Capitalism vs. Communism

[Camelza]

At least I understand that you simply can't call a communist economy a system of free market enterprise LOL. You on the other hand, seem to believe in communist free enterprise.

And yet you've yet to prove anything in this poor excuse of a rebuttal. You've only proved that you either a) cannot read or b) choose to ignore my posts to that you can remain in your cage of circular logic.

haven't you realised it yet?

[4years]

Communism is the worst aberration ever appeared in the face of Earth. Well it is clear you don't understand communism.

Stalin's Purge; the repression of religion and spirituality; the deplorable satanic materialism; the invasions of Cecoslovachia, Hungary and Afghanistan are only few examples of what communism was for humanity. How many times do I have to say that the USSR was not communist? Communism: a classless, moneyless, stateless soceity where worker's control the means of production. The USSR fails to meet all of the requirements for being communist.

For what concerne the economic policy, communism is just made for those who don't want to work and want the government protecting their ass while they are wasting their times singing the Internationale and shouting like dogs at the strikes. Again, there is no goverment in communism and no money. Therefore, since the object of a strike is to get money wether in salary increases or benifits thre would be no reason to strike in communism and a nonexistent goverment is incable of protecting anyone.

Why are there so many people with misconceptions about communism?

[4years]

The Illuminati and COMMUNISM!

by Ray Novosel
[align=]-Snip-[/align]
http://www.google.it/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=& ... IwvCDhTjLA

I don't even need to refute this. The failings are self evident.

[Of the Free Socialist Territories]

The Illuminati and COMMUNISM!

by Ray Novosel
[align=]-Snip-[/align]
http://www.google.it/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=& ... IwvCDhTjLA

I don't even need to refute this. The failings are self evident.

The most evident failure is that, at the page's bottom, it lists jesusissaviour.com and conspiracy world.com.

That, and it mentions the Illuminati. It makes you weep, doesn't it?

[Samantha Smith]

Not this thread again...

[Sociobiology]

People need to understand that there IS NO GOVERNMENT in a true communist state.

then communism is limited to societies of 150 individuals or less.

INDIVIDUALS ARE PAID DEPENDING ON THEIR OCCUPATION
(while generally everyone is paid the same more or less, important members of society such as heart surgeons are paid extra for their precise art and training)

and your pay is determined by whom?

[Trotskylvania]

People need to understand that there IS NO GOVERNMENT in a true communist state.

then communism is limited to societies of 150 individuals or less.

I'm afraid he is sadly mistaken about communism. Communism has no state. There is still something akin to government, in the form of a minimally coercive, democratic and federal common administration.

INDIVIDUALS ARE PAID DEPENDING ON THEIR OCCUPATION
(while generally everyone is paid the same more or less, important members of society such as heart surgeons are paid extra for their precise art and training)

and your pay is determined by whom?

Again, he is incorrect, since he is talking about the higher stage of communism. There is no such thing as pay in the higher stage of communism. For one, money doesn't exist. Furthermore, goods are distributed to fulfill people's physical and creative needs. Finally, labor has been transformed by the higher productive forces from an onerous, alienating burden that is done as a means to an end to the highest calling of life. Labor is a means of free sociability and creative expression, and due to the level of abundance provided by the development of technology and the orderly use of that technology, society is structured to make even less desirable, socially necessary labor not onerous.

[Socialdemokraterne]

So every attempt to implement "true communism" has ended horribly, and the only examples that communist really point to, as a user in this thread has said are subnation states that have been a tiny bleep on the radar and have made no substantial(if any) contribution to human progress or increasing the standard of living.

By the Communists own admission, a true communist state has never existed, and if a true communist state has never existed there is no evidence to suggest that it would actually work, thus communism is faith-based. Communism being faith-based, is no better than Christianity or any other religion.

Based on this logic alone, though, one can correctly assume that Communism is inherently flawed and impractical.

You do understand that your logic could be lobbed right back at you in order to attack "true free markets"? Here, I'll show you:

So every attempt to implement "true free markets" has ended horribly, and the only examples that laissez-faire advocates can really point to, as a user in this thread has said are subnation states that have been a tiny bleep on the radar and have made no substantial(if any) contribution to human progress or increasing the standard of living.

By the their own admission, a "true" free market has never existed, and if a "true" free market has never existed there is no evidence to suggest that it would actually work, thus free markets are faith-based. Free markets being faith-based, they're no better than Christianity or any other religion.

Based on this logic alone, though, one can correctly assume that free markets are inherently flawed and impractical.

The strike is because there has never, ever been an example of a free market. And before you get all huffy about the part I highlighted in red, no. The free market does not get to claim credit for the accomplishments of capitalist systems which did not feature "truly" free markets. If you try, I'll start pointing to social capitalist systems and saying they're successes for socialism. That would have the exact same level of intellectual honesty: none.

The plain truth is that while it's reasonable to hypothesize that things which have never existed will never exist, you can't say that methods to create something which has previously never existed (like free markets or socialist societies) wouldn't work before the methods are even tried. You can hypothesize that the methods will fail (you could get away with saying that Democratic Socialism will fail as a hypothesis), but you can't say this as a matter of fact until the experiment has been run repeatedly. And no, not all methods of implementation of socialism have been attempted nor are they similar enough to Marxism-Leninism and such to project these attempts' results.

Anyone with even an elementary understanding of human nature/biology as well as a shred of common sense knows that the very definition goes against human nature. Class is natural occurrence, and the development of money and private property made trade easier as well as allowed wealth to accumulate. Considering the advantages of capitalism in regards to human nature, no wonder communist governments are known for their draconian laws, tough punishments and horrible living conditions. As human nature will naturally rebel, so persistent will the Government become in pursuit of its idealistic goals that it will natural expand to suppress the very people it ironically sought to free.

Substantiate your claims about human nature or surrender them. Remember, in order for something to be a part of human nature it must be an omnipresent trait, you can't have a single human that doesn't feature that characteristic. Oh, and let's hear your biology angle completely played out since it has a much better chance of becoming a somewhat substantive argument than appeals to "human nature". You are perhaps going to claim that no organism ever acts in a manner that won't somehow increase its selective fitness as an individual?

Let's start the biology game with two words: drunk driving.

In laymen terms Communism is immoral, idiotic and as faith-based as religion.

All I've seen so far is bad logic and unsubstantiated claims. Move to the biology angle, it's your last hope.

[PETAland]

History has shown that a capitalist economy is more efficient than a communist one, and currently we see Europe taking a very socialist approach (and socialism is very similar to communism). Currently, European countries are starting to fail and default, and only Germany has been left unscathed by this approach, but who knows when that will change?

[Samantha Smith]

History has shown that a capitalist economy is more efficient than a communist one, and currently we see Europe taking a very socialist approach (and socialism is very similar to communism). Currently, European countries are starting to fail and default, and only Germany has been left unscathed by this approach, but who knows when that will change?

*cough* and America is/was not?

[Of the Free Socialist Territories]

History has shown that a capitalist economy is more efficient than a communist one,

Where?

and currently we see Europe taking a very socialist approach

No, we don't, we see it taking a less neo-liberal approach than America.

(and socialism is very similar to communism).

Depends what form of socialism you're talking about.

Currently, European countries are starting to fail and default, and only Germany has been left unscathed by this approach, but who knows when that will change?

Hence capitalism is failing. Hence socialism.

[Mavorpen]

History has shown that a capitalist economy is more efficient than a communist one, and currently we see Europe taking a very socialist approach (and socialism is very similar to communism). Currently, European countries are starting to fail and default, and only Germany has been left unscathed by this approach, but who knows when that will change?

Europe isn't taking a "very socialist approach." That's why they're fucked up.

[The Remote Islands]

If communism is so great, how come all the threads about communism here on NSG haven't been collectivized into a handful (or less) of super-threads? Even Stalin could pull that off.

[Of the Free Socialist Territories]

If communism is so great, how come all the threads about communism here on NSG haven't been collectivized into a handful (or less) of super-threads? Even Stalin could pull that off.

Stalin wasn't a communist.

[Mavorpen]

If communism is so great, how come all the threads about communism here on NSG haven't been collectivized into a handful (or less) of super-threads? Even Stalin could pull that off.

Stalin wasn't a communist.

He advocated for communism. Thus, he was a communist. Doesn't mean he was a very smart one.

[Sociobiology]

History has shown that a capitalist economy is more efficient than a communist one, and a mixed economy is far better than either.

fixed

[Of the Free Socialist Territories]

Stalin wasn't a communist.

He advocated for communism. Thus, he was a communist. Doesn't mean he was a very smart one.

How did Stalin advocate for communism?

History has shown that a capitalist economy is more efficient than a communist one, and a mixed economy is far better than either.

fixed

Europe and America's economies are mixed. They're broken.

[Socialdemokraterne]

Europe isn't taking a "very socialist approach." That's why they're fucked up.

I don't really know about that, Mav. I thought the current financial crisis in the Eurozone had more to do with the poor performance of several governments' bonds and the erosion of the economies of Greece and (to a somewhat lesser, but still significant extent) Italy. Handing control of the means of production to workers doesn't really get at that unless I'm missing something.

[Mavorpen]

He advocated for communism. Thus, he was a communist. Doesn't mean he was a very smart one.

How did Stalin advocate for communism?

Here.

[The American Commune]

The free market/true capitalism is the best system. It encourages self-efficiency and lack of reliance on others.

Lack or reliance on others is a bad thing. We need to be interdependent to succeed.

[Samantha Smith]

The free market/true capitalism is the best system. It encourages self-efficiency and lack of reliance on others.

Haha, you were sarcastic, right?


....right?

[Mavorpen]

Europe isn't taking a "very socialist approach." That's why they're fucked up.

I don't really know about that, Mav. I thought the current financial crisis in the Eurozone had more to do with the poor performance of several governments' bonds and the erosion of the economies of Greece and (to a somewhat lesser, but still significant extent) Italy. Handing control of the means of production to workers doesn't really get at that unless I'm missing something.

I was imitating his erroneous conclusion.

[Socialdemokraterne]

I don't really know about that, Mav. I thought the current financial crisis in the Eurozone had more to do with the poor performance of several governments' bonds and the erosion of the economies of Greece and (to a somewhat lesser, but still significant extent) Italy. Handing control of the means of production to workers doesn't really get at that unless I'm missing something.

I was imitating his erroneous conclusion.

With you now.

[Inyourfaceistan]

Capitalism will die soon
Comunist is future

I'll have a 7.62mm waiting for you when you try.

[Tyladoria]

Why not Fascism?