Communism (Continued from Standoff Forum)
- Thread starter ChrisReid
- Start date
Delance
Victory, you say?
Originally posted by Dominator
No - it`s the essence of communismit is quite old euphemism
Quite true. The "Democratic" Republic of Germany was anything but.
Actually, you call a "Democracy" a country you like, even if it's a dictatorship, and "Imperialist" any country you don't, even if it's a democarcy.
Also, you call "Liberal" or "Neoliberal" someone you don't like. In the US, a liberal is to the left. In Brazil and Europe, it's to the right. The same term can refer to totally different people with totally different political points of view, as long as the individual in question is being criticized.
Needaham45
Spaceman
Political terms rarely go along with their actual meaning. Liberal and Conservative as you mentioned, and Democracy as well. Look at the US, we call ourselves a democracy, but in actuality, we're a republic. A true Democracy has never exsisted, similar to how a true Communist state has never existed, but I don't think this has anything to do with the paint job on Kilrathi Capitol Ships in Standoff 
Delance
Victory, you say?
Originally posted by Needaham45
A true Democracy has never exsisted, similar to how a true Communist state has never existed, but I don't think this has anything to do with the paint job on Kilrathi Capitol Ships in Standoff
I agree that it's off-topic.
But if you really think "true communism never existed", the 100 millions lives aready lost in the process should be a sign it was never a good idea to begin with.
Needaham45
Spaceman
Well, in theory, Communism is great. If it could be followed out EXACTLY as Marx proposed, it would be the best thing out there. The problem is human flaws get in the way. Greed and the like keep it from happening. The reason why so many died because of "communism" is because it wasn't really communism - it was a poor attempt at it. Of course, human flaws aren't going to go away for a long time (until we evolve past our animal insticts, which could never happen), so Communism is impractical because it couldn't work in the world today. In theory, it's a great idea, but in actuality, with the current evolutionary state of humans, it can't and won't work the way Marx wanted. Therefore, communism has never existed in it's true form, and all those deaths can't be attributed to communism, but rather to the poor tries at it that weren't it.
But this is a serious thread about Standoff, if we're going to continue this discussion, I suggest creating a thread in the Off-Topic forum, and letting me know about it.
But this is a serious thread about Standoff, if we're going to continue this discussion, I suggest creating a thread in the Off-Topic forum, and letting me know about it.
Delance
Victory, you say?
This apology for genocide is an old and beaten argument. 100 million people already paid the price for this "utopia", but of course there's a "good excuse" for everything. You seriously need to de-program your brain. Now I agree this is the wrong forum, so this is closed.
PopsiclePete
Mission programmer
Sorry for continuing off-topic, but I agree with Needaham45 completely. Delance, you got to admit that feudalism and it's natural evolution, capitalism, also killed an awfull lot of people.
The problem with every system other than our "capitalist democracies" is that they tend to get ruled by dictators. These dictators are responsible for the poverty and deaths, not the system. Look at Irak, for example. People there are not rich, but Saddam has like what, two dozens palaces ? With all the oil there it should be a rich country, but it's not. Look at the small Kuwait just besides Irak. It's a "capitalist democracy" and it's rich.
Our "capitalist democracy" system is far from perfect though. The only advantage of it is it's middle-class taxpayers who pay for everything in the country. There are still poor people and there are still dictators, but now it's more subtle. Banks, big companies, the world organisations that lend billions to countries in exchange for their soul, criminal organisations, mafia, secret agencies, president of the United States
The problem with every system other than our "capitalist democracies" is that they tend to get ruled by dictators. These dictators are responsible for the poverty and deaths, not the system. Look at Irak, for example. People there are not rich, but Saddam has like what, two dozens palaces ? With all the oil there it should be a rich country, but it's not. Look at the small Kuwait just besides Irak. It's a "capitalist democracy" and it's rich.
Our "capitalist democracy" system is far from perfect though. The only advantage of it is it's middle-class taxpayers who pay for everything in the country. There are still poor people and there are still dictators, but now it's more subtle. Banks, big companies, the world organisations that lend billions to countries in exchange for their soul, criminal organisations, mafia, secret agencies, president of the United States
Delance
Victory, you say?
Capitalism is not the evolution from feudalism. It's a completely different system. Ever heard of the liberal revolutions? Old regime? Absolutism?
I know that for the pseudo-scientific communism, it’s the “natural” evolution of capitalism, but that’s been proved untrue by history.
Impossible. If dicators rule them, they are dictatorships, not democracies. The issue you are missing here is the power of the state. In totalitarian regimes (read: socialism), the state controls every aspect of life. You can have a totalitarian socialist state mixed with capitalism, like on the early russian revolution, or china.
What a great example. Do you know who the greatest defenders of Saddam and the Iraq regime are? Well, the communists
Kwait is a semi-feudal monarchy, it has nothing to do with modern democracy, liberalism, or the illuminist ideals..
Our "capitalist democracy" system is far from perfect though. The only advantage of it is it's middle-class taxpayers who pay for everything in the country. There are still poor people and there are still dictators, but now it's more subtle. Banks, big companies, the world organisations that lend billions to countries in exchange for their soul, criminal organisations, mafia, secret agencies, president of the United States
Of course it's far from perfect. But at least it's not a totalitarian dictatorship. You seem to have no idea of what happens when communists rise to power. In other to subjugate Ukraine, the communists devised a nice plan: apprehend all food. Millions died of starvation. Of course, there was no shortage of intellectuals making an apology for this atrocity. Heck, my own country is full of them.
Needaham45
Spaceman
This a continuation of a thread from that got off topic in the Standoff Forum - I didn't want it to polute a serious thread.
Delance, no one has died for Utopia, because Utopia has never been acchieved. Communism has never actually occured. People have died because of people misinterpreting communism and distorting it. If someone said "capitolism is when I control the market", and 100 million people died under that system, is that 100 million who died in persuit of democracy? I don't think so, because they weren't actually under a capitolist system. If the people never really tried for a communist state, they didn't die for communism, they died for the distorted view that their leaders had of it.
Also, as PopsiclePete said, Capitolism is an evolution of Feudalism. Just as Socialism an evolution of capitolism, and communism an evolution of socialism. They're all connected, and each follows a logical progression - slowly from economy being controlled by land owners, to people, to the government. The ideal situation would be a Democratic Communism, (not a contradiction, democracy is political, Communism is economic) in which the people are the government, and therefore control the economy directly. The problem is this has never happened, and cannot until humans evolve past animalistic behaviors, if they ever do. In theory, that would be a Utopia, just the same as in theory, it would be the best situation.
Also, Kuwait is a nominal Constitutional Monarchy. You say it's not democratic at all. The UK is a Constitutional Monarchy. Are you prepared to say they're not democratic either? Check out the CIA World Factbook, and government type for the two countries if you don't believe me (http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/index.html). It's true they aren't democracies, but they both have democratic elements. The US isn't a democracy either - but we have democratic elements. Don't say Kuwait isn't democratic, unless you are referring to true democracy, which like Communism, has never existed.
The western world's view on government isn't perfect either - I'm glad you can see that. I will say as of right now, it's probably the best acchievable - but if that's the best, what does that say about the rest of the world?
Delance, no one has died for Utopia, because Utopia has never been acchieved. Communism has never actually occured. People have died because of people misinterpreting communism and distorting it. If someone said "capitolism is when I control the market", and 100 million people died under that system, is that 100 million who died in persuit of democracy? I don't think so, because they weren't actually under a capitolist system. If the people never really tried for a communist state, they didn't die for communism, they died for the distorted view that their leaders had of it.
Also, as PopsiclePete said, Capitolism is an evolution of Feudalism. Just as Socialism an evolution of capitolism, and communism an evolution of socialism. They're all connected, and each follows a logical progression - slowly from economy being controlled by land owners, to people, to the government. The ideal situation would be a Democratic Communism, (not a contradiction, democracy is political, Communism is economic) in which the people are the government, and therefore control the economy directly. The problem is this has never happened, and cannot until humans evolve past animalistic behaviors, if they ever do. In theory, that would be a Utopia, just the same as in theory, it would be the best situation.
Also, Kuwait is a nominal Constitutional Monarchy. You say it's not democratic at all. The UK is a Constitutional Monarchy. Are you prepared to say they're not democratic either? Check out the CIA World Factbook, and government type for the two countries if you don't believe me (http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/index.html). It's true they aren't democracies, but they both have democratic elements. The US isn't a democracy either - but we have democratic elements. Don't say Kuwait isn't democratic, unless you are referring to true democracy, which like Communism, has never existed.
The western world's view on government isn't perfect either - I'm glad you can see that. I will say as of right now, it's probably the best acchievable - but if that's the best, what does that say about the rest of the world?
Delance
Victory, you say?
That's a Sophism. Communism never occurred because it's an unrealistic, unnatural, brutal system that will only result in tyranny and genocide. They tried to implement it and what happened? Totalitarianism and genocide.
Now, to justify its total and absolute failure, apologists come and say it never "truly" happened. So, because it failed so miserably, it never happened, so it's still good! It’s not important if millions died in the process, it's their fault anyway, because they are not "evolved" enough. It's such a phallacy it's hard to actually respond to it.
Nice piece of revisionism. This is the same thing as saying Hitler and the Nazis were nice guys, just misunderstood. It's absurd.
Rubbish. Feudalism ended when the countries united under the leadership of a king. Liberal revolutions either removed the king from power making a republic, or limited the king's power. That's on Europe, of course. In no way a evolution. The principles of economy already existed way before feudal Europe. Actually, the Mediterranean economy by the time of the roman republic and empire was way more developed.
This is a lie. Communism was a system elaborated by a group of individuals, it is not, in any way, a natural evolution. Several attempts were made to implementing it, resulting in the death of 100 million people.
The name of this is totalitarian government - the State has absolute power. There cannot be a democratic communism because a nation in which the government has all the power is necessarily a totalitarian dictatorship.
Communism necessitate absolute power, or people will go on doing what they have always done, i.e., non-communist things. Of course you'll say that they are just "not evolved" because they want to trade.
Who are you, or Marx, to decide what's the best course of evolution for mankind? Besides, there's nothing more animalistic than communism, which is basically a hive-like society. No individuality, no freedom. Fucking ants. It would the great involution into darkness that mankind has ever suffered.
It’s amazing that every single victory won for freedom was about limitation of State power over the population, and communism is the ultimate totalitarian power. No king or emperor in the Middle Ages or the ancient world could even dream with the kind of power the ruling class has under a communist regime. It’s goes directly against all social evolution of society.
About the rest of the post. The power of England is limited, and has been so for many centuries. The government does not have absolute power. Individual rights are respected. That's the essence of a democracy.
Communism, necessarily, means that there's no individual rights, no freedom. There cannot be communism unless there's a totalitarian regime to impose it, for the simple fact that it contradicts the human nature. Communism is only possible if everyone thinks the same, and since that's impossible, it requires repression, thought police, and other methods to ensure obedience. Go read 1984.
Democracy requires individual rights, freedom, free speech, free enterprise. Sure, it’s a very imperfect system, and I could go on for hours describing the imperfections of the US. It’s far from perfect, but a liberal democracy that respects individual rights has never in history committed any atrocity against its own citizens like the terrible things done by totalitarians regimes this century. What does the genocidal crimes of the last have in common? They were all planned planed by the State. Sometimes against its own citizens, sometimes against people they want to subjugate or simple eliminate. People that have no defense under a totalitarian regime. That’s exactly the thing you’ll end up with Communism.
Of course, you can always go with the magical sophism that any and all bad things that happen caused by communists or a communist country is because they are not “evolved”, and it’s not really communism. Because communism is so perfect, nothing bad can ever come out of it. Even tough there’s not even the slightest evidence towards this way, and in face of a staggering amount of proof it’s amongst the cruelest social systems that were ever devised by men.
Re: Re: Communism (Continued from Standoff Forum)
Well I just went and checked out the definition of communism from a variety of sources and it is as I thought it was.
I am confused as to whether you are blaming the deaths of people on communism which does indeed sound very good, or peoples attempts at implementing it which is obviously never going to work since most people are selfish in some way and crave power.
Well I just went and checked out the definition of communism from a variety of sources and it is as I thought it was.
I am confused as to whether you are blaming the deaths of people on communism which does indeed sound very good, or peoples attempts at implementing it which is obviously never going to work since most people are selfish in some way and crave power.
Delance
Victory, you say?
Re: Re: Re: Communism (Continued from Standoff Forum)
The first one. "most people are selfish in some way and crave power" is not the issue. Unless you consider people wanting to have personal freedoms some form of selfishness. To communists, not wanting to have a totalitarian government, or the desire to have freedom of thought, not to mention speech, is a selfish, animalistic instinct. The remedy to this lack of "evolution", is, of course, prison, gulags (concentration camps), starvation, or other form of repression typical of the totalitarian regimes.
Of course, every time this fails, and it always do, they can blame something or someone else, and say it was not “truly communism”. Blame the victims as animalistic and selfish, not able to see the great true of communism, an utopia that cannot be stained by the blood of its victims.
However, the total lack of evidence to back up communism, both as in theory and practice, is completely ignored. All evidence against it is ignored “in limine”, without any examination.
The first one. "most people are selfish in some way and crave power" is not the issue. Unless you consider people wanting to have personal freedoms some form of selfishness. To communists, not wanting to have a totalitarian government, or the desire to have freedom of thought, not to mention speech, is a selfish, animalistic instinct. The remedy to this lack of "evolution", is, of course, prison, gulags (concentration camps), starvation, or other form of repression typical of the totalitarian regimes.
Of course, every time this fails, and it always do, they can blame something or someone else, and say it was not “truly communism”. Blame the victims as animalistic and selfish, not able to see the great true of communism, an utopia that cannot be stained by the blood of its victims.
However, the total lack of evidence to back up communism, both as in theory and practice, is completely ignored. All evidence against it is ignored “in limine”, without any examination.
Frosty
a full fledged GF
I'm behind Delance 100% on this one.
It probably impresses your pals down at the local coffee-shop when you wax intellectual about how pure Communism is untainted because it's never been tried, but it really makes no difference. Every implementation of communism since the birth of the concept had been horribly flawed, which is as good as the concept itself being horribly flawed. And incidentally, it is.
It probably impresses your pals down at the local coffee-shop when you wax intellectual about how pure Communism is untainted because it's never been tried, but it really makes no difference. Every implementation of communism since the birth of the concept had been horribly flawed, which is as good as the concept itself being horribly flawed. And incidentally, it is.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Communism (Continued from Standoff Forum)
Now this was not part of any definition I read.
And Frosty, cut the "it may impress your pals etc blah blah blah" BS. My lack of understanding forms of government stems from my ignorance of such things due to it not being my main area of study. I simply don't care that much what kind of government such and such has.
Now this was not part of any definition I read.
And Frosty, cut the "it may impress your pals etc blah blah blah" BS. My lack of understanding forms of government stems from my ignorance of such things due to it not being my main area of study. I simply don't care that much what kind of government such and such has.
PopsiclePete
Mission programmer
Hey, I am not 100% against him either. I agree that every implementation of communism have failed miserably... and that it's an utopy. That's exactly what Needaham45 and I are saying from the begining. The only thing in everything he said I don't agree with is the "Communism killed 100 million people" easy sentence that is like he read in a book and that may make him look intellectual. I just wanted to remind him that every other system has it's share of deaths too. The only advantage of capitalism as it's mainly done in the western countries is that the power is divided into more people, thus making the emergence of a dictator much more difficult.
BTW Frosty, I don't talk about communism with my pals. I just felt Delance's statements where too bold and unfair, that's all. He seems to think that communism=totalitarian=deaths. That's an easy link to make, but it not true either. I am no communist, but I don't like people bashing things simplisticly, saying something is black and the other white. It's oversimplistic. Everything's not that simple and you can't ignore the facts that won't help you prove your point... but reading the other threads were Delance has posted it would seem he does for a variety of subjects.
Oh, and Delance, please don't reply to this with like a quote for each sentence and then giving your response for each, I don't like arguing that much. I gave my opinion, that's all.