+ Reply to Thread
Page 42 of 42 FirstFirst ... 282930313233343536373839404142
Results 657 to 670 of 670

  1. #657
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    6,835

    Re: Is Communism the best fit for society?

    The ideology of capitalism

    • People need freedom
    • When people compete against one another, they achieve greater things
    • Some people have more than others because they make better use of their abilities
    • Governments should not interfere with the rights of individuals to make their own living
    • The government should interfere in the economy as little as possible

    The ideology of communism

    • People need one another
    • When people work together as equals, they achieve greater things
    • No-one should have more than anyone else - everybody's needs are equally important
    • Governments should make sure that everyone's needs are being met
    • There is central control of the economy

    https://www.sahistory.org.za/article...t-start-russia

    If you contrast and compare ideologies of capitalism with communism, you reach striking conclusions about why communism is not a good fit for society.


    1. For all human societies, “freedom” appears to be a very important condition for the development and survival of citizens, or, if you will, subjects of the state. It is directly related to people’s competencies. As I have proposed, competence is a basic condition of humans inasmuch as it motivates people to develop and nurture their abilities. Moreover, the issue of “competency” assumes people are not equal, and therefore are not inhibited by restrictions to develop their best abilities.


    The military is a good example of what happens when people are subject to commandments, rather than opportunities to realize human potential. We know, of course, the necessity of military discipline for the successful defeat of an enemy. Does the military, however, inhibit freedom to develop one’s full potential. We can discuss the military with ideas about both advantages and disadvantages of military life as it pertains to human potential. The most crucial idea for “military repression” is basic training where military recruits learn military discipline so as to function as a unit to defeat an enemy. Recruits in bootcamp are subject to discipline to learn military standards and skills to defeat an enemy. After the recruit has been disciplined to military rule, the soldier, or sailor is assigned to regimental groups to learn specialties enabling them to use weapons and techniques to attack and defeat the enemy. It is during the secondary phase of military training that the soldier or sailor becomes a formidable adversary for defeating the enemy by developing competencies for military tasks. In coordination with other members, recruits learn to utilize weaponry or military assets necessary to attack and destroy the enemy. If, after bootcamp training, or officer training programs, the soldier or sailor, is not assigned to additional training to optimize competencies, there would be no utilization of human potential for a successful military operation.

    What is important in our example of military discipline is the method by which it produces an army or navy. Bootcamp training is necessary to teach recruits military discipline to carry out orders for the successful completion of battle plans. After the first phase of bootcamp training, experienced military personnel determine, according to tests, military drills, and professional acumen, the proper allocation of men for training programs. Subsequently, we have a well-trained army or navy prepared to defeat an enemy.

    There are numerous examples of how people are processed in the armed forces, or in civilian training programs for the efficient allocation of human resources. The list for the allocation for human labor includes military training, vocational schools, on the job training programs, college and university programs, and, of course, the competitive marketplace where survival or termination of a good or service is determined by job performance.

    In short, the means by which human resources are utilized depends on “competency needs” and how those needs are fulfilled in most areas of human activity. Capitalism has succeeded as a social and economic system primarily because it allows for an efficient use of human resources in numerous areas of activity. Communism, on the other hand, restricts freedom for individuals to realize “competency needs,” therefore stifling individual freedom.

    One may equate communism with an army or navy inasmuch as it is government control of human capital. However, even though the government proposes equality, it utilizes knowledge of social differences for soldiers and sailors for the efficient use of military forces. However, in the marketplace, a communist government violates individual freedom by allocating labor through stifling government bureaucracies and controls impinging on individual freedoms. By not allowing the free market to determine proper utilization of human resources, a communist government causes inefficiency in the marketplace.

    In central planning offices removed from government owned companies, and not in direct contact with market demands or fluctuations, government bureaucrats plan for the allocation of material resources and labor, the consequences of which are inefficiencies of productivity and wasteful use of human resources.

    While a communist government may have a lethal armed force capable of defending the nation or defeating an enemy, it’s economy may be in jeopardy from the inefficient allocation of labor and material resources. This phenomenon of government control producing military efficiencies while at the same time bringing about economic dysfunctions leading to national disaster is found with the collapse of the USSR, the decline of the Cuban economy, the eminent collapse of Venezuela, and other government failures. The crux of the problem for these communist nations is while they may be able to produce effective military forces, they cannot, because of economic failures, sustain the nation.

    While a communist government may have an efficient military, it cannot sustain military operations without a well-functioning market with capital expenditures from the efficient sale of goods and services. For several decades, in the USSR, the government controlled the economy with relative success until the free market world economy impacted with more efficient uses of labor and material resources. Thus, we have an example of world nations defeating a communist nation with free markets, or more efficient allocation of labor with “competency needs” of workers more fully utilized.

  2. #658
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    6,835

    Re: Is Communism the best fit for society?

    Communist societies are controlled by a huge government bureaucracy with corrupt government officials. Whereas before the communist revolution when the nation was capitalism, economic activities depended on successful entrepreneurs or businessmen. Under communism extravagant homes or mansions are occupied by communist officials who have little understanding of business operations. Numerous examples of what happens to private property in the new communist society are found in the history of communist revolutions. After the USSR took over Eastern Europe following WW II, communist officials displaced successful businessmen and occupied their property, therefore living affluent lifestyles without sufficient knowledge or understanding of business, the result of which was a deteriorating economy.

  3. #659
    Join Date
    May 2019
    Posts
    4

    Re: Is Communism the best fit for society?

    Look how communist countries growth up

  4. #660
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    6,835

    Re: Is Communism the best fit for society?

    Quote Originally Posted by Grameruuu View Post
    Look how communist countries growth up
    Where are the examples of communist nations becoming superior to capitalist nations? In order to analysis, you must present principles. If the basis is freedom, communism fails. If the basis is economic prosperity, communism fails. If you mean equality, communism may succeed at the expense of freedom and economic prosperity. In short, a society managed by communist leaders will fail if the main criteria is economic prosperity, or daily work activities where most people spend their time.

    After a communist revolution, there is a short period of economic success as societal resources are deployed to maximize economic activities. Then, extreme inefficiencies kick in as business or economic activities become incumbered with bureaucratic inefficiencies as well as misallocation of economic resources.

    Oh, yes, we have "communes" based on living together in harmony, or in an utopian world. Based on history, failure rates for communes is very high as communal arrangements become awkward. Equality based rules, although earnestly adopted, collapses as social relations are strained from daily activities as members attempt to adapt to real world issues and problems. Traditional values are discarded and replaced with new "communal rules and regulations." Communes fail as members find that "reinventing the wheel" doesn't work. What they find is all those norms and values from traditional societies are not necessarily wrong. Mostly, communes are mini-rebellious societies where people attempt to make their ideals real, but in the course of living out the new social order, they find discord and dysfunctions. It is difficult to create a new social order when the old one has redeeming qualities. Ha. ha.
    Last edited by Cnance; 05-23-2019 at 11:22 PM.

  5. #661
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    6,835

    Re: Is Communism the best fit for society?

    In analyzing communes, one concludes they fail primarily because the deviant social order breaks down. Everyday activities, intended to afford meaning in the life of commune members with a new set of norms and values, breaks down. Marxists and communal members have common ideals inasmuch as both are rebels from capitalist societies. Marxists find communism to be the solution to exploitation by capitalists, communes begin as a consequence of people becoming unhappy with traditional activities, such as work, family life, social clubs, and other forms of community life. In short, commune life is a form of rebellion. Most often the rebels come from “deviant populations,” or those individuals who may be rejected because of irregular behavior, or beliefs that they have better ideas or methods for achieving happiness.

    In the same way Marxists rebel against capitalism because of “perceived” exploitation, commune members seek to form a “new social order” based on dissatisfaction with “normal” group activities (educational institutions, businesses, social clubs, neighborhoods, or other lawful means for living, and/or resolving conflicts). Also included in commune populations are criminals. They seek to implement unlawful means, or deviant activities, which consist of seeking likeminded people for their rebellion. As for deviant activities, adult males may engage in sexual intercourse with children or minors, and therefore violate state laws. In short, communes afford deviant actors a means for fulfilling desires which otherwise violate normative standards of communities, sometimes resulting in criminal activity.

    Deviant acts may appeal to peoples' rebellious instincts, but the consequences in terms of resolution of conflict as well as fulfillment of individual needs may be dire, or dissatisfying.

    Why do Commune sfail?
    https://www.quora.com/Why-did-hippie-communes-fail

    There are some common reasons: Open admission to the group - "everybody is welcome". It just doesn't work. You wind up with: more people than you can support,people with mental health issues, people with criminal behavior, people whomake no contribution to the group.

    Financial problems - bad money management, unrealisticexpectations about business (for example farming is very hard work and not very lucrative), not enough income to support the group.

    Disagreements / fighting inside the group. Who is in control,how are decisions made all the way down to who is going to clean the bathroomand wash the dishes. Getting enough group residents to help make the communework. In some "open relationship" and "free love" groups,jealousy caused disagreements and splintering.

    Angry neighbors. If you make people angry enough, they will find a way to get rid of you. Health codes, Social services, Child protectiveservices, the drug enforcement agency (DEA) / police. Zoning board. The people could not get the zoning for their land changed, so they finally resorted todesperate measures that led to criminal charges and the dissolution of the group.

    The later, more successful communes, he said, were a result of lessons learned in the early movement: ''that there has to besome leadership and decision-making, some control of membership, that you can'tsell drugs to people in town, go skinny-dipping in the town pond and offendyour neighbors.''

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_American_Utopian_communities
    https://www.nytimes.com/1998/08/03/us/excesses-blamed-for-demise-of-the-commune-movement.html
    Last edited by Cnance; 05-25-2019 at 11:16 PM.

  6. #662
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    6,835

    Re: Is Communism the best fit for society?

    Studying revolutions enables one to understand the impact of communism for important world events. The Chinese communist revolution is of particular interest insofar as it eradicated Chinese capitalism as well as freedoms associated with it. Presently, the world is engaged in a new communist revolution inasmuch as Communist China is attempting to become a dominate world power. It all began with the 1917 Bolshevik Revolution establishing the USSR, and, subsequently, communist revolutions throughout the world, and, of course, the "cold war." Communism in the USSR spilled over borders to have an enormous impact on the Chinese Revolution which ended in 1949 with the advent of Communist China. The USSR declined in influence as Communist China gained military superiority with its influence on the Korean War, the Vietnam War, and economic dominance of South East Asia.

    As China and the USSR began to split, the Soviet Union became less repressive. During the so-called Khrushchev Thaw from 1953 to 1964, the USSR saw a reduction in censorship. At the same time, China restructured its government and eliminated much of its culture during two movements known as the Great Leap Forward and the Cultural Revolution. During the Great Leap Forward, which took place from 1958 to 1961, the government took land from peasants, who were then organized into farming cooperatives, a policy that ultimately lead to famine. The Cultural Revolution was a state-sponsored eradication of traditional Chinese culture that took place from 1966 to 1976 and resulted in the destruction of temples and schools as well as the murder of people associated with traditional values.


    https://classroom.synonym.com/differences-communism-russia-china-5800.html

    During the "Cultural Revolution," the Chinese communist party took private land, reduced entrepreneurship opportunities, and took lives in order to establish a "communist economy."

    Needless to say, people in China lost freedom to assemble, to speak, and to pursue their goals or desires. One could succeed within the boundaries of Communist censorship, including state owned and controlled property.






    Last edited by Cnance; 05-27-2019 at 11:43 PM.

  7. #663
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    6,835

    Re: Is Communism the best fit for society?

    Because of political affiliation, Kulaks were abused, murdered and imprisoned by Russian communists. In order to understand, one must review circumstances of capitalism to contrast with communism. In the USSR, we have a large farm with a variety of farm animals, hay, and vegetables. For the past decade the farm has prospered, and even become more productive as crop rotation methods have made the land more fertile, and efficient management techniques for plowing and seeding have increased productivity of the land. Suddenly, "a communist coup" has taken over the nation. Government bureaucrats now control the land, and they proclaim to have more superior knowledge of farming than capitalist land owners. Just imagine the consequences and you have insight into the downside of Communism. Government bureaucrats in a distant capital city are now assuming control over vast areas of land. Professing superior knowledge, based on Party propaganda, they issue orders for land management. What may be the consequences?

    Based on “competence-based principles,” one can predict the outcome for government owned and operated farms. First, government officials would make speeches professing knowledge of farming, and, secondly, they would predict better crop productivity under a communist regime. It may not happen during the next growing season, but, soon, those state owned and operated farms would cease to be productive. Actually, what I have described happened after the 1917 Bolshevik Revolution in the USSR. Farmers, otherwise known as Kulaks, lost land, and in many cases, their lives. The communist government, with collectivization programs, took over the land. Government bureaucrats in distant government offices dictated regulations and procedures to farm and manage land. It was a disaster! Farm productivity fell and farm expertise vanished as Kulaks were rounded up, imprisoned, and, in many cases, killed for not paying allegiance to the communist government. Again, a major problem with communism is it ignores issues of “individual competency,” and, in the case of Russian farms, it ignored the "accumulated expertise" of those many farmers who lost their lives and livelihood to “Incompetent” communist officials.

    Historical information is available to corroborate the persecution of Russian Kulaks. It is an excellent example of the "abuses of communism."

    In July 1929, it remained official Soviet policy that the kulaks should not be terrorized and should be enlisted into the collective farms. Stalin disagreed: "Now we have the opportunity to carry out a resolute offensive against the kulaks, break their resistance, eliminate them as a class and replace their production with the production of kolkhozes and sovkhozes".[14]

    The requisition of grains from wealthy peasants (kulaks) during the forced collectivization in Timashyovsky District, Kuban, Soviet Union. 1933
    A decree by the Central Committee on January 5, 1930 was titled "On the pace of collectivization and state assistance to collective-farm construction." [15] On 30 January 1930, the Politburo approved the dissolving of kulaks as a class. Three categories of kulaks were distinguished, the first to be sent to the Gulags, the second to be relocated to distant provinces such as the north Urals and Kazakhstan, and the third to other areas within their province.[16]

    The peasantry were required to relinquish their farm animals to government authorities. Many chose to slaughter their livestock rather than give them up to collective farms. In the first two months of 1930, peasants killed millions of cattle, horses, pigs, sheep and goats, with the meat and hides being consumed and bartered. For instance, the Soviet Party Congress reported in 1934 that 26.6 million head of cattle had been lost and 63.4 million sheep.[17] In response to the widespread slaughter, the Sovnarkom issued decrees to prosecute "the malicious slaughtering of livestock" (хищнический убой скота).[18]

    Stalin ordered severe measures to end kulak resistance. In 1930, he declared: In order to oust the 'kulaks' as a class, the resistance of this class must be smashed in open battle and it must be deprived of the productive sources of its existence and development. ... That is a turn towards the policy of eliminating the kulaks as a class.[19]

    The overwhelming majority of kulaks executed and imprisoned were male,[2] but precise numbers have been difficult to obtain. Stalin ordered that kulaks were "to be liquidated as a class"[23] and this liquidation was considered by many historians[who?]To have resulted in the Soviet famine of 1932–1933. This famine has complicated attempts to identify the number of deaths arising from the executions of kulaks. A wide range of death tolls has been suggested, from as many as 6 million suggested by Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn,[24] whereas the much lower number of 700,000 deaths are estimated by Soviet sources.

    According to data from Soviet archives, which were published only in 1990, 1,803,392 people were sent to labor colonies and camps in 1930 and 1931. Books based on these sources have said that 1,317,022 reached the destinations. The fate of the remaining 486,370 cannot be verified. Deportations on a smaller scale continued after 1931. The reported number of kulaks and their relatives who died in labor colonies from 1932–1940 was 389,521. Former kulaks and their families made up the majority of victims of the Great Purge of the late 1930s, with 669,929 arrested and 376,202 executed.[25]

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kulak

    Kulaks may have been good farmers, but they weren't good communists; they refused to cooperate with tyrannical government officials. How much did Stalin know about farming?

    Marx got it wrong! His ideological bias got in the way of understanding the real world. Again, after reading the works of Marx, I have concluded his basic assumptions for the formation and development of human societies was flawed. He failed to considered social differences to be a natural condition of human societies. Therefore, he proposed a solution to a problem for which there is no remedy. How do you eliminate or change something which is a natural characteristic of the thing you propose to change? It is an endless road. You find social differences, then, you attempt to eliminate them; then, they reoccur in different forms as you redefine them.

    In the philosophical context of Marxian analysis, the Hegelian model related to dialectical processes for social change is flawed because it assumes predictability based on assumed motivations of actors to resolve social injustices when in fact those social injustices are based on preconceived ideas, or suppositions, rather than an understanding of how "competence-based social relationships" evolve to determine social situations and therefore the natural formation of society. The problem for the final stage of social class conflict may never be resolved because social relationships based on social differences, or competency-based evaluations, may never reach a stage of final resolution.

    After reaching the last stage of social class conflict, or perceived last stage, how do you make certain it will be based on equalitarian principles when the very thing you are changing is based on social differences? Moreover, because social relationships are dynamic insofar as social acts are subject to ongoing evaluations based on "competency-based needs," there is no good model for predicting or method to determine social order. If there is a model, it would be based on economic factors of capitalism where people have the freedom to make choices for "courses of action" to achieve goals, which, for the most part, relate to economic activities, or daily work routines where people fulfill "competence-based needs." A free market appears to be the best means by which "competence-based needs" are fulfilled. In other words, individuals are better at determining how to fulfill "their needs" than bureaucrats in government offices. No matter how you spin it, communism is form of tyranny whereby government assumes authority over the population in almost all areas of activity, therefore subverting freedom for people to pursue their own destiny.




    Last edited by Cnance; 05-29-2019 at 06:46 PM.

  8. #664
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    6,835

    Re: Is Communism the best fit for society?

    Historical evidence for the consequences of communism in China is one of the most depressing accounts of what happens when leaders attempt to impose communism on the population.

    The
    Great Leap Forward was an economic and social campaign by the Communist Party of China (CPC) from 1958 to1962. The campaign was led by Chairman Mao Zedong and aimed to rapidly transform the country from an agrarian economy into a socialist society through rapid industrialization and collectivization. However, it is widely considered to have caused the Great Chinese Famine. 20 to 43 million people perished from starvation during the Great Leap Forward.[13] Not all deaths during the Great Leap Forward were due tostarvation. Frank Dikötter estimates that at least 2.5 million people were beaten or tortured to death and an additional 1 to 3 million people committed suicide.[14] The Great Leap Forward also led to the greatest destruction of real estate in human history, outstripping any of the bombing campaigns during World War II.[15] Approximately 30 to 40 percent of all houses were demolished.[16] Frank Dikötter states that "homes were pulled down to make fertilizer, to build canteens, to relocate villagers, to straighten roads, to make place for a better future beckoning ahead or simply to punish their owners."[15]

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_killings_of_landlords_under_Mao_Zedong#Death_ toll_of_the_1947–1951_killings

    https://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/2015/06/china-great-purge-150615051144914.html

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_killings_of_landlords_under_Mao_Zedong#Death_ toll_of_the_1947–1951_killings

    Since China's "Great Leap Forward," there has been a concerted effort by Chinese communist leaders to enact reforms for a more humane society. However, in order to control the population, communist leaders use various measures, one being the continuation of property laws whereby the communist state owns all of the land. Chinese citizens may own property, but they are not entitled to own the land under the property, and foreign citizens are not allowed to own Chinese land.

    For the purpose of land occupancy, Chinese citizens have rights, but the state controls
    agreements for terms as well as duration of contracts.

    I have posted about how freedom thrives in a capitalist society where there are unfettered business opportunities to fulfill competency based needs. Time has elapsed sufficiently to allow for an accurate assessment of the merits of communism. We have histories of communism from the world's largest nations, Russia and China. Evidence indicates communism to be antithetical to natural tendencies of humans to maximize abilities, and therefore to realize full potential. Marx was wrong in overemphasizing social differences as a measure of social ills and therefore preconditions for social transition to equalitarian societies. The more government attempts to eliminate social differences, the more harm is caused to the population.

    Knowing competency based social differences are natural for human groups, institutions, organizations, what value is social analysis based on "assumptions" of exploitation? Are individuals being exploited, or are they fulfilling tendencies to satisfy basic needs? If, as I have proposed, social stratification is a natural condition for human society, then, we don't have situations of social injustice, we have situations of "natural selection." In an analysis of social outcomes, one will find situations of social difference, otherwise interpreted by Marxist as situations of exploitation. Often, according to Marxists, capitalism, is considered to be the culprit rather than natural social selection processes.

    Therefore, we have a basic question. What value is Marx's theory when it violates basic assumptions of human nature?

    Perhaps, Marxian analysis, as flawed theory of human society, should be condemned to the "ashes of history." The problem remains, in all societies there are issues of social injustice. How are those issues resolved? Knowing capitalism is a better fit for fulfilling competency based needs, what remains are remedies to resolve problems. Traditionally, when social injustice issues become burdensome or disruptive for the society, government remedies are invoked. Knowing there may never be perfect solutions, the best course may be to allow people to find solutions. Assuming people are moral, democracy allows them to explore and find solutions, most often through government bureaucracies. Therefore, government, in one form or another, is essential. Allowing for natural processes for individual development, the best form of government may be one allowing individuals to develop, and maximize, "competence based needs."

    It is apparent, based history, communism thwarts, rather then allows, individuals to satisfy and therefore fulfill their human potential.

    Last edited by Cnance; 06-01-2019 at 03:29 PM.

  9. #665
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    6,835

    Re: Is Communism the best fit for society?

    Czarist Economic Success, Communist failure!

    The Truth about the Legacy left by Pre-Revolutionary Russia

    While pre-revolutionary Russia was backward compared to Britain, Germany, and the United States, her economy was developing rapidly and her society was undergoing significant liberalization in the last decades of Tsarist rule. During 18 of the last 25 years before the outbreak of the First World War in 1914, Tsarist Russia enjoyed the highest rate of industrial growth in the world, and by 1913 was overtaking France as the world’s fourth industrial power. As for the progress of liberalization, here below is a summary of what had been achieved that will startle many readers, coming as it does from the pen of a great Russian historian and political scientist of Hungarian origin, the late Professor Tibor Szamuely, a former Red Army veteran imprisoned by Stalin, and a former Vice-Rector of Budapest University and Lecturer in Politics at Reading University until his untimely death in 1971.

    https://mises.org/wire/how-communism-survived-thanks-capitalist-technology

    History cannot be altered or changed to satisfy the whims of ideological fanatics. Historical evidence is clear, Russian communism was a disaster. Everyone (parents, children, old people, sick people, and conquered populations) suffered from communism. In its wake there has been social conflict, political corruption, genocide, imprisonment of opposing factions, and, economic failure.


    After decades of Communist rule, by contrast, with its concentration of all power, ownership, and resources in the hands of the omnipotent Marxist State, tens of millions of people had died in internal repression under Lenin and his successors, the seeds of liberty and democracy had been totally stamped out, trade unions had become the passive and subservient organs of the Communist Party, corruption had become universal, and the mass of the population had been reduced to a condition of penury, misery, and serfdom.

    Russian Communist Failure preceding the collapse of the USSR.

    Here below are just a few key facts about the material conditions of life under Soviet Communism.

    According to such scholars as Professor Sergei Propokovich, Dr Naum Jasny, and Mrs Janet Chapman, for instance, the real wages of Soviet industrial workers in 1970 were hardly higher than in 1913. Similarly, the Swiss economist, Jovan Pavlevski, calculated in 1969 that the real wages of Soviet industrial workers attained the level of 1913 only in 1963. Pavlevski also found that the real incomes of Soviet agricultural workers in 1969 were only 1.2%higher than in 1913. In addition, let it be remembered, unlike the pampered Communist elite, with their posh apartments, countryside villas, and privileged access to imported luxury goods, Soviet citizens had to endure the daily misery of constant shortages of the most basic necessities, like washing powder, razor blades, meat and vegetables, and many other items we take for granted in the West.

    This picture of the generally low living standards suffered under Soviet Communism between 1917 and 1991, darkens further when one includes the evidence of the widespread poverty that existed among old people and the inhabitants of some of the most backward former Soviet republics. Thus according to Ilja Zemstov, a former professor of sociology at the Lenin Institute of Baku (Azerbaijan), writing in 1976, one in two retired persons in the Soviet Union lived in poverty, and in the Soviet republic of Azerbaijan, 75% of the population lived below the poverty line and there were more homes without water, electricity and toilets than in the whole of Western Europe. Other scholars, also writing in the 1970s, calculated that about half of all housing in the Soviet Union was without running water or sewerage, and living space per person was only about half that available in Western Europe. But perhaps the most telling single fact revealing the economic bankruptcy of Soviet Communism, was the spectacular failure of its inefficient and unproductive collectivized agricultural sector. Despite only representing about 3% of the total agricultural area of the Soviet Union, the tiny private holdings cultivated in their spare time by Soviet collective farmers provided one-third of the country’s total agricultural output.

    Last edited by Cnance; 06-02-2019 at 05:26 PM.

  10. #666
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    6,835

    Re: Is Communism the best fit for society?

    Reasons for the failure of Communism must be considered. I have criticized Marx for his historical analysis of class conflict whereby capitalist exploitation of the proletariat leads to a communist revolution. However, based on historical evidence, we find communism doesn’t result in an ideal, or even a satisfactory, social order. Instead, it causes disruption, poverty, and misery. Capitalism, although having problems, has progressed through industrial stages to improve labor and industrial relationships, and therefore, it has increased worker autonomy and satisfaction, not exploitation, as Marx predicted. Compared to an agrarian economy, free market industrial economies require advanced skills, more often than not, resulting in workers fulfilling, or even maximizing, “competency-based” needs.

    Marx claimed capitalism to be harmful for workers, but, primarily, it is a means by which people survive, thrive, and fulfill cherished dreams and/or aspirations. Throughout history, we don’t find equalitarian societies, we find human groups in various forms of social and economic development. Communism, as Marx proposed, is utopia, it is inadequate for understanding human behavior. For explaining why people behave the way they do, I propose Social Recognition Theory.

    1. Individuals are motivated to behave the way they do to maintain or gain “social recognition for competence.” Evaluative criteria related to the areas under evaluation derive from culture, values, and norms of the society.

    2. The status assignment system, based on values and norms of the society, is the framework by which individuals evaluate social situations and therefore determine social order for society. Evaluative frameworks for social interaction derive from two levels of influence. Macro levels, organizations related to social institutions of society (family, religion, economic, government, education, and military) and micro levels (groups) where individuals are involved in daily activities. In social situations, macro criteria, in one form or another, influences social outcomes inasmuch as they relate to the situation. Through daily social encounters, society is maintained and perpetuated.

    3. In order to maintain one’s self-esteem, social recognition for competency by reference group members, or by significant others, is essential.

    4. The greater the level of competence in relationship to an activity, the greater will be one’s involvement in that activity as significant others afford positive evaluations.

    Capitalism allows individuals to fulfill “competence-based needs,” whereby individuals have more opportunities to pursue goals and interests without government interference.

    Rather than proposing social differences to be problematic, I propose them to be a natural phenomenon for all human societies. As for social problems, they are also found in all societies, and have persisted since the beginning of civilization. In every social group, there are those who conform, and those, usually a minority, who are nonconformists, or deviants. If it were not so, we would have little or no use for laws and law enforcement. In a capitalist society, business and government leaders facilitate freedom and maintain social order for the peaceful coexistence of citizens. They do not alter society through radical changes or revolution. In communist societies, leaders use government to the detriment of individual freedom as they apply party rules to control the population.


    Last edited by Cnance; 06-05-2019 at 02:14 PM.

  11. #667
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    6,835

    Re: Is Communism the best fit for society?

    It appears as if Communist China is unravelling. Since the Communist Revolution in 1949, the Chinese Communist party has been responsible for the death, imprisonment, and murder of millions of Chinese citizens, not to mention the loss of land as the government confiscated millions of areas from Chinese farmers. It appears as if Communist officials aren’t good farmers. ha. ha. Oh, it is not funny!

    In Hong Kong thousands of protesters facing police tear gas, pepper spray, batons, water hoses, and rubber bullets have claimed a small victory for civil rights. The Legislative Council there has agreed for now to stop considering a controversial bill that would allow Hong Kong residents and visitors to be extradited to China for trial.

    https://news.yahoo.com/whats-stake-hong-kong-184957933--politics.html

    TiananmenSquare incident!

    From the outset of the incident, the Chinese government’s officialstance was to downplay its significance, labeling the protesters “counter revolutionaries” and minimizing the extent of the military’s actions onJune 3–4. The government’s count of those killed was 241 (including soldiers),with some 7,000 wounded; most other estimates have put the death toll much higher. In the years since the incident, the government generally has attempted to suppress references to it. Public commemoration of the incident isofficially banned. However, the residents of HongKong have held an annual vigil on the anniversary of the crackdown,even after Hong Kong reverted to Chinese administration.

    In the aftermath of the crackdown, the United States instituted economic and diplomatic sanctions for a time, and many other foreign governments criticized China’s handling of the protesters. The Western media quickly labeled the events of June 3–4 a “massacre.” The Chinese government arrested thousands of suspected dissidents; many of them received prison sentences of varying lengths of time, and a number were executed. However, several dissident leaders managed to escape from China and sought refuge in the West, notably Wu’er Kaixi.

    https://www.britannica.com/event/Tiananmen-Square-incident
    Last edited by Cnance; 06-12-2019 at 04:07 PM.

  12. #668
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    27,170

    Re: Is Communism the best fit for society?

    oh HAHAHA redundant cnance ALWAYS resorts to his COMMUNISM rant like a dog eats its VOMIT!! so predictable!! so BORING!!
    i do not endorse/recommend any advertising on scam.com associated with my name /posts or otherwise. thank you

  13. #669
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    6,835

    Re: Is Communism the best fit for society?

    Quote Originally Posted by lexx View Post
    oh HAHAHA redundant cnance ALWAYS resorts to his COMMUNISM rant like a dog eats its VOMIT!! so predictable!! so BORING!!
    I will post what I please!

    Yes, so predicable, so boring! With communism, we have the highest number of brutal and indefensible murders in world history! After the Bolshevik Revolution (1917) we have the brutal repressions and killing of millions of Russian farmers, displacement of their land, and, under the USSR, we have brutal repression and imprisonment of millions of Russian citizens, the brutal control and exploitation of East European nations, the brutal repression and murder of millions of Chinese people, the displacement and murder of millions of Chinese farmers, the destruction of Venezuela, and, most horrible, the curtailment and elimination of freedom for over half the world's population.

    Oh, yes, we can't forget, the devastating Korean War, the Cold War, and the brutal repression and curtailment of freedom by the Cuban government. How many Cuban citizens have fled to the United States to avoid communism? There is "much to cover," communism is one of the worst calamities in world history.


    How stupid is lexx? Is lexx a communist?

    As long as Communism is a world threat to freedom, national sovereignty and world peace, I will post on this forum!
    Last edited by Cnance; 06-13-2019 at 12:21 AM.

  14. #670
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    6,835

    Re: Is Communism the best fit for society?

    Quote Originally Posted by lexx View Post
    oh HAHAHA redundant cnance ALWAYS resorts to his COMMUNISM rant like a dog eats its VOMIT!! so predictable!! so BORING!!
    For the benefit of Communist lexx, here is a list of death rates of Communism, the highest in the history of the world! One problem with communists is how can they deny the horrendous record of murder, genocide, starvation, and torture. How can anyone with a conscious ignore such atrocities?

    Communism deaths (murder, genocide, starvation, and torture) by government leaders!

    Collectively, communist states killed as many as 100 million people, more than all other repressive regimes combined during thesame time period. By far the biggest toll arose from communist efforts tocollectivize agriculture and eliminate independent property-owning peasants. InChina alone, Mao Zedong’s Great Leap Forward led to a man-made famine in which as many as 45 million peopleperished – the single biggest episode of mass murder in all of world history. In the Soviet Union, Joseph Stalin’s collectivization – whichserved as a model for similar efforts in China and elsewhere – took some 6 to 10 million lives. Mass famines occurred in many other communist regimes, rangingfrom North Korea to Ethiopia. In each of these cases,communist rulers were well aware that their policies were causing mass death,and in each they persisted nonetheless, often because they considered theextermination of “Kulak” peasants a feature rather than a bug.

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2017/11/07/lessons-from-a-century-of-communism/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.ebf9d7fd6c02
    Last edited by Cnance; 06-14-2019 at 07:33 PM.

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may post new threads
  • You may post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may edit your posts
  •