Communism as a philosophical disease

[Rio de Fuego]

A) It actually helped rip apart the USSR
B) Capitalism did not kill communism, it is still alive
C) The embargo hurts Cuba immensely
D) USSR and Cuba are Socialistic which is not the same as comunism

Socialism is the first stage of Communism though. It morphed into state capitalism as there is no way to compete against capitalistic societies without selling goods on a global scale.

A very, very, very long first 4th stage. The point is not to compete but to provide for the people of the nation, a lack of competition is kind of the point

[Rio de Fuego]

A very Randian view on socialism

Unity until death!

Drown the parasitic leeches!

[The Serbian Empire]

Socialism is the first stage of Communism though. It morphed into state capitalism as there is no way to compete against capitalistic societies without selling goods on a global scale.

A very, very, very long first stage. The point is not to compete but to provide for the people of the nation, a lack of competition is kind of the point

However, such a government would collapse into poverty if it didn't compete.

[Rio de Fuego]

A very, very, very long first stage. The point is not to compete but to provide for the people of the nation, a lack of competition is kind of the point

However, such a government would collapse into poverty if it didn't compete.

Are we referring to communism or socialism here?

[Pandeeria]

It actually really reminds me of Oceania from 1984. Original purpose of English Socialism (INGSOC) was to push forward, but the Party said "fuck that" and just started ruling forever, not for the sake of progress, but for the sake of power.

A very Randian view on socialism

No, not of socialism. Of the USSR.

I wasn't talking socialism in that posts. I don't like socialism nor communism, but I wasn't addressing true socialism in that post. I was addressing the failure that was the USSR I'm terms of progress to the communist ideal.

[Rio de Fuego]

A very Randian view on socialism

No, not of socialism. Of the USSR.

Randian none the less

[The Serbian Empire]

However, such a government would collapse into poverty if it didn't compete.

Are we referring to communism or socialism here?

Both in actuality as Communism can only work if no country has capitalism, One capitalist will ruin the whole system. Socialism trying to assure a quality of life will demand some form of capitalism if only from selling goods beyond the borders.

[Pandeeria]

No, not of socialism. Of the USSR.

Randian none the less

No, realistic.

The USSR by the 70's wasn't trying to achieve the communist dream. They were by the 1970's trying to achieve power for the sake of power, like the Party in 1984.

To argue that the USSR was still trying to achieve communism by the late 70's is foolish and fan boyish, not Randian.

[Rio de Fuego]

Are we referring to communism or socialism here?

Both in actuality as Communism can only work if no country has capitalism, One capitalist will ruin the whole system. Socialism trying to assure a quality of life will demand some form of capitalism if only from selling goods beyond the borders.

Socialism doesn't require full blown anti-capitalism some degree of free market is required to keep everything payed for.

Communism only works with no capitalism, it's requires worldwide ideological cooperation for top effectiveness. A capitalist won't ruin the whole system as an economy would pretty much not exist, that capitalist can try running a business but without currency not sure how it would cork

[Rio de Fuego]

Randian none the less

No, realistic.

The USSR by the 70's wasn't trying to achieve the communist dream. They were by the 1970's trying to achieve power for the sake of power, like the Party on 1984.

To argue that the USSR was still trying to achieve communism by the late 70's is foolish and fan boyish.

You misunderstand I don't disagree, the USSR though originally having noble goals quickly devolved into an imperialist staying in power machine

[The Serbian Empire]

Both in actuality as Communism can only work if no country has capitalism, One capitalist will ruin the whole system. Socialism trying to assure a quality of life will demand some form of capitalism if only from selling goods beyond the borders.

Socialism doesn't require full blown anti-capitalism some degree of free market is required to keep everything payed for.

Communism only works with no capitalism, it's requires worldwide ideological cooperation for top effectiveness. A capitalist won't ruin the whole system as an economy would pretty much not exist, that capitalist can try running a business but without currency not sure how it would cork

The problem is the party in the USSR wasn't the Socialist Party, but the Communist Party.

[Pandeeria]

No, realistic.

The USSR by the 70's wasn't trying to achieve the communist dream. They were by the 1970's trying to achieve power for the sake of power, like the Party on 1984.

To argue that the USSR was still trying to achieve communism by the late 70's is foolish and fan boyish.

You misunderstand I don't disagree, the USSR though originally having noble goals quickly devolved into an imperialist staying in power machine

Oh, ok. Sorry about that.

[Rio de Fuego]

Socialism doesn't require full blown anti-capitalism some degree of free market is required to keep everything payed for.

Communism only works with no capitalism, it's requires worldwide ideological cooperation for top effectiveness. A capitalist won't ruin the whole system as an economy would pretty much not exist, that capitalist can try running a business but without currency not sure how it would cork

The problem is the party in the USSR wasn't the Socialist Party, but the Communist Party.

Yes the problem does arrise when one jumps from a Pre-industrial Economy based on what was essentially slavery to the final form of the communist transition

[New Acardia]

Communist only brings misery to the peoples they govern .

[Rio de Fuego]

Communist only brings misery to the peoples they govern .

I'll just ignore you, because arguing would just be too much "Fun"

[The Serbian Empire]

The problem is the party in the USSR wasn't the Socialist Party, but the Communist Party.

Yes the problem does arrise when one jumps from a Pre-industrial Economy based on what was essentially slavery to the final form of the communist transition

It would work even less impressively in an industrial economy as it never took off outside of Eastern Europe, Asia, and Somalia.

[Master Shake]

Both in actuality as Communism can only work if no country has capitalism, One capitalist will ruin the whole system. Socialism trying to assure a quality of life will demand some form of capitalism if only from selling goods beyond the borders.

Socialism doesn't require full blown anti-capitalism some degree of free market is required to keep everything payed for.

Communism only works with no capitalism, it's requires worldwide ideological cooperation for top effectiveness. A capitalist won't ruin the whole system as an economy would pretty much not exist, that capitalist can try running a business but without currency not sure how it would cork

Why did the USSR and other "communist" nations still use currency then?

Basically the World Wide Revolution is a must for true communism to blossom. With capitalists around you basically have a dictatorship telling its people to wait for the revolution and to not leave the nation (East Germany comes to mind)....

[Master Shake]

Communist only brings misery to the peoples they govern .

There is a reason so many communist satellites had Revolutions and tried to break away from the USSR....

[New Acardia]

However, such a government would collapse into poverty if it didn't compete.

Are we referring to communism or socialism here?

Both turn the nations they govern in to shit holes .

[Rio de Fuego]

Yes the problem does arrise when one jumps from a Pre-industrial Economy based on what was essentially slavery to the final form of the communist transition

It would work even less impressively in an industrial economy as it never took off outside of Eastern Europe, Asia, and Somalia.

Well firstly you the workers must become alienated by the products the produce (Fairly hard in a service based post-industrial economy) then socialism for hundreds of years then communism, you should never go from capitalism to communism unless you want failure

[Rio de Fuego]

Are we referring to communism or socialism here?

Both turn the nations they govern in to shit holes .

Sweden, Norway, Finland, all well known as hell holes

[The Serbian Empire]

Both turn the nations they govern in to shit holes .

Sweden, Norway, Finland, all well known as hell holes

Those places have enough capitalism to make Karl Marx turn in his grave like a turbine at Chernobyl.

[Doitsu-san]

Sweden, Norway, Finland, all well known as hell holes

Those places have enough capitalism to make Karl Marx turn in his grave like a turbine at Chernobyl.

Agreed. The Nordic Model is capitalism with socialistic elements. It is very far from socialism, with Nordic states having some of the freest trade anywhere.

[Rio de Fuego]

Sweden, Norway, Finland, all well known as hell holes

Those places have enough capitalism to make Karl Marx turn in his grave like a turbine at Chernobyl.

2 things

1)- "Karl Marx turn in his grave like a turbine at Chernobyl" Is very amusing
2)- They're socialist enough to be considered as such

[The Serbian Empire]

Those places have enough capitalism to make Karl Marx turn in his grave like a turbine at Chernobyl.

Agreed. The Nordic Model is capitalism with socialistic elements. It is very far from socialism, with Nordic states having some of the freest trade anywhere.

Indeed, especially Denmark which is freer than the US which is supposedly the posterboy of Capitalism is.