Notices
Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 100 of 320
Like Tree79Likes

Thread: Common Misconceptions about Communism

  1. #1 Common Misconceptions about Communism 
    Universalis Infinitis Devon Keogh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Dublin, Republic of Ireland
    Posts
    145
    Ever since the USSR was founded, smear campaigns have targeted Communism, not because it is a bad system, but has been implemented as a tool for a few politicians to become omnipotent dictators etc Stalin, Mao Zhedong, Pol Pot, Kim Il-Sung. They themselves abused and corrupted the idea of communism for their own gain at the expense of the masses.

    Misconception No. 1:

    The people of a communism country have no incentive to work as there is no extra money to be gained:

    In a communist system, if people do not bother to work for the betterment of the country, sanctions are imposed on them for their idleness. This excludes people unable to work. Therefore no person can drag down the others of society.

    Misconception No. 2:

    Communism always leads to dictatorship:

    Communism was meant to be rule by the working classes, but the USSR had become a dictatorship under Stalin. Russian Communism was a corrupted form, and by using the influence of the USSR in foreign matters, being the biggest country in the world, the corrupted form spread throughout Asia, causing these countries to become corrupted also. This is not what true Communism aspires to do.

    Misconception No. 3:

    Communism secures the power into a small clique of party officials:

    This is another result of corrupted Communism. The USSR under Stalin saw the masses oppressed while he secured all the power of the country. Even Party officials feared his sudden and utterly destructive wrath.

    Misconception No. 4:

    All "Communist/Socialist countries in history actually adhered to real communist thought.

    Corrupted Socialism/Communism created by Stalin and spread throughout the world by his policies.

    If any person wishes to see true communism/socialism, read the original books by Karl Marx.


    Last edited by Devon Keogh; November 2nd, 2013 at 06:09 PM.
    pyoko likes this.

    "If I have seen further it is by standing on the shoulders of giants."
    Sir Isaac Newton

    In my own opinion there is no greater mathematical Principle than that which is x - x = 0. This shows that matter can be created from nothing as long as the total product of the matter's mass & energy equal exactly zero.
    The only question is, "Where did all that antimatter go?"

    Favourite Elements: Sodium, Neodymium, Xenon
    Reply With Quote  
     

  2.  
     

  3. #2  
    Universal Mind John Galt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    14,169
    You seem to have overlooked one of the most significant misunderstandings. The USSR was not a communist country. It was a socialist country. The socialism was perceived as a necessary step on the road to communism, but communism was never implemented. Criticising communism on the failings of the USSR is like criticising the moon landings for not reaching Mars.


    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #3  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    794
    communism... proved it self for what its worth blame or applaudise to whatever you want
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #4  
    Universalis Infinitis Devon Keogh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Dublin, Republic of Ireland
    Posts
    145
    Quote Originally Posted by John Galt View Post
    You seem to have overlooked one of the most significant misunderstandings. The USSR was not a communist country. It was a socialist country. The socialism was perceived as a necessary step on the road to communism, but communism was never implemented. Criticising communism on the failings of the USSR is like criticising the moon landings for not reaching Mars.
    Everything it worked up to was for Communism. Communism is basically just Socialism, but without a government, currency etc. It hd to implement Communist ideas before the country became Communist, and it did.
    pyoko likes this.

    "If I have seen further it is by standing on the shoulders of giants."
    Sir Isaac Newton

    In my own opinion there is no greater mathematical Principle than that which is x - x = 0. This shows that matter can be created from nothing as long as the total product of the matter's mass & energy equal exactly zero.
    The only question is, "Where did all that antimatter go?"

    Favourite Elements: Sodium, Neodymium, Xenon
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #5  
    Universalis Infinitis Devon Keogh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Dublin, Republic of Ireland
    Posts
    145
    Quote Originally Posted by blackscorp View Post
    communism... proved it self for what its worth blame or applaudise to whatever you want
    If you want to be ignorant and laugh it off, that is fine by me, just dont go around saying things without evidence. You ould have at least tried to explain why you believe it.

    "If I have seen further it is by standing on the shoulders of giants."
    Sir Isaac Newton

    In my own opinion there is no greater mathematical Principle than that which is x - x = 0. This shows that matter can be created from nothing as long as the total product of the matter's mass & energy equal exactly zero.
    The only question is, "Where did all that antimatter go?"

    Favourite Elements: Sodium, Neodymium, Xenon
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #6  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    794
    Quote Originally Posted by Devon Keogh View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by blackscorp View Post
    communism... proved it self for what its worth blame or applaudise to whatever you want
    If you want to be ignorant and laugh it off, that is fine by me, just dont go around saying things without evidence. You ould have at least tried to explain why you believe it.
    I have seen communism its best side and worst side also capitalism best side worst side... so I have right to talk...
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #7  
    Universal Mind John Galt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    14,169
    Quote Originally Posted by Devon Keogh View Post
    Everything it worked up to was for Communism.
    In theory this was the intention. In practice the unsavoury characters who acquired power distorted the original intent and created a country that was not truly socialist and that was never going to take the step to communism. Marx had never intended that a feudal state like Russia should become the first communist state. Horrifying thought and the antithesis of his concepts.

    Quote Originally Posted by Devon Keogh View Post
    Communism is basically just Socialism, but without a government, currency etc.
    Which is a lot like saying peace is just like war, but without all the killing.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #8  
    Universalis Infinitis Devon Keogh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Dublin, Republic of Ireland
    Posts
    145
    Quote Originally Posted by John Galt View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Devon Keogh View Post
    Everything it worked up to was for Communism.
    In theory this was the intention. In practice the unsavoury characters who acquired power distorted the original intent and created a country that was not truly socialist and that was never going to take the step to communism. Marx had never intended that a feudal state like Russia should become the first communist state. Horrifying thought and the antithesis of his concepts.

    Quote Originally Posted by Devon Keogh View Post
    Communism is basically just Socialism, but without a government, currency etc.
    Which is a lot like saying peace is just like war, but without all the killing.
    Here is how the transition from Socialism to Communism goes:

    The country implements communistic policies thoroughly. The workers become used to these policies to such an extent that government is then abolished, and you have communism.

    "If I have seen further it is by standing on the shoulders of giants."
    Sir Isaac Newton

    In my own opinion there is no greater mathematical Principle than that which is x - x = 0. This shows that matter can be created from nothing as long as the total product of the matter's mass & energy equal exactly zero.
    The only question is, "Where did all that antimatter go?"

    Favourite Elements: Sodium, Neodymium, Xenon
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #9  
    Universal Mind John Galt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    14,169
    Quote Originally Posted by Devon Keogh View Post
    Here is how the transition from Socialism to Communism goes:

    The country implements communistic policies thoroughly. The workers become used to these policies to such an extent that government is then abolished, and you have communism.
    So? I don't see your point relative to what I was saying. I'll repeat. The USSR was not a communist state. As implemented it was never going to become a communist state.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  11. #10  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    8,822
    Quote Originally Posted by Devon Keogh View Post
    Ever since the USSR was founded, smear campaigns have targeted Communism, not because it is a bad system, but has been implemented as a tool for a few politicians to become omnipotent dictators etc Stalin, Mao Zhedong, Pol Pot, Kim Il-Sung. They themselves abused and corrupted the idea of communism for their own gain at the expense of the masses.

    Misconception No. 1:

    The people of a communism country have no incentive to work as there is no extra money to be gained:

    In a communist system, if people do not bother to work for the betterment of the country, sanctions are imposed on them for their idleness. This excludes people unable to work.

    Misconception No. 2:

    Communism always leads to dictatorship:

    Communism was meant to be rule by the working classes, but the USSR had become a dictatorship under Stalin. Russian Communism was a corrupted form, and by using the influence of the USSR in foreign matters, being the biggest country in the world, the corrupted form spread throughout Asia, causing these countries to become corrupted also. This is not what true Communism aspires to do.
    It may not aspire to it, but that's the way it's bound to end up. The reason is that it restricts people's freedom, so people have to be forced into compliance.



    Misconception No. 3:

    Communism secures the power into a small clique of party officials:

    This is another result of corrupted Communism. The USSR under Stalin saw the masses oppressed while he secured all the power of the country. Even Party officials feared his sudden and utterly destructive wrath.
    Riiight. It's not the system, just the people running the system. Just keep believing that.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  12. #11  
    Universal Mind John Galt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    14,169
    Quote Originally Posted by Harold14370 View Post
    Riiight. It's not the system, just the people running the system. Just keep believing that.
    Much like the USA to day, then.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  13. #12  
    Theatre Whore babe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Resident of Big Island of Hawai'i since 2003, and in Bayside, Ca. since 1981, Humboldt since 1977
    Posts
    12,443
    My mother lived under Communism and so did much of my family in Slovenia. THE RESULT....to keep the farm, Uncle had to work a job to pay the taxes to keep his farm which had been in the family for generations. Then he came home and worked the farm till dark.

    It isn't a just, equal or FAIR type of government.

    It is conform. or you lose.

    It is much better now.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  14. #13  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    8,822
    Quote Originally Posted by John Galt View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Harold14370 View Post
    Riiight. It's not the system, just the people running the system. Just keep believing that.
    Much like the USA to day, then.
    We're getting there. Another Democrat administration or two and we're right there.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  15. #14  
    Theatre Whore babe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Resident of Big Island of Hawai'i since 2003, and in Bayside, Ca. since 1981, Humboldt since 1977
    Posts
    12,443
    Quote Originally Posted by Harold14370 View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by John Galt View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Harold14370 View Post
    Riiight. It's not the system, just the people running the system. Just keep believing that.
    Much like the USA to day, then.
    We're getting there. Another Democrat administration or two and we're right there.
    I think you are right.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  16. #15  
    Universalis Infinitis Devon Keogh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Dublin, Republic of Ireland
    Posts
    145
    Quote Originally Posted by Harold14370 View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Devon Keogh View Post
    Ever since the USSR was founded, smear campaigns have targeted Communism, not because it is a bad system, but has been implemented as a tool for a few politicians to become omnipotent dictators etc Stalin, Mao Zhedong, Pol Pot, Kim Il-Sung. They themselves abused and corrupted the idea of communism for their own gain at the expense of the masses.

    Misconception No. 1:

    The people of a communism country have no incentive to work as there is no extra money to be gained:

    In a communist system, if people do not bother to work for the betterment of the country, sanctions are imposed on them for their idleness. This excludes people unable to work.

    Misconception No. 2:

    Communism always leads to dictatorship:

    Communism was meant to be rule by the working classes, but the USSR had become a dictatorship under Stalin. Russian Communism was a corrupted form, and by using the influence of the USSR in foreign matters, being the biggest country in the world, the corrupted form spread throughout Asia, causing these countries to become corrupted also. This is not what true Communism aspires to do.
    It may not aspire to it, but that's the way it's bound to end up. The reason is that it restricts people's freedom, so people have to be forced into compliance.



    Misconception No. 3:

    Communism secures the power into a small clique of party officials:

    This is another result of corrupted Communism. The USSR under Stalin saw the masses oppressed while he secured all the power of the country. Even Party officials feared his sudden and utterly destructive wrath.
    Riiight. It's not the system, just the people running the system. Just keep believing that.
    Well, Stalinism is the result. Stalinism is the problem, not Communism or Socialism. Stalinism is the political form that spread to Asia, parts of Africa and Cuba, not Communism or Socialism. Stalinist governments lie to themselves and the outside world that they are true to the original ideologies of Karl Marx to make themselves feel better.

    Stalinism evolved into Maoism and furthermore into the extremist Juche ideology.

    I admit that the system is flawed, but only indirectly, in that it can be abused and turned into a shell of the true values, and all I wish for this article is that it dispels the lie that is Stalinism and its subdivisions, removing the idea that these are Communism/Socialism.
    Last edited by Devon Keogh; November 2nd, 2013 at 06:15 PM.

    "If I have seen further it is by standing on the shoulders of giants."
    Sir Isaac Newton

    In my own opinion there is no greater mathematical Principle than that which is x - x = 0. This shows that matter can be created from nothing as long as the total product of the matter's mass & energy equal exactly zero.
    The only question is, "Where did all that antimatter go?"

    Favourite Elements: Sodium, Neodymium, Xenon
    Reply With Quote  
     

  17. #16  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    794
    so you say communism is good...??? than why there is no country who has communism...?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  18. #17  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    8,822
    It is a terrible system, where the government runs people's economic lives. There is no room for individual freedom. Whatever is not forbidden is compulsory. It goes against everything I believe in.
    babe, Bread Girl and The Huntsman like this.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  19. #18  
    Theatre Whore babe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Resident of Big Island of Hawai'i since 2003, and in Bayside, Ca. since 1981, Humboldt since 1977
    Posts
    12,443
    Quote Originally Posted by Harold14370 View Post
    It is a terrible system, where the government runs people's economic lives. There is no room for individual freedom. Whatever is not forbidden is compulsory. It goes against everything I believe in.
    My family can attest to this! Well said Sir Harold14370!
    Reply With Quote  
     

  20. #19  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    794
    they for sure have great ideas... but there are some points wich do not let it work...
    Reply With Quote  
     

  21. #20  
    Theatre Whore babe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Resident of Big Island of Hawai'i since 2003, and in Bayside, Ca. since 1981, Humboldt since 1977
    Posts
    12,443
    Quote Originally Posted by blackscorp View Post
    they for sure have great ideas... but there are some points wich do not let it work...
    IT doesn't work. Period.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  22. #21  
    Moderator Moderator
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Washington State
    Posts
    8,309
    Quote Originally Posted by Devon Keogh View Post
    Misconception No. 1:

    The people of a communism country have no incentive to work as there is no extra money to be gained:

    In a communist system, if people do not bother to work for the betterment of the country, sanctions are imposed on them for their idleness. This excludes people unable to work. Therefore no person can drag down the others of society.
    That's probably the biggest problem right there. People do the bare minimums and often finding cooperative and corrupt ways to screw the government rather than trying to improve their own condition--it makes the whole system inherently inefficient and difficult to manage. Someone who could make 200 widgets but has a quota of only 100 widgets learns to be only half productive. Communism is in fundamental disagreement with human psychology, such systems are bound to fail, bring misery, or both.
    Harold14370, babe and The Huntsman like this.
    Meteorologist/Naturalist & Retired Soldier
    “The Holy Land is everywhere” Black Elk
    Reply With Quote  
     

  23. #22  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    San Diego
    Posts
    1,970
    Quote Originally Posted by Devon Keogh View Post
    In a communist system, if people do not bother to work for the betterment of the country, sanctions are imposed on them for their idleness. This excludes people unable to work. Therefore no person can drag down the others of society.
    In a communist system most people will do the bare minimum to avoid punishment. In a system where most people do the bare minimum, little work gets done, and the economy is sickly as a result.
    babe likes this.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  24. #23  
    Universalis Infinitis Devon Keogh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Dublin, Republic of Ireland
    Posts
    145
    Quote Originally Posted by Lynx_Fox View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Devon Keogh View Post
    Misconception No. 1:

    The people of a communism country have no incentive to work as there is no extra money to be gained:

    In a communist system, if people do not bother to work for the betterment of the country, sanctions are imposed on them for their idleness. This excludes people unable to work. Therefore no person can drag down the others of society.
    That's probably the biggest problem right there. People do the bare minimums and often finding cooperative and corrupt ways to screw the government rather than trying to improve their own condition--it makes the whole system inherently inefficient and difficult to manage. Someone who could make 200 widgets but has a quota of only 100 widgets learns to be only half productive. Communism is in fundamental disagreement with human psychology, such systems are bound to fail, bring misery, or both.
    I agree that Communism is flawed, but is that not the truth for everthing. I would have proposed the idea that a person betters themself by reaching for an infinite quota, and the higher they get the better they are rewarded.

    Hard workers are paid more
    Lazy workers are paid less

    "If I have seen further it is by standing on the shoulders of giants."
    Sir Isaac Newton

    In my own opinion there is no greater mathematical Principle than that which is x - x = 0. This shows that matter can be created from nothing as long as the total product of the matter's mass & energy equal exactly zero.
    The only question is, "Where did all that antimatter go?"

    Favourite Elements: Sodium, Neodymium, Xenon
    Reply With Quote  
     

  25. #24  
    Time Lord
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    8,046
    I'll start by admitting that France is a socialist country that shows no visible signs of having given up any of its democracy.

    So yes. Socialism can work. It is working right now in at least one country.

    Quote Originally Posted by Devon Keogh View Post
    Ever since the USSR was founded, smear campaigns have targeted Communism, not because it is a bad system, but has been implemented as a tool for a few politicians to become omnipotent dictators etc Stalin, Mao Zhedong, Pol Pot, Kim Il-Sung. They themselves abused and corrupted the idea of communism for their own gain at the expense of the masses.

    Misconception No. 1:

    The people of a communism country have no incentive to work as there is no extra money to be gained:

    In a communist system, if people do not bother to work for the betterment of the country, sanctions are imposed on them for their idleness. This excludes people unable to work. Therefore no person can drag down the others of society.
    The problem is how do you know who "can work"?

    A person can deliberately choose to fail a test, even if they have the ability to pass it.

    They can't deliberately choose to succeed at a test, even if they lack the ability to pass it.

    If every person always told the truth, then this would work. How would you make them always tell the truth, though?



    Misconception No. 2:

    Communism always leads to dictatorship:

    Communism was meant to be rule by the working classes, but the USSR had become a dictatorship under Stalin. Russian Communism was a corrupted form, and by using the influence of the USSR in foreign matters, being the biggest country in the world, the corrupted form spread throughout Asia, causing these countries to become corrupted also. This is not what true Communism aspires to do.
    How would communism avoid dictatorship?

    If the people have no way to FORCE their leaders not to oppress them, then by what other means would they prevent it?

    Dictatorship could be avoided if everyone in the government were always honest and trustworthy, and benevolent.

    How would you prevent dishonest, untrustworthy, and malevolent people from getting into positions of power? Use psychic powers to read their minds, before giving them the job?


    Misconception No. 3:

    Communism secures the power into a small clique of party officials:

    This is another result of corrupted Communism. The USSR under Stalin saw the masses oppressed while he secured all the power of the country. Even Party officials feared his sudden and utterly destructive wrath.
    Again, how do you prevent it? At the democratic level, making all the day to day decisions by community vote would be extremely tedious. There are simply too many decisions, and voting simply takes too much time.

    The government inevitably moves toward putting more and more power in the hands of executives, and letting them exercise discretion without consulting the public directly. Why? Because that is the only way a large volume of decisions can be made quickly. There is no other possible way to do it.

    How long do you think it can last before the guy/woman starts consolidating power to himself? Initially it would be just for convenience, to allow him/her to get more done quickly. But sooner or later someone would get into a position where they just couldn't resist using it for their own purposes.


    Misconception No. 4:

    All "Communist/Socialist countries in history actually adhered to real communist thought.

    Corrupted Socialism/Communism created by Stalin and spread throughout the world by his policies.

    If any person wishes to see true communism/socialism, read the original books by Karl Marx.

    Perhaps the reason they never perfectly adhered to it is because it is utterly impossible to perfectly adhere to it and run a country at the same time?
    babe and The Huntsman like this.
    Some clocks are only right twice a day, but they are still right when they are right.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  26. #25  
    Universalis Infinitis Devon Keogh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Dublin, Republic of Ireland
    Posts
    145
    Quote Originally Posted by kojax View Post
    I'll start by admitting that France is a socialist country that shows no visible signs of having given up any of its democracy.

    So yes. Socialism can work. It is working right now in at least one country.

    Quote Originally Posted by Devon Keogh View Post
    Ever since the USSR was founded, smear campaigns have targeted Communism, not because it is a bad system, but has been implemented as a tool for a few politicians to become omnipotent dictators etc Stalin, Mao Zhedong, Pol Pot, Kim Il-Sung. They themselves abused and corrupted the idea of communism for their own gain at the expense of the masses.

    Misconception No. 1:

    The people of a communism country have no incentive to work as there is no extra money to be gained:

    In a communist system, if people do not bother to work for the betterment of the country, sanctions are imposed on them for their idleness. This excludes people unable to work. Therefore no person can drag down the others of society.
    The problem is how do you know who "can work"?

    A person can deliberately choose to fail a test, even if they have the ability to pass it.

    They can't deliberately choose to succeed at a test, even if they lack the ability to pass it.

    If every person always told the truth, then this would work. How would you make them always tell the truth, though?



    Misconception No. 2:

    Communism always leads to dictatorship:

    Communism was meant to be rule by the working classes, but the USSR had become a dictatorship under Stalin. Russian Communism was a corrupted form, and by using the influence of the USSR in foreign matters, being the biggest country in the world, the corrupted form spread throughout Asia, causing these countries to become corrupted also. This is not what true Communism aspires to do.
    How would communism avoid dictatorship?

    If the people have no way to FORCE their leaders not to oppress them, then by what other means would they prevent it?

    Dictatorship could be avoided if everyone in the government were always honest and trustworthy, and benevolent.

    How would you prevent dishonest, untrustworthy, and malevolent people from getting into positions of power? Use psychic powers to read their minds, before giving them the job?


    Misconception No. 3:

    Communism secures the power into a small clique of party officials:

    This is another result of corrupted Communism. The USSR under Stalin saw the masses oppressed while he secured all the power of the country. Even Party officials feared his sudden and utterly destructive wrath.
    Again, how do you prevent it? At the democratic level, making all the day to day decisions by community vote would be extremely tedious. There are simply too many decisions, and voting simply takes too much time.

    The government inevitably moves toward putting more and more power in the hands of executives, and letting them exercise discretion without consulting the public directly. Why? Because that is the only way a large volume of decisions can be made quickly. There is no other possible way to do it.

    How long do you think it can last before the guy/woman starts consolidating power to himself? Initially it would be just for convenience, to allow him/her to get more done quickly. But sooner or later someone would get into a position where they just couldn't resist using it for their own purposes.


    Misconception No. 4:

    All "Communist/Socialist countries in history actually adhered to real communist thought.

    Corrupted Socialism/Communism created by Stalin and spread throughout the world by his policies.

    If any person wishes to see true communism/socialism, read the original books by Karl Marx.

    Perhaps the reason they never perfectly adhered to it is because it is utterly impossible to perfectly adhere to it and run a country at the same time?
    Communism has flaws, that is why I do not support perfect adherence, just a fair adherence. No one country perfectly adheres to the idea of democracy, even though they say they do...?

    Community vote for everything is not what I want. I was just stating that Stalin secured ALL power within his hands, able to kill millions at the signing of a letter etc.

    How does democracy avoid dictatorship? It makes sure that all laws passed are constitutional, and that no one person can stay in power for a very long time.

    You know if people can work from things like medical records etc.

    PS: I am a Democratic Socialist, and I support most of the ideas of Trotskyism.

    "If I have seen further it is by standing on the shoulders of giants."
    Sir Isaac Newton

    In my own opinion there is no greater mathematical Principle than that which is x - x = 0. This shows that matter can be created from nothing as long as the total product of the matter's mass & energy equal exactly zero.
    The only question is, "Where did all that antimatter go?"

    Favourite Elements: Sodium, Neodymium, Xenon
    Reply With Quote  
     

  27. #26  
    Moderator Moderator
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Washington State
    Posts
    8,309
    Quote Originally Posted by Devon Keogh View Post
    No one country perfectly adheres to the idea of democracy, even though they say they do...?
    Which ones? Seriously the US and most others have representative governments. Democracy doesn't work well above the county.

    How does democracy avoid dictatorship? It makes sure that all laws passed are constitutional, and that no one person can stay in power for a very long time.
    You are correct about a rule of law and impartial court system. As for term limits, I'm not sure how common that is. The US doesn't have term limits for anyone except the president, and even that is pretty recent only since the 1930s.
    Meteorologist/Naturalist & Retired Soldier
    “The Holy Land is everywhere” Black Elk
    Reply With Quote  
     

  28. #27  
    Forum Professor pyoko's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    1,091
    Quote Originally Posted by billvon View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Devon Keogh View Post
    In a communist system, if people do not bother to work for the betterment of the country, sanctions are imposed on them for their idleness. This excludes people unable to work. Therefore no person can drag down the others of society.
    In a communist system most people will do the bare minimum to avoid punishment. In a system where most people do the bare minimum, little work gets done, and the economy is sickly as a result.
    What is the basis for this outrageous statement?
    It is by will alone I set my mind in motion.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  29. #28  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    San Diego
    Posts
    1,970
    Quote Originally Posted by pyoko View Post
    What is the basis for this outrageous statement?
    A good explanation comes from Robert Nielsen:

    ===============
    The most common and simple explanation for why communism failed is that people are greedy. This is a gross simplification but does contain some truth. Communism failed to provide incentives for workers and citizens to work hard and be productive. While there are many benefits from equality, if pushed to an extreme it robs people of an incentive to make an effort. There was little if any reward for hard work or innovation and a lack of punishment for poor or inefficient work. The lack of incentives was a major reason for the poor performance of Eastern Europe economies. Why bother working hard if the reward was the same as doing the bare minimal?


    The lack of incentives was system wide. Employees had little incentive to work hard as they would be paid the same regardless. While egalitarianism has many merits, under Communism it was taken to an extreme. There was too little difference in pay between professions to encourage workers to improve their skills and work harder. As there was no unemployment, there was no threat of firing, so people were guaranteed a job no matter how badly they worked (if at all). With neither a credible threat nor promise of reward to motivate staff, productivity in Communist countries stagnated.


    This problem affected management too. Under Communism managers were not incentivised to be economically efficient, but to fulfill the plan. This meant there was a huge emphasis on quantity even if the quality was very poor. Managers often resorted to lying to meet unrealistic quotas. They suffered from perverse incentives that placed fulfilling political goals ahead of efficiency. Firms in general had little incentive to be efficient or control costs. They could easily access credit and further state funding to cover their costs. Financial losses meant little to managers as there was no chance of the firm going bankrupt. No matter what the difficulties, the state would pay to bail the business out. The state guarantee of a job has meant everyone must be employed even if they add little to the factory.


    One of the greatest failings of communism was its inability to innovate. Eastern Europe failed to develop new technologies or adopt more efficient processes, instead remaining with obsolete methods. This was especially apparent in the 1980s when the West prospered and made advances in IT while the Communist Bloc stagnated with the same technology it had been using for decades. This isn’t to say there were no innovations under Communism, just that there were very few of them and they were mainly concentrated in the field of military and space. Of all the main inventions and technological advances of the late 20th century, almost none of them were made in communist countries and almost all were made in the USA.


    This was mainly due to the lack of incentives to innovate. This is because capitalist firms can profit from new inventions or suffer losses for being technologically backward. A communist firm gains no reward for innovation and suffers no loss for backwardness or even stagnation. Capitalism is more flexible and allows new businesses to enter with new ideas, whereas communism is rigid and slow to adopt to change. Due to the repressive atmosphere of Communism, creativity was discouraged and treated with suspicion. Ideas had to conform to the party line; dissent was neither wise nor rewarding. The heavy levels of bureaucracy stifled attempts at innovation and the rigidity of the central plan made it exceptionally difficult for new innovations to be put into practice.


    Communism's greatest weakness was its failure to adapt. Whatever the merits of Communism’s Five Year Plan during the 1930s, the world changed and Communism failed to keep up. It couldn’t create new and more efficient methods of production and as a result it stagnated. It never moved on past the heavy steel mills even after these ceased to be competitive. By the 1980s the economic system was bankrupt of fresh ideas, with preference still being given to the stale old methods. This lack of innovation (especially in the IT sector) was crippling and one of the fatal flaws of Communism. This coupled with an inability to incentivise workers to work hard and efficiently, meant Communism did not succeed as an economic system.
    ========================
    Lynx_Fox, madanthonywayne and babe like this.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  30. #29  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    794
    Quote Originally Posted by billvon View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by pyoko View Post
    What is the basis for this outrageous statement?
    A good explanation comes from Robert Nielsen:

    ===============
    The most common and simple explanation for why communism failed is that people are greedy. This is a gross simplification but does contain some truth. Communism failed to provide incentives for workers and citizens to work hard and be productive. While there are many benefits from equality, if pushed to an extreme it robs people of an incentive to make an effort. There was little if any reward for hard work or innovation and a lack of punishment for poor or inefficient work. The lack of incentives was a major reason for the poor performance of Eastern Europe economies. Why bother working hard if the reward was the same as doing the bare minimal?


    The lack of incentives was system wide. Employees had little incentive to work hard as they would be paid the same regardless. While egalitarianism has many merits, under Communism it was taken to an extreme. There was too little difference in pay between professions to encourage workers to improve their skills and work harder. As there was no unemployment, there was no threat of firing, so people were guaranteed a job no matter how badly they worked (if at all). With neither a credible threat nor promise of reward to motivate staff, productivity in Communist countries stagnated.


    This problem affected management too. Under Communism managers were not incentivised to be economically efficient, but to fulfill the plan. This meant there was a huge emphasis on quantity even if the quality was very poor. Managers often resorted to lying to meet unrealistic quotas. They suffered from perverse incentives that placed fulfilling political goals ahead of efficiency. Firms in general had little incentive to be efficient or control costs. They could easily access credit and further state funding to cover their costs. Financial losses meant little to managers as there was no chance of the firm going bankrupt. No matter what the difficulties, the state would pay to bail the business out. The state guarantee of a job has meant everyone must be employed even if they add little to the factory.


    One of the greatest failings of communism was its inability to innovate. Eastern Europe failed to develop new technologies or adopt more efficient processes, instead remaining with obsolete methods. This was especially apparent in the 1980s when the West prospered and made advances in IT while the Communist Bloc stagnated with the same technology it had been using for decades. This isn’t to say there were no innovations under Communism, just that there were very few of them and they were mainly concentrated in the field of military and space. Of all the main inventions and technological advances of the late 20th century, almost none of them were made in communist countries and almost all were made in the USA.


    This was mainly due to the lack of incentives to innovate. This is because capitalist firms can profit from new inventions or suffer losses for being technologically backward. A communist firm gains no reward for innovation and suffers no loss for backwardness or even stagnation. Capitalism is more flexible and allows new businesses to enter with new ideas, whereas communism is rigid and slow to adopt to change. Due to the repressive atmosphere of Communism, creativity was discouraged and treated with suspicion. Ideas had to conform to the party line; dissent was neither wise nor rewarding. The heavy levels of bureaucracy stifled attempts at innovation and the rigidity of the central plan made it exceptionally difficult for new innovations to be put into practice.


    Communism's greatest weakness was its failure to adapt. Whatever the merits of Communism’s Five Year Plan during the 1930s, the world changed and Communism failed to keep up. It couldn’t create new and more efficient methods of production and as a result it stagnated. It never moved on past the heavy steel mills even after these ceased to be competitive. By the 1980s the economic system was bankrupt of fresh ideas, with preference still being given to the stale old methods. This lack of innovation (especially in the IT sector) was crippling and one of the fatal flaws of Communism. This coupled with an inability to incentivise workers to work hard and efficiently, meant Communism did not succeed as an economic system.
    ========================
    this yes
    Reply With Quote  
     

  31. #30  
    Time Lord
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    8,046
    Yeah. Offering people the chance to better their circumstances by working harder makes them feel more empowered, even if they never actually decide to use that option (and most don't). That increases job satisfaction, which keeps people interested in participating in the system.

    Most of the failed capitalist systems are brought down by organized crime. Mexico, for example, is run by its cartels and coalitions of dirty police. When there's that much crime happening, totally unchecked, so the system is just plain bleeding money into the hands of people who contribute nothing at all beyond death and violence..... then the incentive to work hard is even less present than it might be in a communist system.

    At least in a communist system, criminals aren't being able to amass large hoards of money with which to pay their henchmen. Most systems of organized crime would fall flat on their face if they weren't able to provide livelihoods to the people who joined them.

    So, capitalism does best in a society that doesn't flinch at the thought of having to punish naughty behavior. You have to be a little bit heartless to be a good capitalist.
    Some clocks are only right twice a day, but they are still right when they are right.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  32. #31  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    8,822
    Quote Originally Posted by kojax View Post
    At least in a communist system, criminals aren't being able to amass large hoards of money with which to pay their henchmen.
    Says who?
    Russian mafia - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    The Russian Mafia (Russian: русская мафия; russkaya mafiya) or Bratva, is a term used to refer to the collective of various organized organized crime elements originating in the former Soviet Union.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  33. #32  
    Forum Cosmic Wizard icewendigo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    2,148
    A common misconception about isms, is that it means the same thing to many people in various social environment and that implementation of the ism can be pointed to (as what it is) regardless of the historical/political/warfare/struggle/etc reality, as if an ism, is a piece of chicklets bubble gum.

    Thats why, many debate about an ism starts off with one person saying THIS is what x-ism really is, and is followed by someone saying no, during the asteroid crash of 1701 when the plague was rampant and nihilist monkeys were running around with cossbows, john doe the 1st implemented X-ism and although he was a drunken lying politician, his implementation of X-ism shows what x-ism really is!... but then someone says yeah, but philosopher Theroreticus McInABookNeverTested said in is authoritative precursor book when half of what was known 2 decades later was unknown and uninvented, that Xism really is this and that, etc

    ...and so on



    Also, Communism vs Capitalism is somewhat of a false dichotomy, because it takes a load of crap that people take for granted as givens and limits/confines the conceptual field (keeps you inside the box),
    both what-is-usually-portrayed-as-Capitalism and the misconception-of-what-Communism-is-based-on-the-corrupt-stalinian-version, typically enshrine/use the medieval relics of money(corruption/conficts of interests), hirearchy(abuse of power/anti-democratic, and secrecy(censorship, manipulation of public opinion, propaganda, etc) . THats like saying the only drinks we can choose, are coke and pepsi, [limiting the debate to pepsi being much better than coke, no coke is better] without realizing that you are in fact limiting all potenital drinks (orange juice, milk, water, wine, etc) because you are taking the fact that a liquid must be black-brown, and sugar loaded, and acid, and carbonated as givens without realizing you are making this arbitrary limit.

    just randoms thoughts
    Last edited by icewendigo; November 6th, 2013 at 01:23 PM.
    babe likes this.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  34. #33  
    Universalis Infinitis Devon Keogh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Dublin, Republic of Ireland
    Posts
    145
    Quote Originally Posted by Lynx_Fox View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Devon Keogh View Post
    No one country perfectly adheres to the idea of democracy, even though they say they do...?
    Which ones? Seriously the US and most others have representative governments. Democracy doesn't work well above the county.

    How does democracy avoid dictatorship? It makes sure that all laws passed are constitutional, and that no one person can stay in power for a very long time.
    You are correct about a rule of law and impartial court system. As for term limits, I'm not sure how common that is. The US doesn't have term limits for anyone except the president, and even that is pretty recent only since the 1930s.
    Well, Term limits on Presidency are there to stop the President becoming a rule-for-life dictator...

    "If I have seen further it is by standing on the shoulders of giants."
    Sir Isaac Newton

    In my own opinion there is no greater mathematical Principle than that which is x - x = 0. This shows that matter can be created from nothing as long as the total product of the matter's mass & energy equal exactly zero.
    The only question is, "Where did all that antimatter go?"

    Favourite Elements: Sodium, Neodymium, Xenon
    Reply With Quote  
     

  35. #34  
    Moderator Moderator
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Washington State
    Posts
    8,309
    Quote Originally Posted by Devon Keogh View Post
    Well, Term limits on Presidency are there to stop the President becoming a rule-for-life dictator...
    I doubt it had anything do with it. The balance of power wasn't effected at all regardless of how long a president could serve--they couldn't make new law, nor would they be immune to being overruled or decisions stricken by US Supreme Court. It was in large part passed to codify a tradition that went back to President Washington followed by most presidents to that point, because a lot of Republicans wanted a shot at the White House, and there was a term limit political movement in many states at the time. I don't think avoiding a dictatorship was ever part of the serious discussion.
    babe likes this.
    Meteorologist/Naturalist & Retired Soldier
    “The Holy Land is everywhere” Black Elk
    Reply With Quote  
     

  36. #35  
    Time Lord
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    8,046
    Quote Originally Posted by Harold14370 View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by kojax View Post
    At least in a communist system, criminals aren't being able to amass large hoards of money with which to pay their henchmen.
    Says who?
    Russian mafia - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    The Russian Mafia (Russian: русская мафия; russkaya mafiya) or Bratva, is a term used to refer to the collective of various organized organized crime elements originating in the former Soviet Union.
    Note that they originated in the "former" soviet union, after it became capitalist.

    However, admittedly, the same people who later became the Russian mafia were primarily former KGB. So the same people who ruined Communism in the USSR went on to ruin capitalism in the nations that came afterward also.

    The main difference is that under Communism they weren't considered criminals. They were still brutes, but the state granted them legitimacy.
    Last edited by kojax; November 6th, 2013 at 07:59 PM.
    Some clocks are only right twice a day, but they are still right when they are right.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  37. #36  
    Forum Professor pyoko's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    1,091
    Quote Originally Posted by billvon View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by pyoko View Post
    What is the basis for this outrageous statement?
    A good explanation comes from Robert Nielsen:

    ===============
    The most common and simple explanation for why communism failed is that people are greedy. This is a gross simplification but does contain some truth. Communism failed to provide incentives for workers and citizens to work hard and be productive. While there are many benefits from equality, if pushed to an extreme it robs people of an incentive to make an effort. There was little if any reward for hard work or innovation and a lack of punishment for poor or inefficient work. The lack of incentives was a major reason for the poor performance of Eastern Europe economies. Why bother working hard if the reward was the same as doing the bare minimal?


    The lack of incentives was system wide. Employees had little incentive to work hard as they would be paid the same regardless. While egalitarianism has many merits, under Communism it was taken to an extreme. There was too little difference in pay between professions to encourage workers to improve their skills and work harder. As there was no unemployment, there was no threat of firing, so people were guaranteed a job no matter how badly they worked (if at all). With neither a credible threat nor promise of reward to motivate staff, productivity in Communist countries stagnated.


    This problem affected management too. Under Communism managers were not incentivised to be economically efficient, but to fulfill the plan. This meant there was a huge emphasis on quantity even if the quality was very poor. Managers often resorted to lying to meet unrealistic quotas. They suffered from perverse incentives that placed fulfilling political goals ahead of efficiency. Firms in general had little incentive to be efficient or control costs. They could easily access credit and further state funding to cover their costs. Financial losses meant little to managers as there was no chance of the firm going bankrupt. No matter what the difficulties, the state would pay to bail the business out. The state guarantee of a job has meant everyone must be employed even if they add little to the factory.


    One of the greatest failings of communism was its inability to innovate. Eastern Europe failed to develop new technologies or adopt more efficient processes, instead remaining with obsolete methods. This was especially apparent in the 1980s when the West prospered and made advances in IT while the Communist Bloc stagnated with the same technology it had been using for decades. This isn’t to say there were no innovations under Communism, just that there were very few of them and they were mainly concentrated in the field of military and space. Of all the main inventions and technological advances of the late 20th century, almost none of them were made in communist countries and almost all were made in the USA.


    This was mainly due to the lack of incentives to innovate. This is because capitalist firms can profit from new inventions or suffer losses for being technologically backward. A communist firm gains no reward for innovation and suffers no loss for backwardness or even stagnation. Capitalism is more flexible and allows new businesses to enter with new ideas, whereas communism is rigid and slow to adopt to change. Due to the repressive atmosphere of Communism, creativity was discouraged and treated with suspicion. Ideas had to conform to the party line; dissent was neither wise nor rewarding. The heavy levels of bureaucracy stifled attempts at innovation and the rigidity of the central plan made it exceptionally difficult for new innovations to be put into practice.


    Communism's greatest weakness was its failure to adapt. Whatever the merits of Communism’s Five Year Plan during the 1930s, the world changed and Communism failed to keep up. It couldn’t create new and more efficient methods of production and as a result it stagnated. It never moved on past the heavy steel mills even after these ceased to be competitive. By the 1980s the economic system was bankrupt of fresh ideas, with preference still being given to the stale old methods. This lack of innovation (especially in the IT sector) was crippling and one of the fatal flaws of Communism. This coupled with an inability to incentivise workers to work hard and efficiently, meant Communism did not succeed as an economic system.
    ========================
    I disagree. It explains how greed topples communism from the top. It does not support your outrageous statement that most people would be lazy.
    It is by will alone I set my mind in motion.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  38. #37  
    Universalis Infinitis Devon Keogh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Dublin, Republic of Ireland
    Posts
    145
    Quote Originally Posted by Lynx_Fox View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Devon Keogh View Post
    Well, Term limits on Presidency are there to stop the President becoming a rule-for-life dictator...
    I doubt it had anything do with it. The balance of power wasn't effected at all regardless of how long a president could serve--they couldn't make new law, nor would they be immune to being overruled or decisions stricken by US Supreme Court. It was in large part passed to codify a tradition that went back to President Washington followed by most presidents to that point, because a lot of Republicans wanted a shot at the White House, and there was a term limit political movement in many states at the time. I don't think avoiding a dictatorship was ever part of the serious discussion.
    They did that for Consuls in the Roman Empire. The Consul could only spend one year of his life in the highest post of Roman society, this was for fear of the Kingdom of Rome which had been overthrown with King Lucius Tarquinius Superbus. I presume that this was the reason that the US adopted this policy.

    If you grant a president infinite time of presidency, he will see himself as the upholder of the people, the country unable to function without him. He will become arrogant, greedy and ruthless in the belief of his own lie. He will probably gain a cult of personality, people whispering in his ears deeds of his greatness. This is how dictatorship starts.

    "If I have seen further it is by standing on the shoulders of giants."
    Sir Isaac Newton

    In my own opinion there is no greater mathematical Principle than that which is x - x = 0. This shows that matter can be created from nothing as long as the total product of the matter's mass & energy equal exactly zero.
    The only question is, "Where did all that antimatter go?"

    Favourite Elements: Sodium, Neodymium, Xenon
    Reply With Quote  
     

  39. #38  
    Moderator Moderator
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Washington State
    Posts
    8,309
    Quote Originally Posted by Devon Keogh View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Lynx_Fox View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Devon Keogh View Post
    Well, Term limits on Presidency are there to stop the President becoming a rule-for-life dictator...
    I doubt it had anything do with it. The balance of power wasn't effected at all regardless of how long a president could serve--they couldn't make new law, nor would they be immune to being overruled or decisions stricken by US Supreme Court. It was in large part passed to codify a tradition that went back to President Washington followed by most presidents to that point, because a lot of Republicans wanted a shot at the White House, and there was a term limit political movement in many states at the time. I don't think avoiding a dictatorship was ever part of the serious discussion.
    They did that for Consuls in the Roman Empire. The Consul could only spend one year of his life in the highest post of Roman society, this was for fear of the Kingdom of Rome which had been overthrown with King Lucius Tarquinius Superbus. I presume that this was the reason that the US adopted this policy.

    If you grant a president infinite time of presidency, he will see himself as the upholder of the people, the country unable to function without him. He will become arrogant, greedy and ruthless in the belief of his own lie. He will probably gain a cult of personality, people whispering in his ears deeds of his greatness. This is how dictatorship starts.
    I have no doubt that's your opinion. But it seems the question is about whether term limits exist to prevent dictatorship as you claimed. I suggested that it had no part in the US thinking which resulted in term limits and you've offered nothing to counter. Modern representatives governments with their checks and balances are not Rome.
    Meteorologist/Naturalist & Retired Soldier
    “The Holy Land is everywhere” Black Elk
    Reply With Quote  
     

  40. #39  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    1,839
    I think there is a misconception about what communism mean, as I understand; it is not a system but community living. It cannot exist on its own but based a social system. Most of the discussion seems to be stressing the negatives and not much on the positives. There is no homogeny system, all have plus and minuses. My suggestion is use the kitchen system, why, because all the system has to work together for food to be prepared. The outcome is optimal since everyone can eat what is cooked and be satisfied. Every system must be supported by another system.

    .
    Reply With Quote  
     

  41. #40  
    Life-Size Nanoputian Flick Montana's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Flatland
    Posts
    5,438
    Communism suffers the same singular problem faced by Capitalism and, indeed, all other forms of government; people.

    Every system can and will be abused to the detriment of those involved.
    "Sometimes I think the surest sign that intelligent life exists elsewhere in the universe is that none of it has tried to contact us." -Calvin
    Reply With Quote  
     

  42. #41  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    1,839
    Quote Originally Posted by Flick Montana View Post
    Communism suffers the same singular problem faced by Capitalism and, indeed, all other forms of government; people.

    Every system can and will be abused to the detriment of those involved.
    My goodness, I am absolutly in agreement, nothing to add.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  43. #42  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    San Diego
    Posts
    1,970
    Quote Originally Posted by Flick Montana View Post
    Communism suffers the same singular problem faced by Capitalism and, indeed, all other forms of government; people.
    Definitely! No pure "-ism" survives contact with reality, and no "-ism" that assumes people will act intelligently for the benefit of others can work very well. The proof is in the pudding; the validity of a system is in how well it works in the real world of imperfect and selfish people.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  44. #43  
    Life-Size Nanoputian Flick Montana's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Flatland
    Posts
    5,438
    Quote Originally Posted by billvon View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Flick Montana View Post
    Communism suffers the same singular problem faced by Capitalism and, indeed, all other forms of government; people.
    Definitely! No pure "-ism" survives contact with reality, and no "-ism" that assumes people will act intelligently for the benefit of others can work very well. The proof is in the pudding; the validity of a system is in how well it works in the real world of imperfect and selfish people.
    Which, at least in my opinion, is why a government must be in a constant state of self-review and change. I think traditionalists are far more dangerous to a society than they realize.
    "Sometimes I think the surest sign that intelligent life exists elsewhere in the universe is that none of it has tried to contact us." -Calvin
    Reply With Quote  
     

  45. #44  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    1,839
    Quote Originally Posted by Flick Montana View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by billvon View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Flick Montana View Post
    Communism suffers the same singular problem faced by Capitalism and, indeed, all other forms of government; people.
    Definitely! No pure "-ism" survives contact with reality, and no "-ism" that assumes people will act intelligently for the benefit of others can work very well. The proof is in the pudding; the validity of a system is in how well it works in the real world of imperfect and selfish people.
    .

    Which, at least in my opinion, is why a government must be in a constant state of self-review and change. I think traditionalists are far more dangerous to a society than they realize.
    All said with minimum words
    Reply With Quote  
     

  46. #45  
    Theatre Whore babe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Resident of Big Island of Hawai'i since 2003, and in Bayside, Ca. since 1981, Humboldt since 1977
    Posts
    12,443
    Quote Originally Posted by Devon Keogh View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Lynx_Fox View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Devon Keogh View Post
    Well, Term limits on Presidency are there to stop the President becoming a rule-for-life dictator...
    I doubt it had anything do with it. The balance of power wasn't effected at all regardless of how long a president could serve--they couldn't make new law, nor would they be immune to being overruled or decisions stricken by US Supreme Court. It was in large part passed to codify a tradition that went back to President Washington followed by most presidents to that point, because a lot of Republicans wanted a shot at the White House, and there was a term limit political movement in many states at the time. I don't think avoiding a dictatorship was ever part of the serious discussion.
    They did that for Consuls in the Roman Empire. The Consul could only spend one year of his life in the highest post of Roman society, this was for fear of the Kingdom of Rome which had been overthrown with King Lucius Tarquinius Superbus. I presume that this was the reason that the US adopted this policy.

    If you grant a president infinite time of presidency, he will see himself as the upholder of the people, the country unable to function without him. He will become arrogant, greedy and ruthless in the belief of his own lie. He will probably gain a cult of personality, people whispering in his ears deeds of his greatness. This is how dictatorship starts.
    That happens in the first four years.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  47. #46  
    Moderator Moderator Markus Hanke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Ireland
    Posts
    7,172
    Quote Originally Posted by Stargate View Post
    Most of the discussion seems to be stressing the negatives and not much on the positives.
    Perhaps that's because none of the socialist states lasted, with the notable exception of the DPRK, and we all know how that one is going. As a system of government, I think it would be safe to say that socialism doesn't work, because it is ultimately based not on cooperation, but coercion and fear. I had the misfortune of having been borned and raised under a socialist regime up until my primary school years, and even though my family made a run for it when I was still a kid, I nonetheless have some pretty vivid memories of what it was like.

    Communism itself simply does not exist as a form of government.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  48. #47  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    1,839
    Quote Originally Posted by Markus Hanke View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Stargate View Post
    Most of the discussion seems to be stressing the negatives and not much on the positives.
    Perhaps that's because none of the socialist states lasted, with the notable exception of the DPRK, and we all know how that one is going. As a system of government, I think it would be safe to say that socialism doesn't work, because it is ultimately based not on cooperation, but coercion and fear. I had the misfortune of having been borned and raised under a socialist regime up until my primary school years, and even though my family made a run for it when I was still a kid, I nonetheless have some pretty vivid memories of what it was like.

    Communism itself simply does not exist as a form of government.
    Markus, I know of no system that has ever lasted. The socialist system was started in ancient times, it served for long periods and it went down. I think every system will ultimately fall with time. Years from now people will look back and say capitalism cannot work; it certainly is going through tough times at present.

    I would like to see these systems like I see a fruit. It is important to eat the whole fruit because the roughage is good for digestion and the excretion of waste matter. Socialism of itself cannot work it needs part capitalism, and part of all the other systems to allow it to function. There is also this phenomenon that we call natural rise and fall. With time everything falls to give rise.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  49. #48  
    Forum Ph.D.
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    894
    Quote Originally Posted by Markus Hanke View Post

    I had the misfortune of having been born and raised under a socialist regime up until my primary school years, and even though my family made a run for it when I was still a kid, I nonetheless have some pretty vivid memories of what it was like.
    I'm very interested in the history and politics of the Communist world, and I was attracted to some aspects of Communist ideology when I was much younger. My views have changed altho' I always disliked what I saw as the absence of political freedom under these regimes.
    Can I ask you where you were "born and raised" and also to mention any memories you care to share? Perhaps you would prefer to keep this information private!
    Reply With Quote  
     

  50. #49  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    1,839
    I'm very interested in the history and politics of the Communist world, and I was attracted to some aspects of Communist ideology
    There is no communist world or ideology, there is however a socialist system. The idea of communism is based on fear and propaganda.
    There are communist in the capitalist system, simply because the people live in communities. All the different systems control the communities.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  51. #50  
    Forum Ph.D.
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    808
    Quote Originally Posted by John Galt View Post
    You seem to have overlooked one of the most significant misunderstandings. The USSR was not a communist country. It was a socialist country. The socialism was perceived as a necessary step on the road to communism, but communism was never implemented. Criticising communism on the failings of the USSR is like criticising the moon landings for not reaching Mars.
    The USSR did not fail .. it succeeded so well and became so rich that capitalists saw opportunity, and broke it up through whatever means including offering billions of dollars to prominent Russians if they would break up the USSR. (they couldn't destroy it militarily.) Russia is so advanced and prosperous today that it makes the U.S. look like a third world, starving nation. The other former USSR nations aren't doing so badly either, or else why does Europe want them to be part of the EEC other than military opportunities of course.
    Search engines are such useful tools .. I wonder why more people don't use them?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  52. #51  
    Forum Ph.D.
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    808
    Quote Originally Posted by Stargate View Post
    I'm very interested in the history and politics of the Communist world, and I was attracted to some aspects of Communist ideology
    There is no communist world or ideology, there is however a socialist system. The idea of communism is based on fear and propaganda.
    There are communist in the capitalist system, simply because the people live in communities. All the different systems control the communities.
    In the first Christian church they had "all things common."
    Search engines are such useful tools .. I wonder why more people don't use them?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  53. #52  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    1,839
    Quote Originally Posted by Aristarchus in Exile View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Stargate View Post
    I'm very interested in the history and politics of the Communist world, and I was attracted to some aspects of Communist ideology
    There is no communist world or ideology, there is however a socialist system. The idea of communism is based on fear and propaganda.
    There are communist in the capitalist system, simply because the people live in communities. All the different systems control the communities.
    In the first Christian church they had "all things common."
    I guess it depends where you want to start with Christianity. The first system was based on socialism, religion was not yet formed.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  54. #53  
    Theatre Whore babe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Resident of Big Island of Hawai'i since 2003, and in Bayside, Ca. since 1981, Humboldt since 1977
    Posts
    12,443
    Quote Originally Posted by Halliday View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Markus Hanke View Post

    I had the misfortune of having been born and raised under a socialist regime up until my primary school years, and even though my family made a run for it when I was still a kid, I nonetheless have some pretty vivid memories of what it was like.
    I'm very interested in the history and politics of the Communist world, and I was attracted to some aspects of Communist ideology when I was much younger. My views have changed altho' I always disliked what I saw as the absence of political freedom under these regimes.
    Can I ask you where you were "born and raised" and also to mention any memories you care to share? Perhaps you would prefer to keep this information private!
    Mom wasn't born and raised bur forced to after WWII....as were my Uncle and other family! I can only speak of what my mother shared with me.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  55. #54  
    Moderator Moderator Markus Hanke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Ireland
    Posts
    7,172
    Quote Originally Posted by Halliday View Post
    Can I ask you where you were "born and raised" and also to mention any memories you care to share? Perhaps you would prefer to keep this information private!
    I do not want to be rude or anything, but since I am using my real name both here and on all other forums I am active on, I prefer not to reveal or discuss any specifics, especially since this doesn't just involve me but all the rest of my family too.

    Let's just say the memories are largely negative, though it needs to be remembered that nothing is ever just "black or white" - there were good aspects to the system too, and I have no doubt that so long as you kept quiet and just went along with the flow of things without ever expressing opinions that went contrary to approved political ideology, you were able to have a comfortable, secure and stable life. But the price to pay for this was of course your freedom, both physically as well as intellectually.

    A few of my memories :

    - queuing at the shop at 4am for a delivery of bananas
    - ordering your car at the time your kids are born, because it took 20 years to build and deliver
    - my sister not being allowed to go to college, simply because my parents weren't party members
    - our phones being tapped, and the house bugged
    - travelling required special permits, and was allowed only to approved socialist countries

    These are the harmless ones, other memories are much worse, but I won't go into details.
    babe likes this.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  56. #55  
    Universal Mind John Galt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    14,169
    Quote Originally Posted by Aristarchus in Exile View Post
    Russia is so advanced and prosperous today that it makes the U.S. look like a third world, starving nation.
    !!!!!!
    When were you last in Russia? When did you last have a lengthy conversation with a Russian citizen, living in Russia about how things are going?

    I concede I've spent a lot more time in the US than in Russia, but I've spent enough time there and have enough routine contact with Russians to know you are talking nonsense.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  57. #56  
    Moderator Moderator Markus Hanke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Ireland
    Posts
    7,172
    Russia is so advanced and prosperous today that it makes the U.S. look like a third world, starving nation.
    Speak for yourself. You have obviously never lived there.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  58. #57  
    Theatre Whore babe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Resident of Big Island of Hawai'i since 2003, and in Bayside, Ca. since 1981, Humboldt since 1977
    Posts
    12,443
    A friend of mine in Russia does not describe it as anything that Aristarchus in Exile expresses!!
    Reply With Quote  
     

  59. #58  
    Moderator Moderator Markus Hanke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Ireland
    Posts
    7,172
    Quote Originally Posted by babe View Post
    A friend of mine in Russia does not describe it as anything that Aristarchus in Exile expresses!!
    That's hardly surprising, I dare say. Russia has advanced leaps and bounds in recent years, but it is nowhere near the level of development that the US is, as anyone will tell you who has spend any amount of time in both countries.

    My suspicion is that our friend AinE has more than just a casual affinity to the ideologies of socialism, communism and anarchy, hence his opinions as expressed. It is obviously not based on any objective data.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  60. #59  
    Theatre Whore babe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Resident of Big Island of Hawai'i since 2003, and in Bayside, Ca. since 1981, Humboldt since 1977
    Posts
    12,443
    Quote Originally Posted by Markus Hanke View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by babe View Post
    A friend of mine in Russia does not describe it as anything that Aristarchus in Exile expresses!!
    That's hardly surprising, I dare say. Russia has advanced leaps and bounds in recent years, but it is nowhere near the level of development that the US is, as anyone will tell you who has spend any amount of time in both countries.
    I know. Those I talk to.....from there...speak of a lot of repression my friend. It is sad. People have no clue what goes on in other countries. I do because I have family in 4 countries in the world.......some not close family but, family to me is family.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  61. #60  
    Moderator Moderator Markus Hanke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Ireland
    Posts
    7,172
    Quote Originally Posted by babe View Post
    I know. Those I talk to.....from there...speak of a lot of repression my friend. It is sad. People have no clue what goes on in other countries. I do because I have family in 4 countries in the world.......some not close family but, family to me is family.
    Yes, you are right. I was fortunate in that I chose a career that enabled me to travel and work extensively as an expat; I am married to a Pacific Islander, my kids are all born overseas in different countries, and one of my daughters is about to marry into an African culture. I have seen and experienced a lot more than most people, so unfounded and obviously incorrect statements such as the ones made by AinE about Russia don't sit very well with me.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  62. #61  
    Theatre Whore babe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Resident of Big Island of Hawai'i since 2003, and in Bayside, Ca. since 1981, Humboldt since 1977
    Posts
    12,443
    Quote Originally Posted by Markus Hanke View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by babe View Post
    I know. Those I talk to.....from there...speak of a lot of repression my friend. It is sad. People have no clue what goes on in other countries. I do because I have family in 4 countries in the world.......some not close family but, family to me is family.
    Yes, you are right. I was fortunate in that I chose a career that enabled me to travel and work extensively as an expat; I am married to a Pacific Islander, my kids are all born overseas in different countries, and one of my daughters is about to marry into an African culture. I have seen and experienced a lot more than most people, so unfounded and obviously incorrect statements such as the ones made by AinE about Russia don't sit very well with me.
    Ditto. and you know my daughter has lived and works in Switzerland. She is an expat also *S*
    Markus Hanke likes this.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  63. #62  
    Moderator Moderator Markus Hanke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Ireland
    Posts
    7,172
    Quote Originally Posted by babe View Post
    Ditto. and you know my daughter has lived and works in Switzerland. She is an expat also *S*
    I went to college there - beautiful place !!!
    Reply With Quote  
     

  64. #63  
    Theatre Whore babe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Resident of Big Island of Hawai'i since 2003, and in Bayside, Ca. since 1981, Humboldt since 1977
    Posts
    12,443
    Quote Originally Posted by Markus Hanke View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by babe View Post
    Ditto. and you know my daughter has lived and works in Switzerland. She is an expat also *S*
    I went to college there - beautiful place !!!
    Really she is in Zurich....and I think I am moving her to probably New York in the next year....she has explored a lot but she has not yet met my family in Slovenia. My son just did..on his own...blew me away....they came and picked him up from the train station in Ljubljana....and to the family home...he speaks no Slovenian but my cousin Mialci....her daughter was their interpreter...he was blown away by the warmth and love he received from family he never met of his grandmothers.....I had met Mialci when she was little and her brother..............the love and warmth of their desire to see their American (and they are naturalized from my Grandfather) cousins...wow...made my Mom very happy!
    Reply With Quote  
     

  65. #64  
    Theatre Whore babe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Resident of Big Island of Hawai'i since 2003, and in Bayside, Ca. since 1981, Humboldt since 1977
    Posts
    12,443
    W
    Quote Originally Posted by Markus Hanke View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by babe View Post
    Ditto. and you know my daughter has lived and works in Switzerland. She is an expat also *S*
    I went to college there - beautiful place !!!
    Lausanne?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  66. #65  
    Moderator Moderator Markus Hanke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Ireland
    Posts
    7,172
    Quote Originally Posted by babe View Post
    Lausanne?
    Very close, in fact just on the opposite side of the lake from Lausanne Good guess
    Reply With Quote  
     

  67. #66  
    Theatre Whore babe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Resident of Big Island of Hawai'i since 2003, and in Bayside, Ca. since 1981, Humboldt since 1977
    Posts
    12,443
    Quote Originally Posted by Markus Hanke View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by babe View Post
    Lausanne?
    Very close, in fact just on the opposite side of the lake from Lausanne Good guess
    Leysin? I spend two weeks there ..
    Reply With Quote  
     

  68. #67  
    Theatre Whore babe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Resident of Big Island of Hawai'i since 2003, and in Bayside, Ca. since 1981, Humboldt since 1977
    Posts
    12,443
    montreux I also spent time at...but Leysin...had the American College...spent two weeks there..met a professor from UC Berkeley and writer who I dated and later was published and on teleivision.....and a group from London and Rhodesia...and we spent the two weeks together with some local people and a couple of crazy Aussies.! Mark Sptiz won the medals and we'd sit and watch the Olympics..1972...What an experience. Rooming and watching the Olympics with people of every country and we had a dance bar at night....oh my heavens..too much fun and too much laughter...
    Markus Hanke likes this.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  69. #68  
    Moderator Moderator Markus Hanke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Ireland
    Posts
    7,172
    Quote Originally Posted by babe View Post
    Leysin? I spend two weeks there ..
    No, Le Bouveret But the college I went to isn't there anymore in its original form.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  70. #69  
    Theatre Whore babe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Resident of Big Island of Hawai'i since 2003, and in Bayside, Ca. since 1981, Humboldt since 1977
    Posts
    12,443
    Quote Originally Posted by Markus Hanke View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by babe View Post
    Leysin? I spend two weeks there ..
    No, Le Bouveret But the college I went to isn't there anymore in its original form.
    sad but good experiences for you!! great memories for me
    Reply With Quote  
     

  71. #70  
    Forum Ph.D.
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    894
    Quote Originally Posted by Stargate View Post
    I'm very interested in the history and politics of the Communist world, and I was attracted to some aspects of Communist ideology
    There is no communist world or ideology, there is however a socialist system. The idea of communism is based on fear and propaganda.
    There are communist in the capitalist system, simply because the people live in communities. All the different systems control the communities.
    The phrase "the communist world" did not imply the world was ruled by communism. It simply referred to those countries controlled by communist regimes and such countries clearly had a political history. With the demise of communism in the former Soviet Union, and Eastern Europe, the communist world became smaller but there are still a few countries one might call communist.
    Communism most certainly had a general ideological base often called Marxism or Marxism-Leninism. This did not mean that all communist states followed exactly the same political and economic policies.
    There may well be a significant amount of truth in your second sentence but in no way does it justify your first sentence.
    I am not clear about the meaning of your third and fourth sentences.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  72. #71  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    1,839
    Quote Originally Posted by Markus Hanke View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by babe View Post
    I know. Those I talk to.....from there...speak of a lot of repression my friend. It is sad. People have no clue what goes on in other countries. I do because I have family in 4 countries in the world.......some not close family but, family to me is family.
    Yes, you are right. I was fortunate in that I chose a career that enabled me to travel and work extensively as an expat; I am married to a Pacific Islander, my kids are all born overseas in different countries, and one of my daughters is about to marry into an African culture. I have seen and experienced a lot more than most people, so unfounded and obviously incorrect statements such as the ones made by AinE about Russia don't sit very well with me.
    I have also travelled extensively; sometimes I am shocked at what people say about other countries they do not know anything about. As for Russia, I would agree, one has to go and live there in order to understand the ills of that country.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  73. #72  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    1,839
    Quote Originally Posted by Halliday View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Stargate View Post
    I'm very interested in the history and politics of the Communist world, and I was attracted to some aspects of Communist ideology
    There is no communist world or ideology, there is however a socialist system. The idea of communism is based on fear and propaganda.
    There are communist in the capitalist system, simply because the people live in communities. All the different systems control the communities.
    The phrase "the communist world" did not imply the world was ruled by communism. It simply referred to those countries controlled by communist regimes and such countries clearly had a political history. With the demise of communism in the former Soviet Union, and Eastern Europe, the communist world became smaller but there are still a few countries one might call communist.
    Communism most certainly had a general ideological base often called Marxism or Marxism-Leninism. This did not mean that all communist states followed exactly the same political and economic policies.
    There may well be a significant amount of truth in your second sentence but in no way does it justify your first sentence.
    I am not clear about the meaning of your third and fourth sentences.
    My point is there is a misconception going around that there are communistic regimes and communistic ideologies. If you had stated the socialistic world became smaller I would not have responded. I know of no system that is communistic, I only know of a system that is socialism based on a social order. The word communism is used to disseminate fear and propaganda. There was no demise of communism in the former Soviet Union, the people still live in communities today as they do all over the world. Marxism and Leninism were expressing socialistic ideas.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  74. #73  
    Forum Ph.D.
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    894
    Quote Originally Posted by Stargate View Post
    .




    My point is there is a misconception going around that there are communistic regimes and communistic ideologies. If you had stated the socialistic world became smaller I would not have responded. I know of no system that is communistic, I only know of a system that is socialism based on a social order. The word communism is used to disseminate fear and propaganda. There was no demise of communism in the former Soviet Union, the people still live in communities today as they do all over the world. Marxism and Leninism were expressing socialistic ideas.
    I'm not clear about what you are saying. Certainly a great many fine writers and commentators use the term communist to describe the nature of certain regimes and the core of ideas, or ideology, they followed.
    I would say that communism is a leftist, radical, form of socialism. It differs from mainstream, or moderate socialism, as supporters of communism advocate that the State should control, and own, the means of production. Also communist ideologists have rarely backed the concept of liberal democracy.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  75. #74  
    Forum Ph.D.
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    808
    Quote Originally Posted by John Galt View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Aristarchus in Exile View Post
    Russia is so advanced and prosperous today that it makes the U.S. look like a third world, starving nation.
    !!!!!!
    When were you last in Russia? When did you last have a lengthy conversation with a Russian citizen, living in Russia about how things are going?

    I concede I've spent a lot more time in the US than in Russia, but I've spent enough time there and have enough routine contact with Russians to know you are talking nonsense.
    A very close friend of mine is Russian. We drink vodka together. As an example of Russian prosperity St. Petersburg is the number one tourist destination for Europe. The problems in Russia today are the same as the problems in Canada and the U.S., not enough money spent on social programs to help alcoholics, etc., not because there is not enough money .. the new Russian oligarchs have PLENTY of it.
    Search engines are such useful tools .. I wonder why more people don't use them?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  76. #75  
    Forum Ph.D.
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    808
    Quote Originally Posted by Markus Hanke View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by babe View Post
    A friend of mine in Russia does not describe it as anything that Aristarchus in Exile expresses!!
    That's hardly surprising, I dare say. Russia has advanced leaps and bounds in recent years, but it is nowhere near the level of development that the US is, as anyone will tell you who has spend any amount of time in both countries.

    My suspicion is that our friend AinE has more than just a casual affinity to the ideologies of socialism, communism and anarchy, hence his opinions as expressed. It is obviously not based on any objective data.
    The U.S. is bankrupt, so it's a good thing Russia is nowhere near their levels. Lt's watch the $80 billion dollar olympics in Sochi, shall we. Let's watch U.S. astronauts carried to the space station in Russian rockets because the U.S. finds it too expensive to get there.
    Search engines are such useful tools .. I wonder why more people don't use them?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  77. #76  
    Moderator Moderator Markus Hanke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Ireland
    Posts
    7,172
    Quote Originally Posted by Aristarchus in Exile View Post
    A very close friend of mine is Russian. We drink vodka together. As an example of Russian prosperity St. Petersburg is the number one tourist destination for Europe. The problems in Russia today are the same as the problems in Canada and the U.S., not enough money spent on social programs to help alcoholics, etc., not because there is not enough money .. the new Russian oligarchs have PLENTY of it.
    This is not what you originally stated; you said :

    Russia is so advanced and prosperous today that it makes the U.S. look like a third world, starving nation.
    That is not the same as

    the new Russian oligarchs have PLENTY of it.
    The second statement is true, the first one blatantly false, as you would know if you had lived, worked, and tried to do business in Russia and the US, or in any other former Soviet Union country for that matter.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  78. #77  
    Forum Ph.D.
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    808
    Quote Originally Posted by babe View Post
    A friend of mine in Russia does not describe it as anything that Aristarchus in Exile expresses!!
    If a poor person earning minimum wage in Canada working two weeks to pay rent for a room in a slovenly rooming house spoke to Russian media what kind of picture would he tell of life in Canada. I don't know your friend in Russia but I have a very close Russian friend and have a very clear picture of life in Russia, the mega affluence and the mega poverty, same as in Canada and the U.S.A. When the communist/socialist government in Russia was replaced with the Capitalist mega problems arose for those 'left behind.'
    Search engines are such useful tools .. I wonder why more people don't use them?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  79. #78  
    Forum Ph.D.
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    808
    Quote Originally Posted by babe View Post
    My mother lived under Communism and so did much of my family in Slovenia. THE RESULT....to keep the farm, Uncle had to work a job to pay the taxes to keep his farm which had been in the family for generations. Then he came home and worked the farm till dark.

    It isn't a just, equal or FAIR type of government.

    It is conform. or you lose.

    It is much better now.
    Slovenia .. good mopeds those Tomos. In Canada an 80 year old fellow just lost his farm to a freeway. The police state sent the police to remove him. They carried him out.
    Search engines are such useful tools .. I wonder why more people don't use them?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  80. #79  
    Moderator Moderator Markus Hanke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Ireland
    Posts
    7,172
    Quote Originally Posted by Aristarchus in Exile View Post
    same as in Canada and the U.S.A
    Again, that is not what you originally stated ! You said :

    Russia is so advanced and prosperous today that it makes the U.S. look like a third world, starving nation.
    So you implied that Russia is far advanced compared to the US, not "same as".
    Reply With Quote  
     

  81. #80  
    Forum Ph.D.
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    808
    [QUOTE=Aristarchus in Exile;484739]
    Quote Originally Posted by babe View Post
    My mother lived under Communism and so did much of my family in Slovenia. THE RESULT....to keep the farm, Uncle had to work a job to pay the taxes to keep his farm which had been in the family for generations. Then he came home and worked the farm till dark.

    It isn't a just, equal or FAIR type of government.

    It is conform. or you lose.

    It is much better now.
    Slovenia .. good mopeds those Tomos. In Canada an 80 year old fellow just lost his farm to a freeway. The police state sent the police to remove him. They carried him out. My Russian friend says, "If you want something done right, get it done in Slovenia."
    Search engines are such useful tools .. I wonder why more people don't use them?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  82. #81  
    Moderator Moderator Markus Hanke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Ireland
    Posts
    7,172
    Quote Originally Posted by Aristarchus in Exile View Post
    In Canada an 80 year old fellow just lost his farm to a freeway. The police state sent the police to remove him. They carried him out.
    You forgot to mention that under Canadian law he would have been adequately compensated for his loss; in a socialist regime he would have just been chased off ( at best ! ), without ever seeing a penny. Likely he would also have been incarcerated for further indoctrination, since he resisted the rule of the proletariat.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  83. #82  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    1,839
    Quote Originally Posted by Halliday View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Stargate View Post
    .

    My point is there is a misconception going around that there are communistic regimes and communistic ideologies. If you had stated the socialistic world became smaller I would not have responded. I know of no system that is communistic, I only know of a system that is socialism based on a social order. The word communism is used to disseminate fear and propaganda. There was no demise of communism in the former Soviet Union, the people still live in communities today as they do all over the world. Marxism and Leninism were expressing socialistic ideas.
    I'm not clear about what you are saying. Certainly a great many fine writers and commentators use the term communist to describe the nature of certain regimes and the core of ideas, or ideology, they followed.
    I would say that communism is a leftist, radical, form of socialism. It differs from mainstream, or moderate socialism, as supporters of communism advocate that the State should control, and own, the means of production. Also communist ideologists have rarely backed the concept of liberal democracy.
    I am trying to point out to you that there are different aspects of socialism, some radical, some central, some democratic social, but there is no basis for communism as a system. Socialism is not modern, it was the first system comming from thousand and thousands of years ago. Community living is the option to divide people into groups to make control managable. The communist idea was used to frighten people into accepting other form of governments.

    There are thousands of very good writers that write about communism however, most of them are really talking about socialism. I cannot see how you can be talking about a feature of a system and claiming it to be the system itself. As I said before, there are communist in every system because the people in the system live in communities.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  84. #83  
    Forum Ph.D.
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    808
    Quote Originally Posted by Markus Hanke View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Aristarchus in Exile View Post
    same as in Canada and the U.S.A
    Again, that is not what you originally stated ! You said :

    Russia is so advanced and prosperous today that it makes the U.S. look like a third world, starving nation.
    So you implied that Russia is far advanced compared to the US, not "same as".
    Yes, it is far advanced over the U.S. .. for instance, unless the U.S. military has big hidden secrets the U.S. would definitely lose a conventional war to Russia. Of course we would lose the world in a nuclear exchange. I also highly doubt there are as many people on social programs in Russia as are on Food Stamps in the U.S. The Russian economy is booming whereas we know what is happening in the U.S. Europe is now totally dependant on Russian natural gas for survival, whereas the U.S. has only just begun to recover a small portion of their daily energy needs from U.S. soil.
    Search engines are such useful tools .. I wonder why more people don't use them?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  85. #84  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    1,839
    Quote Originally Posted by Markus Hanke View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Aristarchus in Exile View Post
    In Canada an 80 year old fellow just lost his farm to a freeway. The police state sent the police to remove him. They carried him out.
    You forgot to mention that under Canadian law he would have been adequately compensated for his loss; in a socialist regime he would have just been chased off ( at best ! ), without ever seeing a penny. Likely he would also have been incarcerated for further indoctrination, since he resisted the rule of the proletariat.
    In most socialist states you cannot question the authority of the proletariat, because the state is the dictator, although they say it is in the interest of the masses.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  86. #85  
    Forum Ph.D.
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    808
    Quote Originally Posted by Markus Hanke View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Aristarchus in Exile View Post
    In Canada an 80 year old fellow just lost his farm to a freeway. The police state sent the police to remove him. They carried him out.
    You forgot to mention that under Canadian law he would have been adequately compensated for his loss; in a socialist regime he would have just been chased off ( at best ! ), without ever seeing a penny. Likely he would also have been incarcerated for further indoctrination, since he resisted the rule of the proletariat.
    Did the police in Canada carry him to a mental institution? Probably, but we don't know as the state controlled media ended the story with him being carried out of his home .. and he was perfectly capable of walking, by the way. Adequately compensated? Under whose terms? The real value of his property to the freeway developes was in the millions, and he did not receive anywhere near that much. If he was compensated adequately he would have left voluntarily. The free world is not free. Free enterprise is not free. U.S. citizens are STILL not allowed to visit Cuba unless they are likely to make money in a business there.
    Search engines are such useful tools .. I wonder why more people don't use them?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  87. #86  
    Forum Ph.D.
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    808
    Quote Originally Posted by Stargate View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Markus Hanke View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Aristarchus in Exile View Post
    In Canada an 80 year old fellow just lost his farm to a freeway. The police state sent the police to remove him. They carried him out.
    You forgot to mention that under Canadian law he would have been adequately compensated for his loss; in a socialist regime he would have just been chased off ( at best ! ), without ever seeing a penny. Likely he would also have been incarcerated for further indoctrination, since he resisted the rule of the proletariat.
    In most socialist states you cannot question the authority of the proletariat, because the state is the dictator, although they say it is in the interest of the masses.
    Do you remember Kent State in the U.S.? While attending a G20 summit protest in Ottawa, Canada I was assaulted twice with weapons by the masked police, I was not masked, I carried no weapon, I was making no noise, I was threatening no one, I was standing alone and not part of a group that was rambunctious. Freedom?
    Search engines are such useful tools .. I wonder why more people don't use them?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  88. #87  
    Forum Ph.D.
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    894
    Quote Originally Posted by Stargate View Post


    I am trying to point out to you that there are different aspects of socialism, some radical, some central, some democratic social, but there is no basis for communism as a system.

    As I said before, there are communist in every system because the people in the system live in communities.
    Why is there "no basis for communism as a system"?
    What on earth does your last sentence mean?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  89. #88  
    Forum Ph.D.
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    808
    Quote Originally Posted by Halliday View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Stargate View Post


    I am trying to point out to you that there are different aspects of socialism, some radical, some central, some democratic social, but there is no basis for communism as a system.

    As I said before, there are communist in every system because the people in the system live in communities.
    Why is there "no basis for communism as a system"?
    What on earth does your last sentence mean?

    Speak to the Hutterites about a basis for communism .. "all things common." Of course, someone will say the Hutterites are "communalists" .. and we can get into endless nit picking over definitions.
    Search engines are such useful tools .. I wonder why more people don't use them?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  90. #89  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    1,839
    Quote Originally Posted by Halliday View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Stargate View Post


    I am trying to point out to you that there are different aspects of socialism, some radical, some central, some democratic social, but there is no basis for communism as a system.

    As I said before, there are communist in every system because the people in the system live in communities.
    Why is there "no basis for communism as a system"?
    What on earth does your last sentence mean?
    Let me turn the whole thing around, please tell me the basis of communal livng as a system, and I will tell you the basis of socialism as a system.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  91. #90  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    1,839
    Quote Originally Posted by Aristarchus in Exile View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Halliday View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Stargate View Post


    I am trying to point out to you that there are different aspects of socialism, some radical, some central, some democratic social, but there is no basis for communism as a system.

    As I said before, there are communist in every system because the people in the system live in communities.
    Why is there "no basis for communism as a system"?
    What on earth does your last sentence mean?

    Speak to the Hutterites about a basis for communism .. "all things common." Of course, someone will say the Hutterites are "communalists" .. and we can get into endless nit picking over definitions.
    I do not think it is nitpicking, definition is very important. Socialism is a system and communism is not. So many people believe communism is a dirty thing when it is not, they cannot see themselves as communist although they are. Most will tell you although they live in a community and will defend the community they are defensive when you call them that. Who perpetuated this lie, the people who had different agendas to induce personal gain mainly as a country?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  92. #91  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    1,839
    Quote Originally Posted by Aristarchus in Exile View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Stargate View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Markus Hanke View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Aristarchus in Exile View Post
    In Canada an 80 year old fellow just lost his farm to a freeway. The police state sent the police to remove him. They carried him out.
    You forgot to mention that under Canadian law he would have been adequately compensated for his loss; in a socialist regime he would have just been chased off ( at best ! ), without ever seeing a penny. Likely he would also have been incarcerated for further indoctrination, since he resisted the rule of the proletariat.
    In most socialist states you cannot question the authority of the proletariat, because the state is the dictator, although they say it is in the interest of the masses.
    Do you remember Kent State in the U.S.? While attending a G20 summit protest in Ottawa, Canada I was assaulted twice with weapons by the masked police, I was not masked, I carried no weapon, I was making no noise, I was threatening no one, I was standing alone and not part of a group that was rambunctious. Freedom?
    There is abuse everywhere, in every system.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  93. #92  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    San Diego
    Posts
    1,970
    Quote Originally Posted by Aristarchus in Exile View Post
    Did the police in Canada carry him to a mental institution? Probably, but we don't know as the state controlled media ended the story with him being carried out of his home.
    A state controlled media would not have reported on the story.

    and he was perfectly capable of walking, by the way.
    He probably didn't want to.

    Adequately compensated? Under whose terms?
    Most likely by a real estate appraiser.

    If he was compensated adequately he would have left voluntarily.
    You don't know that.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  94. #93  
    Forum Radioactive Isotope Paleoichneum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Washington State, USA
    Posts
    4,564
    [QUOTE=Aristarchus in Exile;484741]
    Quote Originally Posted by Aristarchus in Exile View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by babe View Post
    My mother lived under Communism and so did much of my family in Slovenia. THE RESULT....to keep the farm, Uncle had to work a job to pay the taxes to keep his farm which had been in the family for generations. Then he came home and worked the farm till dark.

    It isn't a just, equal or FAIR type of government.

    It is conform. or you lose.

    It is much better now.
    Slovenia .. good mopeds those Tomos. In Canada an 80 year old fellow just lost his farm to a freeway. The police state sent the police to remove him. They carried him out. My Russian friend says, "If you want something done right, get it done in Slovenia."
    AiE cite your source for this.
    babe likes this.
    If more of us valued food and cheer and song above hoarded gold, it would be a merrier world. -Thorin Oakenshield

    The needs of the many outweigh the need of the few - Spock of Vulcan & Sentinel Prime of Cybertron ---proof that "the needs" are in the eye of the beholder.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  95. #94  
    Moderator Moderator
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Washington State
    Posts
    8,309
    I think a lot of people confuse socialism and communism.

    Using a simple example of a farmer:

    In a socialist system the farmer owns his land and tractor...but the state limits where, what and how much he can sell of his harvest.

    In a communist system the farmer doesn't own his land or the tractor. He shows up and farms the land he's assigned, with the tools he's issued, told what to produce and paid according to what the state will pay him. It fails because the farmer isn't responsible for maintaining, improving or increasing his yield.

    (by comparison capitalist he's own, farm what he wants and sell to what ever the market can bare).
    babe likes this.
    Meteorologist/Naturalist & Retired Soldier
    “The Holy Land is everywhere” Black Elk
    Reply With Quote  
     

  96. #95  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    1,839
    Quote Originally Posted by Lynx_Fox View Post
    I think a lot of people confuse socialism and communism.

    Using a simple example of a farmer:

    In a socialist system the farmer owns his land and tractor...but the state limits where, what and how much he can sell of his harvest.

    In a communist system the farmer doesn't own his land or the tractor. He shows up and farms the land he's assigned, with the tools he's issued, told what to produce and paid according to what the state will pay him. It fails because the farmer isn't responsible for maintaining, improving or increasing his yield.

    (by comparison capitalist he's own, farm what he wants and sell to what ever the market can bare).
    In a communist system the farmer doesn't own his land or the tractor.
    Lynx, who created this system? Where did it come from? I do not know of a communist system.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  97. #96  
    Moderator Moderator
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Washington State
    Posts
    8,309
    Lynx, who created this system? Where did it come from? I do not know of a communist system.


    Because when expressed they seldom last for long. Mao's original farming configuration during the late 50s is a classic example. Land and equipment removed, farmers organized on communes and everything strictly controlled including the meals the farmers could take off the same land they harvested. It led to dramatic reductions of harvest, and inability to deal with a relatively minor drought seasons from lack of economic flexibility--tens of millions starved, rampant cannibalism, children abandoned, and mounting atrocities as the government trying to maintain control of the human driven catastrophe hidden for decades after the fact.
    Meteorologist/Naturalist & Retired Soldier
    “The Holy Land is everywhere” Black Elk
    Reply With Quote  
     

  98. #97  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    1,839
    Quote Originally Posted by Lynx_Fox View Post
    Lynx, who created this system? Where did it come from? I do not know of a communist system.


    Because when expressed they seldom last for long. Mao's original farming configuration during the late 50s is a classic example. Land and equipment removed, farmers organized on communes and everything strictly controlled including the meals the farmers could take off the same land they harvested. It led to dramatic reductions of harvest, and inability to deal with a relatively minor drought seasons from lack of economic flexibility--tens of millions starved, rampant cannibalism, children abandoned, and mounting atrocities as the government trying to maintain control of the human driven catastrophe hidden for decades after the fact.
    Lynx, I am not really talking about the outcome of actions taken by any government, I am more addressing the difference between communism and socialism. I am actually asking,what is the basis of communism, are we talking about two distinctive systems?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  99. #98  
    Theatre Whore babe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Resident of Big Island of Hawai'i since 2003, and in Bayside, Ca. since 1981, Humboldt since 1977
    Posts
    12,443
    Quote Originally Posted by Aristarchus in Exile View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by babe View Post
    My mother lived under Communism and so did much of my family in Slovenia. THE RESULT....to keep the farm, Uncle had to work a job to pay the taxes to keep his farm which had been in the family for generations. Then he came home and worked the farm till dark.

    It isn't a just, equal or FAIR type of government.

    It is conform. or you lose.

    It is much better now.
    Slovenia .. good mopeds those Tomos. In Canada an 80 year old fellow just lost his farm to a freeway. The police state sent the police to remove him. They carried him out.
    and he was compensated for this property.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  100. #99  
    Universalis Infinitis Devon Keogh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Dublin, Republic of Ireland
    Posts
    145
    Quote Originally Posted by Lynx_Fox View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Devon Keogh View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Lynx_Fox View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Devon Keogh View Post
    Well, Term limits on Presidency are there to stop the President becoming a rule-for-life dictator...
    I doubt it had anything do with it. The balance of power wasn't effected at all regardless of how long a president could serve--they couldn't make new law, nor would they be immune to being overruled or decisions stricken by US Supreme Court. It was in large part passed to codify a tradition that went back to President Washington followed by most presidents to that point, because a lot of Republicans wanted a shot at the White House, and there was a term limit political movement in many states at the time. I don't think avoiding a dictatorship was ever part of the serious discussion.
    They did that for Consuls in the Roman Empire. The Consul could only spend one year of his life in the highest post of Roman society, this was for fear of the Kingdom of Rome which had been overthrown with King Lucius Tarquinius Superbus. I presume that this was the reason that the US adopted this policy.

    If you grant a president infinite time of presidency, he will see himself as the upholder of the people, the country unable to function without him. He will become arrogant, greedy and ruthless in the belief of his own lie. He will probably gain a cult of personality, people whispering in his ears deeds of his greatness. This is how dictatorship starts.
    I have no doubt that's your opinion. But it seems the question is about whether term limits exist to prevent dictatorship as you claimed. I suggested that it had no part in the US thinking which resulted in term limits and you've offered nothing to counter. Modern representatives governments with their checks and balances are not Rome.
    You seem to be thinking of the Roman Empire. I am speaking of the Roman Republic, which can be described in theory as a modern representative government. I call it "modern" as it is similar to most modern democratic governments.

    Why do you think that the Roman Republic is not alike to modern Western governments? They had a similar organization with a senate etc. They had Social Welfare for the poor, called the dole (a ration of food). Their society had two classes, the Patricians (modern: rich business-people) and the Plebians (modern: 99% of people). They had a Capitalist society based around money, trading with the known world. They were obsessed with the military and acted like the known world police force (just like the modern USA).

    I could go on for centuries...
    Last edited by Devon Keogh; November 10th, 2013 at 05:48 AM.

    "If I have seen further it is by standing on the shoulders of giants."
    Sir Isaac Newton

    In my own opinion there is no greater mathematical Principle than that which is x - x = 0. This shows that matter can be created from nothing as long as the total product of the matter's mass & energy equal exactly zero.
    The only question is, "Where did all that antimatter go?"

    Favourite Elements: Sodium, Neodymium, Xenon
    Reply With Quote  
     

  101. #100  
    Universalis Infinitis Devon Keogh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Dublin, Republic of Ireland
    Posts
    145
    Quote Originally Posted by babe View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Devon Keogh View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Lynx_Fox View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Devon Keogh View Post
    Well, Term limits on Presidency are there to stop the President becoming a rule-for-life dictator...
    I doubt it had anything do with it. The balance of power wasn't effected at all regardless of how long a president could serve--they couldn't make new law, nor would they be immune to being overruled or decisions stricken by US Supreme Court. It was in large part passed to codify a tradition that went back to President Washington followed by most presidents to that point, because a lot of Republicans wanted a shot at the White House, and there was a term limit political movement in many states at the time. I don't think avoiding a dictatorship was ever part of the serious discussion.
    They did that for Consuls in the Roman Empire. The Consul could only spend one year of his life in the highest post of Roman society, this was for fear of the Kingdom of Rome which had been overthrown with King Lucius Tarquinius Superbus. I presume that this was the reason that the US adopted this policy.

    If you grant a president infinite time of presidency, he will see himself as the upholder of the people, the country unable to function without him. He will become arrogant, greedy and ruthless in the belief of his own lie. He will probably gain a cult of personality, people whispering in his ears deeds of his greatness. This is how dictatorship starts.
    That happens in the first four years.
    It does not happen in the first four years. The arrogant prevailing mind comes when the president views his term as infinite in length.

    "If I have seen further it is by standing on the shoulders of giants."
    Sir Isaac Newton

    In my own opinion there is no greater mathematical Principle than that which is x - x = 0. This shows that matter can be created from nothing as long as the total product of the matter's mass & energy equal exactly zero.
    The only question is, "Where did all that antimatter go?"

    Favourite Elements: Sodium, Neodymium, Xenon
    Reply With Quote  
     

Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Misconceptions about Medications
    By Neverfly in forum Health & Medicine
    Replies: 25
    Last Post: August 27th, 2013, 01:23 AM
  2. Land Distribution Communism/Capitalism Hybrid
    By kojax in forum Business & Economics
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: June 22nd, 2013, 02:45 PM
  3. How Reagan did beat Communism.
    By timel in forum History
    Replies: 31
    Last Post: March 15th, 2012, 03:28 PM
  4. Communism.
    By mmatt9876 in forum Politics
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: July 22nd, 2011, 07:24 AM
  5. communism, capitalism, fascism
    By jjl034 in forum Politics
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: April 8th, 2010, 07:14 PM
Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •