Let me ask you a couple questions...

[lord of flies]

If you love Communism so much, move to Cuba.

Positive change can be made in every country, not just one.

 

Imagine for a moment, a world where every country is communist except for, say, a Batista-run Cuba and a military junta in Korea. You still love capitalism, for some godforsaken reason. Would "If you love capitalism so much, move to Cuba" be a valid response?

[Walsingham]

- Yes, er... the military does require a dictatorial degree of control over it. The more powerful the military become the mroe closely they have to be monitored. The British army has two complete chains of command, three police forces, and three legal systems before you get to the civil power monitoring it all.

 

- I never said the state wasn't bloodied. But there's a difference between the amount of violence required to stop people from doing extremely weird things like murder, and the amount required to stop people doing normal things like wanting their own house.

 

- By capital I mean private ownership.

[I want teh kotor 3]

If you love Communism so much, move to Cuba.

Positive change can be made in every country, not just one.

 

Imagine for a moment, a world where every country is communist except for, say, a Batista-run Cuba and a military junta in Korea. You still love capitalism, for some godforsaken reason. Would "If you love capitalism so much, move to Cuba" be a valid response?

 

Yeah. If, somehow, America became Commie, I'd be on the first plane out.

[lord of flies]

- Yes, er... the military does require a dictatorial degree of control over it. The more powerful the military become the mroe closely they have to be monitored. The British army has two complete chains of command, three police forces, and three legal systems before you get to the civil power monitoring it all.

Functional bureaucracy is not the same as dictatorship, comrade. Again, does the bus or train system require a dictatorship?

- I never said the state wasn't bloodied. But there's a difference between the amount of violence required to stop people from doing extremely weird things like murder, and the amount required to stop people doing normal things like wanting their own house.

People can own their own houses in socialist economies. In the Soviet Union, you could own a house as long as you didn't rent it out or otherwise use it to acquire capital. Personal property and private property in the socialist economy are very different thing.

- By capital I mean private ownership.

Actually, the idea of "private ownership" in the sense that the West currently uses it (that you can own large tracts of lands, structures, raw liquid capital, etc) is pretty much completely new and not historically relevant at all.

Yeah. If, somehow, America became Commie, I'd be on the first plane out.

Then I guess we're different people.

[mkreku]

It would be fun to see just how well Cuba would be doing for themselves if the (incredibly unfair) embargo was finally lifted. I'm thinking the US government are actually afraid to lift it because it might show Americans that a Communist nation CAN survive and thrive, despite everything American's seem to be taught in school.

[Trenitay]

I don't remember any school teaching me that communism is bad.

[Hurlshort]

I don't remember any school teaching me that communism is bad.

 

Kids usually figure that out by themselves with the purges and lack of quite a few personal freedoms.

 

And then there are my students, who are from China and Korea and see first hand the differences between the two types of government.

[Guard Dog]

It would be fun to see just how well Cuba would be doing for themselves if the (incredibly unfair) embargo was finally lifted. I'm thinking the US government are actually afraid to lift it because it might show Americans that a Communist nation CAN survive and thrive, despite everything American's seem to be taught in school.

Oh for Gods sake... There are 196 recognized nation states on earth. Cuba is free to trade with 194 of them. But it's the US that wrecking their economy huh? Give me a break.

[lord of flies]

Oh for Gods sake... There are 196 recognized nation states on earth. Cuba is free to trade with 194 of them. But it's the US that wrecking their economy huh? Give me a break.

Its economy is fine, better than China's per capita.

I don't remember any school teaching me that communism is bad.

Ever read 1984 or Animal Farm? What's the moral of those books.

[Trenitay]

Nope. I've only had very limited exposure to both those books and none of it was in school.

[Hiro Protagonist]

Ever read 1984 or Animal Farm? What's the moral of those books.

 

No, never read them and they were never taught at my school when I was a kid. However, I did watch the 1954 Animal Farm cartoon (when I was a kid) on TV and the message I got from it at the time was, as long as you were able to get your way up to the top, you'll be better off than being one of the workers down at the bottom of the food chain. eg. Politican, Doctor, Manager/Boss, etc are better off than a Nurse, employee, etc.

Edited January 25, 2010 by Hiro Protagonist

[mkreku]

Oh for Gods sake... There are 196 recognized nation states on earth. Cuba is free to trade with 194 of them. But it's the US that wrecking their economy huh? Give me a break.

Gee, then everything must be OK! Cuba are free to trade with Micronesia.. one of the 194 other countries affected by the Helms-Burton act. The UN must be crazy since 183 out of those nations who are free to trade with Cuba voted to end the embargo! Give me a break.

 

"International Sanctions against the Cuban Government. Economic embargo, any non-US company that deals economically with Cuba can be subjected to legal action and that company's leadership can be barred from entry into the United States. Sanctions may be applied to non-U.S. companies trading with Cuba. This means that internationally operating companies have to choose between Cuba and the US, which is a much larger market."

 

Like I said, it would be fun to see where Cuba would go once the embargo was lifted.

[Killian Kalthorne]

Yay! Another LoF thread of Communism good, capitalism bad thread! If communism is so good, LoF why is it the US was the first to be called on when there is major disasters? When there is war on the horizon, who is the first to respond against aggression and tyranny? When it comes to some of the greatest inventions and technological accomplishments of the modern era who is the forefront? The United States of America, a capitalistic country.

 

First to invent the electric computer. First to reach the moon. Fundamentally essential to stopped tyrannical aggression in both world wars. Capitalism is the means in which we continue to bring innovation and achievement in the world. Communism and socialism ultimately breeds laziness in the masses, corruption in those in power.

[Oner]

When it comes to some of the greatest inventions and technological accomplishments of the modern era who is the forefront?

Germans and Hungarians? Scientists from various countries living in the US? Scientists from various countries living outside the US?

Edited January 25, 2010 by Oner

[213374U]

Ever read 1984 or Animal Farm? What's the moral of those books.

Among other things, that ideology is just a fa

[Tigranes]

And then there are my students, who are from China and Korea and see first hand the differences between the two types of government.

 

Wait, what?

[lord of flies]

Yay! Another LoF thread of Communism good, capitalism bad thread! If communism is so good, LoF why is it the US was the first to be called on when there is major disasters? When there is war on the horizon, who is the first to respond against aggression and tyranny? When it comes to some of the greatest inventions and technological accomplishments of the modern era who is the forefront? The United States of America, a capitalistic country.

 

First to invent the electric computer. First to reach the moon. Fundamentally essential to stopped tyrannical aggression in both world wars. Capitalism is the means in which we continue to bring innovation and achievement in the world.

Whoa, what a bunch of random garbage. Can't defend capitalism so you have to resort to some random accomplishments people living under it made? The Soviets were the first to space. Dead Hand is vastly more moral than the nuclear football. Et cetera.

 

Why is the world's largest economy and largest military spender by far most capable of projecting force? A question for the mother****ing ages. Also, see how the United States strikes against Israeli aggression on the Palestinian people? Truly, a most moral nation.

Communism and socialism ultimately breeds laziness in the masses, corruption in those in power.

[citation needed]

[Oner]

American intervention was decisive, but not in the sense and proportion you seem to believe.

America's apathy was decisive too.

 

When it comes to some of the greatest inventions and technological accomplishments of the modern era who is the forefront?

Germans and Hungarians? Scientists from various countries living in the US? Scientists from various countries living outside the US?

 

Yeah, but why do they go live in the US?

Probably exactly what you think the reason is. My beef is with the America fanwanking.

 

 

Communism and socialism ultimately breeds laziness in the masses, corruption in those in power.

[citation needed]

I faintly remember something from history classes, involving mass depression and -bridge-jumping. Oil crisis was involved, but only half the cause.

[Moose]

All I'm getting from this thread is nobody milks cows for the fun and pleasure of it.

[Humodour]

I don't remember any school teaching me that communism is bad.

Ever read 1984 or Animal Farm? What's the moral of those books.

 

1984 is one of the most powerful and instructive books around and it's message isn't "communism is evil" it's "totalitarianism is evil". The fact that you confuse the two so easily is indicative of your inability to distinguish the two.

 

Ingsoc is as close to socialism or communism as Nazism was. I.e.: they both include the word 'socialism' in the name and that's about where the similarities to socialism end (cue Wrath of Dagon trying to 'explain' to us how Nazism and Fascism are left-wing).

[lord of flies]

1984 is one of the most powerful and instructive books around and it's message isn't "communism is evil" it's "totalitarianism is evil". The fact that you confuse the two so easily is indicative of your inability to distinguish the two.

 

Ingsoc is as close to socialism or communism as Nazism was. I.e.: they both include the word 'socialism' in the name and that's about where the similarities to socialism end (cue Wrath of Dagon trying to 'explain' to us how Nazism and Fascism are left-wing).

I know that, jesus. Eric Blair was a pretty prominent British socialist. In American class rooms, however, the moral of 1984 and Animal Farm are taught as being "Socialism is bad," even though it isn't.

 

"Maybe the farmer wasn't so bad" is often taught to be the moral of Animal Farm.

[Walsingham]

All you ever do is say how loveliness is socialist. Yet you completely deny that a planned highly controlled economy requires a dictatorial degree of control.

Does a planned highly controlled military require a dictatorial degree of control? Does a planned highly controlled police force require a dictatorial degree of control? Does a planned highly controlled mass transit system require a dictatorial degree of control? The proper functioning of a state system requires control, but don't use such loaded words as "dictatorial" just because you love a tiny minority dominating your economic system.

That would be blind were it not for the fact that you have on several occasions stated your willingness to see blood flow freely in pursuit - no maintenance - of this utopia. Your argument that the violence would be meted out by local committees and is thereby somehow OK reveals your 'reason' as no more than ivory tower mental flatulence. Trapped flatus caused by excess and importune consumption of large heavy texts.

All order relies on implied force, and all implied force relies on actual force. Believe what you like, but the capitalist society I live in is hardly bloodless and unstained.

There is no difference between the communist who would ban private capital because it 'causes' violence and the religious fanatic who would ban sex because it does the same. Both 'problems' are fundamental to human behaviour, and attempts to prohibit them are futile and cause pointless suffering.

 

How, exactly, can private capital be "fundamental to human behavior," when for most of human history we did not even have currency?

 

Thus far it seems your definition of communism means nothing more than a high tax rate on high earners coupled with ... er... not much. Seems pretty weak tea, to be honest.

[lord of flies]

Thus far it seems your definition of communism means nothing more than a high tax rate on high earners coupled with ... er... not much. Seems pretty weak tea, to be honest.

Strong, centrally planned economy? Redistribution of the political system so that power resides with the broad masses? Complete removal of the investor as a social class? Edited January 25, 2010 by lord of flies

[Walsingham]

Thus far it seems your definition of communism means nothing more than a high tax rate on high earners coupled with ... er... not much. Seems pretty weak tea, to be honest.

Strong, centrally planned economy? Redistribution of the political system so that power resides with the broad masses? Complete removal of the investor as a social class?

 

I thought you were in favour of local planning committees. Because you know, centrally planned economies don't freaking work. But then if you want to remove the concept of investors you've clearly got as much grasp of economic behaviour as a concussed bee. Your ideal state is going to be a desert bereft of initiative and scattered with huge failed government projects.

 

Redistribution of power to the masses sounds nice, but how precisely do you propose doing that? Especially given you will refuse to allow those masses the right to invest in anything.

[lord of flies]

I thought you were in favour of local planning committees. Because you know, centrally planned economies don't freaking work. But then if you want to remove the concept of investors you've clearly got as much grasp of economic behaviour as a concussed bee. Your ideal state is going to be a desert bereft of initiative and scattered with huge failed government projects.

Actually, I take a lot of economics and economics related courses for my degree, I probably know more about economics than you since I recognize that centrally planned economies have worked.

 

"Gosplan? A fiction! Soviet industrialization? Bull****!"

-Walsingham

 

As for local planning committees, all power flows down. Organized broad plan, localized small application. Government says "we need to increase heavy industry by 22% by the end of next year," local planning committees get delegated the job of actually doing it, just like in a firmly centrally planned economy.

Redistribution of power to the masses sounds nice, but how precisely do you propose doing that? Especially given you will refuse to allow those masses the right to invest in anything.

That's how you give them power. If people can invest, they can accrue large amounts of raw capital, giving them an unfair political advantage, period.