Communism v Capitalism

[Settrah]

Really? In name? Communist in NAME only? I...do...I need a break. Seriously. Can somebody spot me? How on earth can you say that when they did everything by the communist book?!

It's not wise to click on a thread titled "Communism v Capitalism" and not have a slight clue as to what Communism is.

In fairness, people feel qualified to label people as Fascists, without understanding what Fascism is.

Context: "Stalinism and Maoism were communism in name only. They were essentially fascism in another form."

Communism and Fascism are both going to fall into this.

[Pandeeria]

It's not wise to click on a thread titled "Communism v Capitalism" and not have a slight clue as to what Communism is.

In fairness, people feel qualified to label people as Fascists, without understanding what Fascism is.

Context: "Stalinism and Maoism were communism in name only. They were essentially fascism in another form."

Communism and Fascism are both going to fall into this.

I dislike the whole Stalinism/Maoism = Fascism, or the somewhat thrown around term "Red Fascism", but it's tolerable. Stalinist Russia promoted Nationalism, a strong totalitarian state, Xenophobia, and arguably practiced a type of Imperialism what with their Eastern Bloc puppets.

While it's technically incorrect to equate this with Fascism, it's still understandable how someone can do this. On the other hand, to equate a Stateless, moneyless, classless society (Communism) to a super-powerful state, a rigid class system dominated by the Party, and with the existence of currency is not just intolerable, it's down right hilariously poor. It's bad.

[Mattopilos]

In fairness, people feel qualified to label people as Fascists, without understanding what Fascism is.

Context: "Stalinism and Maoism were communism in name only. They were essentially fascism in another form."

Communism and Fascism are both going to fall into this.

I dislike the whole Stalinism/Maoism = Fascism, or the somewhat thrown around term "Red Fascism", but it's tolerable. Stalinist Russia promoted Nationalism, a strong totalitarian state, Xenophobia, and arguably practiced a type of Imperialism what with their Eastern Bloc puppets.

While it's technically incorrect to equate this with Fascism, it's still understandable how someone can do this. On the other hand, to equate a Stateless, moneyless, classless society (Communism) to a super-powerful state, a rigid class system dominated by the Party, and with the existence of currency is not just intolerable, it's down right hilariously poor. It's bad.

He would be referring to my comment. As a communist myself, I assure you I was not referring the actual theory of communism to the theory of fascism, but rather the way Stalinism and Maoism functioned in a strongly nationalist way. Oh, and some things were very not communist in those two ideologies... the state owned the means of production.

[Parrona]

Capitalism makes the rich richer and the poor poorer
But for socialism. ...........The state pretends to pay us so we pretend to work

[Mattopilos]

Capitalism makes the rich richer and the poor poorer
But for socialism. ...........The state pretends to pay us so we pretend to work

That sounds like social democracy.

[Greater Pareidolia]

Capitalism makes the rich richer and the poor poorer
But for socialism. ...........The state pretends to pay us so we pretend to work

The wrong kind of capitalism does, yes.

[PaNTuXIa]

Capitalism makes the rich richer and the poor poorer
But for socialism. ...........The state pretends to pay us so we pretend to work

wat

That sounds more like fascism.

[Mattopilos]

Capitalism makes the rich richer and the poor poorer
But for socialism. ...........The state pretends to pay us so we pretend to work

The wrong kind of capitalism does, yes.

Capitalism thrives on hierarchy, so... capitalism kinda does that anyway.

[Conscentia]

Capitalism makes the rich richer and the poor poorer
But for socialism. ...........The state pretends to pay us so we pretend to work

wat
That sounds more like fascism.

They're making a reference to a Soviet-era joke.

[Settrah]

An ideal capitalism would keep hierarchy, but make everyone richer.

[Mattopilos]

An ideal capitalism would keep hierarchy, but make everyone richer.

The issue is the gap usually gets larger, not smaller. If there were little difference between the classes, then unrest and poverty would be lowered, but then higher classes couldn't exploit them as well.

[Pandeeria]

An ideal capitalism would keep hierarchy, but make everyone richer.

This is an empty phrase; an empty statement.

Every economic system has over time improved the life of it's inhabitants. The serfs and peasants were better off to their hungry slave ancestors in the ancient times, and like wise the average worker today is better off than their feudal counterparts.

It's like saying "An ideal feudalism would keep hierarchy, but make everyone richer" or "an ancient slave state would keep hierarchy, but make everyone richer". You can insert any economic system you desire so as long as said system has a class proponent to it.

[Kubra]

An ideal capitalism would keep hierarchy, but make everyone richer.

an ideal communism would make alcohol a basic human right, available right beside public water fountains

[Pandeeria]

An ideal capitalism would keep hierarchy, but make everyone richer.

an ideal communism would make alcohol a basic human right, available right beside public water fountains

Some Communists would argue that alcohol stifles Class Consciousness, revolutionary fervor, and generally is just bad. After all, why bother trying to make the essential system any better when you can just get drunk or high or have a lot of sex instead to take your mind off of things?

[Kubra]

an ideal communism would make alcohol a basic human right, available right beside public water fountains

Some Communists would argue that alcohol stifles Class Consciousness, revolutionary fervor, and generally is just bad. After all, why bother trying to make the essential system any better when you can just get drunk or high or have a lot of sex instead to take your mind off of things?

and instead of a shot they'll get shot
Those are fun things and an ideal system will facilitate doing those things
because they are fun

[Pandeeria]

Some Communists would argue that alcohol stifles Class Consciousness, revolutionary fervor, and generally is just bad. After all, why bother trying to make the essential system any better when you can just get drunk or high or have a lot of sex instead to take your mind off of things?

and instead of a shot they'll get shot
Those are fun things and an ideal system will facilitate doing those things
because they are fun

I agree.

[Proctopeo]

What still interests me is how "true capitalism", as far as I'm aware, has not been actually achieved. Was there a nation where the state owned no trade and no industry, and it was entirely privatized? I've never heard of one. For example, the USA has frequent public ownership of trade and industry, but some things are owned by the state, although some are a little strange. Examples of these federal corporations include the Commodity Credit Corporation, the Federal Prison Industries, and the Tennessee Valley Authority.

Of course, this shows a problem (or, at least, what I perceive to be a problem) in excluding systems because they aren't "truly" what they're said to be. What matters more, as I see it, is presentation. That is, what does a system present itself as being, regardless of what it could be argued to be instead? Obviously, we shouldn't ignore what it could be instead, but instead compare presentation to how it's perceived. Perception is, of course, non-objective.

[Mattopilos]

What still interests me is how "true capitalism", as far as I'm aware, has not been actually achieved. Was there a nation where the state owned no trade and no industry, and it was entirely privatized? I've never heard of one. For example, the USA has frequent public ownership of trade and industry, but some things are owned by the state, although some are a little strange. Examples of these federal corporations include the Commodity Credit Corporation, the Federal Prison Industries, and the Tennessee Valley Authority.

Of course, this shows a problem (or, at least, what I perceive to be a problem) in excluding systems because they aren't "truly" what they're said to be. What matters more, as I see it, is presentation. That is, what does a system present itself as being, regardless of what it could be argued to be instead? Obviously, we shouldn't ignore what it could be instead, but instead compare presentation to how it's perceived. Perception is, of course, non-objective.

Which is where I have issue with the "But communism cannot be achieved!". Well, capitalism hasn't either.

[Zombie Swarms]

Well, pure capitalism and communism never existed, and each society interpreted them differently.
The purpose of communism in time, when Marx wrote a ''Manifesto',' was actually very good- worker life conditions were just miserably- low wage, a lot of working hours, horrible home condition, etc.

Same with true capitalism (Who only only exist in theory, as i said before, each society developed their own viewpoint about capitalism).

And then came a October revolution and ruined it all...

Personally, i dislike Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, Mengistu Haile Mariam, and other ''communists''. Ho Chi Minh is my personally favorite.

And if communism was ruined like that, then it's no surprise, that many fought against it. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-communist_resistance

May all Forest Brothers rest in peace.

P.S. I am centrist myself, a little bit left and authoritarian. Personally, capitalism and communism are not in my priority- My priority is the best for my motherland (Patriotism also). I would like left- constitutional monarchy. They are my ideals, that's it.

[Mattopilos]

Well, pure capitalism and communism never existed, and each society interpreted them differently.
The purpose of communism in time, when Marx wrote a ''Manifesto',' was actually very good- worker life conditions were just miserably- low wage, a lot of working hours, horrible home condition, etc.

Same with true capitalism (Who only only exist in theory, as i said before, each society developed their own viewpoint about capitalism).

And then came a October revolution and ruined it all...

Personally, i dislike Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, Mengistu Haile Mariam, and other ''communists''. Ho Chi Minh is my personally favorite.

And if communism was ruined like that, then it's no surprise, that many fought against it. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-communist_resistance

May all Forest Brothers rest in peace.

P.S. I am centrist myself, a little bit left and authoritarian. Personally, capitalism and communism are not in my priority- My priority is the best for my motherland (Patriotism also). I would like left- constitutional monarchy. They are my ideals, that's it.

I can tell you right now, few modern communists support those that you listed (and those that do are referred to as 'tankies'). Many would point out they lack the credentials to even call themselves communists, given state-control of the means of production and the fact classes still existed (the government for one), and the fact a dictator was the ruler. I like to refer to such systems as 'far-left authoritarian' for such reasons.

[Zombie Swarms]

Well, pure capitalism and communism never existed, and each society interpreted them differently.
The purpose of communism in time, when Marx wrote a ''Manifesto',' was actually very good- worker life conditions were just miserably- low wage, a lot of working hours, horrible home condition, etc.

Same with true capitalism (Who only only exist in theory, as i said before, each society developed their own viewpoint about capitalism).

And then came a October revolution and ruined it all...

Personally, i dislike Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, Mengistu Haile Mariam, and other ''communists''. Ho Chi Minh is my personally favorite.

And if communism was ruined like that, then it's no surprise, that many fought against it. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-communist_resistance

May all Forest Brothers rest in peace.

P.S. I am centrist myself, a little bit left and authoritarian. Personally, capitalism and communism are not in my priority- My priority is the best for my motherland (Patriotism also). I would like left- constitutional monarchy. They are my ideals, that's it.

I can tell you right now, few modern communists support those that you listed (and those that do are referred to as 'tankies'). Many would point out they lack the credentials to even call themselves communists, given state-control of the means of production and the fact classes still existed (the government for one), and the fact a dictator was the ruler. I like to refer to such systems as 'far-left authoritarian' for such reasons.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_compass Well, i am not sure, if is the best site, but that's it.
http://www.gotoquiz.com/politics/politi ... -quiz.html This quiz is actually helpful. I found out that i am centrist by that quiz.

Jup, i personally don't defend those Stalinists and Maoists, i actually hate them. Stalin ruined my country.

But actually we can combine capitalism and communism together, and maybe hybrid will really work.

P.S. What about link, what i gave you in previous post?
P.S.S I wished, that there wouldn't break out flame wars. They are very boring.

[Zombie Swarms]

Well, pure capitalism and communism never existed, and each society interpreted them differently.
The purpose of communism in time, when Marx wrote a ''Manifesto',' was actually very good- worker life conditions were just miserably- low wage, a lot of working hours, horrible home condition, etc.

Same with true capitalism (Who only only exist in theory, as i said before, each society developed their own viewpoint about capitalism).

And then came a October revolution and ruined it all...

Personally, i dislike Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, Mengistu Haile Mariam, and other ''communists''. Ho Chi Minh is my personally favorite.

And if communism was ruined like that, then it's no surprise, that many fought against it. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-communist_resistance

May all Forest Brothers rest in peace.

P.S. I am centrist myself, a little bit left and authoritarian. Personally, capitalism and communism are not in my priority- My priority is the best for my motherland (Patriotism also). I would like left- constitutional monarchy. They are my ideals, that's it.

I can tell you right now, few modern communists support those that you listed (and those that do are referred to as 'tankies'). Many would point out they lack the credentials to even call themselves communists, given state-control of the means of production and the fact classes still existed (the government for one), and the fact a dictator was the ruler. I like to refer to such systems as 'far-left authoritarian' for such reasons.

What i wanted to precise about my idea: left-constitutional monarchy. It's practically a mix from communism, capitalism, monarchy (constitutional) and patriotism. (Not nationalism- don't mix them together). For example: Left Kingdom of Romania. (Romanians, please don't be angry, it's just a example)

[Manchuria]

honestly though what's so great about monarchy

[Zombie Swarms]

honestly though what's so great about monarchy

Sometimes politicians are corrupted or just a stealing out country. It would be better, if king (constitutional) ruled the country with parliament. He wouldn't be just a representative figure, but would have power too, but not too much. And if he went's crazy, people and others have the rights to change the leader.

[Settrah]

honestly though what's so great about monarchy

Tourism, charity and international relations. Apparently.

Personally I think they're outdated and need to go. But I gather this is why people flock to them.