Communism vs Capitalism

[Sardauker-Kirov]

As you can see in the topic......

My thoughts about the two ideologies.

Communism could happen in the future, if Capitalism/Democracy is milked out.

Seeing how the so called 'elections' turns into 'who gathers the most cattle, with weak promises to the people'

If the person gains power over the country, he will do whatever he wants. No matter if there is a 'UN or security council'

Just like in Holland, different factions/parties promises the people things, but they won't meet up their promises and just try to rule the land forever, which won't happen, if you don't listen to the voices of the people.

But still, Communism has some flaws, how could crime be stopped if there's no 'police force'

Organized crime could exploit the 'share or work for your bread' thing.

But I'm sure Communism could have some easily adjusted tweaks to the goverment, so it can run smoothly without problems.

But whatever happens in the future, I hope the politics will change in all those corrupt nations with the likes of Bush and Blair.

[Edric O]

We already have about 4 different topics in which we're talking about this... so do we really need another one?

[Duncan_ghola]

And Edric seems to be the one with the most knowledge on communism and capitalism, i see no point to a debate anymore...

[Sardauker-Kirov]

That's why, because almost every topic is turning into a Commie vs Cappie thread. ;)

Soon we would have a Atreid vs Harkie flame war.

[Caid Ivik]

EdricO, all those threads are based on your defense of communism. Here you do have a place for attack. Kirov, define your view on ideal, considerable system. You say something should restrict free trade, and that "something" should be a state with own laws. Where is the difference between this "communism with control" and countries of the Warszaw Pact?

[Dude_Doc]

Bah, the communism we have seen is the communism in it's real state. There is no "perfect" communism, just like there is no perfect dictator who can satisfy his people/country, or a democratic institution that follows all rules by the book. Maybe in 100 years from now, but as long democracy hasn't commited any crimes like the Holocaust (and etc), it will stay the way it is today.

[Sardauker-Kirov]

I don't know if everyone is brainwashed by people of how bad Communism is.

Probably those old disney WW2 propaganda cartoons were shown in the American schools. ;D

Anyways, when I asked someone on college what Communism is; I 'always' get something like. "Communism is bad. Because Stalin was a asshole.."

I ask the real definition of Communism and then the people do this. ".........."

[Dude_Doc]

I don't know if everyone is brainwashed by people of how bad Communism is.

Probably those old disney WW2 propaganda cartoons were shown in the American schools.

It is not what communism is, it is what it was. That's what people judge. Just like one can talk about "real fascism", people don't judge what it is, but what it was, and what it did.

[Sardauker-Kirov]

I repeat once more, stalin didn't FOLLOW the routes of Communism.

Therefore, he and his country isn't Communist at all.

He probably abused the idea, just like the western countries are doing today with "Democracy"

"Fight our comrades, you do this for your brothers and homecountry. Not for me and my spoiled 'dictators and ministers'

::)

Maybe it's fear they smell, fear of how someday Communism will rise from the ashes and people truly face it's true nature.

And if you say Communism is impossible to come forth to our countries, then you're one of the same people that thought 'Democracy' was impossible.

"People voting and partially controlling the country with voting? That's ridiculous the king might say."

[Dude_Doc]

Okay, so if you woke up tomorrow, and your country would become communist, then I assume everything would be just perfect? No dictator or corrupted government? No "behind-the-scenes"?

[Sardauker-Kirov]

Okay, so if you woke up tomorrow, and your country would become communist, then I assume everything would be just perfect? No dictator or corrupted government? No "behind-the-scenes"?

I would scream this~

Happy, happy! Joy, joy!

And if there is a corrupt dictator, he would likely be eliminated by the people.

[Dude_Doc]

I would scream this~

Happy, happy! Joy, joy!

And if there is a corrupt dictator, he would likely be eliminated by the people.

Then why wasn't Stalin killed by the people? How come Castro isn't? Many communist countries in the world hates their leaders, yet, no one has the currage to kill them. Why? Because they can be killed themselves. Their families and friends can die. Just take a look on China, North Korea or Cuba. Your country would become one of those, if it became communist tomorrow.

[Edric O]

For the millionth time: THERE NEVER WERE ANY COMMUNIST COUNTRIES, NOR ANY COUNTRIES WHO EVEN CLAIMED TO BE COMMUNIST.

The USSR, China, North Korea, Vietnam, Cuba, and all the countries of the Warsaw Pact only claim(ed) to be socialist.

Even if every single word Stalin ever spoke was pure truth, that STILL wouldn't make the Soviet Union communist. It would only make it socialist.

[Acriku]

Just as there were no capitalist countries. America may have been close in some instances in history, though.

[Edric O]

What do you mean by that, Acriku? Capitalism means private ownership over the means of production. Isn't that the case in America?

[Acriku]

Just like Russian wasn't entirely communistic, America is not entirely capitalistic.

[Edric O]

There's no such thing as "partially communistic" or "partially capitalistic". A country can be capitalist or non-capitalist; socialist or non-socialist; communist or non-communist.

Of course, there is plenty of variation within each system, but it's a mistake to say that country X is "more capitalistic" than country Y. Usually, when people say "more capitalistic", they mean more right-wing.

[Acriku]

So, using that logic, America is not a capitalist country, because it has socialist aspects.

However, I disagree that there is no such thing. It can be partially -enter economic system- if it includes certain aspects of that economic system. Just like we can't say America is a democracy because it is actually a constitutional republic democracy. It is not entirely done by the people, as democracy itself is.

[Edric O]

Actually, using my logic, America is obviously a capitalist country, because despite the few non-capitalist aspects of the American system, it still has all the main elements of capitalism. In fact, America is far, FAR away from any system other than capitalism.

The stalinist system of the Soviet Union had several elements of socialism, too, but that doesn't make the USSR "socialist", any more than Britain's aristocracy and royalty makes it "feudalist".

As I said before:

First of all, please learn to make the difference between communism, socialism and stalinism. No communist country ever existed, and no country even claimed to be communist. They only claimed to be socialist (hence the "Union of Soviet Socialist Republics"). But socialism is the system in which all means of production are the public property of all the people. Was this the case in the "socialist" countries of the soviet bloc? No. The means of production were NOT controlled by the people. They were controlled by a government oligarchy. Therefore, they weren't even socialists, much less communists!

Quod erat demonstrandum.

And one final note to Dude_Doc: For the past 10 years, China has been a very much capitalist country. If you don't believe me, just go to China and look at the ads for Coca Cola.

[Acriku]

Alright, I can agree with that (rather loose logical thinking on my part), but what about the second part of my post?

I have a question, though: what made America and other countries to think that the USSR was communist in the first place?

[Edric O]

First, I'll answer your question:

During the Cold War, both American AND Soviet propaganda tried to portray the Soviet bloc as "communism", or at least "socialism". They did it for different reasons, but the end result was the same: People on both sides of the Iron Curtain were being told that the Soviet Union represented communism.

The corrupt oligarchy ruling the countries of the Soviet bloc wanted above all to remain in power (I can tell you from personal experience that the diehard "communists" that were in power before 1989 suddenly became diehard "capitalists" after 1989). So they put some "red paint" on their dictatorship and went to great lengths to convince people that the government represented their interests, that they were living in a democracy ("people's democracy" was the phrase) and that they were living in socialism. Basically, the government oligarchy used "socialism" as a cover-up.

The capitalist ruling classes of the West, on the other hand, wanted to kill two birds with one stone. By calling the Soviet Union "communist", they were putting the stigma of Stalin on the real communists. If you were a communist, you were automatically guilty of everything that the stalinists had done. This had the effect of crippling the communist movement. Because of all the horrible crimes of the stalinists, communism was hated and shunned. And this is still going on today.

[Edric O]

Now for the second part of your previous post:

Yes, of course that you can often find some non-capitalist aspects in various capitalist countries. But this "lack of purity" doesn't change anything. Pure or not, it's still capitalism. After all, you have to remember that "capitalism", "socialism", "communism", etc. are very broad terms, and each of them allows for a lot of variation within itself.

[Phage]

Both pure socialism and pure capitalism will never work. What everyone should realize right now if one cannot just straight-jacket something as complex as economics into a nice, simple littler system. What we need is a mixed economy: how mixed is the real question. I say about 50/50, with some meritocratic incentives/programs thrown in.

[Sardauker-Kirov]

I would scream this~

Happy, happy! Joy, joy!

And if there is a corrupt dictator, he would likely be eliminated by the people.

Then why wasn't Stalin killed by the people? How come Castro isn't? Many communist countries in the world hates their leaders, yet, no one has the currage to kill them. Why? Because they can be killed themselves. Their families and friends can die. Just take a look on China, North Korea or Cuba. Your country would become one of those, if it became communist tomorrow.

"Fear is the ultimate ruling tool"

And that's why Stalin was merciless against his people, he wanted them to believe that they are powerless.

While in the reality, the PEOPLE always have might over the country.

If Stalin's people revolted, either his soldiers would join with the rebels which refuse to kill the civilians or the rebels will fight to the last man and continue to resist the regime of Stalin.

[Dude_Doc]

"Fear is the ultimate ruling tool"

And that's why Stalin was merciless against his people, he wanted them to believe that they are powerless.

While in the reality, the PEOPLE always have might over the country.

If Stalin's people revolted, either his soldiers would join with the rebels which refuse to kill the civilians or the rebels will fight to the last man and continue to resist the regime of Stalin.

Just like I said. The people didn't revolt. And a Stalinism-thing would happen to any country who changed to communism today/tomorrow.

And one final note to Dude_Doc: For the past 10 years, China has been a very much capitalist country. If you don't believe me, just go to China and look at the ads for Coca Cola.

Yes, I am aware of that. I am also aware that there are, in fact, both rich and poor scales in China too. If you don't have the money, then you don't get the better part of life there.

My point is that if any country was to change to communism around our time (spanning at least 10 years into the future) would have same results as China, North Korea and Cuba has today.