1. #577
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    6,846

    Re: Is Communism the best fit for society?

    I propose there will not be much discussion on this thread because a large number of people have been brain washed. Why do I say that. Well, it is because, as a former professor, I know how much Marxism has penetrated higher education. Where is the proof, one might ask. Well, it is easy to find. Just look at indexes to introductory textbooks in social science disciplines. What you find are many references to Karl Marx. He has become a hero for the majority of college professors. Then, check out college classes. How many lectures and favorable comments are made about Marx?

    Based on logic and understanding, it is easy to conclude Marx was an intellectual Idiot! He did not understand the truth about human nature. He proposed a theory based on equality, which is not found in nature or in human societies. I challenge anyone to refute my proposition. Where do you find equality in the social world? Oh, yes, you find it when government makes it happen. That is not natural, it is contrived. Marx got it wrong!

    Oh, I need to mention, Marx is important. In the real world we have many bloody examples of Marxism, which include Stalin's purges of millions of people, decades of Soviet dictatorship, numerous failed revolutions throughout the world where millions of people have been brutally massacred, imprisoned, and denied economic opportunities to thrive and survive in free societies. It would have been better for the world if Marx had not been born.

    Oh, I forgot to mention China, a Marxist nation. Well, is China really communist? How does its economy function? Doesn't China prosper by manufacturing products for capitalists? What would happen to China if it really practiced communism? It would collapse! In practice, communism doesn't work, it is a destructive form of government.

  2. #578
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    27,179

    Re: Is Communism the best fit for society?

    so your saying you fear communism and i suppose you also fear Islam if these things are so anti human nature how do they even exist !? all forms of gov are made to regulate human nature as you put it! trying to debate with you is useless since you have so many fixated opinions!and you keep making the same comments over and over!!
    i do not endorse/recommend any advertising on scam.com associated with my name /posts or otherwise. thank you

  3. #579
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    6,846

    Re: Is Communism the best fit for society?

    Quote Originally Posted by lexx View Post
    so your saying you fear communism and i suppose you also fear Islam if these things are so anti human nature how do they even exist !? all forms of gov are made to regulate human nature as you put it! trying to debate with you is useless since you have so many fixated opinions!and you keep making the same comments over and over!!
    It would help if you would read what Marx wrote! I have repeatedly stated Communism is a lousy form of government. Then, I have posted numerous examples to support my argument. Lexx has done nothing but make "foolish comments."

    For the benefit of lexx, here is a concise statement of one of Marx's many problems.

    Karl Marx called it dialectic materialism, ongoing class conflict resulting in the destruction of the capitalist class in favor of the proletariat. In the process of destroying social classes in favor of one social class (Communism), capitalists are to be eliminated. It is not a natural process, strong government control is necessary to produce such and unnatural society, one in which individual freedom is reduced. Stalin favored extermination of the bourgeois class of "capitalist upstarts" in order to make a new social order, or communism. He exterminated several million Russians to bring about the new communist order, which, of course, never happened. You can’t change human nature! Cuba is undergoing devastating damage from the many decades of communism. The communist assumption of equality defies human nature. Sorry, Marx did not get it right. If he had, we would have worldwide communism. He assumed an equalitarian society of one social class would fulfill peoples' needs. In reality, a one party society violates individual freedom to pursue one’s own destiny based on what is best for each individual. Moreover, we don't find individuals resembling one another. People tend to compete in areas where they can maximize competencies. Subsequent, people mobilize resources, the net results of which is change, not a stagnant one class society.

    Here is a statement about a failed Communist state. What is the defense for Marx based on the history of the USSR? What defense can there be with so much failure?

    Despite the appearance of strength, the Soviet Union was a deeply-flawed state. Some authors discussed those weaknesses, but no one knew just how significant they were. There were in fact major economic, political and other weaknesses in the Soviet state. Economically, the Soviet system simply did not generate sufficient wealth to sustain its political, social and economic ideals as well as provide for needs of its population. This is striking because the Soviet Union included some of the richest agricultural land in the world and a vast depository of natural resources as well as a well-educated population. Why with all those advantages was the Soviet Union economy so weak? There are a range of reasons. One factor is that the Soviet economy never recovered from the collectivization of agriculture. As a result, agriculture did not provide a surplus to help finance advances in industrialization. Command economics is part of a reason. Trying to centrally manage the economy created many distortions as did the inefficient use of investment capital. The Soviet Union also stifled individual initiative which has proved to be such a vital part of Western economies. Instead, huge resources were directed to an unproductive bureaucracy and inefficient military and security services. Without allowing consumer demand to play a role in the economy, the force of "creative destruction" never acted to eliminate wasteful and unproductive state enterprises. The USSR is an example of what happens without a free market economy. In a capitalist nation, entrepreneurs take charge to make the economy succeed and prosper. Examples abound, but the most obvious one is how much government influences economic growth. If the government dictates rules and regulations for economic activity, and government leaders become economic sector leaders, one would expect a high level of inefficiency, or even corruption, in economic, or business activities.

    http://histclo.com/essay/war/com/sov/stag/sc-weak.html

    Okay, lexx, go at it. Let's read your defense of Marx.
    Last edited by Cnance; 01-27-2019 at 06:04 PM.

  4. #580
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    27,179

    Re: Is Communism the best fit for society?

    PROVIDE for the general WELFARE!!
    i do not endorse/recommend any advertising on scam.com associated with my name /posts or otherwise. thank you

  5. #581
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    6,846

    Re: Is Communism the best fit for society?

    Quote Originally Posted by lexx View Post
    PROVIDE for the general WELFARE!!
    Since. you have no good argument to support communism, you post a lot of foolish nonsense.
    Last edited by Cnance; 01-29-2019 at 12:48 PM.

  6. #582
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    27,179

    Re: Is Communism the best fit for society?

    communism is NOT an ARGUMENT it's a CONDITION of living!?
    i do not endorse/recommend any advertising on scam.com associated with my name /posts or otherwise. thank you

  7. #583
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    6,846

    Re: Is Communism the best fit for society?

    Quote Originally Posted by lexx View Post
    communism is NOT an ARGUMENT it's a CONDITION of living!?
    No, a condition for living is also an argument inasmuch as there are various kinds of "conditions for living." So, to propose one condition of living over another is to propose an argument.

  8. #584
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    6,846

    Re: Is Communism the best fit for society?

    Who will be the next leader of Venezuela? Newly elected Guaido is a democratically elected President, Maduro is the opposition socialist dictator. Venezuela is on the verge of collapsing with a failed socialist government destroying the nation. It may be a matter of days until this dangerous and destructive dispute is resolved. What would have happened if Marx had never proposed his utopian theory of Communism? In my opinion, the world would be better off without communism, Marx's failed theory for a "new world order."

    Venezuela with its socialist government is a good example of what happens when people are denied freedom and opportunities to realize their competences. When a government micro-manages a society with rigid rules and regulations while ignoring entrepreneurs, or business opportunities, the results are predictable. The most glaring example of a failed communist, or Marxian, society is Russian. After seventy years of Marxism with unimaginable human misery, mass executions, corruption, and a failed economy, the USSR finally collapsed.


    https://venezuelanalysis.com/news
    Last edited by Cnance; 01-31-2019 at 12:04 PM.

  9. #585
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    6,846

    Re: Is Communism the best fit for society?

    Harmful consequences of Marxism continues to grow like a ravaging plague. Western world leaders thought the world would be at peace after WWII, but because of the Communist menace there has been turmoil and conflict on all major continents of the world. It is worse than expected for the fate of Venezuela's Socialist government. Recently, disturbing events have escalated. Socialist Dictator Nicolas Maduro has refused to leave the nation after opposition leader President Quadro threatened to take back the nation. Maduro’s military is now killing teenage protesters in the streets, arresting and imprisoning any, and all, opposition, and has even threatening a female Judge defending teenagers attacked by Madura’s military. Maduro’s Military has attempted to harm the baby of Quadro, the opposition leader, and much, much, more!

    Now, Russia and Chinese governments have sworn to support Maduro’s dictatorship. President Trump has indicated the US may come to the aid of Venezuela's oppressed people. However, because of recent support from China, Russia, and even North Korea, Maduro’s regime appears to have enduring support from powerful Communist nations. Subsequently, the US has lost influence in Venezuela's conflict. With support from a powerful coalition of Communist nations, it appears as if President Quadro’s attempt to take back Venezuela from Socialist dictator Madura has been thwarted. It may be a show down between freeworld capitalist nations and communist super powers. As an indication of support from communist nations, a few days ago, a Russian airplane flew several tons of Maduro’s gold from Venezuela to a safe haven.

    https://www.bbc.com/news/world-latin-america-47066906

    Based on the Monroe Doctrine, the United States has maintained a policy of noninterference in political affairs by foreign powers on both North and South American continents. However, with the situation in Venezuela erupting, there is a new threat. If China, Russia, or North Korea, take sides with Socialist Venezuela and supplies Madura's dictatorship with military arms or support, it will be a direct violation of the Monroe Doctrine.
    Last edited by Cnance; 02-01-2019 at 11:26 PM.

  10. #586
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    6,846

    Re: Is Communism the best fit for society?

    Karl Marx wrote several books with a long index of topics, all of which have been subject to endless theoretical analysis and commentary. There is, however, and central theme to Marx’s writings. It can be summarized as follows: regardless of the historical circumstances, economic relationships, or everyday social situations of citizens, there has always been exploitation. In ancient times, wealthy land owners exploited. Later, capitalists, who were formerly wealthy land owners, exploited. Furthermore, Marx claimed exploitation of the proletariat (workers) will continue to worsen as capitalists take more and more profit at the expense of workers whose increasing exploitation and poverty will lead to revolution, the result of which will be an equalitarian state, or “communism.”

    I propose a critique of Marx based on theoretical and empirical weaknesses.

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

    Marx proposed: "From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs" This principle refers to free access and distribution of goods, capital and services. In Marxist view, such an arrangement will be possible in a communist society where there will be an adequate supply of goods and services, it would follow from the full development of socialism, which would allow for sufficient government control to govern the society. Everyone would be provided for in a new world order with a common bond of brotherhood for the benefit of all. Studying the USSR, one finds state control over the population to maintain a common bond of brotherhood, which broke down over time as individuals sought freedom from government control.

    Studying the USSR, one finds state control over the population for maintaining a common brotherhood broke down as individuals sought freedom from government control. In theory, communism may be appealing, but, in practice, it fails because people are inclined to seek validation for “competent outcomes,” not for behavior acceptable to government. When the government dictates proper, or acceptable, social relationships, individuals often rebel, seeking to validate their own unique behavior. In the USSR, the government used the military to control and regulate the population, resulting in a coercive military dictatorship.

    For Marxism, we find this proposal about ability to be a major contradiction. He did not acknowledge the important role of “competence” for the development of human societies. Instead, he proposed it to be an important idea for a classless, or communist society. If Marx had acknowledged the importance of competence, he would have no good reason for proposing a theory for an egalitarian society. By analyzing societies in an historical context for "competency based social behavior," he would have derived a different theory, one explaining common social behavior, not an anomaly, or behavior found only in a classless communist society.

    Marx exaggerated the extent to which beliefs associated with capitalism influence worker’s submission to capitalism. The proletariat, according to Marx, often suffer from “false consciousness” whereby they believe incorrect or even “corrupt” ideas about capitalists, enabling capitalists to deceive or otherwise subvert proletariat beliefs and/or interests in order to maintain and perpetuate capitalism to exploit labor for the benefit of large profits. Marx's solution was to educate the proletariat to the deceitful practices of capitalists to perpetuate false ideas. We know, of course, in a capitalist society freedom is allowed. Therefore, knowledge about the organization and its operations would be known to workers. In a socialist nation, on the other hand, government control of the workplace may prevent such information from being disseminated.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/From_e...g_to_his_needs

    I have maintained “competence” to be one of the most important concept for understanding human behavior as well as the most important concept for critiquing Marx’s theory of an equalitarian or communist society. From the writings of Marx, we begin with his critique of social stratification. Marx began his argument against capitalism by claiming social stratification to be an evil, or an unnatural condition brought about by ruling class domination and exploitation of the proletariat or lower-class workers. As a harmful phenomenon, Marx traced social stratification from early civilizations to his lifetime in Europe. He assumed a reduction or elimination of social differences would result in the formation of egalitarianism, or communism, the final resolution of social class conflict. However, Marx failed to take into account the “full range” of possibilities for human societies. A major weakness of Marx was his rejection of the possibility of “social stratification” being a natural phenomenon of human societies.

    In the abstract, Marx’s ideas may have a sensible appearance. However, when applied to actual situations, another world emerges, one in which Marx appeared to ignore or circumvent with philosophical twists and turns. Marx found all stages of development, including ancient societies, to be flawed with exploitation and abuse. I propose there is another explanation for social stratification, and it doesn’t include social class exploitation and abuse. Beginning with ancient agrarian societies, I will critique Marx’s ideas about the evils of social stratification.

    In ancient agrarian societies, we find people with various levels of expertise for planting seeds and harvesting crops. Let’s assume all workers have equal access to land for planting. Over time, we would expect some workers to have developed superior ability based on motivation, knowledge of planting, harvesting, experience in the field, and opportunities to harvest. Therefore, one would expect a hierarchy of workers to plant and harvest fields. Eventually, among field hands, the most competent workers became land owners, and subsequently, in Mesopotamia, land ownership flourished in the “cradle of civilization” known as the “Fertile Crescent Valley”. Then, there are other factors to consider, such as sex, age, family relationships, physical condition, and even ethnicity.

    It is idealistic to think everyone shared everything in common, or tended to share equally in the distribution of land for harvesting. As time progressed, small plots of land for planting and harvesting were expanded into larger land holdings. We know from historical records that agriculture was stratified by land ownership. It is not difficult to imagine some field hands owning land and therefore expanding the “business of agriculture.” Some planters and harvesters becoming more efficient than others, therefore enabling them to teach and supervise less experienced field hands.

    How about the next stage of agricultural development? So, we have people becoming more skilled at planting and harvesting which means a hierarchy of worker skills evolves. Then, with years of experience in planting and harvesting, knowledge of best procedures for food production accrues, which means a few people become expert planters and harvesters, as well as land owners. Then, depending on the quantity of produce, storage sheds or buildings for crop storage are constructed near the fields. Thus, from planting and harvesting, humans progressed to a more efficient means for storing food. Subsequently, land owners took control of larger and larger plots of agricultural land.

    This description of early agriculture may fit with what we know about the development of the “Fertile Crescent Valley” or other agricultural areas throughout the ancient world. It is also a description of how “differences in competence,” as defined by social situations, determines social stratification of societies. In short, social differences in all human groups are found in all societies. Therefore, “social stratification is a natural phenomenon,” not the consequence of exploitation or land owner abuse.

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

    In all civilizations, at each stage of social development, individuals adopt norms of conduct based on values, framed by social institutions (family, political, educational, religious, and military), which influence and direct daily activities. In addition to social institutions, other factors including topography, mineral resources, and stage of technological development have contributed to the growth and development of civilization. Daily activity may be explained as a means by which individuals utilize their “competencies” for the execution of social roles. The most enduring areas of human activity have been jobs for sustaining agricultural as well as other business activity. Without jobs and businesses, past and present, townships, cities, states, or other attributes of a civilized world could not exist.

    Following the path of economic activity from ancient to modern civilizations, one can trace products of human ingenuity. In particular, one can see how humans have been able to transform agrarian societies into highly productive and prosperous urban communities where human competences have played out in numerous ways. In particular, human ingenuity flourished during the industrial revolution to transform rural into urban city lifestyles for the emergence of a new world. Individual competencies played out in remarkable ways to reshape landscapes from farm and ranch land to suburban enclaves for city workers. As human competencies played out, individual competencies have contributed to a remarkable degree in technological advances in numerous areas such as factory and business activities.

    As for abuses of power by individual states, kingdoms, or empires, we find another competency based distributive curve based on greed, lust for power, military conquest, and other abuses by government leaders. As for judgements of right or wrong for abusive or destructive actions, it has become a matter of “individual competence” to make moral judgements. With advancing civilization has come laws and other regulatory devices to control crime in order to protect citizens from “deviant activities.” In all areas of social activity, whether it be government or business, one finds “areas of competence” determining social role outcomes, and subsequently social institutional frameworks for social behavior.

    If you read about Karl Marx’s career as a journalist and editor of newspapers, it is easy to conclude he was a radical. Some of those newspapers where banned by the state for being subversive. Mostly, Marx slanted his arguments against capitalism by exaggerating the extent of worker exploitation. Then, as of now, when an entrepreneur starts up a new business it is essential for that business owner to hire the most competent employees. So, on one hand, we have Marxists claiming the company is exploiting labor to make a profit, while, on the other hand, we have reasonable people claiming the businessman to be successful for hiring competent people to make the business succeed. The businessman example is more typical of what really happens with capitalism; it is about the importance of “human competency” for business success. The life of Marx is a good example for the extent to which radicals go to promote their agendas. Moreover, if one studies his professional life as a writer and newspaper editor, it is easy to conclude Marx had a strong bias, or, if you will, prejudice against capitalism.
    Last edited by Cnance; 02-06-2019 at 05:20 PM.

  11. #587
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    6,846

    Re: Is Communism the best fit for society?

    Throughout the world commune experiments based on Marx's communism have been attempted. The failure rate is shocking! Even when applied in local groups communism doesn't work. While nations where adopting Marxism communes were popping up everywhere.

    https://www.ic.org/paradisenow/

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/People%27s_commune
    Last edited by Cnance; 02-12-2019 at 05:37 PM.

  12. #588
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    6,846

    Re: Is Communism the best fit for society?

    Marx’s analysis of social classes is flawed inasmuch as he neglected to address the rudimentary "foundations of human nature." For his macro-analysis of societies and subsequent proposal of social class change, he imposed his values and interpretation, or his subjectivity, on entire societies. It resulted in a mode of analysis leading to his theory of class conflict based on assumptions of control and exploitation by controlling members of the middle and upper classes over the proletariat, or working classes. There is little or no evidence for Marx’s assertion that people suffer false consciousness and are therefore dubbed into submission by capitalists or persons in authority. There is however evidence of rebellion or revolts as a consequence of controlling members abusing their authority over working classes. However, each context of rebellion or revolt must be examined based on specific circumstances of abuses or mishandling of authority. It is certainly true that workers need supervision by supervisors to complete tasks necessary to produce products or services, and, in most circumstances, the workplace dictates chains of commandment for the execution or completion of work-related activities.

    Again, Marx’s mode of analysis wasn’t value neutral, it was a set of preconceived ideas based on assumptions and interpretations which had little or no empirical basis. In most areas of analysis, Marx’s perception of workers involved in activities of production, social classes, and social conflict was flawed. Marx could not test his hypotheses for social classes, class conflict and the final resolution, Communism. Marx’s proposal for a classless communist society had no empirical bases. It has not been tested, and his philosophical mode of analysis flawed his analysis by funneling his ideas of social relations through philosophical frameworks. Marx derived his social class conflict from Hegel, a well-known German philosopher, who proposed what he termed the “dialectic process” to explain social conflict between social classes and its final resolution with a one class society. Perhaps, the philosophical basis of Marx’s theory was the primary reason for his social class conflict theory not materializing in the real world. Another miscalculation for Marx was his assumption of business relations in Europe remaining constant, or there being little or no changes in the economic order for those societies.

    Marx’s most egregious error was assuming a one class Communist society as the final resolution of social class conflict. It would happen as a result of capitalist exploitation of the “proletariat,” or working classes. In the real world, we don’t find people amenable to the elimination of social differences. It is human nature to seek social recognition for competent outcomes. As an example, new employees seek jobs where they can excel or succeed. An efficient factory or workplace is one in which workers have found jobs to accomplish work tasks necessary to produce a product or service, not necessarily to just work or consume time on the clock. Therefore, social stratification based on job duties is essential for efficient productivity. There cannot be a classless society when most people seek recognition for individual areas of competence, not for the commandments of their superiors in the workplace, or expectations or dictates of government leaders or persons in authority in their communities. It is true that workers seek approval and recognition from superiors, but the end goal for both workers and supervisors is to produce products or services, not to persevere in the pursuit of sameness.

    In short, Marx assumed exploitation of workers when, in fact, workers use their abilities to accomplish work related tasks for wages or income. In the context of worker’s situation in the workplace, and in the community, Marx assumed workers or the “proletariat” where being exploited, when, in fact, in most cases, they were about doing their business to fulfill needs to be useful and productive workers. In other words, Marx made unproven assumptions about workers or the proletariat class. Marx had not proven his case of capitalist exploitation of workers. Moreover, Marx's assumption or workers being alienated because they were not fulfilling themselves in their work has not been proven.

    Even though we have unproven assumptions, Marx's solution for worker exploitation was emancipation leading to “Communism,” which would give people the freedom that bourgeois society denies them. Communism is, he explains, "the positive transcendence of private property, or human self-estrangement, and therefore the real appropriation of the human essence by and for man... the complete return of man to himself as a social being..." (Economic and Philosophical Manuscripts of 1844) Marx was a very busy protagonist, he wrote volumes proposing an utopian ideology which continues to inspire and mislead liberals in their views of society.
    Last edited by Cnance; 02-14-2019 at 01:56 PM.

  13. #589
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    6,846

    Re: Is Communism the best fit for society?

    President Trump just made a speech about Venezuela, a nation in turmoil with a socialist dictator and an economy in a death spiral as capitalism is replaced with socialism. Trump pointed out the utter failure of Maduro's dictatorship declaring the US will never be a socialist nation. Thank God I am living in a capitalist nation where people are free to choose their own government without coercive tactics of government leaders. The world now has sufficient examples of failed socialist governments to declare communism a failed government for any society. We now await China's declaration for what it practices, verses what it proposes. If China were truly a communist nation, it would not practice capitalism. China would refute capitalism for all those evil practices Marx declared to be the downfall of governments. It may fit, however, Marx's proclamation for the end justifying the means. However, in the case of China, the end is a capitalist economy justified by a communist government. How weird is that?
    Last edited by Cnance; 02-19-2019 at 11:50 PM.

  14. #590
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    6,846

    Re: Is Communism the best fit for society?

    What would Marx have written about the exploitation of labor if he had considered the Roman Empire? Certainly, he would have had a far better case for his theory of social class conflict and exploitation. As I have mentioned, there has been labor exploitation since dawn of civilization. In every historical period, there have been critics of the establishment, and therefore radicals or rebels who, like Marx, find social injustice. My point, however, is it is a natural phenomenon of civilized societies. Could we find a Marxist in all societies? Perhaps, depends on a number of factors including political repression, educational opportunities, and opportunities to present cases of exploitation for an audience. Marx lived when historical circumstances allowed radicals opportunities, and radical newspapers audiences to stir up public indignation over social justice issues associated with capitalism, a new form of economy resulting from the industrial revolution.

    Marx missed a great opportunity, he should have been born in the Roman Empire era. ha. ha. Throughout the Roman period many slaves for the Roman market were acquired through warfare. At the time, there was maximum exploitation for the benefit of the ruling class. Many captives were either brought back as war
    booty or sold to traders,[9] and ancient sources cite anywhere from hundreds to tens of thousands of such slaves captured in each war.[10][11] These wars included every major war of conquest from the Monarchical period to the Imperial period, as well as the Social and Samnite Wars.[12] The prisoners taken or re-taken after the three RomanServile Wars (135–132, 104–100,and 73–71 BC, respectively) also contributed to the slave supply.[13] While warfare during the Republic provided the largest figures for captives,[14] warfare continued to produce slaves for Rome throughout the imperial period.[15]

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

    As for modern day implications of Marxism, we find excellent cases of labor exploitation in some third world nations, and in nations where the "rule of law" is weak. However, from a Marxist perspective, all societies are exploitative, which goes to the heart of the problem. For Marxism, social class conflict continues as long as there are social class differences. Since it is not possible to conceive of a society which is not stratified based on social differences (competence outcomes) for the population, the Marxist revolution will continue until the end of time, or until there are no people to study. Since Marxism is ridiculous, why not just eliminate it? The world would be better off without death and destruction associated with "leveling processes"' for achieving "equality," or communism. The main point is communism is an utopian state which is unattainable.
    Last edited by Cnance; 02-20-2019 at 07:15 PM.

  15. #591
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    6,846

    Re: Is Communism the best fit for society?

    Marx’s Ten Principles for Communism.

    Karl Marx and Engels proposed the following principles for communism in their “Manifesto of The Communist Party,” which he and Friedrich Engels wrote in 1848. As far as I can determine, Marx didn’t change his views in later writings.

    https://www.marxists.org/archive/mar.../Manifesto.pdf

    1. Abolition of Private property in land and the application of all rents of land to public purposes.
    2. A heavy progression of graduated income taxes.
    3. Abolition of all right of inheritance.
    4. Confiscation of the property of all immigrantand rebels.
    5. Centralization of credit in the state by means of a national bank with state capitol and an exclusive monopoly.
    6. Centralization of the means of communication and transport in the hands of the state.
    7. Extension of factories and instruments of production owned by the state; the bringing into cultivation of waste land, and the improvement of the soil generally in accordance with a common plan.
    8. Equal obligation of all to work. Establishment of industrial armies, especially for agriculture.
    9. Combination of agriculture with manufacturing industries; gradual abolition of the distinction between town and country by a more equable distribution of the population over the country.
    10. Free education for all children in public schools. Abolition of child factory labour in its present form. Combination of education with industrial production, etc.

    A useful means for analyzing these propositions is to evoke ideas concerning human nature and societies. Two salient ideas are "individual competences" and "efficiency." As I have already noted, Marx ignored individual differences by proposing communism, or a society based on equality. Where do we find such societies? Where do we find equality in the real world? I am not proposing an ideal world where everyone works in harmony. It is an awkward world where jobs are distributed based on common factors and performances are expected to be good to excellent, especially today in a high tech world. As for efficiency, it is part of any workplace where it is required to produce goods or services in a competitive world. Oh, assuming the world is not competitive, or we don't want to produce the best product or service, efficiency would not be important. However, there is no such world, unless you want to consider failing businesses or declining economies. If we assume what Marx proposed for eliminating capitalism, how do we function without competition or incentives to maximize individual performance?

    If you read the ten principles of communism, you come to the conclusion that it is not possible without a strong central government, and, in order to enforce regulations and rules, a strong military is required. Thus far, communist governments have been military dictatorships. It is not conceivable that people would do the following without coercion: surrender property to the state, forego inheritances, move into common residences to eliminated differences between town and country, be required to use a common means of transportation such as a national trains or busses, be required to work on farms and factories on the same plot of land, make children go to factories for an education, leave home to become members of "industrial armies," allow taxes to go up for the benefit of the "common good," and be required to deal with one central bank. What happened to competition? I guess Marx and Engels didn't like it. Being brilliant thinkers, ha ha, I suppose they assumed people would work without incentives, or do it for the "common good" without objection. Oh, I agree, children should not be exploited in the workplace. In the next century, after they wrote their thesis, labor laws were passed to protect children from work-related abuses.

    The history communist dictators is a lesson for the world. In theory, communism may seem appealing, but, in practice it is an abomination. It has been an enormous waste of resources, affording horrible repressions resulting in some of the most horrific catastrophes in the civilized world.

    Dictators have been the driving force behind communism, even from the very beginning. Some of the more influential communist dictators include:
    • Vladimir Ilich Lenin: Although Marx is considered the father of communism, Lenin is the one who put his theories into practice, effectively turning Russia from a czarist nation to a communist one. Lenin ruled Russia from 1917 until his death in 1924.
    • Joseph Stalin: As Lenin's extremely powerful successor, Stalin took communism to new heights when he governed the Soviet Union from 1922 until 1953.
    • Mao Zedong: Mao founded the communist movement in China and ruled the country for more than 25 years until his death in 1976.
    • Ho Chi Minh: Once a covert agent for Moscow, Ho Chi Minh is credited with spreading communism to Vietnam. A devoted follower of Stalin, he is probably best known for his guerilla warfare tactics.
    • Kim Il-sung: Father of North Korea's current leader, Kim Jong-il, Kim Il-sung worked closely with the Soviet Union and China to spread communism. North Korea has always remained very isolated from the rest of the world, often causing panic over the country's nuclear capabilities.
    • Fidel Castro: Castro resigned as president of Cuba on Feb. 19, 2008, concluding a nearly 50-year reign. Castro and his revolutionaries overtook the country in 1959 and began a Marxist communist government. Thus, Cuba became the Western Hemisphere's inaugural communist state. Power has really been in the hands of Castro's brother Raul since 2006, when Castro's health began to wane. Raul succeeded his brother as dictator in 2008 [source: New York Times].

    https://people.howstuffworks.com/communism2.htm

    The number of people killed by the Communist governments amounts to more than 94 million.

    The statistics of victims include deaths through executions, man-made hunger, deportations and forced labor. The breakdown of the number of deaths is given as follows:
    65 million in the People's Republic of China
    20 million in the Soviet Union
    2 million in Cambodia
    2 million in North Korea
    1.7 million in Ethiopia
    1.5 million in Afghanistan
    1 million in the Eastern Bloc
    1 million in Vietnam
    150,000 in Latin America
    10,000 deaths "resulting from actions of the international Communist movement and Communist parties not in power."

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Bl...k_of_Communism
    Last edited by Cnance; 02-22-2019 at 02:13 PM.

  16. #592
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    6,846

    Re: Is Communism the best fit for society?

    For Communist nations, government has authority over the family. In the old USSR, weekly meetings were held in soviet communities where a "block leader" would supervise the education and daily activities of Soviet citizens. Communist nations make concerted efforts to brainwash people in order to serve the interest of the Communist dictator, and, therefore, perpetuate the communist state.

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
  •