problem.
If the state does not keep track of input then how can it actually know that everyone did their best?
Communist China suffered a famine partly because people working on farms figured they could slack off as they would be fed either way.
bobomcgraw 2 years ago
Well then the government didn't do to well on that.
roberth1990 2 years ago
There are two kinda of states. A capitalist state and a workers state.
The state is merely a body of armed men used to suppress one class against the other.
The state is only there to act as a buffer to protect the interests of the ruling class in the US it is the capitalist class.
Just look at what happens when workers go on strike in the US:
The state sends in the police to break up the strike. If the strikers hold their ground and win, then the governor sends in the national guard.
WhatCrass 2 years ago
@roberth1990 name one capitalist dictator pleez
mattskateboard91 2 years ago
@mattskateboard91
Baby Doc.
I can name more if you want but you asked for one.
roberth1990 2 years ago
Gen. Augusto Pinchoet of Chile and the horrors he commuted upon all former supports of the democratically elected president Salvador Allende.
Col. Fernando Baptisa of Cuba, Suarto of Indonesia (huge mass murderer), Papa Doc, etc..
WhatCrass 2 years ago
Comment removed
dizzypilots1 2 years ago
p.s. are you suggesting that the current batch of politicians we have are trained from birth to be leaders?
Personally, I think most modern day politicians are just in it for themselves.
tellyontellyon 2 years ago
And you would be right.
I doubt most politicians are trained to be human, at least that is what the evidence suggests.
bobomcgraw 2 years ago
i agree with you that a government can't be judged by who runs it
just like a car and a drunk driver or a sober soccer mom
the car didn't decide who drove it
but i would rather live under socialist government
for the people, by the people.
ewokone555 2 years ago
You will have to look up direct democracy yourself ... it's a big subject...
but basically.. the workers form their own councils and go along and debate and vote themselves, rather than electing an MP every 5 years to do it for them.
For more strategic/national policies... the councils send a representative to speak for each council..
.. but this individual can be instantly recalled if they don't do what the council wants.
tellyontellyon 2 years ago
You mean original Greek democracy?
What we have is a bit closer to a republic, as Plato described it at least, with people trained in politics making the decisions rather than everyone no matter what they work at.
bobomcgraw 2 years ago
'People trained in politics'...
You talking about those selfish rich bastareds who pretend to represent us?
True socialists are proposing a dramatic constitutional change...
.... revolution!
Btw.. revolution doesn't mean violence... it simply means the removal of power from the ruling class and putting it into the hands of ordinary people.
tellyontellyon 2 years ago
No, people who are actually trained for it from birth, it would be their one purpose in life, not a 'job'.
Like how in some Empires and Kingdoms the heir to the throne might have been trained and prepared his entire life for when he assumed power, so that he could do the job properly.
bobomcgraw 2 years ago
I thought we were talking about the real world??? ??
Actual real politicians in this day and age are all out of Oxford and Cambridge and Eton...
.. these days, very few do it out of a sense of duty or vocation.. mostly it is just another career choice for rich people.. We need to put power into the hands of real ordinary people...
... not some imaginary group of people groomed from birth to be leaders.. why would anybody want that anyway???
You support a feudal system???
Get real.
tellyontellyon 2 years ago
You are assuming far too much.
Plato's Republic had the ruling class trained from birth, much like some members of old nobility, to perform one role.
I don't know why you assumed I was in favour of anything based on what I said.
I was presenting you with historical fact, not opinion.
It would be like claiming I was an anti-Semite because I recited a partial history of Nazi Germany.
bobomcgraw 2 years ago
I'm having difficulty having a discussion with you?
Do we have crossed wires? We could get lost in words...
You wanted to know about Democracy under Communism...
... then you started going on about Plato's republic...
... ???
I gave you a brief explanation about how democracy would work under communism... it has nothing to do with plato's republic.
tellyontellyon 2 years ago
We were talking about democracy, though you seemed to be talking about Greek democracy so I brought up Plato's Republic as it is the closer to what we currently employ.
I then explained further how Plato's republic would actually work.
For some reason you assumed my explanation was an endorsement.
bobomcgraw 2 years ago
Actually I never mentioned Greek democracy and I wasn't talking about Greek democtracy... it was you that brought up Greek democracy.
I don't see why you felt the need to explain the current system and it's similarity to Plato's republic .. I was only talking about communist democracy, nothing else.
I hadn't tried to start a discussion about democracy in general...
You asked about democracy in communism... and so I explained it...
that's all.
tellyontellyon 2 years ago
You used the phrase 'direct democracy', which required an explanation.
Your explanation made it sound quite similar to Greece's original form of democracy.
I brought up Plato's republic because when you're talking about contemporary democracy it helps to know assorted facts about its history.
bobomcgraw 2 years ago
Do you now have an idea about how democracy would operate under genuine communism as intended by Marx?
I'm sure you can find out more from google or Wiki or whatever.
tellyontellyon 2 years ago
Comparing Stalinism with Communism/Socialism is the same as comparing the Catholic Church to the Inquisition.
Socialism is fully democratic.
After the russian revolution it was attacked by 22 capitalist countries that also supported terrorist counter-revolutionaries within Russia...
...It was that unfortunate situation that allowed a totalitarian state to develop.
Stalin stripped the workers councils (soviets) of their power.
tellyontellyon 2 years ago
But it is a fair comparison, they might be very different in key areas but they are very similar in others.
And the inquisition was a catholic thing, they were part of the church.
bobomcgraw 2 years ago
?????
But you can't judge the whole of the Catholic Church and what it stands for, by one brief historical period.
Nor can you judge socialism by the Stalinist deformation that occured.
The 'similar areas' are not problems, i.e. I see no reason why people should be paid billions while others are starving?
Raise the minimum wage and have a maximum wage about 4 to 5 times higher.
Nationalise the top 150 companies/banks etc.
Have direct democracy.
tellyontellyon 2 years ago
You're right, you can't, but you can point to it as an example of when things were really bad.
To simply ignore it as an isolated incident or a one time thing is actually quite dangerous.
You'll have to explain the similar areas bit some more, I don't quite get the starving/being paid billions thing.
What would direct democracy be?
bobomcgraw 2 years ago
Who is ignoring it?
The CPSU became very influential when other struggling socialist states had no other support... so they ended up adopting the CPSU/Stalinist model...
... but Socialism is much older than Stalin... and inseperable from democracy... to potray it as otherwise is unfair.. and dangerous... and just what the capitalists want you to do.
The 'similar bits' are a planned economy..
the 'different bit' is having power in a central bureaucracy instead of workers councils.
tellyontellyon 2 years ago
none of those countries represent communism
communism never existed,most of them were state socialist and even then you can compare those countries represent socialism
what about capitalism or imperialism huh?
just look at somalia,bangladesh etc
communism/anarchism are the best and most moral system ever
jesus himself was a communist
fettergraf 2 years ago
I don't think one is absolutely better than the other, I do think they have different strong points and weak points.
This is why I maintain that an economic policy that merges the two, so as to get the strengths of both should be preferred.
bobomcgraw 2 years ago
One of the tenets of Marxism is that there are only two "revolutionary" classes in human history- the bourgeoisie (the middle class/nouveau riche) and the proletariat (urban, industrial laborers.) According to this logic, peasant farmers (such as the leaders of the Zapatista rebellion in Mexico, or the MST in Brazil) cannot be true revolutionaries. Neither can college students (like SDS in 1960s America).
TheTollundWoman 2 years ago
Marx's definition of "revolutionary" classes was informed solely by the historical context of 19th century Europe; it took into account none of the situations in Africa, Asia or America. Capitalism according to Marx was not the antithesis of communism; it was a necessary prerequisite for utopia.
TheTollundWoman 2 years ago
According to Marx, proletariat is the class of people that 'sells' it's labour in order to earn a living! So, the peasant farmers are in a fuedal society what factory workers are in Capitalist society!!
sagar6413 2 years ago
I've spoken to too many people from Cuba, Romania, Czech republic and fromer U.S.S.R. that told me that communism sucked.
Toddthedidger 2 years ago
I know, it seems like a good idea in theory but absolutely fails when you try to put it into practice.
bobomcgraw 2 years ago
They're right, communism most definitely did "suck", especially in the form it took in the "Soviet Union"- which was really a mechanism that enabled Russia to dominate its Eastern European neighbors and deny their people the right to self-determination- all under the guise of a worker's utopia.
Of course, the capitalist powers of that era were just as brutal. The USSR had "satellite states"; Western Europe had "colonies", "protectorates" and "zones of influence."
TheTollundWoman 2 years ago
but two wrongs don't make a right. Communism and capitalism *both* perpetuate inequality- capitalism by allowing corporations to grow rich through exploitation, and communism by creating an undemocratic *elite* among members of the Communist Party- the so-called "dictatorship of the proletariat", which ends up being just as EVIL as any other dictatorship.
TheTollundWoman 2 years ago
Well, any suggestions.....any way we can prevent this formation of elite class and also not to allow the exploitation of human beings by fellow human beings? Always somone comes up with such a comment against Communism without any hint about how the things could be corrected! We keep harping upon the democracy of the West and USA, is it really the democracy? Is there a level playing field for rich and poor as far as politics is concerned?
sagar6413 2 years ago
Well, any suggestion to prevent the formation of elite class? Every time someone would come up with this statement about *Undemocratic Elite* etc. about communism, but I wonder if there is democracy or oligarchy in Capitalist countries?
sagar6413 2 years ago
The Capitalist powers after ww2 where not as brutal. Most gave up there formal colonies. There was a rerason why East Germans risked there lives to live in West Germany and not the other way around.
Toddthedidger 2 years ago
right there buddy, communism sucks.
GeneralCoreyvous 2 years ago
erm just 1000 of them emigrated
most of them stayed
millions escaped the pinochet regime and went to eastern germany
fettergraf 2 years ago
Stalin killed millions upon millions because communism does not facilitate the population with an option to replace their leadership. Communist leaders therefore must strike fear into the people as they hold there power only with brute force. This leads to... guess what... Millions of people being killed...
MrWilman79 2 years ago
Is that why he did it?
Or was it because he was a very evil man?
bobomcgraw 2 years ago
He was undoubtedly evil. But his evil intentions where only made possible because Communism by-passes democracy and left his actions un-checked.
MrWilman79 2 years ago
People can commit acts of evil despite the presence of potential obstacles.
I still maintain that to judge a political system based on the people that took advantage of it makes no sense.
There are plenty of democratic nations whose governments periodically bypass the democratic method when it suits them, that kind of action is not unique to Communism, Fascism or anything else.
bobomcgraw 2 years ago
No it isn't. But When a democracy suspends democratic practices this is the exception to the rule. These exceptions are usually in times of national emergency. And these suspensions are facilitated in a democratic constitution as are the accepted circumstances under which such an emergency can be declared. Yes, democracy is far from perfect, but it aspires to be. Yes Bush screwed up, but he can only screw up for at the most 8 years, why? because of democracy.
MrWilman79 2 years ago
First off, I never mentioned suspension of democratic practices I said their are nations who bypass the democratic process when it suits them, those are two different things.
Second, Bush's term limit is as a result of the constitution, it has nothing to do with democracy.
bobomcgraw 2 years ago
Im american, and im pro communism. And you are exactly right, the stigma attached to communism is spawned from the way we are raised, were raised to think that socialism is evil. Lenin had the right idea, and despite his warnings after his death stalin came to power and reformed the goverment taking out the essential parts that kept the goverment from being a dictatorship.
Dark907 2 years ago
#1
"bypassing democratic proccess"
"suspending democratic practice"
please explain the difference.
#2
The US constitution is the cornerstone of its Democracy, it is evolved by democracy, it was framed to preserve and embody the priciples of democracy and the ammendment which limits the duration of a presidency was put in place by a process called... Democracy.
MrWilman79 2 years ago
1)
Bypassing is undemocratic, the recent Lisbon debacle has been an example where nations bypassed democracy in order to try and pass the treaty.
Suspension is an emergency power.
2)
Fair enough, I will give you number two.
Just remember it is not as important, the difference between temporarily suspending the democratic process and bypassing it altogether is.
bobomcgraw 2 years ago
Could it not be argued that what is or what isn't an emergency is merely a matter of personal interpretation? But we are going round in circles here... The Millions of Stalins political opponents as well as the 6 million+ Jews of the third reich would not have died had they enjoyed truly democratic government. Feel free to cite a truly successful communist or Facist state and prove me wrong.
MrWilman79 2 years ago
I would imagine a hurricane that almost destroys a city, a famine, an earthquake, a wild fire, a terrorist or any otherwise unprovoked attack (on a reasonably large scale) could all be described as emergencies without people worrying about the term 'personal opinion'.
As for stable Communist states, I don't know of any, but then I am not here to defend or promote the practice of Communism, or Fascism either.
bobomcgraw 2 years ago
All those horrible things you mentioned would be unquestionably disastrous. And of course are emergencies in the Humanitarian sense. but not typically in the political sense. None of the above for example would neccessitate the assembley of a co-aligned war cabinet such as Churchill's Government of National Unity. The GNU was assembled along with the suspension of the General election.
Was I wrong to think you were trying to obsolve Communism from any part in the horrors of soviet Russia?
MrWilman79 2 years ago
I didn't mean to separate emergencies into subcategories.
I place the horrors of Soviet Russia at the feet of those who performed them, not the political system they acted through.
Blame Stalin for his acts, not Communism.
It may have allowed him to act unchallenged but that merely makes it a poorly thought out idea, it does not make it evil.
bobomcgraw 2 years ago
Communism, a poorly thought out Idea... An ideology which would have a heart surgeon paid the same salary as a Road sweeper.
Yes, I would say it is a poorly thought out Idea in the extreme.
MrWilman79 2 years ago
Is it a surgeon paid the same as a sweeper or a sweeper paid the same as a surgeon, or is it even either?
I know that Communism does have a class system of its own, at least it did in China, those higher up in the party could expect to be granted a few more perks than their subordinates.
bobomcgraw 2 years ago
The Communism practiced in the USSR was essentially a form of fascism; it was the *state*, and not the "proletariat", that was given complete control of "capital", natural resources, and people's private lives. Nationalization, as practiced by Communist states, did not return resources to the people or the workers, but transferred them from wealthy "capitalists" to the even wealthier State.
TheTollundWoman 2 years ago
The US constitution was written by delegates chosen solely by white men- who at that time composed only a fraction of the residents of the "united states of America." Hence the "founding fathers" were not elected by any truly democratic process, and their decisions were not representative of the will of the American people.
TheTollundWoman 2 years ago
An e-communist:
A teenager who never worked to provide for himself; lives in his comfortable parents' house; posts pro-communist manifestos about redistributing his parents' wealth using broadband connection they pay for. Owns an iPhone, listens to gangster rap and refrains from walking through neghbourhoods populated by deprived proletarians whose rights he stands for and authors of his favourite songs.
Toddthedidger 2 years ago
lenons idea of communism was different then the soviet unions communism... and no government is perfect but in my opinion if you made a compromise between all the governments you'd have a better government for everybody.. another thing that people dont really talk about is a global government... if we had a global government we would have a lot less problems like war and poverty but we'd have a lot of problems deciding what government that would be
patman173 2 years ago
I agree! When you become old/sickly/weak, let's kill you
Overfiend002 2 years ago
also why do people assume 99% of the taxes u pay go to the welfare state? a lot of goes into infrastructure, education, military etc. (or atleast it should!)
asands123 2 years ago
I can see why some people believe socialism is evil because its thet in some ways..IE its taking money from some people and giving to others. However, it would be also evil to not take care of the weak as well. So which is more evil? If you were healthy and had a loaf of bread and I took a quarter of your bread and gave it to a starving person, which act would be worse, ignoring the starving person or taking a small portion of your bread?
asands123 2 years ago
NO! Capitalism is evil. With Communism everyone is equal, with Capitalism, the rich rejoice in the suffering of the poor.
moodymetalman 2 years ago 2
Aint that the truth.
princekrie 2 years ago
No actually it's not. You people dont understand that the system isint itself corrupt. Both capitalism and socialism can either work for against the people. There are oppurtunities for corruption in both.
macwild1234 2 years ago
But from what i have seen from living in america is that capitalism is a horrible thing. Us in the middle class are basicly done for here and the republicans do not care at all. Sure both can be corrupt and both can be bad but I beleave Capitalism = Fail. Its just rich people makeing millions while paying others below them 7-10 bucks an hour. If your in school and trying to keep up with a job and bills and ask for help, they tell you to drop out and work full time. thats not right.
princekrie 2 years ago
No, your witnessing corrupted capitalism. The U.S Govt is corrupt if hadn't noticed. And you would have seen the same with socialism in 1930's Germany. Whats the bigger failure to you? the rich making a couple more bucks? or the death of tens of millions of Jews and Russians under Hitler and Stalins rule? People are corrupt. Not their system. Capitalism just makes it harder for the government to murder people. Private coorperations arent interested in millitary enforcement...they just want the $
macwild1234 2 years ago
The Nazis were not Socialist, in fact Hitler hated Socialism and Communism.
bobomcgraw 2 years ago
??? werent the allied forces fighting to stop the communist regime??? i.e Germany. Maybe Hitler didint like it but he still implemented it in his countreis system of government. My point is that communism is an easier route to corruption than capitalism. The Iraq argument dosent come close to the holocaust, and they are pushing for the arrest of Cheney for lying.
macwild1234 2 years ago
No, Hitler was a fascist dictator, Stalin was the Communist.
Hitler hated Communism so he would not have used it, hell the closest he got to it was in the name of the Nazi party, The National Socialist German Workers Party.
However Hitler's idea of Socialism was very different from Marxists Socialism and was definitely not Communism.
bobomcgraw 2 years ago
Well if you want to put it that way then Capitalism has killed people too. one word. Iraq.
princekrie 2 years ago
In America the word socialism doesn't really have a bad stigma to it anymore. But republicans think it still does so they still use it like a bad word, to no affect.
I agree with you it's dumb to condemn a economic system based on the actions of a politcal figure.
badmuffy 2 years ago