Was communism a bad thing ? a discussion

[Ahmad]

communism is not necessarily a bad thing, those who imposed it on the poeple were wrong.

 

[afriend]

From my expereinces in kerala. I think Communism was required during the inital phases of our countries birth. Where untouchability and castism was prevailant. However now a days there policies are outdated. And they tend to become authoritarian and dictectorial in nature. Only because of indias functioning democracy these communists are put at bay. So i think in todays world communism have lost its relevance.

 

[Meengla]

It's a good discussion even though one doesn't have to agree with the original poster's views.
As someone says above, we need to carefully define 'communism', 'socialism', and 'social democracy' versus 'capitalism'.
Communism has been a mixed bag around the world. Communism may have failed in USSR but it make a lot of infrastructure and education initiative in previously very backward and remote places. In Cuba people are not thriving exactly but they have education and medical care. China was wreck by 1949 but today is a very different story.

 

[chauism]

I think this thread will clear something up regarding China's relationship with communism for you.

Is China Communist? Pop Quiz of Modern China 101

 

[Parashuram1]

Communism meant to control people without letting them have basic freedoms. The food, clothing etc is on allotment basis. You cannot question the government otherwise you'd never be heard of after that. You cannot think anything other than what the state wants you to think even if it is remotely related to politics.

Children are taught what the state wants them to learn. History is twisted, culture is resented and religion abolished. This is done to show that what the government says is right. For instance, very few North Koreans know a life outside their prison of a country. They're made to do what Kim Jong pleases.

Cubans are another parallel example.

Chinese are smart and their hybrid economy is thriving because of a good blend of capitalism and Communism plus their smart capitalizing of growing world demand and becoming a manufacturing "factory" for the world. They are on the right track not because of Communism but because of a hybrid structure in their politics and economy.

In short, Communism was created with good intentions but never applied with the same. Its objective was simple: Control every fibre of the country based on the whims of a few handful of people.

So no it isn't inherently bad but has become a bad concept.

 

[gambit]

Communism is a social structure in which classes are abolished...

That is the problem...That we can delude ourselves into believing the we will not stratified ourselves into 'classes'. This is not the same as the 'nobility' or 'peasant' class. Competition is ingrained into human nature and as long as economic competition is allowed, we will either consciously or subconsciously stratified ourselves into classes. The difference from yesterday is that instead of birthright, as in being borne into nobility, we use money to distinct ourselves from our neighbors.

The man with the Rolls Royce will be regarded and treated differently than the man with the Trabant. So the best way to %99.999 remove any possibility of the people to create for themselves any distinctions is remove any economic competition. That leave politics, or political capital, as the remaining mean to stratified ourselves. So is there wonder why in Cold War era communist countries that Party members lived more luxuriously and treated differently than the people they claimed to represent?

 

[EjazR]

one of the biggest problem with Communism is the lack of freedom of expressing your opinion, there is no opposition party for example. Also no freedom of religion either. AndUSSR suppressed Christians in eastern europe and muslims in central asia. While China does the same to Buddhists and Muslims.
The economic policy of central planning was also a failure, just look at what Mao did to China. That was pure Communism.

What China is now is politically communist but economically capitalist on steroids.

 

[Ibr0kEmYrAz0r]

Communism is an ideology that needs to be evolved and refreshed, just like human being. The old communism ideology was against human nature, it didn't work practically, or at least its implementation failed. However, there is nothing stopping Communism, freedom and democracy co-exist, in fact Communism should absorb some other ideologies, and re-invent itself.

Some good ideas need to be integrated into this Communism, such as devolved governments, political powers to the commoners, privatised properties and lands rewarded as contributions towards human race, eliminating currencies - merge into one credits system, free energy/movement/health/education/pensions, no restrictions on speech/religion/race/employment anywhere on Earth; wealth is no longer an indicator of people's power, but rather knowledge or ability is, e.g. through many cycles of meditation enabling human not to be dependent on inhaling oxegen to survive, etc. LOL...

Perhaps when that day comes, it won't be called "Communism" anymore, but who cares! I have no problems with the idea that one day we live in a classless and stateless society with superabundance of goods and services. I will be happy to visit Brazilian province for breakfast and do morning exercises, then USA province for lunch and some shopping, Pakistan province for afternoon tea and watch crickets, China province for dinner and a evening stroll, then go to bed in Turkish province after relaxing in a steaming sauna, etc. The Zimbabwian are no richer or poorer than Swedes, Palestinian and Israelis are living under same roof, people all speaks in the common language of "Earthian" or "Terranese", of course with their individual culture identity and dialect well preserved.

 

[kugga]

A view about Capitalism and Democracy

Capitalism

Interestingly, Marxism, Communism and its derivative, Socialism, when seen years later in practice, are nothing but state-capitalism and rule by a privileged minority, exercising despotic and total control over a majority which is left with virtually no property or legal rights.

Democracy

“democracy,” a system of the two party state in which both parties are controlled by the same force, and whilst they may squabble over insignificant issues, to give the impression of opposing one another, they actually follow the same basic ideology, which is why the inhabitants of democracies soon discover that it doesn't matter who they vote for, nothing ever changes

Some people are against both

 

[Ahmad]

A view about Capitalism and Democracy

Capitalism

Interestingly, Marxism, Communism and its derivative, Socialism, when seen years later in practice, are nothing but state-capitalism and rule by a privileged minority, exercising despotic and total control over a majority which is left with virtually no property or legal rights.

Democracy

“democracy,” a system of the two party state in which both parties are controlled by the same force, and whilst they may squabble over insignificant issues, to give the impression of opposing one another, they actually follow the same basic ideology, which is why the inhabitants of democracies soon discover that it doesn't matter who they vote for, nothing ever changes

Some people are against both

who says democracy is about 2 parties only(we can have more than 2 parties in a democracy) that they both want the same thing and eventually people tire up, what a flawed definition.

 

[huzihaidao12]

That is the problem...That we can delude ourselves into believing the we will not stratified ourselves into 'classes'. This is not the same as the 'nobility' or 'peasant' class. Competition is ingrained into human nature and as long as economic competition is allowed, we will either consciously or subconsciously stratified ourselves into classes. The difference from yesterday is that instead of birthright, as in being borne into nobility, we use money to distinct ourselves from our neighbors.

The man with the Rolls Royce will be regarded and treated differently than the man with the Trabant. So the best way to %99.999 remove any possibility of the people to create for themselves any distinctions is remove any economic competition. That leave politics, or political capital, as the remaining mean to stratified ourselves. So is there wonder why in Cold War era communist countries that Party members lived more luxuriously and treated differently than the people they claimed to represent?

This is another aspect of the extreme. If capitalism from the previous "bloody capitalism" into a "welfare capitalism", then communist also has stage. Since capitalism can tolerate his shortcomings, then communist why not, do not simply deny the possibility of human development. of course, very long period of time, communist will be no opportunity for the development and validation. I am just speaking from the human history.

I do not know other countries, but in China, Mao and Zhou was very simple, it is a fact.

 

[desiman]

communism is not necessarily a bad thing, those who imposed it on the poeple were wrong.

Thats the main point really, when one looks at communism we forget that communism has never been actually implemented till now. Communistic states have always leaned towards being more militarily focused than actually following the principles of communism. Few have ever read the communistic manifesto and even fewer understand the basis of communism. Western propaganda against communism has made it seem like communism is evil and capitalism is God. The sad fact has always been that communism has always been accompanied secondary principles such as s Leninism, Stalinism, Maoism and Trotskyism. The secondary ideologies have diluted the main principles of communism and always managed to reduce its effectiveness. A purely communistic society would be a perfect one where all citizen's would have the same economic strength and equal share in the countries resources. But sadly communism has always been mistaken as a militarized state and has never managed to even get close to that equilibrium. The human need for more and greed has also contributed in the downfall of communism. Capitalism, being a much more easier system to run, has given better result but has also widened the gap between the rich and the poor. Capitalism encourages the survival of the fittest ideology and is based around the need of profit. As we can see, corporation run the world today and gap between that people have it all and the people who have nothing is only getting wider. Altogether its not the system thats bad, its the people in it.

 

[third eye]

When the state starts to control the lives of its people its bad.

Thats what communism did.

 

[Jungibaaz]

Most religions are have communist ideology, a world free and fair for all. The way communism is practised is what gives it a bad name.

If there ever were a true utopia, communism would be the economic system. All people would be equal. Each person would contribute to their ability, and each person's needs would be met. Excess would be shared as community wealth.

In reality, if all the wealth were split equally today, tomorrow there would be rich people and there would be poor people. If the wealth were split the next day, the rich would lose their incentive to produce.

That is the primary problem with communism: it does not take into account human nature. The result is not plenty with everyone content; the result is more commonly the expectation to consume exceeding the commitment to produce.

China is doing just fine though

 

[mikkix]

guys soon we will taste the fruits of bad capitalism and then an another show for economic system..