The Student Room Group
Uni students - Complete our survey >>
Uni students - Complete our survey >>
Uni students - Complete our survey >>

Opinions about Communism?

Scroll to see replies

Original post by BubbleBoobies
it discourages self-worth and personal ambition - it destroys the human spirit, does it not? how can a person feel like they matter if they are meant to be just like every other work-ant in their commune? also, communism makes people poorer, so making people poorer is *also* evil, surely?


That's how 95% of people feel under capitalism. But as long as that 5% of people are empowered by it, you can peddle tales of rags to riches success and make the worker ants work.
Original post by TearsInRain
Oh please don't tell me that our medicine and technology are the result of natural law. Natural =/=best. Humans are always improving on what nature has provided for us and Communism is the next logical step.

Like how we did not give up airplanes because some of the first models crashed, we should not give up on the Communist ideal just because some of the early proponents were fascists.


I think you got the wrong end of the stick here.

Where is communism (horizontal hierarchy) represented in nature?
Original post by otester
I think you got the wrong end of the stick here.

Where is communism (horizontal hierarchy) represented in nature?


No, you are confused. I did not say Communism is present in nature; in fact it is the opposite. I used examples to show that the natural way is not necessarily the best way to do things.
Original post by TearsInRain
No, you are confused. I did not say Communism is present in nature; in fact it is the opposite. I used examples to show that the natural way is not necessarily the best way to do things.


Medicine/technology can be physically determined to be functional or not functional, same goes for vertical hierarchies, I am asking for such a demonstration of horizontal hierarchies?
Original post by otester
Medicine/technology can be physically determined to be functional or not functional, same goes for vertical hierarchies, I am asking for such a demonstration of horizontal hierarchies?


Okay I don't know what your argument is supposed to be. It doesn't matter whether horizontal collectivism has ever existed. What I am saying is the following.

E.g. giving birth with morphine in a hospital setting is far superior to giving birth in nature when it comes to managing the pain. Morphine is unnatural, a recent discovery but it is better.

Therefore it is a conceivable that a system like Communism though unnatural and recently formed into a movement could be superior to any natural state society that has previously existed.

Anyway I have to go now. This conversation has been interesting. Goodbye.
(edited 8 years ago)
Original post by SirMilkSheikh
If the whole world was communist, then the world would look like 1984.


Orwell was a socialist.
(edited 8 years ago)
Original post by Mathemagicien
Fine; everyone is not equal, so distributing wealth equally is not fair.


That fits well within the socialist mantra of each according to their ability and each according to their need.

One of the major left wing reason to object to capitalism is that it so often doesn't reward people how they deserve. Some of the hardest and exploited workers, those who contribute so much to human progress get nothing whilst someone who does nothing other than own land/property can get filthy rich on the back of renterism.

Don;t pretend capitalism does a fair job of distributing wealth.
Original post by TearsInRain

Anyway I have to go now. This conversation has been interesting. Goodbye.


Looks like someone has a bruised ego... :colone:
Original post by ChaoticButterfly
That fits well within the socialist mantra of each according to their ability and each according to their need.

One of the major left wing reason to object to capitalism is that it so often doesn't reward people how they deserve. Some of the hardest and exploited workers, those who contribute so much to human progress get nothing whilst someone who does nothing other than own land/property can get filthy rich on the back of renterism.

Don;t pretend capitalism does a fair job of distributing wealth.


It's not all about physical work but responsibility as well, something the left seem to absolve themselves of.
In theory it would be great but it'll never work
Original post by balanced
I think it's one of the worst things to take place on earth, killing over 100million people. Not to mention those that suffered as a result, and didn't die. I would happily end my life to kill a communist leader, and would happily fight against a communist government.


But as Lenin said "imperialism is the highest stage of capitalism" and imperialism has caused more genocides than communism
Original post by scrotgrot
That's how 95% of people feel under capitalism. But as long as that 5% of people are empowered by it, you can peddle tales of rags to riches success and make the worker ants work.


1) right, so an artist or a musician really feels like a worker ant in a commune. a person who uses their hobby as their means of income really feels like a slave under capitalism? under capitalism, there's no 'from each according to his ability to each according to his need' principle, so people can do as they want to get their money regardless of its capacity to fulfil that principle. their success is completely up to them and their ability to make others happier via their own happiness (whatever hobby it is that they're using)
2) communism *still* makes people poorer. that's the difference between eastern europe and western europe, or better: north korea and south.
Original post by balanced
I think it's one of the worst things to take place on earth, killing over 100million people. Not to mention those that suffered as a result, and didn't die. I would happily end my life to kill a communist leader, and would happily fight against a communist government.


communism is now only alive in fun places like North Korea. perhaps OP should go and live there.
Original post by BubbleBoobies
it discourages self-worth and personal ambition - it destroys the human spirit, does it not? how can a person feel like they matter if they are meant to be just like every other work-ant in their commune? also, communism makes people poorer, so making people poorer is *also* evil, surely?


I completely agree. Any ambitious, self motivated person who wants to work hard, achieve highly and basically do well for themselves would despise communism. Communism is about collective apathy.
Original post by william91919
I completely agree. Any ambitious, self motivated person who wants to work hard, achieve highly and basically do well for themselves would despise communism. Communism is about collective apathy.


exactly - whether or not you have the most empathetic communist leader imaginable (a modern day jesus christ or something similarly hyperbolic) you are never going to change society without incentives. I'm sure those defending socialism or communism are tired of this argument, but incentives structure all human action - if you have no reason to do something, you're not going to do it, and if you have no reason to be a saint, you're not going to be a saint (and communism pretty much, long term, requires people be as such). if you have a society even where the government puts all people into each position based on their ability, you'll *still* have a society that works less hard. if you put even a genius in charge of a communist society's central bank, the fact that they might **** up isn't going to realistically change how much they are paid, seeing as they all work for the same money (especially in those kind of institutions where the state has a direct role). there is also no role of competition, meaning that, unless all goods are *imported* from capitalist societies, which they won't be able to largely afford, goods will not only cost a lot to produce, but their quality will be reduced based on a lack of incentive driving innovation (profit). incentives are absolutely central to understanding human behaviour - it's not a cultural variable, it is static for everybody as part of their nature. if we have intelligence, we will live by incentives.
Original post by BubbleBoobies
exactly - whether or not you have the most empathetic communist leader imaginable (a modern day jesus christ or something similarly hyperbolic) you are never going to change society without incentives. I'm sure those defending socialism or communism are tired of this argument, but incentives structure all human action - if you have no reason to do something, you're not going to do it, and if you have no reason to be a saint, you're not going to be a saint (and communism pretty much, long term, requires people be as such). if you have a society even where the government puts all people into each position based on their ability, you'll *still* have a society that works less hard. if you put even a genius in charge of a communist society's central bank, the fact that they might **** up isn't going to realistically change how much they are paid, seeing as they all work for the same money (especially in those kind of institutions where the state has a direct role). there is also no role of competition, meaning that, unless all goods are *imported* from capitalist societies, which they won't be able to largely afford, goods will not only cost a lot to produce, but their quality will be reduced based on a lack of incentive driving innovation (profit). incentives are absolutely central to understanding human behaviour - it's not a cultural variable, it is static for everybody as part of their nature. if we have intelligence, we will live by incentives.


I feel there's this belief from people who are pro-communism that capitalism about greed and that greed is an evil of human nature. I don't see how wanting something in exchange for how hard you work is greedy, that's just normal. If someone was working very hard and wasn't getting anything in exchange I would think it's quite abnormal that they're okay with that and maybe suggest they ask for a pay raise. If 'human nature' is about working hard and being rewarded for it then that really fits what the majority of people already know - capitalism is the best solution.

Also let's not forget that you can have a welfare state on top of capitalism - almost all successful countries in the world are in simple terms capitalist economies with varying levels of welfare state on top.
Original post by ChaoticButterfly
Orwell was a socialist.


was he a *communist*? nope
was he even really a socialist in the statist sense, I wonder
Original post by the bear
communism is now only alive in fun places like North Korea. perhaps OP should go and live there.


N.Korea is a monarchy, with succession being passed down via bloodline. The elites ruling over the peasantry, the very thing communism opposes.
Not only that, N.Korea operates using a class system using bloodline to order it's citizens, with it dictating all aspects of an individual's life. This again is not communist in the slightest.
Even equal distribution means nothing to the regime anymore, during the famine in the 90's the resources were allocated to the ruling elite while the everyday citizens starved. Hell, the regime even unofficially allowed illegal trade between it's citizens and with China too as well as the growing of (private) crops.
Original post by the bear
communism is now only alive in fun places like North Korea. perhaps OP should go and live there.


I was expecting personal attacks and dictionary definition arguments, I must say I'm pleasantly surprised :lol:

Quick Reply

Related discussions

Latest

Trending

Trending

Articles for you