Capitalism or Communism? Is communism really that horrible?

[regent]

So what nation or nations on this planet have ever practiced Marxian communism or had a pure socialistic economy? What nation or nations on this planet today practices laissez faire or pure capitalism? There might be a few.
America, today, as most nations, practices a combination of socialism and regulated capitalism.
As soon as the ink was dry on America's Constitution the government was involved in our economy, primarily helping business, and the government continues helping business today.
America has always had welfare for its citizens and that was a function of state governments. When state governments could no longer afford it, it was then taken over by the national govenment. Today much of people-welfare has been returned to the state governments.
Business or corporation welfare, once a function of both state and national governments, today has been largely taken over by the national government.

 

[The T]

The best part about communism is the way it freaks out the right wingers.

Yeah that Liberty stuff is for chumps, right?

 

[ScreamingEagle]

The best part about communism is the way it freaks out the right wingers.

"Revolutions, like trees, must be judged by their fruit" ...Ignazio Silone

 

[Intense]

Capitalism or Communism? Is communism really that horrible?

Hmmmm, Liberty V.S. Slavery,........... Let me ask you..... is this the last choice You would get to make for Yourself or not?

Is Communism really that horrible? Are you for real?

 

[AmericanFirst]

Going into this i would like to say that i am more on the capitalist end of the spectrum. Though going into this i am generally capitalist knowing the pros and cons of them both may change your own mind. Even though communism was originally a social thing it has also found itself as a government with one man in control. So lets try and picture it with a U.S or near that style democracy.
In essence capitalism is smaller government and communism is huge government. Now before your western instincts tell you to instantly choose capitalism think of the benefits of huge government control in your life.
In communism ideal/original communism everyone is equal. Though it almost never happens that a nation goes completely on the guidelines of a known social policy. Everyone is equal and therefore have the same things to live on and lean on their whole lives. Everyone once again must be equal in society and as a result you lose the right to earn. So in exchange for a lifetime safety net given by the government you give up the ability to earn your way up the ladder. This is because only one social class exist and that is common working class. So you have nothing to look foward to besides that life forever.
It is up to you to decide whether that is a bad or a good thing for you. As a result of this innovation potential is silenced. So is a lifelong safety net really worth losing earning rights and silencing so much potential for innovation?
Now knowing the main gains and losses of communism lets talk about capitalism.
Essentially capitalism is the exact opposite of communism in its original and purest form. In ideal/original capitalism they're is pretty much no government interference in your life. Of course they still have laws as any other nation but if you follow them you are left alone for all of your life. Capitalism is that sweet freedom you taste, love and learn about. In ideal capitalism you can go out and earn it all. You can dream big and dream about the journey there. You can be a bigshot nobody will ever forget. But with that ability to dream big and earn it all you lose that security you had with communism. And if someone earns too much capital they can decide to make everyone else work for dirt cheap money if they choose. They can dominate or without a law from it a monopoly can occur. And if you fail you have nothing to fall back on unless a generous citizen with decent capital decides to help you up.
So is the freedom of capitalism worth the possibility of ending up with nothing?
In conclusion i would like to share my opinion. I belive the risk involved with capitalism is worth the big dreams and potential unlocked that comes with it. People have bigger things to live for and more fuel to live on. Because "the dream" actually exist. In addition to the fact that the world/nation could innovate so much faster.
I would like for you to build an opinion of your own and for you to give me your feedback and for you to discuss amongst youselves.

Communism stinks, been proven to stink, if idiots in this country love it o much they can move to a communist country and live there, but leave this country alone.

 

[AmericanFirst]

The best part about communism is the way it freaks out the right wingers.

"Revolutions, like trees, must be judged by their fruit" ...Ignazio Silone

The worst thing about communism is how idiot lefty libtards embrace it.

 

[The T]

The best part about communism is the way it freaks out the right wingers.

"Revolutions, like trees, must be judged by their fruit" ...Ignazio Silone

The worst thing about communism is how idiot lefty libtards embrace it.

not to mention scary as Hell because these people vote.

 

[The T]

Capitalism or Communism? Is communism really that horrible?

Hmmmm, Liberty V.S. Slavery,........... Let me ask you..... is this the last choice You would get to make for Yourself or not?

Is Communism really that horrible? Are you for real?

Maybe we should call the millions that Died under Uncles Joe Stalin, And Mao and ask them what happens when you don't tow the party line...?

 

[Nic_Driver]

Before Rhodesia became Zimbabwe, it was the bread basket of Africa. The people were well fed, well educated and pretty happy.

Then a socialist took over at the urging of the UN and the radical chic douche-nozzles in New Yawk.

SLIME, er, er, Time mag/rag even did a BIG article on him. It was on the Front Cover titled: "Mugabe: A Practical Marxist"

Many years ago.

Now? Now the people of Zimbabwe are literally starving to death. They're Inflation Rate was literally 1,000,000,000,000%. Literally. I'm not being a prick. literally over One Trillion percent.

And unemployment was over 85%.

I could post pictures of the starving people in Zimbabwe, but what would be the point?

Seriously. Our Board libtards would make some excuse or another. Or, more likely, a lot of excuses.

Just like they make excuses for Hitler, "The very man who name the Party 'National socialist German Workers Party' wasn't really a socialist. He was faking you guys out".

Or that the USSR and their communist murders -- It wasn't really the fault of communism. Or....

Think what you will. This is why you can't trust socialists (aka; democrats) with ANYTHING.

These are seriously stupid people, folks.

socialism, communism, fascism -- Whatever, has a 100% FAIL rate.

And these idiots want to try it again?

If I were in charge, I'd give them some land and build a giant wall around it. Shoot ANYBODY that tries to get back into the US. No mercy.

They'd all be dead, they'd all starve to death in a couple generations.

KIL, KILL, KILL!...the mantra of the right.

Apparently ignorance really does breeds comtempt.

 

[Nic_Driver]

Capitalism or Communism? Is communism really that horrible?

Hmmmm, Liberty V.S. Slavery,........... Let me ask you..... is this the last choice You would get to make for Yourself or not?

Is Communism really that horrible? Are you for real?

Maybe we should call the millions that Died under Uncles Joe Stalin, And Mao and ask them what happens when you don't tow the party line...?

What tenet of communisim is it that supports a dictator and the oppresion of the people?

 

[Katiegrrl0]

Pure Socialism or Communism is workable with smaller numbers. It has never been applied to the full extent with mass numbers. The CCCP was built in the image of Stalin and was not even close to Communism. China under Mao was another military running roughshod over the citizens. Neither are good examples.
The Native Americans were very close to a pure Communist or Socialist state. They operated in smaller communities and prospered. It is hard to say whether these types of governments could flourish with populations in the millions.
Looking at the US and many European nations who have been based in a very capitalistic government for centuries it would be impossible to change the mindset based on material possessions.
Most nations are a variation on many styles of government. Trying to have a nation become Socialist or Communist would be impossible.
Communities that are self sustaining do exist and at a high level. I know of no community such as this larger than 1500 people in one area.

I think the greatest difficulty in building a large Communist or Socialist state would be incentive driven by profit and higher standard of living.

If you look at what many see as Communist states CCCP and China they were fragile at the center as they were pushed into those forms of government. Control was vital to the leaders to keep their powers. This is not Communist or Socialist. If there is a constant struggle for power the system was not installed correctly i.e military takeover or never Communist or Socialist in the first place.
In small groups where people are willing to share a more communal model of life these systems can work fine.

Yes look at Jonestown. It is an excellent example of how socialism can work in a small setting. In a small setting the governing body does not get hungry for power like in big settings. In small settings it is always safe.

Jonestown was not Communist or Socialist. It was a community based on some strange religious belief. The problem with debate on a topic like this as the examples people chose to use never fit the comparison. Many aboriginal tribes and the Native Americans are the prime examples. Of small community working in a Socialistic or Communistic nature. They provided for that tribe. They made clothes and grew crops and hunted. This was for provisioning for their own.
The setting you have chosen was driven by a totally different motive and does not fit. Waco would be a similar example to what you suggest and this was not at all like the comparisons I have used.
As I said on a large scale it would be very difficult to maintain as it would lack innovative incentive.
There are communities as i stated all over the world and they work within the confines of the larger nation state. They can be self-sufficient in many ways, providing food, clothing, schooling, and power. Some even have outside business interests where extra food and other manner of things are bartered or sold. These have existed for many years.

 

[miami_thomas]

I didn't write those words but your right that a liberal did.

So you disagree with those words in spirit? You don't think the government 'of the people' should promote the general welfare ‘of the people’? You difer from the position of our nations founding documents?

Well, I guess that puts things in perspective.

You do have that right but I disagree with the basic premise of your argument.

By the way it is promote not provide.

Uhmmm...thats what I said....thanks though.

It does not say 'of the people'

 

[miami_thomas]

Pure Socialism or Communism is workable with smaller numbers. It has never been applied to the full extent with mass numbers. The CCCP was built in the image of Stalin and was not even close to Communism. China under Mao was another military running roughshod over the citizens. Neither are good examples.
The Native Americans were very close to a pure Communist or Socialist state. They operated in smaller communities and prospered. It is hard to say whether these types of governments could flourish with populations in the millions.
Looking at the US and many European nations who have been based in a very capitalistic government for centuries it would be impossible to change the mindset based on material possessions.
Most nations are a variation on many styles of government. Trying to have a nation become Socialist or Communist would be impossible.
Communities that are self sustaining do exist and at a high level. I know of no community such as this larger than 1500 people in one area.

I think the greatest difficulty in building a large Communist or Socialist state would be incentive driven by profit and higher standard of living.

If you look at what many see as Communist states CCCP and China they were fragile at the center as they were pushed into those forms of government. Control was vital to the leaders to keep their powers. This is not Communist or Socialist. If there is a constant struggle for power the system was not installed correctly i.e military takeover or never Communist or Socialist in the first place.
In small groups where people are willing to share a more communal model of life these systems can work fine.

Yes look at Jonestown. It is an excellent example of how socialism can work in a small setting. In a small setting the governing body does not get hungry for power like in big settings. In small settings it is always safe.

Jonestown was not Communist or Socialist. It was a community based on some strange religious belief. The problem with debate on a topic like this as the examples people chose to use never fit the comparison. Many aboriginal tribes and the Native Americans are the prime examples. Of small community working in a Socialistic or Communistic nature. They provided for that tribe. They made clothes and grew crops and hunted. This was for provisioning for their own.
The setting you have chosen was driven by a totally different motive and does not fit. Waco would be a similar example to what you suggest and this was not at all like the comparisons I have used.
As I said on a large scale it would be very difficult to maintain as it would lack innovative incentive.
There are communities as i stated all over the world and they work within the confines of the larger nation state. They can be self-sufficient in many ways, providing food, clothing, schooling, and power. Some even have outside business interests where extra food and other manner of things are bartered or sold. These have existed for many years.

And what would happen to members of the said tribe if they did not do their part?

 

[AmericanFirst]

Before Rhodesia became Zimbabwe, it was the bread basket of Africa. The people were well fed, well educated and pretty happy.

Then a socialist took over at the urging of the UN and the radical chic douche-nozzles in New Yawk.

SLIME, er, er, Time mag/rag even did a BIG article on him. It was on the Front Cover titled: "Mugabe: A Practical Marxist"

Many years ago.

Now? Now the people of Zimbabwe are literally starving to death. They're Inflation Rate was literally 1,000,000,000,000%. Literally. I'm not being a prick. literally over One Trillion percent.

And unemployment was over 85%.

I could post pictures of the starving people in Zimbabwe, but what would be the point?

Seriously. Our Board libtards would make some excuse or another. Or, more likely, a lot of excuses.

Just like they make excuses for Hitler, "The very man who name the Party 'National socialist German Workers Party' wasn't really a socialist. He was faking you guys out".

Or that the USSR and their communist murders -- It wasn't really the fault of communism. Or....

Think what you will. This is why you can't trust socialists (aka; democrats) with ANYTHING.

These are seriously stupid people, folks.

socialism, communism, fascism -- Whatever, has a 100% FAIL rate.

And these idiots want to try it again?

If I were in charge, I'd give them some land and build a giant wall around it. Shoot ANYBODY that tries to get back into the US. No mercy.

They'd all be dead, they'd all starve to death in a couple generations.

KIL, KILL, KILL!...the mantra of the right.

Apparently ignorance really does breeds comtempt.

And the lefty idiots heroes are stalin, castro, soros, and the socialist failed leaders of the past.

 

[The T]

Capitalism or Communism? Is communism really that horrible?

Hmmmm, Liberty V.S. Slavery,........... Let me ask you..... is this the last choice You would get to make for Yourself or not?

Is Communism really that horrible? Are you for real?

Maybe we should call the millions that Died under Uncles Joe Stalin, And Mao and ask them what happens when you don't tow the party line...?

What tenet of communisim is it that supports a dictator and the oppresion of the people?

Ask the millions that died at the hands of tyrants that thorough no fault of thier own were deemed 'enemies of the state' and disappeared?

 

[AmericanFirst]

Capitalism or Communism? Is communism really that horrible?

Hmmmm, Liberty V.S. Slavery,........... Let me ask you..... is this the last choice You would get to make for Yourself or not?

Is Communism really that horrible? Are you for real?

Maybe we should call the millions that Died under Uncles Joe Stalin, And Mao and ask them what happens when you don't tow the party line...?

What tenet of communisim is it that supports a dictator and the oppresion of the people?

The tenant of history where it happened, like it? MOVE THERE.

 

[miami_thomas]

So what nation or nations on this planet have ever practiced Marxian communism or had a pure socialistic economy? What nation or nations on this planet today practices laissez faire or pure capitalism? There might be a few.
America, today, as most nations, practices a combination of socialism and regulated capitalism.
As soon as the ink was dry on America's Constitution the government was involved in our economy, primarily helping business, and the government continues helping business today.
America has always had welfare for its citizens and that was a function of state governments. When state governments could no longer afford it, it was then taken over by the national govenment. Today much of people-welfare has been returned to the state governments.
Business or corporation welfare, once a function of both state and national governments, today has been largely taken over by the national government.

If you consider it helping, then you are right. But I vote that the things going on now are actually not constitutional as they are hurting our national welfare not helping.

 

[Nic_Driver]

By the way it is promote not provide.

Uhmmm...thats what I said....thanks though.

It does not say 'of the people'

Hence the little marks...

 

[Nic_Driver]

Maybe we should call the millions that Died under Uncles Joe Stalin, And Mao and ask them what happens when you don't tow the party line...?

What tenet of communisim is it that supports a dictator and the oppresion of the people?

The tenant of history where it happened, like it? MOVE THERE.

When did it happen?

 

[Nic_Driver]

Maybe we should call the millions that Died under Uncles Joe Stalin, And Mao and ask them what happens when you don't tow the party line...?

What tenet of communisim is it that supports a dictator and the oppresion of the people?

Ask the millions that died at the hands of tyrants that thorough no fault of thier own were deemed 'enemies of the state' and disappeared?

and you find 'tyrants' where in the tenets of communism?