Homestar Runner Wiki Forum

OK.

Everytime I mention "communism" and "socialsim", I'm not referring to the evil state capitalistic system with totalitarianism and a corrupt beaurocracy (how do you spell that?? ) that existed in the USSR, former Eastern Europe, Cuba, China, North Korea and Vietnam. I'm referring to the ideology of Marx.

You know? The thought of the proletariat/working class owning the means of production, the evolution from capitalism, slowly into socialism and later develop into communism, the educational and health system, giving everyone a chance....

Oh and also, I don't hate America just because I'm a communist (not a stalinist... (stalinist = USSR kinda political system)). In fact, I actually believe if the US turned slowly into a socialist country, it would be much better than it would be now.

And no, I don't want to "destroy" capitalism because I'm a communist (not stalinist), I think capitalism is a great system, because it has yielded high economic results but communism and socialism are better.

On to business. This thread was made to disscuss communism/socialism.

First topic: Communism/Socialism: Good or bad?

- PP

_________________

In my personal opinion, pure communism is very hard to achieve, much like anarchy (in the sense of a 'constructive' one where everyone lives together in peace) is. I think it's achievable at best only by smaller groups, not entire nations and certainly not massive ones.

If I recall ... the Oneida Society in Oneida, New York was something like this.

Ironically, after the founder died, his son began to turn the Society into ... the Oneida Silverware Company. D:

_________________

I think that communism is a great idea. Unfortunately, that's all it can be until everyone is willing to put other people in front of their own interests. From what I understand, (and correct me if I'm wrong) what communism basically boils down to is everyone sharing everything (the material wealth and the workload).

The great thing about this idea is that it means no one is poor or homeless, and everyone contributes to society. The problem however, is that so many of the people who have the material wealth wouldn't be willing to give it up.

I don't doubt that mankind could accomplish great things under this system, but unfortunately, I don't believe it is feasible, at least not in the near future.

_________________

Communism = Fun logo, not practical!

Hey, that's a wonderful idea, but so are flamethrowers that shoot chocolate hundred dollar bills. A true communist state would always fail, just for the fact that not everyone is CAPABLE of performing all the jobs needed in a society, much less be willing to do them and receive equal economic compensation.

There will never be a society where a middle school janitor receives the same income as an orthodontist.

But it's not income that matters, it's the fact that both are contributing to society that matters. You're just applying a capitalist mindset to the situation.

Communism, to the best of my understanding, is the idea that all economic assets are distrbuted equally amongst the society. Income was just a random economic benefit that fit into that sentence. But yes, you're right, it doesn't have to necessairly be MONEY, it can be form of property or asset that can be traded.

Money's a lot easier to measure, though.

No, idiot.

That's stalinism. That's the USSR, Eastern Europe, etc. Don't post anything here if you don't know what you're talking about.

- PP

_________________

communism worked good in theory. But you need a tight knit group for it to work. Like you said it can never work with large populations such as countries.

_________________

Hey, thanks for the information! Your helpful and kind demeanor were able to point me in the right direction, of which I was previously completely unaware!

Communism - A theoretical economic system characterized by the collective ownership of property and by the organization of labor for the common advantage of all members.

Stalinism - The bureaucratic, authoritarian exercise of state power and mechanistic application of Marxist-Leninist principles associated with Stalin.

Communism is the concept, Stalinism is the implementation of that concept via Stalin's methods. There's no need to be rude.

Ugh, the internet is being infested with all these red heads. Pretty much everyone (that isn't a socialist/communist) on the internet says that communism is a good idea in theory, but it's a terrible idea in theory and a terribly economic system. It involves very little use, if any at all, with money, so people are less willing to work. This is also really bad for trade, as we wouldn't have anything to give back due to the whole economic system. I'll admit, I didn't read all the posts in this thread, but really if it you believe in something involving money more, than it's probably closer to capitalism anyway. And this is talking economically only, I don't really know much about everything else.

Also, PP, even if you are one of these aforementioned red heads, I really appriciate the fact you're not one of those ones who hate America and the whole capitalist system like some people I've met.

_________________
A nerd and proud of it!

Easy there, McCarthy... Just because you think Communism is a good theory, doesn't make you an evil red.

You're assuming that money is the reason people would work. While, in capitalist society, it is generally true that we work because we want/need money, in a communistic society, the general good of all is the motivation for working. (think of tribal society like you'd see in National Geographic, or on PBS/Discovery channel. They don't use money, but everyone has a job to do and everyone does it, granted, it's not exactly communism, but it's a good analogy).
In theory communism IS a great idea. Since everyone is required for the community to work, it'd force people to ignore their pride and get along. However, for it to work people have to ignore their feelings of greed. For a capitalistic society, it's unlikely this would happen.
Personally, I love capitalism. It WOULD be good to have people stop competing and work together, but I don't see that happening, so, yay communism.

_________________
If you can't fix it with a hammer, you have an electrical problem.

But you have to realize people can't work without a motivation. It's not good in theory because people are obviously not going to do that. And like I said, without money, how's the economy going to function properly? How are you going to buy stuff from stores? Steal them? And just because people want money it doesn't make them greedy, which most socialists/communists on the internet seem to assume. Money is not used in capitalism to make people greedy (which, surprisingly, some people actually think it is), it's just so the economy is balanced and people don't just take whatever they want from a store.

_________________
A nerd and proud of it!

In a non-capitalistic society, money isn't the motivation. Look at tribal societies, for example. People don't have money, or an economy, but they still work.
People won't have to buy things from stores, as everyone will get their share. The problem comes when human greed steps in and some people get more than their share. I think that was the problem with communist Russia..
All of the problems you're bringing up about communism are problems because you're analyzing it from within a capitalist framework.
Not that I think communism is perfect, I love capitalism, too much, but I do think communism could fix some of the "flaws" with the way we currently do things.

_________________
If you can't fix it with a hammer, you have an electrical problem.

Everyone gets their share? Of what? You can't get a share of something unless it's... something... if you're talking about what the people make, than I guess that might work in some way, but then why would it make a difference in how hard you worked or not if you're just going to get "your share"?

Also, of course the system worked fine in tribes, because they're so small that every person has to do something and if they don't they're punished, as opposed to a whole country in which everyone can't be monitored at once. Not only that, but the tribe's motivation to continue working was not only so they have materials that can only be made by them, but they thought they were pleasing some god.

_________________
A nerd and proud of it!

Well, an economy can involve any kind of trade, right? Whether it services, goods, or currency, as long as something is traded for something else, that's a economic function, correct?

Nintendork - how did you know I had red hair!? Just kidding.

Ummm...how the heck does that make any sense at all?


wait... nevermind I just got it.

_________________

Kay...

_________________
A nerd and proud of it!

Reading what I wrote, I shouldn't have used "economy". I think I should have said currency, but, since that's the same thing as money, I don't know what I was thinking there..

You are completely correct.

_________________
If you can't fix it with a hammer, you have an electrical problem.

In communism, the motivation is to contribute positively to society. Unfortunately many people have a problem with putting other people before themselves. Communism could work great, but only if everyone was willing to contribute.

_________________

Exhibit Elf is right people putting others before themselves seems to be a problem.
and if you'll follow me over here to my next point...
The problem with communism is that we as people need to be better then others and its been like that since the beginning of time, we need the rich to be rich, and need the poor to be poor so we can feel better about ourselves, so we can survive the horrendous world we live in.

_________________
THE GOOD TIMES ARE OVER!!! - Hometsarrunner

I have read the Communist Manifesto by Engels and Marx, and the points expressed are wonderful. But, human nature gets in the way.

This was expressed by Mao. He used the labors of his country to better his own life and basically become a tyrant. Stalin did the same thing. Unfortunately, Lenin ended up going against the ideas he championed by creating the Vanguard party.The point of the Vanguard party was to uphold the ideals of Communism, but ended up being held up in a stance above the proletariat. It's very creation went against the ideal of communism.

There are many things in the Manifesto I support. Example; being able to have a guaranteed income doing what you are good at (from the quote "To each their own skill, to each their own need".) The problem with capitalism is that you are forced to do something you don't want to do and something you are not necessarily good at to make very little and increase the revenues of some CEO. And, the laborer is considered expendable in capitalism; worthless, cheap and easily replacable. In the socialist idea, the laborer is considered the equal of even the bosses, no more or less important. No link in a chain is more or less important than the one's its connected to.

I think that it would be a good idea to integrate some of these ideas into the way things work currently. The idea of oil execs making 6 billion in 3 months annoys me... I also support an progressive tax bracket. Tax the poor less so they have a chance to better their situation, and tax the rich more because they can afford it.

This is the origin of my support for social programs in the USA. Socialized medicine provides good health for all. Sure, it may cost a bit more on taxing, but think about the condition of your fellow man. Surely, when you are sick, you would hope for someone to help you.The main reason why it is not available in the US is due to the fact that the right wing does not want to help drug addicts. With socialized medicine, they will be able to get the help that they need to kick their habits, if not then be able to prevent themselves from getting AIDS by clean needle exchange programs.

One of my favorite quotes from The Communist Manifesto (something I actually have been noted of quoting often);

"The proletariat has only one thing to lose, their chains."

The condition of workplaces has made it so that some people are almost enslaved. I had a friend who worked at the Solo cup factory for 10 years, and because of the chemical fumes, she has to live on oxygen. I asked her why her fellow employees didn't unionize and fight for better conditions... she said because they are afraid of losing their jobs. Since the unemployment rate there is so high, they will have a scabs taking over as soon as they think about picketing. This disgusted me...

Point being, I do believe people need the ability to better themselves, but people need a fair chance at getting what they need as well. So I think the integration of some marxist ideas is a good idea in order to help those who need it.

It annoys me that so many people slave for near nothing, but some people don't do anything and are insanely rich (such as paris hilton).

One incredible thing that the communists did was make sure church and state were separated. Plus, making it so that all people are equal no matter what the circumstance, unlike the conservative nazis that are running the US now.

In short... I hate the way capitalism is, and I don't think that full blown Communism can work due to human nature. I think an integration of both systems will cause the true egalitarian ideal of both systems to be achieved.

_________________

Few people have talked about socialism.

Socialism is a far more practical version of communism, and much more possible. It was tried in Cuba and turned the country around until the embargo forced them to deal with the "communists", and it became corrupt from then on out.

Socialism can work as it appeals to human nature more than communism. The point is that you can't change the world overnight. but changing one country at a time is hard too; what if a country decides to be a crap for brains like america was and start an embargo purely because their ideals disagree with their own?

We need to work towards socialism, plain and simple. The world is getting far too Funk up. As someone pointed out in the other topic, some people commit crimes to go to prison, just to have a roof over their head. This just shows how much captialism is failing.

Most people who support capitalism have it etched so far into their heads they can't see an alternative.

There are alternatives. Maybe we haven't discovered the best way forward yet; but that does not mean capitalism is anywhere near an ideal state.

We need to take the emphasis off a person's "hard labour" being all that matters, and appreciate other ways in which a person can contriube. We need to free up resources and alot people to jobs they enjoy and can do, instead of the flaws in the education and hiring system keeping them away from them. We need to focus on using machines to do the down and dirty work so we have more workers that can be trained for slightly less menial jobs, or even just to maintain these machines. We need to become more tolerant of alternate lifestyles; not hiring someone because they like having pink hair is madness, especially now that in this day and age it's down to a person's particular fashion rather than outright rebellion.

The world is Funk. The longer we remain capitalist, the greedier we get. Greed is human nature, but it only becomes a serious problem if it's encouraged.

Under a socialist model, people would earn "around" the same, but not the exact same. You can still get extra money from working harder, socialism just presents people from shooting up the ranks and earning millions just because of a spot of hardwork and luck they had a few years back.

Socialism isn't a system where everyone is poor, as that makes little sense. Capitalism is just plain selfish and doesn't work in the long run. One of the main things it fails to take into account is that wealth is passed on from parent to child.

The model is flawed and has just about as many holes as communism, if not more, it's just because it encourages greed that it lasts this long.

Now, think about it for a second. Which do you really think was the founding values of america, a free market, or freedom and equality for all?

Because, unfortunately, it appears that they are mutually exclusive...

It was an idea that looked good in theory, but went lousy in practice.

_________________
So, so you think you can tell Heaven from Hell, blue skies from pain. Can you tell a green field from a cold steel rail? A smile from a veil? Do you think you can tell?

One of the main flaws with socialism, is (if I remember correctly, correct me if I'm wrong here) the concept that everyone is "equal." Well, I hate to break it to the idealists, but if everyone is equal, then there wouldn't be any hamburger flippers. Some people are smarter than others. Some are stronger, or faster, or just in all aspects better.

Also, with there's the whole aspect of human nature. Now, just think about this. Yon socialists say that people won't go with a socialism. Doesn't that make it a bad concept? A society is made up of people. So, a government that requires a vast majority of total support is naturally going to fail. Yes, if everyone could get along and put the greater good ahead of themselves, things would be great. But until you can find a way to hypnotise and brainwash everyone, it's simply not going to happen. Socialism's like Santa Claus. It gives you a warm fuzzy feeling to consider, but anyone with a basic grasp on reality would know that it just doesn't work.

... so they should be treated appropriately to their natural disposition rather than how much they do to overcome it?

Another flaw of capitalism.



I'm not entirely sure how much you know about socialism, but I think you're confusing it with communism.

You're probably right in point number 2. I don't know much about the difference between the Communism and Socialism, just as I'm sure lots of people don't. However, I still don't see how it could be that something that's supposedly so great could have never worked in the past.

As to point number one, well, perhaps I phrased poorly. My general meaning is that socialism/communism will never work because people are inherently not equal, and it isn't just to give the same amount of support/money/whatever to someone who works half as much as anyone else. I'm really just not finding a good way to express this.

So, can we establish some definitive differences between socialism and communism? I don't really feel knowledgable enough to do so without doing some research.

_________________
Like High School Debate and Forensics? Check this out!

the biggest problem with Communism is that it's impossible, which is why it's never been successfully implemented. you always end up with the state having to imprison and/or execute millions of people because they don't want to be part of the system. and that's no good.

the biggest ideological problem with Communism, as i see it, is that the proles are never Communists. they're Capitalists. they want to be rich; they don't just want everyone else to be as poor as they are. it's only ever middle-class people who are Communists, because they have the luxury of subscribing to whatever philosophy they want, whereas the poor are too busy trying to find their next meal and their next month's rent.

the way to go is a mixed Capitalist/Socialist economy. a regulated market, with socialized health care, etc, is pretty much the best compromise. i would also throw in some democratic proportional representation, but that's a political system and we're talking about economics here.

In communism, according to Marx, the government disappears and there is economic cooperation as well. The principle of distribution becomes "from each according to his/her ability, to each according to his/her need."

In socialism, it is a dictatorship of the proletariat which is a government organized for the defense of survival "rights." Also, distribution goes by the principle "from each according to his/her ability, to each according to his/her work."

A compromise of ideals of socialism and capitalism could work. A lot of countries in europe have this already. Where the rich are taxed more, the poor are taxed less, socialized medicine, and other factors.

http://politicalcompass.org/ See where you stand.

_________________

You're pretty right there, but I tihnk what you describe pretty much is a form of socialism that isn't actually waterred down. Under socialism, people can still get different wages. It's just that you won't find anyone getting 10 times the wages just because they put in a bit of work and had immense good luck at some point in their life.