Could Communism be successful if the government was run by the right person(s)?
Please vote, reply, and comment!
No, we've been over this countless times.
And it's mind-numbingly boring.
[b]Proper explanation:[/b]
Properly regulated free market is much more efficient resource-wise than communism, since the task of coordinating supply and demand is completely delegated to the agents rather than the government, which is sole task should be to control externalities and certain "vices", while promoting innovation and positive side effects of the agents interacting.
Communism is impossible because the amount of resources needed just to optimize and coordinate every damn transaction, as a central entity, are near infinite, specially taking into account market dynamism. Once you give that task to each participating party, these costs are massively diluted and reduced do to scale, so they're no longer a concern.
Put into layman's terms: it's much easier (and efficient) to let everybody do whatever they want under certain rules than telling each and every one of them what to do.
Communism is always faulty.
Communism is only possible in villages. As in, really really small villages
Where there is no money....
So you have to be in the past.
I voted yes and here's why:
Communism was working splendidly (or at least better than Stalin did) under Lenin. Many people loved his new ideas and most people enjoyed him. Also, 73% of Russians say they lived better during the Communist government and 68% want to change back.
It a good plan on paper
[QUOTE=Dracon;30272620]Communism is only possible in villages. As in, really really small villages
Where there is no money....
So you have to be in the past.[/QUOTE]
Avatar could never have fit more. :v:
[QUOTE=Comrade82;30272650]Communism was working splendidly (or at least better than Stalin did) under Lenin. Many people loved his new ideas and most people enjoyed him. Also, 73% of Russians say they lived better during the Communist government and 68% want to change back.[/QUOTE]
That's an extremely bland argument to say the least.
Yes.
It just hasn't been and probably never will.
Yes, but if one were to truly follow the ideals of Marx and not become a brutal tyrant, it would work!
[QUOTE=Comrade82;30272675]Yes, but if one were to truly follow the ideals of Marx and not become a brutal tyrant, it would work![/QUOTE]
I suppose you have some statistical or econometric data backing that up.
If not, those are just words in the air.
Power corrupts.
That is all.
Actually, there are some small voluntary communist communities in the US which communicate with the outside world and they do fairly fine with regards to the welfare of their people.
[editline]5th June 2011[/editline]
It really only works on a small scale
As said before, it's one of those things that on a big scale, hasn't worked so well because
1. People become tyrants, mad with power.
2. The whole "people being equal" thing only works with people of the lower class. If you've ever read "Red Scarf Girl", the communism in China led to the girl's life being total shit, because she was in a higher class. She became outcast because of her family's status, her family was seen as evil, and she herself was criticized unfairly. All of this seemed fine because it was a system which gave power to those in the lower class, when really, it made life fucked up because those in the higher classes who were apparently "evil" had their lives turned upside down for something that wasn't their fault.
They describe the torment she went through because the Red Guards had torn through her house (it was legal) and she was almost forced to change her name.
3. In a village, there aren't any classes really, just some people with better jobs than others, so everyone is technically lower class.
Communism is good in theory, but is ruined by human nature.
Seems to work okay in Cuba, that country would be SO amazing if it weren't for the US trade embargo. That said, communism has some good ideas, but plenty of shitty ones too. Best to stick with good old fashioned socialism, tried and true. Just look at the most prosperous and pleasant countries in the world, most if not all of them are socialist.
[QUOTE=shatteredwindow;30274116]Communism is good in theory, but is ruined by human nature.[/QUOTE]
This entirely.
No, because humans are too easily corrupted by having to much power in the transition towards communism.
In my eyes, it's not communism unless it's a classless society.
So right when you said "government was run," your argument fell, to me.
It would work if everyone was totally pure and could not be corrupted by power. But, I doubt anybody like that has or ever will exist.
Have you read "Animal Farm"?
"Oh, so everybody is working for the good of everybody else? Hm, well I bet if I do no work, my neighbor will pick up the slack."
[QUOTE=Sumap;30275381]It would work if everyone was totally pure and could not be corrupted by power. But, I doubt anybody like that has or ever will exist.
Have you read "Animal Farm"?[/QUOTE]
Animal Farm was an adaptation of the history of the Soviet Union, so it's nothing new.
It's still a great example, though.
Not working here because man is always greedy and wants to be better than others... It's just human nature. I think the best chance is Parliamentary republic because (in theory) it mixes both right-, and left-wing politics. Still... voted "yes" but there ain't "right" people for doing it..
It's as successful as facism, just the lie is different.
You're asking a board full of predominantly high school students.
my fucking god, this thread is filled with people who have no idea what they're talking about
Communism does not work because as a prerequisite it requires everybody to not only be equal, but WANT to be equal.
I don't even have to write a paragraph long thing about the different nuances that make it fragile (like how it's very close to an anarchic state of living when done "properly") and unstable to have.
godamnit
[QUOTE=Comrade82;30272650]I voted yes and here's why:
Communism was working splendidly (or at least better than Stalin did) under Lenin. Many people loved his new ideas and most people enjoyed him. Also, 73% of Russians say they lived better during the Communist government and 68% want to change back.[/QUOTE]
jesus christ
[QUOTE=Comrade82;30272675]Yes, but if one were to truly follow the ideals of Marx and not become a brutal tyrant, it would work![/QUOTE]
no
[QUOTE=HyyperVyyper;30272935]Power corrupts.
That is all.[/QUOTE]
way too simplistic
[QUOTE=shatteredwindow;30274116]Communism is good in theory, but is ruined by human nature.[/QUOTE]
while this is technically correct it's the tip of the iceberg. communism is an abhorrent idealogy because it ALLOWS itself to be ruined by human nature. there is a reason democracy works, because it has separation of powers, checks and balances and is actually impossible to turn into a dictatorship without force because if you try to implement legislature that boosts yourself in power you have to deal with the constitution, and to do that you have to make a referendum which has to be passed by the majority of people in your country, so ultimately it's still the will of the people and you're still a democracy anyway.
It's not that it would be a failure, in the same way that democracy isn't a success. It's just that communism fundamentally expects too much of people, especially coming from a privileged state. The ideal kind of communism (or at the very least, social democracy) was sort of shown in the Paris Commune in the 1870s or whenever that was.
Bastardised communism of the Stalin and post variety doesn't show a democratic socialist society in action, it shows a fundamentally stratified dictatorship (supposedly of the proletariat).
[QUOTE=CheeseMan;30275725]my fucking god, this thread is filled with people who have no idea what they're talking about
Communism does not work because as a prerequisite it requires everybody to not only be equal, but WANT to be equal.
I don't even have to write a paragraph long thing about the different nuances that make it fragile (like how it's very close to an anarchic state of living when done "properly") and unstable to have.
godamnit
jesus christ
no
way too simplistic
while this is technically correct it's the tip of the iceberg. communism is an abhorrent idealogy because it ALLOWS itself to be ruined by human nature. there is a reason democracy works, because it has separation of powers, checks and balances and is actually impossible to turn into a dictatorship without force because if you try to implement legislature that boosts yourself in power you have to deal with the constitution, and to do that you have to make a referendum which has to be passed by the majority of people in your country, so ultimately it's still the will of the people and you're still a democracy anyway.[/QUOTE]
Democracy is not that much more workable than communism, it suffers from the same fate. Power will corrupt leaders regardless of the constitutions and checks/balances. In times of war and terror, the constitution can be amended and made to look like it's for the benefit of the society. As well as that, democracy needs a strong base so that it isn't inherently corrupted.
I think it was Aristotle or Plato that said democracy could fall if the balance wasn't perfect. You have the people, the executive and the legislature and if they're not in balance then it will fall into mob rule, bring up an all-powerful leader or demagogue or an oligarchy will form (as in USSR).
With the media and watchdog organisations taking such importance in the 21st century the balance will be fucked soon enough.
The reason it never works is because people only want to better themselves amongst others, as in more money, cars, houses, ect ect. Communism wants everybody equal, but people lose motivation when they know that they cannot do that, thus not working harder. Its good on paper, but it never works in real life.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
