Communism as a philosophical disease

[Rio de Fuego]

Negating the point of communism, communism pretty much requires industrialization, it's part of the ideology

The USSR never had it either as it wasn't industrialized until after the Bolshevik Revolution.

Indeed, a Socialist or Communist revolution is tailored around an industrialized nation (Specifically turn of the century England, France, or Germany)

[Margno]

*sigh.* The far left doesn't think people are equally clever, we think they're equally important.

[Pandeeria]

Negating the point of communism, communism pretty much requires industrialization, it's part of the ideology

The USSR never had it either as it wasn't industrialized until after the Bolshevik Revolution.

It wasn't industrialized until Stalin came along.

[Korouse]

The USSR never had it either as it wasn't industrialized until after the Bolshevik Revolution.

Indeed, a Socialist or Communist revolution is tailored around an industrialized nation (Specifically turn of the century England, France, or Germany)

But none of those would ever be Socialist around those times, because those totally cool Conservative parties made all that industrialization and ruled with an iron fist so the socialists didn't get militant.

[Venatorium]

Of course its a disease. Communism is a parasite, a bulging tumor. It has killed in excess of millions, be it Stalinism, Leninism, Maoism, etc. It should be eradicated.

[The Serbian Empire]

The USSR never had it either as it wasn't industrialized until after the Bolshevik Revolution.

Indeed, a Socialist or Communist revolution is tailored around an industrialized nation (Specifically turn of the century England, France, or Germany)

Yet the parties still had the gall to call themselves Communist. I think it says everything about the ideology and that is it can't develop a foot hold in fully modernized economies.

[Rio de Fuego]

Indeed, a Socialist or Communist revolution is tailored around an industrialized nation (Specifically turn of the century England, France, or Germany)

But none of those would ever be Socialist around those times, because those totally cool Conservative parties made all that industrialization and ruled with an iron fist so the socialists didn't get militant.

They're was far to much suppression and far to much contentment in the working class to have a functional socialist revolution

[The Serbian Empire]

The USSR never had it either as it wasn't industrialized until after the Bolshevik Revolution.

It wasn't industrialized until Stalin came along.

Some ten to fifteen years later. If anything, it proves that Marxism can spur industrialization, but it almost will never take hold in an industrialized economy without Soviet assistance.

[Rio de Fuego]

Indeed, a Socialist or Communist revolution is tailored around an industrialized nation (Specifically turn of the century England, France, or Germany)

Yet the parties still had the gall to call themselves Communist. I think it says everything about the ideology and that is it can't develop a foot hold in fully modernized economies.

The ideology of communism is a idea for the future, it appeals to nations in poverty but it is ultimately bad for them. Socialism however has a foothold in many nations worldwide and an elected socialist government is the precursor to socialist revolution and then communism

[The Serbian Empire]

But none of those would ever be Socialist around those times, because those totally cool Conservative parties made all that industrialization and ruled with an iron fist so the socialists didn't get militant.

They're was far to much suppression and far to much contentment in the working class to have a functional socialist revolution

Thus the image of Communism and Socialism as a philosophical disease as it only appears as a viable option in agrarian economies and causes industrialization.

[Master Shake]

Of course its a disease. Communism is a parasite, a bulging tumor. It has killed in excess of millions, be it Stalinism, Leninism, Maoism, etc. It should be eradicated.

Basically burn all communist literature...

[Pandeeria]

It wasn't industrialized until Stalin came along.

Some ten to fifteen years later. If anything, it proves that Marxism can spur industrialization, but it almost will never take hold in an industrialized economy without Soviet assistance.

True, but again, what caused a lot of deaths was Stalin's insanely rapid industrialization.

While Stalin was a dick of epic proportions, he did a lot for the Union. For all intents and purposes, Stalin is the one that turned it into the military and industrial superpower that could compete with the US. I credit Stalin as the man who single handily push the USSR to be a superpower.

[Geilinor]

The USSR never had it either as it wasn't industrialized until after the Bolshevik Revolution.

Indeed, a Socialist or Communist revolution is tailored around an industrialized nation (Specifically turn of the century England, France, or Germany)

Once you become that industrialized, the appeal of a revolution dies and the workers turn to democratic socialist and social democratic parties.

[Pandeeria]

Indeed, a Socialist or Communist revolution is tailored around an industrialized nation (Specifically turn of the century England, France, or Germany)

Once you become that industrialized, the appeal of a revolution dies and the workers turn to democratic socialist and social democratic parties.

That's... wow, I actually agree a lot with that.

[The Serbian Empire]

Yet the parties still had the gall to call themselves Communist. I think it says everything about the ideology and that is it can't develop a foot hold in fully modernized economies.

The ideology of communism is a idea for the future, it appeals to nations in poverty but it is ultimately bad for them. Socialism however has a foothold in many nations worldwide and an elected socialist government is the precursor to socialist revolution and then communism

Except that these elected "socialists" are little more than economic centrists who practice mixed economies are best economies and will never be fully socialist or capitalist.

[Geilinor]

Some ten to fifteen years later. If anything, it proves that Marxism can spur industrialization, but it almost will never take hold in an industrialized economy without Soviet assistance.

While Stalin was a dick of epic proportions, he did a lot for the Union. For all intents and purposes, Stalin is the one that turned it into the military and industrial superpower that could compete with the US. I credit Stalin as the man who single handily push the USSR to be a superpower.

As much as I hate Stalin, I do have to give him that much credit. He did infinitely times more than Maoism did.

[Korouse]

Yet the parties still had the gall to call themselves Communist. I think it says everything about the ideology and that is it can't develop a foot hold in fully modernized economies.

The ideology of communism is a idea for the future, it appeals to nations in poverty but it is ultimately bad for them. Socialism however has a foothold in many nations worldwide and an elected socialist government is the precursor to socialist revolution and then communism

So what you're saying is, Socialists party are in it to overthrow the existing government? Very hostile sounding.

[Distruzio]

In the 1950's, during the Red Scare in America, many 'specialists' branded communism as a disease. Of course, we're going to ignore what they said because it was just political propaganda. But philosophically and biologically speaking, could they be correct?

One of the tenets of communism is that all humans are equal, but that's biologically and factually incorrect. We could say otherwise: humans are inherently unequal. Some are smarter, some are richer, that's the way it is and it's always been. Since communism ignores these basic principles, I choose to brand it as "philosophical disease", a disorder of philosophical structure. After all, aren't philosophers supposed supposed to use logic and scientific facts to build their ideologies? The only way to 'cure' communism is through education of the masses. It's the only way to eradicate this illogical ideology that was responsible for the deaths of literally milions of people from earth.

Do you agree with me? Why/Why not? In your opinion, how do we cure communism?

Being that the McCarthy Era and subsequent Tea Party GOP fearmongering has perverted American comprehension of terms you are, colloquially, correct. But the venom of your critique loses its potency once we actually define the terms you use. You have, no doubt, found communists and those not altogether hostile to communism pointing out that "communism" is stateless and hierarchiless and, therefore, cannot be held liable for the assertions you make as "communism" without a State and without hierarchy establishes a social and economic equality among individuals. In this way, everyone is individually unique although they exist within an idealized and equalized society. These posters are correct. Being correct, they expose a fundamental flaw in your reasoning - you fail to define your terms precisely and, in doing so, fail to actually say anything of value about communism.

I do, however, feel that it is anti-individual and is, therefore, anti-human. It is anti-human in that it posits economic and social egalitarianism in such a grotesque manner that individuals are alienated from all organic identity. What I mean is that communism and its philosophical linchpin, horizontal collectivism, alienates the human individual from human society by undermining the "hierarchical" nature of humanity. Horizontal collectivism and it's economic and social derivatives challenges vertical collectivism and individualism - both of which are historic characterizations of human civilization and necessary for the perpetuity of human society.

Therefore, communism or, rather more accurately, horizontal collectivism, isn't a "philosophical" disease. It's a blight. An actual and very real threat to our survival.

[The New Sea Territory]

Of course its a disease. Communism is a parasite, a bulging tumor. It has killed in excess of millions, be it Stalinism, Leninism, Maoism, etc. It should be eradicated.

Communism never killed anybody. The systems you describe are means of achieving communism.

[Rio de Fuego]

The ideology of communism is a idea for the future, it appeals to nations in poverty but it is ultimately bad for them. Socialism however has a foothold in many nations worldwide and an elected socialist government is the precursor to socialist revolution and then communism

Except that these elected "socialists" are little more than economic centrists who practice mixed economies are best economies and will never be fully socialist or capitalist.

I disagree socialism is alive and well worldwide, we surely won't see a revolution in our time, but the far left is still kicking

[Geilinor]

In the 1950's, during the Red Scare in America, many 'specialists' branded communism as a disease. Of course, we're going to ignore what they said because it was just political propaganda. But philosophically and biologically speaking, could they be correct?

One of the tenets of communism is that all humans are equal, but that's biologically and factually incorrect. We could say otherwise: humans are inherently unequal. Some are smarter, some are richer, that's the way it is and it's always been. Since communism ignores these basic principles, I choose to brand it as "philosophical disease", a disorder of philosophical structure. After all, aren't philosophers supposed supposed to use logic and scientific facts to build their ideologies? The only way to 'cure' communism is through education of the masses. It's the only way to eradicate this illogical ideology that was responsible for the deaths of literally milions of people from earth.

Do you agree with me? Why/Why not? In your opinion, how do we cure communism?

I do, however, feel that it is anti-individual and is, therefore, anti-human. It is anti-human in that it posits economic and social egalitarianism in such a grotesque manner that individuals are alienated from all organic identity. What I mean is that communism and its philosophical linchpin, horizontal collectivism, alienates the human individual from human society by undermining the "hierarchical" nature of humanity. Horizontal collectivism and it's economic and social derivatives challenges vertical collectivism and individualism - both of which are characterizations of human civilization and necessary for the perpetuity of human society.

That's the point of communism. They oppose the organization of a state.

[The Serbian Empire]

The ideology of communism is a idea for the future, it appeals to nations in poverty but it is ultimately bad for them. Socialism however has a foothold in many nations worldwide and an elected socialist government is the precursor to socialist revolution and then communism

So what you're saying is, Socialists party are in it to overthrow the existing government? Very hostile sounding.

At least that is what a hardline communist would support. However, that's why Communists were turned into a scapegoat for 1920s era bombings and formed Red Scares in the 1950s.

[Korouse]

Of course its a disease. Communism is a parasite, a bulging tumor. It has killed in excess of millions, be it Stalinism, Leninism, Maoism, etc. It should be eradicated.

Communism never killed anybody. The systems you describe are means of achieving communism.

Bloody tyrannical governments made to transition into an anarchic society...

Seems kinda stupid.

[Pandeeria]

Except that these elected "socialists" are little more than economic centrists who practice mixed economies are best economies and will never be fully socialist or capitalist.

I disagree socialism is alive and well worldwide, we surely won't see a revolution in our time, but the far left is still kicking

No, it's not. The far left and far right are dead. Right now it's the time for centre-left and moderate right.

Socialism doesn't exist anymore, except if you count North Korea, but they're State-Socialists on spoiled steroids and meth.

[-Arabiyah-]

I wouldn't say it's disease more like a political religion/cult of personality. In a way it functions like a religion at times.