[Jack22031994]

(Original post by When you see it...)
People are really stupid. They either don't know what communism is (most of the responses on the first page of this thread) or are so caught up in it that they can't see past the fundamentalism that often accompanies it (people writing essays on intangible things that are vaguely related to real-world issues and trying to blame capitalism for everything).

Are you supporting communism or not?


This was posted from The Student Room's iPhone/iPad App

[MonkeySee]

(Original post by x_Natalie_x)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holodomor
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khmer_R...le_of_Cambodia
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mao_zedong#Legacy
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Purge

This is why Communism was bad. All of these tragedies were inflicted during the process of creating - or, while attempting to create - a communist state.

Chairman Mao should definantly not be on that list of failures. He laid the foundation to what china is now, an economic superpower.

[Jack22031994]

(Original post by und)
I think you have a fundamental misunderstanding about the creation and distribution of wealth. Capitalism is a system that takes wealth away from those who make it.

How? Lord sugar has made his money and none has been taken, give an example of people's money been taken (other than taxes etc) and to whom it gies to as well


This was posted from The Student Room's iPhone/iPad App

[ellieHA]

On paper it's great, but when put into practice it has always ended up as a repressive regime where everyone is unhappy and doesn't have enough resources to live comfortably

If you could get someone running the show who knew what they were doing and did it while keeping everyone happy then fine, but this has not yet been the case

[und]

(Original post by Jack22031994)
give an example of people's money been taken (other than taxes etc) and to whom it gies to as well

That'll be very easy, but you're missing the point. Wealth isn't money. Money is a means of distributing wealth, and modern banking has made it a very flawed one at that.

Here's my example for you: Chinese workers who toil away for 12 hours a day making iPads for meagre salaries. The wealth they make is taken by Apple. It's quite simple, really.

[When you see it...]

(Original post by Jack22031994)
Are you supporting communism or not?


This was posted from The Student Room's iPhone/iPad App

Does it matter? People are so caught up in these little systems, I think it would better to debate something like this without any initial motivation either way.

[Jack22031994]

(Original post by und)
That'll be very easy, but you're missing the point. Wealth isn't money. Money is a means of distributing wealth, and modern banking has made it a very flawed method.

Here's my example for you: Chinese workers who toil away for 12 hours a day making iPads for meagre salaries. The wealth they make is taken by Apple. It's quite simple, really.

Yeah but apple have a business to run , people to employ and pay and development of new products, if they gave all the "wealth" to the chinese (or any) workers they would go bankrupt as they would have no money
Your argument that money isn't wealth is flawed because without money there is no wealth, for example they more MONEY you have the WEALTHIER you are, and if You are driving money isn't wealth, tell me how you can wealth with a world with no form of money (whatever form Its in)


This was posted from The Student Room's iPhone/iPad App

[Jack22031994]

(Original post by When you see it...)
Does it matter? People are so caught up in these little systems, I think it would better to debate something like this without any initial motivation either way.

But if there was no motivation there would be no reason to debate, surely?


This was posted from The Student Room's iPhone/iPad App

[und]

(Original post by Jack22031994)
Yeah but apple have a business to run , people to employ and pay and development of new products, if they gave all the "wealth" to the chinese (or any) workers they would go bankrupt as they would have no money
Your argument that money isn't wealth is flawed because without money there is no wealth, for example they more MONEY you have the WEALTHIER you are, and if You are driving money isn't wealth, tell me how you can wealth with a world with no form of money (whatever form Its in)


This was posted from The Student Room's iPhone/iPad App

Money is not wealth. Even Adam Smith (the 'grandfather of capitalism') said so in his books. Wealth is material; money is not.

Apple have a business to run, eh? Can you explain how they can be making billions of dollars in profit, despite there being far fewer people working for far fewer hours at their HQ compared to the factories they work with? The reason they can exploit their workers in such a way is because that's how capitalism works. Can you justify this profit, when you know that many of their workers live in squalid conditions?

[Jack22031994]

(Original post by und)
Money is not wealth. Even Adam Smith (the 'grandfather of capitalism') said so in his books. Wealth is material; money is not.

Apple have a business to run, eh? Can you explain how they can be making billions of dollars in profit, despite there being far fewer people working for far fewer hours at their HQ compared to the factories they work with? The reason they can exploit their workers in such a way is because that's how capitalism works. Can you justify this profit, when you know that many of their workers live in squalid conditions?

Without the capitalist system, they couldn't survive as a business so therefore the workers would have less money and living in worse conditions because of it.

Let me ask you a question, do you own an apple product? If so you are furling a system you seen to hate and it is the same with Microsoft do if you have a PC you are also furling the system you seem to hate, so you justify you buying products from companies who make billions in profit because of a capitalist system you seem to hate?

Sorry for spelling mistakes I am on my iPod
This was posted from The Student Room's iPhone/iPad App

[BACTSR2]

It's a supposed end to a cycle of human progress, which invokes certain religion like connotations and is somewhat dangerous. People will do anything if they feel they are acting in either, the best interests of humanity, in the long run or in accordance with God's wishes.

It would create equality where it doesn't naturally exist. Humans are not born equal, the strong would be held back by the weak. Perhaps this is morally acceptable, but is it sustainable, given free will?

[und]

(Original post by Jack22031994)
Without the capitalist system, they couldn't survive as a business so therefore the workers would have less money and living in worse conditions because of it.

Let me ask you a question, do you own an apple product? If so you are furling a system you seen to hate and it is the same with Microsoft do if you have a PC you are also furling the system you seem to hate, so you justify you buying products from companies who make billions in profit because of a capitalist system you seem to hate?

Sorry for spelling mistakes I am on my iPod
This was posted from The Student Room's iPhone/iPad App

If Apple didn't exist, people would be poorer? I think you need to learn a bit more about what communism aims to achieve, rather than spouting your ill-informed views about what you think will happen if private companies cease to exist.

No, I don't own any Apple products. I don't actually own any Microsoft products either, but you seem to think people have a choice anyhow, when often they don't. The majority of people have very little choice under capitalism, other than to allow their labour to be exploited in exchange for enough to simply survive.

[Kallisto]

(Original post by pollypix123)
(...) Don't neg this, because I'm just curious...
Why does everybody hate communism so much? (...)

EDIT: Why all the negs? I was just asking :c

The principle of communism is a classless society as you suppose. To keep that, people are/were observed, oppositions are/were oppressed and - most of all - people who don't think so are/were jailed. People have been influenced by propaganda in young years, so they believe in communism. In other words: countries, which have/had communism as system of government, controlled people all the time. Classless society is an utopian dream, because people are trying to be in a best position compared to the others time and time again.

But this is not a reason to oppressed people, eh?

[Jack22031994]

(Original post by und)
If Apple didn't exist, people would be poorer? I think you need to learn a bit more about what communism aims to achieve, rather than spouting your ill-informed views about what you think will happen if private companies cease to exist.

No, I don't own any Apple products. I don't actually own any Microsoft products either, but you seem to think people have a choice anyhow, when often they don't. The majority of people have very little choice under capitalism, other than to allow their labour to be exploited in exchange for enough to simply survive.

Of course people do, I have chosen to buy Apple Products and you have made the choice not to, that's the choice you and I have made, and no one is being truly exploited because surely that would be labour in return for nothing and anyway another thing is if workers in china ate being exploited by apple why would China let that happen in there own country and aren't they meant to be communist?

I know what communism aims to achieve, equality of out come right?(which is wrong)
Well that's what Soviet Russia tried to achieve



This was posted from The Student Room's iPhone/iPad App

[snozzle]

(Original post by MonkeySee)
Chairman Mao should definantly not be on that list of failures. He laid the foundation to what china is now, an economic superpower.

Might = right?

[Jack22031994]

(Original post by MonkeySee)
Chairman Mao should definantly not be on that list of failures. He laid the foundation to what china is now, an economic superpower.

But yet china has oppression and human right abuses?


This was posted from The Student Room's iPhone/iPad App

[thinbeard]

its evil, not just bad. i think people have already pointed out george orwells critiques, but i also suggest reading the gulug archipelago by Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Gulag_Archipelago

[Bollo's Lovechild]

(Original post by Jack22031994)
Of course people do, I have chosen to buy Apple Products and you have made the choice not to, that's the choice you and I have made, and no one is being truly exploited because surely that would be labour in return for nothing and anyway another thing is if workers in china ate being exploited by apple why would China let that happen in there own country and aren't they meant to be communist?

I know what communism aims to achieve, equality of out come right?(which is wrong)
Well that's what Soviet Russia tried to achieve

I am gonna get negged so badly, but this poster is a complete tool.

What has the choice of buying products from any private company got to do with it, at least the way you explain it?
The fact is that if businesses want to make profit they have to exploit their workers, because the profit motive means that workers have to cost the company less than the value of the goods and services they provide - otherwise the business wouldn't make a profit. That is the problem with capitalism - those with the tools of production exploiting those without and the cycle gets more and more vicious.
Also to paraphrase your example, basically it is labour in return for nothing because Apple is giving its Chinese workers next to nothing per head and yet manages to make massive profit margins, also per head! Surely then the workers are not being paid for their worth, and as the other poster said, the workers are living in squalid conditions. How is this fair? And this is the basic structure for practically all private companies.
The fact that they are Chinese has nothing to do with it, just Google Tianemen Square if you think the Chinese care so much about their citizens, and neither is China still communist. In recent years it has been wrought by the influence of capitalism and is currently undergoing industrialisation.

I'm not even going to bother trying to discuss the first bit of the bottom of your post because I've no idea what you mean, but the cited system in Soviet Russia was totalitarianism through Stalin, not communism (though this is what communism inevitably leads to).
You also have to consider that if communism were to be implemented in this day and age, the resources to do so (e.g technology) have significantly improved and that it is less likely to be against people's will (how many people still want to live in a system where investment bankers exploit everyone?), not that I'm advocating it. I know that perhaps this hasn't been articulated very well, but you'll forgive me as I'm on my phone lol.

[monk_keys]

(Original post by Jack22031994)
and anyway another thing is if workers in china ate being exploited by apple why would China let that happen in there own country and aren't they meant to be communist?

Paxman in the house.

[malloryoscar]

(Original post by monk_keys)
Paxman in the house.

I hate the common expression that dismisses years of sociology and marxist theory "it simply doesn't work"
Rather like a serial killer justifying his actions by saying "I simply cannot change"

Socialist and Marxist ideals are not something to dismiss but to strive for, in a capitalist world where we enter into barbarism almost, with a survival-of-the-fittest mentality driving us to selfish acts justifiable because it's 'human nature'.

We are socially conditioned by our parents, the media, marketing, almost indoctrinated to obey with the status quo and follow the consensus.

Rather than except the inequalities of life why don't we strive to change and challenge capitalism, with its atrocities. Marxism hasn't truly been applied; Stalin was a mere dictator. Rather than be an armchair socialist why don't we actually challenge the confines of our so called 'democracy' and unbound ourselves into an era of limited economic struggle and self expression.

Utopian you might say, but to evolve into this state of change and equality we must take the first step...