Is Communism Good?

[attilavolciak07]

using the original policies of communism, I think it is a great sstem, please dont call or insult me about this

[Starvin Marvin]

Who knows?, proberly the Americans will disagree due too there history with communists

[wilpuri]

COMMUNISM - HANDLE WITH CARE.

[craziii]

communism will never work in a human society.

[roy34543]

Theoretically yes. In practice no unless endless human bounty and resources that are plentiful for everyone exist, Which defeats the purpose.

[green tea]

If it would work and would be entirely different from everything communists tried until now, then I think yes, it could be good. But would we call it communism then?

[Blau&Gruen]

It could be handeled correctely in an ideal Kibbutz with access to the beach. Ideal Kibbutzim on beaches have unfortunately not yet been created. The Mars colony might be the next chance to create an ideal Kibbutz with Club-Med-feeling. Otherwise, it might be worth to check Star Treck Next Generation. Captain Piccard is the guy who does it right.

[H.r.E.]

Captain Piccard is the guy who does it right.

w0t? he is a communist?


ya it would theoritacelly work , i once saw this report about a jewish community which lived some way like dat and it worked - the unfair thing was they could get all things and food everyday not regarding how much and wat they worked

this is why i reject this aspect of communism , but deleting the class society would be good but it does not work dat way

[Blau&Gruen]

w0t? he is a communist?

Ya, Lily Sloane to Picard:

"No money? You mean you don't get paid?"

Picard answers:

"The acquisition of wealth is no longer the driving force in our lives. We wish to better ourselves and the rest of humanity."

Star Trek: First Contact, Act Three (if I am not mistaken)

[Carl von Döbeln]

Theoretically yes

[roy34543]

The problem with the kibbutzim was that it was not a very good economical system, it was argiculture based almost entirely. And that it mostly required peoples national fervor to work, If they got lazy nothing could be done. So it required their spirit of wanting to help nurture the country(Israel) rather then being selfish.

[Shi Huangdi]

Communism is inherently bad because it takes away the right to private property. So even if it were run by perfect people, it would still fail--or at least, the majority would not have enjoyable lives.

[Dr. Croccer]

Communism is inherently bad because it takes away the right to private property. So even if it were run by perfect people, it would still fail--or at least, the majority would not have enjoyable lives.

It takes away competition, an ancient human vice and vitue, which is both good and bad depending on the situation. Pretty much everything in communism depends on the situation. It takes away competition, which means that the people can concentrate on working for the government but also takes away the benefits of competition. People can feel happy under a communist state, with nationalism, celebrations and just the same comforts that the West has but they can also feel unhappy because of the lack of private property.

IMO the notion that communism is bad because of the lack of private property is silly. Just because my house now is of the state (which it already is, anyway) doesn't mean I can't enjoy it, or any other of my (or rather, the state's) belongings more than before. It'll certainly piss off the corporations and any one who wants profit because of their want for economic freedom so they can... make profit. That's one of the very things that Communism is against. I think that Communism can work (it already worked decently in it's ''Goulash'' form, but alright, I'll ignore like it didn't exist), if it succeeds in the above aspects. Nonetheless, Communism is a political, economic, social and personal trial and Capitalism is an easier system but Communism is (or is cracked up to be :hmmm superior to it if it fully succeeds.

[attilavolciak07]

The policies of providing housing and jobs for everyone is good too but it depends!

[rathelios]

Communism is always bad. Here are some of the reasons:

There is no point working hard or doing something well because this effort is not rewarded. Consequently the most successful strategy for the majority of individuals is to sponge off others. Thus less and less work gets done by more and more people. The productivity of workers goes down but their basic consumption does not.

There is no feedback mechanism between producers and consumers (market prices / supply and demand). This results in people not being able to consume the goods that they need – like bread – but having too much availability of things that they don't need – like Kalashnikovs and tractors.
This also results in a huge waste of resources spent on making too many tractors and not growing enough wheat. The distribution of goods and services to areas where they are in high demand is similarly inoperative for the same reasons. So no one gets what they want when they need it; everyone gets too much of what they don't want.

Without the potential for profit there is no incentive to improve any process.

Communism is inherently corrupt. Collective ownership is actually management by committees and committee chairmen. These people have the potential to profit through bribes and other forms of corruption – and they do.

In addition committees are notoriously bad at taking decisions. To a committee the safest decision is to do nothing. This produces stagnation. Things that need to be done don't get done and much time and resources are spent on superficial things and functions that look good but are ineffectual and counter-productive – like five year plans to increase tractor production for example.

Individuals advance through the governing hierarchy or any other workplace by telling their superiors exactly what they want to hear regardless of the facts. Failure is covered up. No one gets fired for incompetence. Individuals who tell the truth lose out so no one tells the truth. This produces increasingly incompetent management and more waste.

Hard work and efficiency count for nothing in such a system so the only way to advance is to use workplace politics – i.e. denouncing your enemies, back-stabbing your friends and sucking up to your superiors. This behaviour escalates exponentially as people attempt to destroy others before they are themselves destroyed.

The only way to control the populace with such a manifestly screwed up system is to create a massive authoritarian state complete with repressive secret police force and an unjust judiciary. Secret police function by scaring people into denouncing those around them before they are themselves denounced. This turns neighbour against neighbour, worker against worker and children against parents. This results in even more universal suffering.

Ownership of goods is a psychological fact created by the way the human brain thinks. The person with the final say in how a resource is used is in fact its owner. So in truth communism is therefore a very inefficient and wasteful absolute monarchy.

[Tiberius Nero]

People still have to learn to distinguish between socialism and communism; there has never been a communist society on earth. Marx was clear about the differences and how one is a transition to the other, but if one is genuinely interested into the matter on might want to check out The State and Revolution by Lenin as an introduction and explanation of certain key tenets of communist theory.

[roy34543]

Well i would say marx didnt exactly have the same ideas in mind the Soviet union did, his works were a lot more steamlined so theres a lot less "major" faults. But its still not a very good system.

[Tiberius Nero]

I just want people to know what the terms they use mean. Communism is the ideal classless society where no state apparatus exists and everyone is equal and produces according to one's ability and receives according to one's need etc. This is supposed to come through a transitional period of socialism. One cannot criticize communism as having failed, as I so often see happening, because it has simply never existed.

[Desperado †]

If you mean is comunism a good fundamental idea, then I'd say yes. You could argue that you can't handle comunism correctly due to (arguably)people's selfish instinct e.t.c which leads to corruption and breaks the system down. Problem is I guess is that a goverment that is comunist tends to be very authoritatian as well, (but arguably can you have a comunist goverment that isn't?).
In a perfect world there would be comunism. And I guess we have to try and make the world a better one. But often radical changes in goverments quickly tend not to work, so to make comunism work a gradual approach is needed.

I mean I live in Britain but the NHS is a brilliant (and fairer than the American) system. Perhaps not a complete comunist goverment is needed, but perhaps part.

[Enemy of the State]

Communism rewards the lazy and stupid while punishing the industrious and smart.

Communism is also inherently a totalitarian ideology. There is simply no way to reach communism without "removing" the unwanted elements in society. Any attempt at a communist state has always ended in bloodshed, and always will.