[MrBill]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('dhfenton', 'I')t's isn't that the system won't work; it's that the incompetance and corruption at the top pervert the system and cause it to breakdown.

Soviet Union is to Communism as W's "democracy" is to Capitalism.

Incompetant leadership causes the system to fail. If capitalism works so well; how come China owns the United States right now (quite literally)? As China becomes more progressive, their communist model is winning. Communism does not have to equal dictatorship; which has been the problem with most communist regimes to date. If a truly enlighted and representative communist state were to evolve it might be the most successful the world has ever seen. I think China has a chance at that, if they can address their human rights issues. If they don't improve on human rights, I don't see how they can succeed in the long term. They will be the supreme economic power on the planet for decades to come; but the discontent will continue to erode at the state.

[legit]

China is a ste capitalist country and so was the USSR

[Jake_old]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'C')hina is a ste capitalist country and so was the USSR

[drew]

"evil" should not be a relative term. I am not a believer in cultural relativism. 'Morality' is hard to define, yes, but what the soviet union and stalin 'accomplished' cannot be called anything but evil when it comes to human suffering. The Prof I referred to estimates that the various regimes of the soviet union killed or dirctly caused the deaths of between 70 and 100 million of their own people!! Examples; 13 million Ukranians, 50 million in the Gulags, etc, etc....

Don't get me wrong, I am truly a socialist at heart, but let's call a spade a spade. Evil in this case is evil-what would you call it?

Drew

[Jake_old]

I was really just arguing over semantics, call it evil, thats fine its just that it has a biblical inference, which I don't like.

Our consumer lifestyle has caused the premature deaths of countless millions, really, if you follow the whole process. People get displaced, habitats get ruined, there are people who won't have been born who would have otherwise due to our blind consumerism.

We know we have blood on our hands when we buy a certain brand or other of trainers, made by a slave child, on an almost starvation diet.

Although I suppose it could be argued that they wouldn't have existed in the first place had it not been for industrial agriculture and the unprecidented rise in population levels that this has allowed.

Not to mention species extinction.

OK so we didn't pick up a gun and shoot those people in the head, but surely their deaths/nonexistences can be blamed on us in some way.

But I was being awkward, I'm sorry. Evil is as evil does, we know what it is, but it is hard to describe.

[Windmills]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', '
')
This is a common misconception. It is free societies which rely on the best qualities of human nature at all times. Charity is very important for example in American society. It was interesting to see Clinton appealing for donations on ABC to help in the Katrina relief effort.

Communism assumes the worst in human nature at all times, people aren't assumed to be equal but are made to be equal by the state, by taxation primarily, but also through state ownership of Industries and Services.

[Jake_old]

OK we can agree to disagree. I see the USSR and China as good examples of communism. (Not in terms of Human Rights or anything, just in the ideology.)

If you hoarded wealth in the USSR and you were suspected of doing this, the KGB or some similar agency would come knocking and slap a tax bill on you.

If you lived in Siberia and didn't have work, the Gov looked after you.

It the government needed a job doing in Moscow, and you lived somewhere rural, and weren't contributing to the industrial machine, the government would move you, well the whole family, but forget your friends or roots.

There were virtually no homeless.

There were virtually no rich.(in terms of money$)

I see it as people being forced to be unselfish, but i don't think that was the downfall.

With any society collapse, there has to be a multitude of influences both internal and external.

For the USSR, Afghanistan, the Space Race(It made them compete and they weren't used to it), corruption, poorly managed infrastructure, a more successful great game being played by the current superpower. And probably many more reasons of which I cannot think.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'P')erhaps each system has a set of values that are its weaknesses and strengths.

[smallpoxgirl]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('RedJake', 'T')his is a common misconception. It is free societies which rely on the best qualities of human nature at all times. Charity is very important for example in American society. It was interesting to see Clinton appealing for donations on ABC to help in the Katrina relief effort.

Communism assumes the worst in human nature at all times, people aren't assumed to be equal but are made to be equal by the state, by taxation primarily, but also through state ownership of Industries and Services.

[Jake_old]

Well I believe communism is opposed to individual freedom. The leaders of free nations may well be opposed to it in themselves but the people have it, its just wasted on most.

Now I wrote a piece on perceptions of the individual and their origins as my main degree topic(useful huh?) my conclusion was that communism could offer a kind of collective freedom, as well as a little personal freedom in terms of protection from desperate poor people.

Free capitalism IMO could offer individual freedom, but not collective or protection from poverty.

Was a long time ago now, I wonder if my conclusion would be different was I to write it now.

In the end it made me realise that Woody Guthrie was a superhero, Dostoyevski was a genius. I sincerely hope my conclusions weren't based on propaganda, but I guess we can never tell.

[smallpoxgirl]

Well...i suppose it depends maybe on what you mean by communism. It seems to me that there are two very different ideas at play there. Totalitarianism vs. freedom and communism vs. capitalism. Communism and capitalism are essentially ideas about wealth distribution. Communism is the idea that wealth should be distributed more or less evenly within society. Capitalism is the idea that people should be able to hoarde wealth and charge other people to use part of the hoarde (Capital can be defined as something that you don't personally need, but obtain because someone else does need it and you can charge them to use it. Good example would be an apartment complex.)

One can give examples of any combination from the above. Pinochet's Chile or Nazi Germany would be excellent examples of totalitarian capitalist regimes. OTH most indigenous societies are communistic in wealth distribution, but extremely libertarian in the power dynamics. The more or less flat wealth distribution is maintained by societal custom and clan bonding rather than by coercive government. For example, in many tribes it was considered to be a great honor to be assigned to hunt for the widows and elders.

If by Communist you mean Marxist (or Stalinist, or Trotskyist, or Leninist, or Maoist) then yes, those idealogies are all totalitarian.

[Jake_old]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'I')f by Communist you mean Marxist (or Stalinist, or Trotskyist, or Leninist, or Maoist) then yes, those idealogies are all totalitarian.

[rogerhb]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('RedJake', 'T')he last NEW idea was Hitlers Third Reich (or Third Way).

[Jake_old]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'R')eich means rule or regime.

[bobcousins]

Well, what a surprise, specop starts a dumbass flamebait thread on some controversial topic irrelevant to PO.

He really has perfected trolling to a fine art. And all you suckers keep feeding him. Specop flamebait fusion meltdown.

Mods, can we have Specop post in his own forum, then only move the thread to a real forum in the unlikely event he posts something sensible?

[Windmills]

I'm new here, so I don't know much about any particular members, but I don't think this thread is entirely irrelevant. Forms of government and wealth distribution may come into question as a result of Peak Oil. I think there's some benefit in discussing these things. If people are well-informed and open-minded enough to learn from other perspectives, we may find better ways of organizing ourselves so that perhaps in the future we may avoid repeated cycles of overconsumption and collapse, among many other issues. If we continue to believe that our current systems and the world they have created are the best we can do, then I'll not hold out too much hope for a brighter future.

Not that the dusty, unread, and redundant tomes of history should give anyone any false hope about human self-control.

[Jake_old]

You are right windmills, I don't understand why its in Current Events though.

I also don't understand why people read threads which are not directly PO related and then complain about it!!!

[legit]

Communism is a stateless, classless society. None of the countries labeled as communist were.

[Jake_old]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'C')ommunism is a stateless, classless society. None of the countries labeled as communist were.

[rogerhb]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('RedJake', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'C')ommunism is a stateless, classless society. None of the countries labeled as communist were.

[Jake_old]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'T')rue communism is "international communism", Hitler identified with many aspects but not the international bit, hence "national socialism".