Capitalism VS Communism
Capitalism
Side Score: 243
|
 |
Communism
Side Score: 239
|
|
|
|
|
Capitalism is better. Communism enslaves each individual to the community. Capitalism allows each individual to be free and independent. Communism never makes progress because individuals are not given a just reward for improving things, while capitalism constantly improves. Communism lacks the economic freedom of choice to the fullest extent possible, in Capitalism people are free to choose what they want. Communism gives the lazy as much as the hard working, while capitalism allows each individual to sell their labor, creating a result where the hardest working are rewarded in accordance to how hard they work. In capitalism each person is independent, in communism each person is interdependent, interdependence is a form of slavery. In communism people work where the central Government tells them to, while in capitalism they work where they want. Side: Capitalism
8
points
First off, the objective of Communism is the freedom of the individual. Communism does not give the lazy as much as the hard-working, 8th Plank of the communist manifesto- Those who do NOT contribute to the collective good will not get the fruits of labor of the collective good. And you are free in a communist society because no longer will you have to live in poverty. And what do you mean by no economic freedom, there is no such thing as money in communism."In communism people work where the central Government tells them to" There is no state in a communist society and before the state disappears, everyone is the government, "Dictatorship Of The Proletariat"-A temporary dictatorship of the WORKING CLASS, until the state disappears. Side: Communism
Its a delusional objective...because the centralization of industry elimates the freedom of choice to buy what one wants, and work where one wants. Added it may not reward anything to those who give no contribution, but it gives no reward for how much one contributes. Side: Capitalism
Why the hell would you want a collective good? Those who do NOT contribute to the collective good will not get the fruits of labor of the collective good. Next sentence you say And you are free in a communist society because no longer will you have to live in poverty. Then what the fuck happens to the lazy? Do they get exterminated? Deported? Jailed? Communism is a fat contradiction. Stalin and many others have already proved that Communism does not work. Side: Capitalism
3
points
Capitalism is always distorted by the left into this selfish mentality that all you crave is money. Capitalism begins with the right of private property. It means the separation of state and the economy, in the same form that the state does not control religion. It is a system in which mans actions are voluntary, and not forced, they are free to comply or not, based upon their own convictions and values, not upon what the state believes is in the best interest of the "greater good" Side: Capitalism
1
point
If capitalism is better than communism, then why did the major capitals (UK, U.S., USA) live on the economic crisis? Which is why there is this crisis depressing? Why capitalist countries are on the verge of bankrupt? Was it because the working class will don't want working or the monopoly guy want to take care of money? Capitalism living in money and exploiting the working class! This is the biggest flaw of capitalism. If capitalism is freedom, then freedom is just a theory. So it is better to say that the capitalist world live in a dictatorship and not a democracy! Side: Communism
umm can you name one prosperous communist country, o wait me neither! you call this economic crises in the free world, i agree. but the last "successful" communist country russia collapsed in economic turmoil due to communism. also it would be suprising to you to know that much of our turmoil is government caused. for instance our deflating dollar and realestate bubble pop. caused by the wonderful FED printing money out of thin air with out any support value faster than i can pass go in monopoly after rolling double ones. the housing bubble pop, the cause of fannie mac and banks loaning credit to bad buyers from encouragement by our great government. i agree capitalism has many problems. but in a imperfect world i must pick the lesser of two evils, that is capitalism. Side: Capitalism
1
point
You see, I do understand your reasoning for being a crapitalist, however crapitalism is only good for the people who are privileged and wealthy (Usually Straight White Males). The people of lower class and minorities can't always control their oppression in a capitalist government, which is why communism is a good alternative for everyone. everyone is treated equal, no more, no less. I feel that the people who don't like communism are typically narcissists who think they deserve more than everybody else. Side: Communism
To the extreme either system of distribution is doomed to failure due to human nature. Some utopian change in human nature, or an over abundance of all necessities coupled with some end to the need for undesirable labor (labor people tend not to want to do, like dig ditches), would lead to communism as a more desirable system when we are speaking of the extremes. As it is, in order for the majority of humans to have a desire to contribute to their society, it requires incentive. Financial gain is the incentive that works best at this point it would seem. Side: Capitalism
2
points
To the extreme either system of distribution is doomed to failure due to human nature. Can you please clarify what you mean by “human nature?” I will say that I agree that either side of the communism vs. capitalism debate taken to the extreme is doomed to failure. But I think I would disagree with you on the cause of such a failure depending on how you view human nature. I believe that we are simply born into a corrupt system, and any attempt at adjusting to that corrupt system only makes someone corrupt. Not because it’s in our nature to be corrupt, but because it’s in our nature to react to stimuli in order to survive. Do you believe that it is in humans’ nature to be greedy or competitive or whatever? Or do you think it’s in our nature to react to a situation in order to survive. If the former, than I can see why you would think human nature is the cause of the systems failure. If the latter, I find it hard to see how that would be a cause to the failure but rather a symptom to something more fundamental within the system itself. Some utopian change in human nature I don’t think anyone is suggesting a “utopian” change to anything, just a more productive/ethical change to the system that is currently in effect. I don’t believe we will ever be perfect, but there’s no sense in trying to submit to a system that doesn’t work or that only benefits a select few when there are far better methods. an over abundance of all necessities coupled with some end to the need for undesirable labor Indeed, scarcity is the issue. And it’s even scarcity that creates some of those undesirable jobs. At any rate, and this is just my opinion, I believe technology is the method for bringing about such a change. That, and a drastic change in incentive and fellowship. As it is, in order for the majority of humans to have a desire to contribute to their society, it requires incentive. Financial gain is the incentive that works best at this point it would seem. Yes, as unfortunate as it is, I agree that financial gain is the fabricated incentive of our time. And even more unfortunate that a catastrophe is required to bring us together and see new incentives, namely the simple selfless incentive of the well being of our fellow human. Side: Capitalism
Do you believe that it is in humans’ nature to be greedy or competitive or whatever? Or do you think it’s in our nature to react to a situation in order to survive. If the former, than I can see why you would think human nature is the cause of the systems failure. If the latter, I find it hard to see how that would be a cause to the failure but rather a symptom to something more fundamental within the system itself. Our nature is what causes societies, governments, etc. to function as they do. If our nature were different than our societies would be different. Hundreds of thousands of years of evolution dictating which views/behaviors in society best survive trumps that, over the last few thousand years or so, a handful of humans (compared to total populations) have realized that by changing, or at least understanding and controlling, our nature could theoretically lead to better societies for the whole. The idea that governments and societies are somehow the driving force, and can so easily be changed in their nature, is an illusion. We collectively presently are bound by our loose pack/tribal nature. Bury in communism, democracy, feudilism, combined with any system for the exchanging of goods and services, and you have the same individualism clashing with pack instinct which makes us what we are. That is not to say some systems don't have better results for the whole. What it does mean, basically, is society is what it is because of us, we are not what we are because of society. I don’t think anyone is suggesting a “utopian” change to anything, just a more productive/ethical change to the system that is currently in effect. I don’t believe we will ever be perfect, but there’s no sense in trying to submit to a system that doesn’t work or that only benefits a select few when there are far better methods. So, say you are a caveman and basically it's a family unit where the strongest male rapes and steals whatever he likes, and since we're human and cannot survive on our own in the wild, what with mamoths and saber tooth tigers, we still stick around despite the inherent injustice of our lot in life (unless you should happen to be the biggest strongest male). If you are a lucky caveman tribe there are several "strongest" males so the power is somewhat balanced hopefully making things a little more fair, but it still likely sucks by todays standards for all but them. Okay, our society would seem utopian to that caveman. However, their nature deemed that utopian change in society impossible. It has been through our long development that the strongest male raping and pilaging has become less advantageous to our survival. I'd argue "Some utopian change in human nature" is not only possible, but our natural tendency. It's just that it takes hundreds of thousands of years for us to naturally develop in that direction. So, not sure what my point was. But I actually do argue for utopian change. I just feel it takes so long that the time we get there it does not seem so drastic or utopian. Indeed, scarcity is the issue. And it’s even scarcity that creates some of those undesirable jobs. At any rate, and this is just my opinion, I believe technology is the method for bringing about such a change. That, and a drastic change in incentive and fellowship. Agreed. And I think technology has accelerated the perceived change. Technolgoy is natural though, despite its designation otherwise. It was inevitable form the time the first caveman used a rock to break a nut, that some day if we survived we'd have airplanes, supercomputers, and smart phones. It is innevitable that if we survive, in a hundred thousand years we will have technologies that make smart phones, airplanes, and supercomputers look like a caveman using a rock to crack open a nut. And our societies will look just as primitive, brutal, and unfair to those future people as cavemen look to us today. Side: Capitalism
2
points
this shouldn't even be a debate. factual every other communist society besides the two we still have today have all failed. communism has factual led every country to poverty. communism is one of the most unmotivating systems ever. why would i go be a doctor when i could sweep floors and still live the same life? drive and motivation is what encourages people to work hard and better themselves. the reward you get from something determines how much effort you will put into it and communism just creates a lazy country. it sounds nice on the outside but it cannot work in a country like the USA. there's too many selfish people that want to be better than you. Side: Capitalism
4
points
Those are not even communist societies. There has never been a communist society. Communism calls for a STATELESS society. Oh and by the way. You don't get paid the same. I am tired of saying this- 8th plank of the Communist Manifesto, those who do not contribute to the collective good will not receive the fruits of labor of the collective good, this is obviously stating that you need to work to survive. So all of your arguments are misconceptions. Oh and for that greed argument- If you live in a bad society where based on wants and competition, you will be greedy , if you live in a society based on helping you will be humanitarian. Side: Communism
Communism is a form of government NOT a society. Stop trying to make comparisons with what is humans interacting with one another (society) and humans governing one another (government). Commies like to use wording to make it seem like the people run the show when it's a person running the show. Side: Capitalism
5
points
8
points
Those countries were not communist, communism has never existed, I hear the same arguments over and over again and they are flawed because they think those countries were communist when they were not. Heard of "Dictatorship Of The Proletariat"? That is when the working class takes over the state until the state disappears. Side: Communism
4
points
At the end of the day, neither side is really 'free'. Both sides depend on people working, it's necessary to maintain any form of social or economic structure. But, in communism, you're not motivated at an individual level for the work that you do, whereas in capitalism, the ideal is that the harder/better you work, the more you receive from the community. Not only would I work better in this model, but I feel it is better at motivating the group, and developing society. One of the main issues I do have with Capitalism is the difference between self interest and collective interest: they're hardly the same in many cases. That's why a mixed economy is needed, and where I feel that government interest is justified. Side: Capitalism
3
points
That is the same argument which states that you get paid the same, however, according to the 8th plank of the communist manifesto by Karl Marx, Those who do not contribute to the collective good will not receive their share from the fruit of labor from the collective good . So you see, those who work will get rewarded accordingly. and if you think that Capitalism gives more motivation than Socialism, then I would like to point out that Socialist countries like Cuba, have more doctors per capital, and the fact that Socialist countries have lower unemployment rates, in fact one of the world's lowest unemployment rates. Side: Communism
What do you really know about Cuba? You have to bring your own blanket to a hospital so run down and nasty you are more likely to die of an infection acquired there than if they performed surgery in your own home. I know many Cubans who have family there. They will tell you the abject poverty those poor people live in. If Capitalism is primarily driven by greed, then Communism is driven by envy. As communist countries either go capitalist or fail time and again... it amazes me that people still believe in it with a damn near religious fervor. Actually... it IS religion to many people and we should treat it as such. Side: Capitalism
2
points
3
points
1
point
2
points
1
point
3
points
A quick look at history proves that, while communism looks great on paper, it ALWAYS degenerates into a crushing of the masses in favor of the elite. There is absolutely no exception that you can point to. Yes, capitalism has problems in that it is always a reflection of people and their selfishness, but so does communism, and that without any of the benefits of capitalism. Side: Capitalism
2
points
What history? Communism has never existed! And if you want to see how a communist society is actually supposed to function, you could go visit those communist communes and villages. It is Impossible for communism to favor the elite because a communist society is supposed to be classless and stateless. Look up "Dictatorship Of The Proletariat". USSR was not communist, Cuba is not communist (Cuba is not a bad place actually) and North Korea is not communist. So those countries will never prove that communism is bad. Side: Communism
1
point
Have you read any of the stories of the many communes which sprang up during the 'Hippie' days? There were a few i visited north of San Francisco, and many others up and down the west coast, and probably in Europe too. They qualify as history. None of them survived beyond a decade or so. Why? Human nature. Eventually someone or some group discovers that they can run the show and take a bigger slice of the pie. Or some decide that they can't work as hard, and it is unfair that they are shorted at distribution time. How exactly do you determine fair distribution? For every 10 people you ask, you are likely to get 11 different answers. And there will always be the slug who does not work. Can the group really just cut him off? Sorry. Great theory, but reality does not back it up. Never has, never will. That's why you can find countless versions of capitalism in history (and many of them did very well) , but no examples of communism that last long enough to be called successful. Side: Capitalism
2
points
Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Communism may look great in paper, but there is not one instance of socialism that has worked in practice. The fundamental flaw to the "Marxist Theory" is that there is too much power in too few hands. This has and will always result in corruption as the few are made accountable to no one. Capitalism is flawed there is no denying that, but communism especially the ones practiced by Vietnam, Nepal, Cyprus, disguise themselves as being democratic while taking away the fundamental human rights of their people. This debate is important because it affects people, and while capitalism is flawed, communism in essence caters to the will of a favored few. This is simple matter of choosing the lesser of the two evils. Side: Capitalism
1
point
Just a reminder, don't jump between communism and Socialism because we are talking about socialism. Cuban doctors invented the lung cancer vaccine and there are doctors in Cuba per capital. That is a fact I put up in case you are going to talk about Socialism. Side: Communism
Communism is pure hell on earth. I talk to people who are from communist countries. That's the only argument you need. If these countries aren't communist then why do they say they are? Just because the p.o.s who got into power didn't want to give it up doesn't mean it's not a communist country. It's the indicator of why communism is fundamentally flawed...humans aren't machines!! Take off the Rosey Glasses and wake up to the atrocities of the last century imposed on innocents by commies. If you want communism, go fix N.Korea. Side: Capitalism
4
points
Let me remind you those countries were not communist if you want to know what commuism is supposed to be like then read 'The Communist Manifesto" before you go around claiming that there was a communist regime. Oh and communism calls for no countries and the borders to be removed. Side: Communism
3
points
The USSR stood for Union Of Soviet SOCIALIST REPUBLICS. And DPRK stood for Democratic People's Republic Of Korea, the name sounds nice but North Korea democratic? No. But by you logic it is because they called themselves democratic. North Korea is not communist, get over it. And if you are going to call Cuba communist, I would just like you to know that people happy living there and it is not hell as you would describe it. And the majority of Cubans like Fidel Castro. You can't argue with me on that one because I am Cuban-Syrian. Side: Communism
You can't ask them because they're living under a dictatorship and They claim they like Castro because they have to! You had more freedom because you are a cuban syrian and not just a cuban all the way! They do have universal healthcare and so does all the other industrilized nations! Even Israel, who needs to fund their militery so they don't you know DIE, has a universal healthcare system! Side: Capitalism
2
points
Those countries never said they are communist, they said they were socialist republics and even if they did call themselves communist, then by your logic, East Germany was great for the people because it called itself, The German DEMOCRATIC Republic. And it is an absolute fact that communism as a great nation never existed but it did exist as small communes or villages. There are some in the valleys of Spain and North America. Side: Communism
I would also like to point out that this argument is between an economic structure (capitalism) and a form of government (communism). It should be between either Federal Republic and Communism or Capitalism and Command and Controlled Economy. To compare an economy structure to a form of government is like apples to oranges. Whatever though. Side: Capitalism
4
points
I would like to point out that communism is also an economic system and there is no ruler if not the ruler is everyone. Now I know you don't know what communism is. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communism also read the manifesto if you can or a summary of it. Side: Communism
2
points
that was not capitalsim, that was war. thats like me saying russia destroyed afghan, all the eastern european countries and germany because of communism. after russia conquered these countires and tried to implement communism yes they became even more destroyed.but the direct takeover of these countries was not communist's doing, so it was after conquest did these countires fail, the difference between east and west berlin after the soviet collapse is the perfect stark image of two economic ideals at work. and i think we all know which one did better. Side: Capitalism
oh you mean like the ussr did when they invaded Afghanistan and imprisoned there own people in Siberian prison camps and what about pol-pot remember that genocidal ass hole and Che Guevara killed over 100 gays, intellectuals, capitalists, and religious leaders each the Nazis only killed over 60000 people communists have killed over 100,0000 over the years conclustion commies are even worse than Nazis Side: Capitalism
oh you mean like the ussr did when they invaded Afghanistan and imprisoned there own people in Siberian prison camps and what about pol-pot remember that genocidal ass hole and Che Guevara killed over 100 gays, intellectuals, capitalists, and religious leaders each the Nazis only killed over 60000 people communists have killed over 100,0000 over the years conclustion commies are even worse than Nazis Side: Capitalism
0
points
Communist manifisto has three parts, revolt of the proletariat, dictatorship of the proletariat, then finally pure communism. the first two steps are very violent actions cause to create turmoil and destory the merhcants of our society, followed by a totalitarian state of controle of the proletariat by a dictator, does not sound very fun imho, and finally, pure communism, whith btw has never been reached where we all share these "fruits" of the labor we produce. communism is an ideal that cant be reached. capitalism has many faults, but i would rather live by the ideals of freedom of cosummerism and the "invisable hand" that also allows finacial freedom then the directed unfree stages of communism. Side: Capitalism
2
points
Capitalism is better. Communism enslaves each individual to the community. Capitalism allows each individual to be free and independent. Communism never makes progress because individuals are not given a just reward for improving things, while capitalism constantly improves. Communism lacks the economic freedom of choice to the fullest extent possible, in Capitalism people are free to choose what they want. Communism gives the lazy as much as the hard working, while capitalism allows each individual to sell their labor, creating a result where the hardest working are rewarded in accordance to how hard they work. In capitalism each person is independent, in communism each person is interdependent, interdependence is a form of slavery. In communism people work where the central Government tells them to, while in capitalism they work where they want. Side: Capitalism
1
point
2
points
Capitalism has been proven to work farther better than communism. In communism an individual cannot be motivated to work because they will recieve the same amount of money and medical care if they did the minimum amount of work. No matter what field you're in, in a communist system, all people recieve the same amount of money no matter what. Capitalism increases the amount of money for the amount of work you do for that specific job(whether it be in education or labor). Side: Capitalism
2
points
There's one simple reason communism can't work, simple human nature. Humans, like all animals, seek to amass influence and resources for themselves and no matter what system we use, someone will always use their postition to acquire them, the difference is that under capitalism, it's the businessmen, under communism, it's the government. People will always do this and changes the system will only change who succeeds and how. Side: Capitalism
communisam may be the poler oppiit to facisam in pollitical theroy but in practice its the exact same thing one man controlls every thing and if you speek out agenst the state your anre exicuted for treeson capitalisam requires a free society inorder to funtion whereas comunisam requires a totalitarin nanie state use your head communisam = the destruction of freedom how can you possiblly support that Side: Capitalism
what the "communist" supporters are probably thinking of is socialism you can have a free democratic and pluralistic society with a socialist economy how ever that would be extremely difficult to maintain that is why most socialist society's turn to communism which as history has shown us repeatedly is oppressive, totalitarian, and highly unstable and virtually unsustainable Side: Capitalism
2
points
Mao and Stalin killed more than Hitler. Around 100 million in total people have been killed by Communism since the first Communist state less than 100 years ago. Communism has never worked, it always fails it is time for the human race to scrap it and move on. Side: Capitalism
2
points
I've read the Communist manifesto, and while I will admit that true Communism has not been achieved (only variants like Stalinism, Maoism, etc.) The principles only look good on paper. Time and time again, it has been shown that Communism has restricted freedom of the individual, but freedom is not always a good thing (Anarchistic societies) The perfect government needs balance, and Capitalism hinges on balance. Therefore, I strongly support the capitalistic stance. Side: Capitalism
2
points
The evil philosophies of fascism and communism were the two great 20th century mass killers. Of these, communism was the greatest killer. 100 million men, women and children have been murdered by socialism so far, and the killing continues today, notably in North Korea. In terms of body count, socialism is by far the most evil religion, the most evil ideology of any sort, of all time. Behind the Iron Curtain, communists stamped out freethought as efficiently as in any authoritarian religious state. Communists are not sceptics, and are atheists only superficially. Marx and Lenin founded an irrational religion every bit as dogmatic, credulous, and opposed to freethought as any of the older religions they criticised. Communism needs to go back to the drawing board. Perhaps the central lesson of the 20th century is this: It is not enough to complain about the existing order. Your solution must be better, not worse. It is not enough to have a revolution against the Tsar. Your revolution must create a society that is more free than society under the Tsar, not less free. Clearly, though the Tsar was a dictator, Lenin made Russia less free, not more. It is not enough to attack the Weimar Republic. The solution must be better, not worse. Disillusioned with Weimar, the Germans turned to Hitler, who delivered total war, humiliating defeat, mass destruction, 7 million German dead, partition and occupation of half the country by Russia for decades, the permanent loss of territory, ethnic cleansing of millions of Germans, the rape of millions more, and a genocidal shame that will hang over Germany for a thousand years. For those of you that need a quick summary of why communism needs to go back to the drawing board before attempting to enslave and kill us all once more. 1. Communist economies are stagnant - people starve, there's no luxury or premium goods. 2. Communism kills, 100 Million dead, 30 Million Refugess and still counting. 3. Communism does not allow the right to travel. East Germany, Zimbabwe, USSR, North Korea, Cuba. No-one ever died trying to get into these countries, but many died trying to escape. 4. No Freedom of religion. Speech, thought, no right to dissent. That's enough for now. Side: Capitalism
1
point
You have only pointed to examples of a particular form of Communism, Authoritarian (Stalinist) Communism. One could easily say that it was the authoritarianism that has been "dis-prove by history", not the ideology of Communism itself. Non-authoritarian communism (see: Marxist) has not been tried on a macro level and thus could not have been disproven, and therefore the entire ideology could not have been disproven. Side: Communism
However, the ideas of communism c Is based on the ideas of Marxism, except authoritarianism . On Karl marx's side Its all about materialism, and Marxism views that just as society transformed from feudalism to capitalism, it would transform itself to socialism and eventually to communism. Well, the method by which the transformation takes place is what differentiates the communists from Marxists. The Communists believe that the transformation will take place through revolutionary means. ~ Ironic Isn't It, on how propaganda works very well on the majority. Side: Capitalism
1
point
I don't care what anyone says about Communism, Marxism, or any other kind of Socialist system. Karl Marx had a good idea as far as a base of understanding for a Socialist society, however I do not think that this type of system could be implemented into our capitalist society today. Marx common phrase “From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs” actually sounds somewhat appealing, however, we live in a current society that would take advantage of such an idea. People would begin having many more “needs” and much less “ability,” which wouldn't fix anything in the long run. Communism is nothing more than disguised tyranny. Redistribution and "sharing" of wealth completely eliminates the incentive to do anything worthwhile. Not to mention a Communist system is generally one which brainwashes all of it's civilians into actually believing its for their own good. Anytime the government is given that much power you will see an inevitable fail from either the economy or the people will eventually overthrow their pathetic leaders whom they think is acting out of their best interest. I think arguing Capitalism vs Communism is sort of a broad range for argument seeing as both ideologies are interconnected to so many others. The pendulum generally swings in two different directions. One side is of freedom, independence, and backbone regulation (Don't kill, commit fraud, ect). The other side is a complete totalitarian authority (Communist dictatorship). We control everything because you're too inferior to know for your own good. Communism might be a more efficient system in times of hardship but it's only because everyone is basically sacrificing their existence to co-exist... We aren't even experiencing ACTUAL Capitalism in the USA today. People think and call this Capitalism but it's nothing more than a generic off brand, more like corporatism. The kicker with a Communist system is that it tries to say its "Egalitarian" yet the majority of the population suffer in poverty while the small minuscule elite parade around and enjoy vast amounts of wealth for themselves. This is why ANY and ALL Communist/Socialist systems are nothing more than disguised tyranny... Side: Capitalism
0
points
I have four things to say: -You are selfish and moronic -You could just be trolling/spamming -That side of capitalism works for the Bourgeoisie, you can never agree on your own post unless you are a Bourgeois. - In communism you don't have to give to the poor, that just happens in the system. Side: Communism
1
point
1
point
Neither But definitely closer to Capitalism than Socialism In the USA we are not capitalist, we are free market. We have anti Trust laws that break up monopolies. Sometimes, especially in our current environment, there is an unfair over correction that is harmful to a business owner. They aren’t big enough to sustain it, but are forced into loosing their businesses because of “a war on capitalism” Like the raisin farmer in California. I believe he won in the Supreme Court, but he didn’t deserve the cost he incurred to stay alive. These are the people that need protection from this society we are becoming! I hate to say, I’m not name calling. But that’s just stupid!But if we think its true then it must be. Regardless of history of facts and even the blatant manipulations in our society today. But keep in mind, without these businesses we'd be far behind in the progress we know and enjoy today. And also they employed much of the population of the day. Although, we did need corrections to improve working conditions, increase safety, and pay higher wages. But the beauty of America isn’t that we were perfect. But the systems we have to correct greed when greed doesn’t correct itself! We are a land of equal opportunity Anyone can take an idea and create a successful business, and charge "what the market will bare" and make a living and/or gain wealth. Many have overcome obstacles for the successes they achieve, with risk. And as far as inheritance and the hand me down wealth - inheritance tax is probably the highest proportional tax in our society. So if you consider "fair share" we accumulate wealth to provide a better life for our families and to pass to our children. The starting point, or tipping point varies of both failure and success in over generations. And sometimes it continues as it is for generations without change. American success is built on ideas, enterprise, risk, and the wants and perceived needs of the general market. An Informative History Lesson on Capitalism Many through our history are "capitalist" but not many did so without loss, even bankruptcy. Here is a Capitalist Parade – And while your at it look at the giving back some of these people did. Do you think that would happen in the USSR or Denmark or Turkey? Milton Hershey – Drooped out of school, he was a poor student. Apprenticed for 4 years then - after two failed attempts, he set up the Lancaster Caramel Co. sold it then made the worlds largest Choc factory – then built a community and a home and school for children. Walt Disney - fired by a newspaper editor because, "he lacked imagination and had no good ideas, started a number of businesses that didn't last too long and ended with bankruptcy and failure Henry Ford – businesses failed and left him broke five times R H Macy - Macy started seven failed business before finally hitting big with his store in New York City F W Woolworth - Before starting his own business, young Woolworth worked at a dry goods store and was not allowed to wait on customers because his boss said he lacked the sense needed to do so. I guess he said F... YOU, and opened his own store, followed by successful chains of stores! Good ole Colonel Sanders and his Fried Chicken - rejected 1,009 times before a restaurant accepted it Albert Einstein - teachers and parents to think he was mentally handicapped Thomas Edison - teachers told Edison he was "too stupid to learn anything Sidney Poitier brutally rejected by American Negro Theater for his heavy Bohamian accent Others with similar stories - H J Heinz - Emily Dickinson - Lucille Ball - P T Barnum - Fred Astaire - Jerry Seinfeld http://www.onlinecollege.org/2010/02/16/ 50-famously-successful-people-who-failed-at-first/ And African Americans – Successful in the face of adversity http://www.theroot.com/photos/2010/02/ Like anything in the social front, with twisting, and media led head hunting, and the public's eagerness to follow without knowledge. Capitalism is redefined, then accepted for whatever they want. Like the urban racial legends believed with a fury, that Democrats and Republicans switched places. So those Republicans who believed in Civil rights and paid for it putting their money and their lives where their heart was on the matter, are NOW called White Supremacists, while Democrats who were always white supremacists (and also some Black slave owners also) are hailed as civil rights heroes! Teddy Roosevelt broke up the capitalist in the early 1900's. And it needed to be broken. They built great industry. We are where we are because of them. It was corrected, they kept the wealth they made, but the monopoly was broken and out of 1 came many oil and gas companies, for competitive free market competition. . Side: Capitalism
We do allow links to threads and comments on Reddit as long as they are relevant to the content guidelines and follow the rules. Use np links or your post will be deleted. Do not post NSFL Content, it will be removed. Support for capitalism--and the political parties which uphold it--is strictly prohibited; comments showing support for capitalism and capitalist parties and politicians will be removed and the user punished at moderator discretion. As a corollary to this, anti-socialist and anti-communist comments are also forbidden. Anti-socialism/communism is pro-capitalism. Every user is expected to have a basic level of understanding and acceptance of socialism and communism before commenting here. Liberalism (the ideology of capitalism), and defending Liberalism is strictly prohibited. This means conflating socialism with anything the government/state does, or suggesting that communism is anything other than a stateless, moneyless and classless system where the means of production are owned by the community. No sectarianism. This is a space for all comrades and all leftists. You are allowed to offer nuanced critiques of other leftist positions, but undermining socialism and/or communism as a whole is not permitted. Mods are getting stricter with content quality. Shit content that does not fit the content criteria (like posts about Basic Income) will now be removed. All bans are at mod discretion for violating specific rules or the general anti-capitalist and pro-socialist, pro-communist nature of the sub. Nobody, not even the mods, has an inviolable right to be here. We're not going to try to make people who don't belong feel welcome. This subreddit is a safe space. Any bigotry, racism, sexism, homophobia, transphobia, ableism and classism is forbidden. Participation in reactionary subs, subs that tolerate or tacitly endorse the aforementioned behavior, will lead to automatic bans. Side: Capitalism
Economic system based (to a varying degree) on private ownership of the factors of production (capital, land, and labor) employed in generation of profits. It is the oldest and most common of all economic systems and, in general, is synonymous with free market system. Side: Capitalism
1
point
1
point
Although claiming to provide for the general need of the people, Communism has caused millions of people to starve to death, such as under Mao Tse Tung's Great Leap forward and the reign of Stalin. This being said, not only has Communism killed more people, but it has also enslaved them. Communism keeps people in fear and controls every move they make. Using fear and intimidation to help 'benefit mankind' is shear nonsence. I have argued with several communists about the millions of deaths caused by Communist in wars, revolutions, starvation, and imprisonment: all say it was for the 'greater good'! My simple reply is this: if you call many failures and millions of deaths 'the greater good', you have your head put on backward. Capitalism is better, yes. Is it perfect? No, but at least it doesn't slaughter the people under it! Side: Capitalism
|
Communism is the perfect form of Government as everyone is equal. there is no working class or middle class. Everyone gains an equal share of everything money food and housing, which would end poverty. However there is too many people in this world, who only care about themselves and how much money they have compared to the next one idiot, like it is some kind of game, of who has the most wins. of which the winner hopes for power, which only corrupts and changes peoples opinion of you for the worst, no matter what they say. Because they are jealous of you want your position and wealth. Side: Communism
then no one has any insentive what so ever to get there lazey asses out of bed echmorning exept for the secret polieses boot on there door ready at any moment to kick it down and haul them of to a labor camp if they dont do there "patrieotic duty" so everyoe is motivated by fear insted of ambition and that is no way to live Side: Capitalism
"Communism is the perfect form of Government as everyone is equal there is no working class or middle class. Everyone gains an equal share of everything money food and housing, which would end poverty." It is true that in communism, apart from the political class, every person is equal in their share of misery and starvation. There is not middle or working class, only the elite political class and the state dependent proles. "However there is too many people in this world, who only care about themselves and how much money they have compared to the next one idiot, like it is some kind of game, of who has the most wins. of which the winner hopes for power, which only corrupts and changes peoples opinion of you for the worst, no matter what they say. Because they are jealous of you want your position and wealth." What you actually meant to say is that when people are given the freedom to pursue their own livelihoods with little or no intervention from the state, they are motivated to work harder and succeed because they know they also have the freedom to fail. They know that despite state enforced equality, their own input and tenacity may be far in excess of the next man and they should be rewarded appropriately. Communism. The abolition of private property and as necessary, liberty. To each according to his own pigeonhole. From each, total compliance. Side: Capitalism
In a nutshell, here's the difference between Communism, Capitalism, and a few of the other 'isms': Communism If you have two cows you give both cows to the government, and then the government sells you some of the milk. Socialism If you have two cows, you give both cows to the government and then the government gives you some of the milk. Fascism If you have two cows, you milk both of them and give the government half of the milk. Nazism If you have two cows, the government shoots you and takes both cows. New Deal If you have two cows, you kill one, milk the other, and pour the milk down the drain. Capitalism If you have two cows, you sell one cow and buy a bull.
Supporting Evidence:
The difference between Capitalism and Communism.
(www.bestcleanfunnyjokes.info)
Side: Capitalism
5
points
For a classless, stateless society where people work for society and themselves. Where if you contribute to the collective good you will get your share and if you don't you went get anything because you don't deserve the product of labor from the collective good. And no more wars over land because there won't be anymore borders. The objective of communism is the freedom of the individual. And the proletariat shall be free from exploitation. And kids won't die for pointless reasons which is mostly poverty-related. Where everyone will rule as one. Kind of like Democracy but safer and more secure. Side: Communism
4
points
From each according to ability, to each according to need(not ability). It is always good to see young comrades, especially ones that are mostly correct in their understanding. I envision communism like a large scale open source community, or gift economy, or even resource based economy. Side: Capitalism
3
points
"And kids won't die for pointless reasons which is mostly poverty-related." Explain why men women and children are starving in north korea, explain the deaths of the refugees who to tried to cross the border due to hunger, explain why the US had to donate large sums of money for food to provide for the north korean people. Side: Capitalism
7
points
Greed is not created by competition, it is created by want, stateless communism dissolves as soon as individuals realize they can trade their own product for a profit to purchase their desires. There is nothing wrong with that, so they would have no guilt in it, and therefor not refrain from it. The same thing would divide the income of labor as soon as individuals realized the value of their labor. Added kids in America have plenty of access to food. Even in pure capitalism, a kid still has an opportunity to work for their food...so they would be able to avoid dying at the hands of their worthless parents. Side: Capitalism
Yes, greed is created by want. A want for more than one needs in order to survive. Competition is created out of a combination of scarcity in resources and the individual will to survive when dependant on those resources. Profit requires scarcity in order to have value. When scarcity (instead of abundance) is promoted and even encouraged in a profit based system such as capitalism, it becomes flawed and unsustainable. Without scarcity, capitalism could not exist as there would be no profit. Capitalism requires scarcity, requires there to be an amount of resources that cannot equally support the entire population. It's like a game of musical chairs, only benefitting the "winners" while at the same time actually creating the unavoidable loss of the losers. Side: Communism
4
points
Communism is an ideology that is separated by several theories and practices (Marxism, Stalinism, Maoism, Trotskyism, Leninism, etc..). On the one hand, their theories have failed because of corruption Stalinist, but after the fall of the Soviet Union, communism has been changing gradually to become a democratic ideology. There are many countries such as Nepal, Cyprus, Uruguay, Vietnam, are ruled by communist parties, but with the democratic system and a Marxist. In my opinion, communism is currently dominating capitalism because communism advocates the working class, while capitalism, unfortunately defends the bourgeoisie. Side: Communism
4
points
The reason I support communism, is not by beauty is by the side communism defend. Most people prefer capitalism even because of money and feel freedom. For me money is bullshit. Money enslaves society. There are thousands of people in Africa who are starving, not only because of armed conflict but also because there is support in the economy of these countries. And I also think that capitalism works like a mafia! Side: Communism
ur right we shuld just do awat with money all together then insted of stors we can just have big ware houses where peaple go and fight echother over all the free shit itll be like black frieday all year wouldent that just be wounder full of we can just have the government give us every thing then we could all expereince the great joy of wateing in line for houers at a thime for a single slice of bread yaeh that sounds like utopia dosest it Side: Capitalism
-1
points
Money enslaves society? Yes. "Slavery is but the owning of labor and carries with it the care of the laborers. While the European plan… Is that capital shall control labor by controlling the wages. This can be done by controlling the money. It will not due to allow the greenback (the debt free currency suggested by president Lincoln) as we cannot control that." - The hazzard circular. July 1862. "None are more hopelessly enslaved than those who falsely believe they are free." - Johann Wolfgang von Goethe More like communism enslaves society. How so? Where do you think communist countries get support from? don't they use money to gain resources? They get support from everybody working to benefit the whole instead of everyone competing to survive. Essentially, communism doesn't need money in order to function. It just requires different incentives. Side: Communism
3
points
If money does not enslave the society, then why do people have to pay the rents? How many people have committed suicide because they could not pay the rents and debts? The money actually served to exchange not to enslave the people. Do not you think that money makes people become greedy? Why there is gangs wars and mafia wars? It is because they are different groups? No! ... It is because of money! Look at the third world countries and you're think why there hunger. And also you have to think why I say that capitalism looks like a mafia. Side: Communism
2
points
your right then we can just steel shit from gient where houses and fight echother for them like black friyday evry day or have the government give us all our shit so we can all enjoy the plesuire of wating in line for houres for a single slice of bred that sounds like utopia right? Side: Communism
Communism is far from perfect, but better than Capitalism. People say that Communism won't work because it assumes people's inherent goodness, but Capitalism encourages people's badness. Greed, selfishness, lying and decadence are all rewarded by the current system and so we are resigned to being bad and don't even have a chance of improvement. By thinking positively and striving to make people better, we might be able to create a world where people are good enough for Communism to work. Side: Communism
Communism won't work. To start off, there won't be any innovation. Why? Because innovation is fostered by dreams of success and competition, which are impossible under communism. Don't believe me? Look at Cuba. It looks like it's stuck int he 50's Also, since everyone gets the same rewards under communism, there's no point in doing a great job, when simply doing an acceptable job will do. Side: Capitalism
There are things that motivate humans to innovate and do a good job other than money. For starters, there's the desire to be recognised and have approval from others, which is human nature. Also, the changes that the innovator will make to society will benefit them as well as the rest of the public, and doing well makes one feel good about oneself. In a true Communist society, the primary reason for doing anything will be passion for what one does, and people will be encouraged to find and do what they love rather than always thinking about material rewards. I think that Capitalism restricts innovation to the elite - the general public are too wrapped up in their prolefeed and trivialities to think about making a difference. Side: Communism
Do you want to say that communism killed 100 million people since 1917? Well let me tell you that your capitalism kills 100 million people every 5-6 years, since 1991. That's much more than 650 million people dying under capitalism, at least 550 million more than under communism. Deal with it. Do you still want to insist on why the Soviet Union fell? China predicted that and fell out with the Soviets and Vietcongs and North Koreans, focusing on a balance of socialism (non-extreme communism) and free trade (a very little bit of capitalism). Vietnam is doing the same, except that it's going closer to the fascist capitalist dog America. Side: Communism
When people cite the millions killed under communism, they are referencing veryfiable historic situations under Stalin, Mao, Castro etc. Perhaps you would like to clarify what millions were killed by Capitalism since 1991? Also, if you check when these posts were created you will find that they are several years old. As such you will likely not get a response from people who posted them. Providing arguments on recent debates is the best way to find people to respond to your points. Side: Capitalism
2
points
2
points
None of them works. What we need is a new system. The capitalism is too much individual and always will have someone there winning and all the other losing or even dying. Communism doesn't works too. A new system maybe works, but we have to have people that understand about it, but the poor part of the population is a problem... Side: Communism
2
points
Communism has control of their people. The USA let our people do whatever the fuck they want. Democracy is like giving a human baby (Who are retarded) an arsenal of weapons and let him sit there with it. He baby is gonna cause a huge big mess and just fuck everything up. Communism is better. The USSR didn't have one of their own people blowing up buildings or shooting children (Sandy Hook was Halarious) Side: Communism
1
point
But communism is better then capalism I guess! Capalism is bad when it goes right communism is bad when it goes wrong! I like Marx's trories I really sorta do! But sochalism is for me or at least the republican verson where there's healthcare and there is a liberal govenormemt! Side: Communism
1
point
1
point
I would say communism is the best type of political movement and I am heavily influenced by the teachings of Karl Marx. How ever capitalist and fascist ideology has embedded the system of money and a hierarchy into human society so realistically socialism is the easiest option to stop poverty. Side: Communism
1
point
Well this may sound absurd and crazy, and just read the whole thing before you judge, but... For me it kind of seems the US used bits of Communism to get out of the Great Depression, or just to not hit rock bottom. Communism is very complex, but, it could be very simple just to say that everybody works for the government, has government jobs, and everyone is in the government. The government owns and "takes care of" all it's "industries". It is kind of easy to think of the government as just one big company, that produces all the stuff for a certain country, and everyone works there. Hm this is hard to put in words. Lets say there is a market called "Red Mart". Red Mart produces a lot of things, from fruits to hand guns. Say their fruit department is going under, they, as a company that has much other "departments" to provide financial support for, "invest" more money into the deparment. The fruit department can plant more orchards with this money, and soon, those orchards will pay for themselves and have much in surplus once the grow fruit. In the Great Depression, the government "invested" much money into the banks to stop the banks from closing, because that would take a huge blow into the economy. You wouldn't be able to get a loan. Where do you get the money to plant a fruit orchard, so you can feed your children? The bank. What happens if they don't have any money to give you? You don't plant an orchard, you live a life of poverty. So the government kind of gave you that loan, since the money flowed like this: Government > Banks > You. So in a way the government sort of funded the banks, just like in Communism. Side: Communism
1
point
1
point
Ideology-Good Reality-Bad Communism is a great idea. If it all runs smoothly, poverty and corruption will be abolished. The country will be at peace. Stalin revolutionized Russia during the late 1920s. It became a peaceful country, from a violent, barbaric war-filled place of chaos to one of the world superpowers. After they dropped communism, what is Russia now? However, there are some factors to consider. Corruption blinds many people, so communism will not run as it should. There is still poverty around communist countries, and crimes are higher in many communist parties. Communism will only be good in an Utopian world. Communism is good. Thank you Marx, Stalin, Engels and George. The fathers of communism. Thank you Kim Sung-il, Fidel Castro and Mao Zedong. The conquerors of communism. Side: Communism
It became a peaceful country, from a violent, barbaric war-filled place of chaos to one of the world superpowers No. Not even remotely close. Stalin and Lenin did not practice communism or even socialism considering they annihilated half of the populace to start the USSR. No large country has ever executed the theory of communism just as no country has every executed the theory of capitalism. No such thing as Laissez-faire or classless/stateless. Side: Capitalism
1
point
There is always one thing that I have said continuously about Capitalism, and that is that Capitalism is nothing more than dictatorship coated in democracy. Communism unites the people as patriotic and active citizens of the State, meanwhile, Capitalism robs the people of their wealth, and remind me how many citizens of Capitalist countries vote, or can be bothered to vote, or are excited about politics like they used to be in the 50's/60's? Hardly any. Capitalism destroys third world nations, leaves them in debt, whilst continuously robbing them on their resources and scraps their people's human and worker's rights. Communism shares wealth evenly amongst the people in a classless system that works for everyone, and yes, while there are some flaws in Communism, Capitalism is nothing but terror for the average working man, who is usually found to be in debt or barely have any money due to the system. Capitalism is also nothing but a breeding ground for globalism, another world sweeping force that is doing nothing but exploiting third world nations and filling the pockets of the rich, who continue to get ever richer. Capitalism is also a breeding ground for corruption. Throughout Capitalist nations there is always a batch of corruption, particularly from businessmen/women and politicians, however, in Communism, there is barely any corruption due to all industry, etc. being owned by the State, therefore not allowing the people to be lied to or robbed even more. I will continuously maintain my support in the original quote ''Capitalism is nothing more than dictatorship coated in democracy.'' And those that cannot see that, are nothing more than blind, stupid or purely ignorant of the truth. And yes, Communism can be reformed to be democratic. Side: Communism
1
point
Comrades, Communism does not work because of the mentality of people. It is because of the selfishness of people. People who would be otherwise wealthy in a Capitalist economy, like a scientist, will think that he deserves more money than a laborer, who gets the same amount of money as his wage. What he does not understand is that the amount of work they do is the same, it is just that the scientist is using his knowledge of Science to do his work, while the laborer is using his physical strength to do his work. Both of them work hard, but one gets more money than the other. This is, of course, unfair. Now some capitalists say that communism destroys competition, as there are no rivals. I say, one does not need competition to work hard. One needs motivation to do his work, which in the case of communism, is the goal for a better society, for which, the people should be patriotic. But, as I have said before, people are too selfish to help each other, and thus, Will want to have more wealth or property. Thus, they will support a Capitalist economy. For those people who say that a communist country can never progress due to lack of competition, I would to name some things which USSR Invented/achievements of USSR:- 1) Invention of Microwaves 2) AK-47 3)The First nuclear power plant 4)The first spacecraft 5) First animal in space(laika the dog) 6)First men and women in space Log in to see some more:- http://www.northstarcompass.org/nsc1212/ Also, in WW2, England was on the verge of being invaded by Germany, and would have lost themselves to Hitler, unless he had changed his strategy. The USSR developed the T-34, probably one of the best Tanks in WW2, and defeated Germany with sheer unity. Last but not the least, USSR helped our country in the war between our country(India) and Pakistan in the war of 1965, thus I feel morally obliged to support Communism Side: Communism
1
point
Союз нерушимый республик свободных Сплотила навеки Великая Русь. Да здравствует созданный волей народов Единый, могучий Советский Союз! Славься, Отечество наше свободное, Дружбы народов надёжный оплот! Партия Ленина - сила народная Нас к торжеству коммунизма ведёт!
Soiuz nerushimyj respublik svobodnykh Splotila naveki Velikaia Rus. Da zdravstvuet sozdannyj volej narodov Edinyj, moguchij Sovetskij Soiuz! Slavsia, Otechestvo nashe svobodnoe, Druzhby narodov nadiozhnyj oplot! Partiia Lenina - sila narodnaia Nas k torzhestvu kommunizma vediot!
Сквозь грозы сияло нам солнце свободы, И Ленин великий нам путь озарил, На правое дело он поднял народы, На труд и на подвиги нас вдохновил. Славься, Отечество наше свободное, Дружбы народов надёжный оплот! Партия Ленина - сила народная Нас к торжеству коммунизма ведёт!
Skvoz grozy siialo nam solntse svobody, I Lenin velikij nam put ozaril, Na pravoe delo on podnial narody, Na trud i na podvigi nas vdokhnovil. Slavsia, Otechestvo nashe svobodnoe, Druzhby narodov nadiozhnyj oplot! Partiia Lenina - sila narodnaia Nas k torzhestvu kommunizma vediot!
В победе бессмертных идей коммунизма Мы видим грядущее нашей страны И Красному знамени славной Отчизны Мы будем всегда беззаветно верны! Славься, Отечество наше свободное, Дружбы народов надёжный оплот! Партия Ленина - сила народная Нас к торжеству коммунизма ведёт!
V pobede bessmertnykh idej kommunizma My vidim griadushchee nashej strany I Krasnomu znameni slavnoj Otchizny My budem vsegda bezzavetno verny! Slavsia, Otechestvo nashe svobodnoe, Druzhby narodov nadiozhnyj oplot! Partiia Lenina - sila narodnaia Nas k torzhestvu kommunizma vediot! Side: Communism
1
point
Capitalism? More like Crapitalism, am I right, my comrades? I know, I know, in a Capitalistic society, Communists such as myself are shunned and frowned upon, but in reality it should be the Capitalists that are condemned by the Communists. I have many reasons to believe that Capitalism is wrong and i’m going to make sure you believe it too. Capitalism is not a very good idea. In fact, Capitalism is actually very moronic and nonsensical. Capitalism is about private property, profit, and competition. So basically what this government all cracks down to is money, money, money and greed. Think about it. The protection of private property is just “Oh this is mine, don’t touch it or I’ll sue you.” We are taught the phrase “Sharing is caring” as young children, but this simply isn’t sharing. This is greed. Profit is just using the money you currently have to try to make more money. The competition piece is just competing with your fellow human beings to be better than them, to be wealthier than them, to have a better life than them, to leave them in the dust. The Capitalist people are circumscribed by the undying lust for money, riches, and wealth, whether it be their own craving for luxury or someone else’s. Money is a sick thing that Capitalism practically worships and there are many problems that come of it. There are wars, gang fights, murders, robberies, and many more complications caused by the simple longing for more riches and fortune. Capitalism really only works for the people who are in the highest upper class, because they are the only ones who are really treated fairly. However, if you don’t happen to be one of the few lucky capitalist pigs, then you’re screwed. If you aren’t in that upper class, then you have to deal with struggling to pay your bills every month, struggling to live without being stressed all the time. The lower class and minorities can’t always control their oppression in a capitalistic society, which is why Communism on the other hand is a good alternative for everyone because all are treated equal, nothing more, nothing less. Side: Communism
1
point
Capitalism kills, and i’m not even exaggerating. Everyone always attacks Communism with a lazy little statement that usually goes like “Oh MaH gAwD cOmMuNiSm KiLlEd LiKe 1o0,o0o,0o0 (one hundred million) PeOpLe” but that statement has no legitimate facts to support it, and it simply isn’t true or accurate in any way. This is because Capitalism has in fact killed more than Communism has directly. Yes, the hundred million deaths that Communism had supposedly “caused” weren’t even directly caused by Communism, or even Communists. You see, Capitalism claims to be a pure government where everyone can fend for themselves and be a powerful person, but the truth is Capitalism is very flawed. Now I won’t lie, Communism isn’t perfect either, but is by far the lesser of two evils. Every government has its problems and rough patches, but Capitalism for the most part is just one big rough patch. It’s quite unfair and hypocritical to claim that Communism has killed one hundred million people, when Capitalism easily kills just as many about every 5 years or so since the 1990’s. Meaning that Capitalism kills about six times as many people than Communism did. And on top of that there are more people dying every year and we are sadly a part of that. Think about it, how many people kill themselves a year because they can’t pay their rent and have no other way out? Poverty is everywhere, there are people begging on the street while people pass them by everyday in their expensive cars. Communism can easily solve the numerous problems that are associated with Capitalism. However, there are a few things that I must address about Communism that can be quite confusing to some people, typically normies. Communism. Is. Not. The. Same. As. Socialism. Though it is true that both Communism and Socialism are systems that break down the social classes and strive for the equality of all, there are some considerable differences between the two. In Socialism, the government is responsible for the production. With Communism on the other hand, the citizens and working class own everything and everyone works towards a common and equal goal. So this begs the question, “If everyone works for the same goal and gets the same things, then what happens if someone doesn’t work as hard? Do they still get the same incentive?” The answer is no, because as Karl Marx states in the 8th plank of his book “The Communist Manifesto”, “Equal obligation of all to work. Establishment of Industrial armies, especially for agriculture.”, Meaning that if you do not work as hard as everyone else, you will not receive your share of income. Surprise, surprise, Communists aren’t evil. The Communist ideology consists of having the citizens working together to achieve a common goal, with everyone helping each other out equally, with no social classes, and no one being any better or any worse than the next person. With that being said, “Прощай мои товарищи”. (Goodbye, my comrades.) Side: Communism
In Socialism, the government is responsible for the production. I was going to upvote you until you said this. Communism is a form of socialism, and socialism is essentially a blanket term for any far left system. Therefore to say the state is in control is not accurate, because first of all when the state is responsible for production in a socialist system it has to be democratic or publicly run on some level to qualify as "socialist" and second of all socialism consists of a spectrum of systems and not just one specific system. Side: Capitalism
0
points
0
points
3
points
2
points
Economic and social system in which all (or nearly all) property and resources are collectively owned by a classless society and not by individual citizens. Based on the 1848 publication 'Communist Manifesto' by two German political philosophers, Karl Marx (1818-1883) and his close associate Friedrich Engels (1820-1895), it envisaged common ownership of all land and capital and withering away of the coercive power of the state. In such a society, social relations were to be regulated on the fairest of all principles: from each according to his ability, to each according to his needs. Differences between manual and intellectual labor and between rural and urban life were to disappear, opening up the way for unlimited development of human potential. Side: Communism
1848 publication 'Communist Manifesto' by two German political philosophers, Karl Marx (1818-1883) and his close associate Friedrich Engels (1820-1895), it envisaged common ownership of all land and capital and withering away of the coercive power of the state. Yes , and this “ common ownership “ is to take place through violent revolution In such a society, social relations were to be regulated on the fairest of all principles: from each according to his ability, to each according to his need Well yes they say that but of course that did not apply to Wealthy industrialist Engels or indeed Marx who frittered away three fortunes on the stock market and never did a days work in his miserable life Side: Capitalism
|
