marharth Posted September 12, 2011 Share Posted September 12, 2011 (edited) . Whether it was an accurate rendition or not really isn't relevant.China. A communist party is still in power. However is communism going on there? No, not really. The reality is, a dictatorship such as Stalin's, was never following communism. What you see is Stalin, and assume Communism is that. :laugh:That is true, but true communism is completely impossible. Words can change there meaning over time. Edited September 12, 2011 by marharth Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeyYou Posted September 12, 2011 Share Posted September 12, 2011 . Whether it was an accurate rendition or not really isn't relevant.China. A communist party is still in power. However is communism going on there? No, not really. The reality is, a dictatorship such as Stalin's, was never following communism. What you see is Stalin, and assume Communism is that. :laugh: I will grant that I paint 'communism' with broad strokes. Basically, how I define it, in its basest form (ignoring dictionary definitions, as that seldom holds true for ANY form of government) is, The People own nothing. Everything is owned by the state, and the state controls everything. From housing, to basic needs, etc. Where you live, where you work, how well you eat, is all decided by the state. There is little to no private ownership of 'real' property. (housing, business, land, etc.) China IS introducing some capitalistic elements into their nation, (ownership of cars, things of that nature...) but, for all intents and purposes, so far as I am concerned, they are still a communist nation. Folks can mince terms all they want, doesn't really matter to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grannywils Posted September 12, 2011 Share Posted September 12, 2011 Ghogiel, to a limited extent I must agree. However, in the U.S. I don't believe we live under a Democracy anymore either; at least not as it was intended (or "written") by the original framers of our Constitution. One more or less has to think outside the box, and recognize the intention of the government in question. In my opinion, there is no government today that is a true form of what it was intended, if you follow my meaning. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghogiel Posted September 12, 2011 Share Posted September 12, 2011 (edited) . Whether it was an accurate rendition or not really isn't relevant.China. A communist party is still in power. However is communism going on there? No, not really. The reality is, a dictatorship such as Stalin's, was never following communism. What you see is Stalin, and assume Communism is that. :laugh: I will grant that I paint 'communism' with broad strokes. Basically, how I define it, in its basest form (ignoring dictionary definitions, as that seldom holds true for ANY form of government) is, The People own nothing. Everything is owned by the state, and the state controls everything. From housing, to basic needs, etc. Where you live, where you work, how well you eat, is all decided by the state. There is little to no private ownership of 'real' property. (housing, business, land, etc.)The people own nothing? In the communist manifesto, it is for the ownership of personal property. Homes =/= factories You offering your skill is what decides where you work. If you are a doctor you work in a hospital. Teacher, you work in a school. Blacksmith, in a forge. And so on. This state doesn't control everything, in reality what it is is the community itself, you decide how to spend resource and the money generated in the economy, and from there see that you need to build housing, or more manufacture this or that. What is supposed to happen is that a doctor can offer much to society, but requires little basic needs. A crippled child doesn't offer much, but has greater needs. And yet both of those peoples needs are fulfilled. If we dropped all our socialist schemes tomorrow, I think a lot of people would be in life threatening danger. The property thing makes sense if you read up. Edited September 12, 2011 by Ghogiel Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nintii Posted September 12, 2011 Share Posted September 12, 2011 (edited) Ok, so this is no longer "Above the Law" ... unless of course you try to follow the line of the "sacred few" at the top with the rest of us at the bottom ... which brings to memory something I heard recently ... "Reach for the top, because the bottom is over-crowded" ... interesting that ... quite Anti-comminist don't you think ?Yes quite, because let's face it, and I quote; "Free will cannot be suppressed: Communism attempts the impossible: to control human individualism by making a society of inherently individual people uniform. Thought is free and independent and, no matter how hard anyone tries, can never be fully controlled. Communism and socialism depend upon ideological compliance with their theories, yet human nature prompts inevitable dissention from such theories. As a result, communism and socialism may achieve full compliance only through coercion, which in turn translates into communism and socialism's great failure. This failure led to the disastrous massacres of communism which were often attempts to combat opinions different from the communist governments. Try as it may, socialism and communism has never been able to destroy dissenting free thought and form a universal thought: one accepting of the communist/socialist theory necessary for such a theory to be implemented and succeed. It is simply human nature to ask questions and to look for the new and the alternative! " ................. end quote. Yup, I reckon you can equate communism as the "chicken religion' because we hate those who want to be eagles, we hate those who want to make their lives better, we despise those who have a dream to soar on the thermals of success ... hell no, you stay right here with us and you pukerk pukerk pukerk like the rest of us darling ... (pukerk - being the heavenly sound chickens and their ilk make) .... go ahead and say with me ... pukerk pukerk pukerk ... how liberating, I feel positively free now ... Ok, playtime over let's get back to some serious commie bashing, and everyone said "amen', well if you can't say amen then say ouch !So let's do the quick one, two to the groin ... and again I quote; The Bad Always End Up on Top: Due to the fact that free will exists even under the strictest attempts to oppress it simply due to human nature, compliance with socialism and communism becomes a major problem in a communist or socialist state. In order to combat this free will, noncompliance, disagreement, and dissension it often becomes necessary for an inherently unequal elite to assume authority and power in a communist state in effort to combat this problem. A concentration of widespread power arises at the top among those elite as a natural result of there existing a superior few. Just as Lord Acton noticed "absolute power corrupts absolutely," large amounts of power intensified in a small area tend to attract those hungry for power while corrupting those in power. Examples of "the bad" on top in control economies: Josef Stalin, Soviet Union Pol Pot, Kmehr Rouge Adolph Hitler, Germany under the National Socialist German Workers Party (nazi in short) Leonid Brezhnev, Soviet Union Fidel Castro, Cuba Mao Zedong, China Kim Il Sung, North Korea Tito, Yugoslavia Ho Chi Minh, Vietnam Huey P. Long, communist leaning governor of Louisiana in the 30's famous for 'removing' opposition .......................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... Communism's Death Toll: Communists and socialists will often tell you that capitalism "kills" the poor. Statistically, though, it is communism that is the cause of the greatest massacre in the history of the world. This results from starvation due to failed central economies, political killings of those defiant of the system, and killings due to the abuse of power and tyranny inherent and encouraged by an unchecked system. Approximately 100 MILLION deaths by direct murder worldwide can be traced to communism. Communism's massacres: - Soviet Union: between 20 and 50 million were put to death at the hands of this evil empire. (some estimates exceed upward of 50 million. As people were sent to camps, the Soviets often deleted all records of that persons existence making exact totals hard to find) Intentional starvings and man made famines were a major killer in the USSR. Worse were the gulag concentration camps (the Soviet equal to Hitler's concentration camps). At one point in 1940 Stalin held over 10 million people in the gulag camps. Enemies of the government were enslaved here then worked and tortured to death. Others were lined up in forests, shot, and buried in unmarked graves. In one Polish site from Stalin's occupation of Poland after treaty with Hitler in 1940, almost 5 thousand captured Polish POW's were lined up and shot at one time. Other cases involved 10 to 15 thousand being lined up and shot. The majority of these killings took place under Stalin's regime, often referred to as a "reign of terror." Stalin is estimated to have put 20% of Russia's population to death. - Cambodia: Under the Kmehr Rouge and regime of Pol Pot in the 1970's, one of the most extreme forms of communism ever was attempted. 2 million were massacred in killing fields in attempts to move toward this "equal form of communism." The reason behind these massacres came from an attempt to build an "equal" society though the only equality which resulted was death. Those who had distinguishing differences from the government's planned economy of farmers were murdered. Scientists, doctors, laborers, and teachers with non-agricultural professions were targeted and murdered because they differed from the agricultural profession and created inequalities in jobs. Pol Pot murdered an estimated one fourth of the population of Cambodia. - China: Mao Tse-Tung's "Great Step Forward" is widely known as the greatest disaster in attempt of a centralized economy. Countless millions were murdered and starved to death in China during this period. China also established a series of gulag concentration camps under Mao, complete with slave labor employing over 10 million people on numerous occasions. In fact, China still employs widespread forced labor today. Estimates on China suggest the total to be about 40 million dead. - Vietnam: Though the totals on Vietnam are unknown due to poor record keeping and the fact that Vietnam remains communist today, several hundred thousands were murdered in Stalinist fashion of execution and slave labor camps. - Others: other death tolls caused by communism by failed schemes in communist China and other communist countries add to the count as do the political prisoners of communism: many who only dared to think freely and differently from the government. Tito's Yugoslavia has estimates of around 1 million deaths to its credit. Mass murders occurred under the communist/socialist regimes of Fidel Castro in Cuba, Kim Il Sung's North Korea, Sandinista's in Nicaragua, Laos, and Ethiopia. In many of these places we will never know the extent of death caused as a DIRECT result of communism and socialism. ............................end quote. Edited September 12, 2011 by Nintii Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghogiel Posted September 12, 2011 Share Posted September 12, 2011 Sorry, but this forced uniform people, destroy dissenting free thought is nonsense. :confused: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ita Posted September 12, 2011 Share Posted September 12, 2011 China IS introducing some capitalistic elements into their nation, (ownership of cars, complete disregard for worker's rights and safety aspects, things of that nature...) but, for all intents and purposes, so far as I am concerned, they are still a communist nation. Folks can mince terms all they want, doesn't really matter to me. Fixed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marharth Posted September 12, 2011 Share Posted September 12, 2011 Sorry, but this forced uniform people, destroy dissenting free thought is nonsense. :confused:People no longer know what communism really is, they think it is a state controlled government like Soviet Russian when real communism is not. There is a reason we keep having to say "True Communism" and "Real Communism." That is because the words meaning has pretty much been changed over time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brokenergy Posted September 12, 2011 Share Posted September 12, 2011 Before I point out again that we are totally off topic here, I just need to ask, BE, did you read what you just wrote? Who cares what it says in political science books, if what happens in the real world is what actually happens? Don't you think that real world experience is going to give you a better idea of what life in general is all about. Aurielius gave you what I thought was an exemplary description of how communism actually worked in one instance (regardless of what it said in the books). I believe that was his point. And this particular old timer still has a functioning brain, thank you very much.... I said and I repeat; Political science is not related to modern history. What Stalin did during his time as leader has no bearing to the political theory of communism. When people talk about communism, we are discussing more in the differences in theory than in practice. When A talks about communism, most of the time he just brings facts that have nothing to do with communist theory but about practice. I know that Stalin did was horrible but it has nothing to do with communist theory, which pretty much everyone said that it doesn't work in practice. Also communist theory is about making everyone equal, classless society where people can democratically can chose which way to go (read it if you don't believe me). The whole point was to give power to the people to allow them to make their own choices rather than allowing governments and the elite to choose for them. There wasn't suppose to be a government, or trade or dictatorship but as seen in practice it doesn't work. That's why I'm against A and others because they are more focused on it's practice than its theory. It is bias. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeyYou Posted September 12, 2011 Share Posted September 12, 2011 Before I point out again that we are totally off topic here, I just need to ask, BE, did you read what you just wrote? Who cares what it says in political science books, if what happens in the real world is what actually happens? Don't you think that real world experience is going to give you a better idea of what life in general is all about. Aurielius gave you what I thought was an exemplary description of how communism actually worked in one instance (regardless of what it said in the books). I believe that was his point. And this particular old timer still has a functioning brain, thank you very much.... I said and I repeat; Political science is not related to modern history. What Stalin did during his time as leader has no bearing to the political theory of communism. When people talk about communism, we are discussing more in the differences in theory than in practice. When A talks about communism, most of the time he just brings facts that have nothing to do with communist theory but about practice. I know that Stalin did was horrible but it has nothing to do with communist theory, which pretty much everyone said that it doesn't work in practice. Also communist theory is about making everyone equal, classless society where people can democratically can chose which way to go (read it if you don't believe me). The whole point was to give power to the people to allow them to make their own choices rather than allowing governments and the elite to choose for them. There wasn't suppose to be a government, or trade or dictatorship but as seen in practice it doesn't work. That's why I'm against A and others because they are more focused on it's practice than its theory. It is bias. This topic is NOT about political theory of communism. It's supposedly about are/should folks in government (be) above the law. This tangent you are running off on has no relevance to the topic at all. While what there was in soviet russia may not have been what textbooks consider "communism", nonetheless, that's what they called it..... in any event, that point doesn't even matter to the topic at hand. So, can we get back on topic please? This ^ Locking the topic for awhile so it can cool off. - Vagrant0 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts