Jump to content

Photo

Why is communism a bad word?


  • Please log in to reply
172 replies to this topic

#41
Lisnpuppy

Lisnpuppy

    Acta non verba

  • Premium Member
  • 13,237 posts

@HeyYou

 

Amen, Brother.



#42
Aurielius

Aurielius

    ProConsul

  • Premium Member
  • 3,354 posts

"If men were angels, no government would be necessary. If angels were to govern men, neither external nor internal controls on government would be necessary. In framing a government which is to be administered by men over men, the great difficulty lies in this: you must first enable the government to control the governed; and in the next place oblige it to control itself. A dependence on the people is, no doubt, the primary control on the government; but experience has taught mankind the necessity of auxiliary precautions."- James Madison, Federalist Papers



#43
JimmyRJump

JimmyRJump

    MoralMinority

  • Premium Member
  • 10,804 posts

A political theory without any reference to it's real world applications is called speculative utopian fiction.

While it is you that turns an essay in humanitarian philosophy into a political pamphlet.  That's like saying tomatoes are a very bad fruit because they're used to throw at entertainers in theatres.  Engels' and Marx' Communist Manifest has little to do with what politicians made of it.  That's why there's Marxism, Trotskism, Leninism, Stalinism and a few other isms I forget.  Someone somewhere captured them all under the Communism moniker and that's where everybody is wrong.



#44
HeyYou

HeyYou

    Resident poster

  • Supporter
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,132 posts

 

A political theory without any reference to it's real world applications is called speculative utopian fiction.

While it is you that turns an essay in humanitarian philosophy into a political pamphlet.  That's like saying tomatoes are a very bad fruit because they're used to throw at entertainers in theatres.  Engels' and Marx' Communist Manifest has little to do with what politicians made of it.  That's why there's Marxism, Trotskism, Leninism, Stalinism and a few other isms I forget.  Someone somewhere captured them all under the Communism moniker and that's where everybody is wrong.

 

But it is also why communism will never work. Each of those 'leaders' had their own vision of how things should be. (tilted to their advantage, of course.) They all twisted the original idea into what they wanted. A consequence of dealing with humans.



#45
PkSanTi

PkSanTi

    Regular

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 94 posts
Yes... Except we are not asking wether it would or wouldn't work, but trying to make an approximation to Marx ideas that's, so to speak, washed and cleaned from the interpretations and prejudices that some governments caused on people. A Marx approximation through Marx. That's the first orientation point I made on the post; not all followed it. As Jimmy said, we don't say tomatoes are bad because they were used as ammunition against people, haha. Then returning to the actual question: why MARXISM (not stalinism, maoism or leininism...) is a bad word? Can't we learn to read an author ignoring what people made of him? Because in that case Nietzsche was a son of a bitc* because he was the philosopher of Nazism. But we read him and respect him because we know he is something else than what Nazism made of him.

Just trying to re-orientate the discussion.

#46
HeyYou

HeyYou

    Resident poster

  • Supporter
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,132 posts

Yes... Except we are not asking wether it would or wouldn't work, but trying to make an approximation to Marx ideas that's, so to speak, washed and cleaned from the interpretations and prejudices that some governments caused on people. A Marx approximation through Marx. That's the first orientation point I made on the post; not all followed it. As Jimmy said, we don't say tomatoes are bad because they were used as ammunition against people, haha. Then returning to the actual question: why MARXISM (not stalinism, maoism or leininism...) is a bad word? Can't we learn to read an author ignoring what people made of him? Because in that case Nietzsche was a son of a bitc* because he was the philosopher of Nazism. But we read him and respect him because we know he is something else than what Nazism made of him.

Just trying to re-orientate the discussion.

Because, as is typical for humans, they are all forms of Communism, which got a bad rep in most places that were NOT the soviet union, and folks don't make the distinction between the various forms. They are all "communism". Therefore, bad.



#47
Lisnpuppy

Lisnpuppy

    Acta non verba

  • Premium Member
  • 13,237 posts

"If men were angels, no government would be necessary. If angels were to govern men, neither external nor internal controls on government would be necessary. In framing a government which is to be administered by men over men, the great difficulty lies in this: you must first enable the government to control the governed; and in the next place oblige it to control itself. A dependence on the people is, no doubt, the primary control on the government; but experience has taught mankind the necessity of auxiliary precautions."- James Madison, Federalist Papers

 

Isn't that kinda what I said earlier?  In my own, craptastic sounding way?  Ha ha ha



#48
TheMastersSon

TheMastersSon

    Old hand

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 939 posts

"If men were angels, no government would be necessary. If angels were to govern men, neither external nor internal controls on government would be necessary. In framing a government which is to be administered by men over men, the great difficulty lies in this: you must first enable the government to control the governed; and in the next place oblige it to control itself. A dependence on the people is, no doubt, the primary control on the government; but experience has taught mankind the necessity of auxiliary precautions."- James Madison, Federalist Papers


Isn't that kinda what I said earlier? In my own, craptastic sounding way? Ha ha ha
I think it's what most people said in this debate. Communism is a bad word in Western countries for the same reason capitalism is a bad word in Communist countries: because any theories can sound great on paper, but the common and undebatable limitation among everybody including Marx is human nature.

Edited by TheMastersSon, 03 February 2018 - 05:39 AM.


#49
Lisnpuppy

Lisnpuppy

    Acta non verba

  • Premium Member
  • 13,237 posts

 

 

"If men were angels, no government would be necessary. If angels were to govern men, neither external nor internal controls on government would be necessary. In framing a government which is to be administered by men over men, the great difficulty lies in this: you must first enable the government to control the governed; and in the next place oblige it to control itself. A dependence on the people is, no doubt, the primary control on the government; but experience has taught mankind the necessity of auxiliary precautions."- James Madison, Federalist Papers


Isn't that kinda what I said earlier? In my own, craptastic sounding way? Ha ha ha
I think it's what most people said in this debate. Communism is a bad word in Western countries for the same reason capitalism is a bad word in Communist countries: because any theories can sound great on paper, but the common and undebatable limitation among everybody including Marx is human nature.

 

 

I was thinking more of what I said about pure communism needing a incorruptible government and pure capitalism relying on the perfect charity of the public in which to function.



#50
Fkemman11

Fkemman11

    Filthy Animal

  • Premium Member
  • 2,662 posts

I think Fascism worked because of harsh penalties for those who did not cooperate or at least act like loyal Nazis. But, it wasn't just that I believe. Most of those people really believed in what the Fascist Party was about and actively supported the idea of personal sacrifice for the greater good of their country and fellow countrymen. Loyalty to the system, at one time, ran very, very deep in that country. I mean loyalty was fanatical- as most of us know. Only through force will any meaningful and long lasting changes ever be made in the freedom loving democracies of today. Corruption and Crime in general are far less of a problem in societies where the citizens believe in their leaders motives and their abilities... or fear them. I am not advocating this course of action, but, I see no other clear alternative. You must either capture the people's imagination and make them want to follow you or you must force them in order to make any form of govt succeed to begin with and continue to function well throughout whatever time and circumstance allow. A ruthless dictator- it seems- is sometimes needed to affect significant change.

 

As stated already, Communism was both feared and despised in Democratic societies due mostly to propaganda and an unwillingness for people to both think for themselves or question their leaders- mainly due to faith in their govt. They didn't always agree with them- but they believed they were competent and had the Country's welfare at heart. Men like Harry Truman and J. Edgar Hoover helped cement the idea that Communism- in any form- was an enemy to Democracy and needed to be fought wherever it was found. Commie Reds were the villains in most Americans minds from the end of WWII onward. Then you have Korea, Vietnam, and the Cuban Missile Crises among other things that reinforced westerners rejection of anything to do with Communism. That sentiment among Americans has subsided in the last several decades since the tearing down of the Berlin Wall- again like has been mentioned. But, that distrust that has been taught by each generations parents does not just disappear- especially with accusations and rumors still circulating about countries that are Communist like Russia and some others. I, personally do not trust Russian leadership. But, that has very little to do with them being "Commies" and is more of a coincidence.






Page loaded in: 0.984 seconds