• Hypothetical: Radical Opposites: Living in Communist vs. Fascist Society
    288 replies, posted
Communism, although it has not worked out in the past I hope it will work out some day. If you think about it, if you lived in a communist society then laziness would be selfishness. Everyone is given a fair amount of work, and if don't do that work for no reason then you're just being an asshole.
[QUOTE=The Winner;25963538]Communism, although it has not worked out in the past I hope it will work out some day. If you think about it, if you lived in a communist society then laziness would be selfishness. Everyone is given a fair amount of work, and if don't do that work for no reason then you're just being an asshole.[/QUOTE] also useless jobs like banker or anything dealing with money or advertisement could be taken out or jobs that could just be taken by machines
I have no idea what to go for. They seem equally good and bad to me. Communism would seem depressing to me since everything is evened out and Fascism has a possibility of being a living hell unless you move up the ladder (or already agree with the rules).
Both are shitty, but I'll take Communism.
Communism is doomed to fail.
Both in practice are pretty shit, but Fascism can at least be somewhat enjoyable if you agree with the leader. Ideally, though, I'd pick communism.
Hypothetically they both suck and everyone who cares about 'equality for all the people' is lying through their teeth. Most people on FP have superiority complexes and no one on this planet is completely selfless unless they've lived in hollowed out rock of a life given to them by their parents and their religious followings. Perfection doesn't exist. [editline]10th November 2010[/editline] Life isn't fair.
Neither. But, if I had to pick, I guess fascism because there is evidence that it has worked in the past.. [editline]9th November 2010[/editline] [QUOTE=imasillypiggys;25962900]well if they figured out how to make real communism it would help you because even you have some restrictions to resources [editline]9th November 2010[/editline] there are many people that work hard without pay, like people that take care of animals or the ones that feed the homeless, not to mention that most people would get very bored of doing nothing all day[/QUOTE] Oh yeah I'm sure animal shelter volunteers and homeless shelter workers can sustain society for everyone else. [editline]9th November 2010[/editline] [QUOTE=Mr. Someguy;25965366]Communism is doomed to fail.[/QUOTE] It's fundamentally flawed.
[QUOTE=JohnnyMo1;25962881]But really, who wouldn't want to live under an emperor? A god-emperor. Of mankind.[/QUOTE]I was thinking more of an Augustus or Caesar, I would rather live in Nazi Germany than the Imperium, that would be the worst.
well would the communism be Stalin kind or true communism?
Social Democratism guys, it's the way of the future.
[QUOTE=Big Dumb American;25955406]I'd move deep into the forest, grow a big beard, and live off the land as a mysterious and elusive hermit for the rest of my days if either one of these systems were imposed.[/QUOTE] Until the government officials(of either system) show up and demand you redistribute your harvested mushrooms to everyone, and let other people live in your cave as a commune instead of selfishly dwelling witin the fatherlands walls thinking of only yourself. you would probably also have to redistribute your beard.
[QUOTE=Kingy_who;25955751]Give me a good reason why it's [b]impossible[/b]. It may be unlikely but there's no reason it's completely impossible.[/QUOTE] As cliché as it may sound its impossible because we are individuals. [editline]10th November 2010[/editline] [QUOTE=Stupideye;25962692]No. Most Communists today believe and aim for Leninism and Trotskyism, from what I've read.[/QUOTE] Funnily enough most people in the soviet union never wanted the Bolsheviks in power, the 1917 revolution wasn't led by bolsheviks and in 1919 they brutally suppressed everyone else.
[QUOTE=Kingy_who;25955808]In the short term maybe, but you may say something your glorious leader dislikes and then you'll be in trouble.[/QUOTE] Ahem....Stalin Hitler Gave Fascism a bad name, It rewards hard work and effort while Communism is an excuse for Lazy, poor and stupid people to do nothing and get paid for it
[QUOTE=Earthen;25970190]Funnily enough most people in the soviet union never wanted the Bolsheviks in power, the 1917 revolution wasn't led by bolsheviks and in 1919 they brutally suppressed everyone else.[/QUOTE] Communism in the USSR was bound to fail from the start. It was done completely ass-backwards.
Wouldn't the more fitting (and logical) pairing be a Fascist Society against an Anarchistic Society? IE: Complete Government Control and No Government Control (and thereby, no Government). The regime of Stalin or the Khmer Rouge would be Facist Communist states. I know people would argue that they weren't true Communist states because government exists and there is still this underlying class divide between the government and the people. However, they are as close as it comes. More importantly, if the government were dissolved, you run in to many more problems than a class divide. You would lack the organization that is needed to maintain properly functioning infrastructure, you would lack the regulations necessary to make sure you stay healthy, you lack the security necessary to make sure you are safe. Eliminating government (and thereby, achieving at least part of the Communist goal) makes life a nightmare of fear and chaos. You can also never stop people from organizing in to groups and forming governments. Families will take the strength of their numbers, and use that to their own gain. Or a group of close individuals will form a small group. These things will unavoidably develop, there by violating that Communist goal. Also, Fascism does not imply Capitalism. In fact, Capitalism can not function properly through Fascism. Fascism is control, and Capitalism is individual liberty. A Fascist society can not have Capitalism because that is an area where the people cannot be controlled. People's purchasing habits have a major impact, and simply the socks you buy will have an impact, which regardless of the impact, is bad for Fascism. So, reconstructing the question is necessary to create a better study. As it stands, the conditions are set up improperly, meaning bad results.
[QUOTE=Kingy_who;25955751]Give me a good reason why it's [B]impossible[/B]. It may be unlikely but there's no reason it's completely impossible.[/QUOTE] A couple of reasons: Human nature tends towards greed, it is a powerful force that can be both good and bad. Greed would need to be completely eliminated which is an impossible and bad thing. In a large enough group it is impossible to extinguish greed without something like brainwashing, and even then it will likely still exist. It would be bad to get rid of greed because it is one of the main driving forces for progress. Second, any type of government needs a leader and/or administration. By definition those people are not equal to everyone-else as they have powers the rest of the people don't. Even in a total democracy you would need unequal people to set up the process.
[QUOTE=Kingy_who;25955514]I think that everyone has different qualities and has a different skill to bring to the community, we're not the same but we are all equal in worth.[/QUOTE] If the system worked well enough, and people would care about others, there would again form a space of personal differences and profiling. As long as the relative hunger for resources would be similar enough to others, there wouldn't have to be a need for additional restrictions in really well working system.
I would in a fascist society, because every one would be orientated towards one ideology therefore causing less political conflicts and unrest, also certain groups of people known to be against a nation can be removed which further increases stability and does not disrupt everyday life.
[QUOTE=JohnnyMo1;25962881]But really, who wouldn't want to live under an emperor? A god-emperor. Of mankind.[/QUOTE] [IMG]http://somethingbadass.5.forumer.com/uploads/somethingbadass/post-3-1241469708.jpg[/IMG] I'd follow this guy regime, he has to be right!
Bear in mind, even the "idealistic", and thus unrealistic, notion of pure communism isn't perfect. Through its desire for perfect equality, it pushes conformity, and stifles human individuality. That said, such a fault is chicken feed compared to pure facism. But at the end of the day it doesn't matter. The real, not ideal, is what matters, and the real shows that all are horrible. Avoid both.
Communism bandwagon because people think Soviets are cool.
I'd rather survive in a fascist state where I'm repressed than starve in some commune where I can't own land.
[QUOTE=Amplar;25970804]Communism bandwagon because people think Soviets are cool.[/QUOTE] Because they are? [editline]10th November 2010[/editline] And generally, the answer is clear. From completely selfish point of view, Fascist rule is ideal for you if you are on the lucky side. The right race, etc. Communism [i]should[/i] treat you independently on who you are.
Hitler got things done, like a beast. Communism disgusts me. [sp]I'm implying Hitler doesn't disgust me. <3[/sp]
[img]http://t3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:tmAjioZWuvaoSM:http://www.redanarchist.org/images/sickleastar.jpg&t=1[/img]
Most likely communist since in a fascist society you rarely get any kind of freedom of speech. But this has been seen in communist states too. [editline]10th November 2010[/editline] [QUOTE=amcwatters;25971363]Hitler got things done, like a beast. Communism disgusts me. [sp]I'm implying Hitler doesn't disgust me. <3[/sp][/QUOTE] You could consider Hitler a good leader since he got Germany out of a crisis.
I'm a social liberal. "Social" because it's related to democratic socialism. Communism is a form of socialism. Ergo: Communism.
Marxists got it wrong, Capitalism is the height of society.
Fascism.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.