journaldan Posted June 25, 2004 Report Share Posted June 25, 2004 Well, if the communal living is based on conditions you get to impose, obviously, you are going to do better. The original question was does anyone believe in communism. True communism would have no such conditions. It is true that community cannot be enforced, I maintain the argument that at one time, it was the norm and no longer is. Even 5,000 years ago, I am sure there was the occassional person who declined to participate in the community. The outlook for that person was probably fairly grim. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Primus Pilus Posted June 25, 2004 Report Share Posted June 25, 2004 Which is exactly why Communism is a failure. In order to be a success, communism must have uniform agreement. When it does not, even a detractor who is exiled from the society as a whole still creates ripples within the fabric of the system. Dictatorial government through elite party enforcement is what really occurs. There is no such thing as true marxist communism outside of small cult groups scattered around. Even then, there is generally a leader or 2 or several who tend to move out in front of the entire group. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Demson Posted June 25, 2004 Report Share Posted June 25, 2004 Which is exactly why Communism is a failure. In order to be a success, communism must have uniform agreement. When it does not, even a detractor who is exiled from the society as a whole still creates ripples within the fabric of the system. Dictatorial government through elite party enforcement is what really occurs. There is no such thing as true marxist communism outside of small cult groups scattered around. Even then, there is generally a leader or 2 or several who tend to move out in front of the entire group. In that mindset, democracy is a failure too. For democacy to be a success, every citizen must be involved with the governing. But it is actually the rule of the majority. Thing is - democacy doesn't have to be perfect for it to succeed. And neither does communism/collectivism (not neccesarily Marxist). Question - isn't our current Western democracy a form of collectivism? So yes - I believe in collectivism and communism... To a certain extend. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
journaldan Posted June 25, 2004 Report Share Posted June 25, 2004 Question - isn't our current Western democracy a form of collectivism? I'd say the answer is no, but I would be open to hear your argument as to how it could be viewed as such. Primuspilas says Communism is/was a failure. The government structure labeled Communism by the Soviets and others was a failure, but was not true textbook definition Communism. True communism existed for thousands of years and worked. But again, I am not a communist Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Primus Pilus Posted June 25, 2004 Report Share Posted June 25, 2004 A failure as it relates to a grand scale. No large scale communist nations exist or have ever existed in the true sense of the word. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Demson Posted June 25, 2004 Report Share Posted June 25, 2004 I'd say the answer is no, but I would be open to hear your argument as to how it could be viewed as such. I'll keep it short. Taxes (*spits*). Everybody sacrifises some of their wealth to the commonwealth, which will benifit everyone, not just yourself. It's the taxpayer's money that has made most of our wealthfare possible. It's just one view of many. It can be written of, or seen as a truth. A failure as it relates to a grand scale. No large scale communist nations exist or have ever existed in the true sense of the word. If, in 100,000 years from now, a new governing ideology emerges in a galaxic society which is statistically 1000 times more succesful then our current world... Will our Western democacy been a failure too? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Primus Pilus Posted June 25, 2004 Report Share Posted June 25, 2004 Probably according to those living in the future. However, the concept of Democracies or Republics, is a several thousand year old form of government. Its always evolving to meet modern challenges or needs, and will continue to do so, regardless of where its practiced. Whether modern democracies/republics like those of the US and Europe survive or not, isn't the question, but whether or not the concept can and does 'work'. Communism, on the other hand, at least the form practiced in reality, doesn't evolve. So far it has either collapsed or radically changed. By evolution, I mean the concept that the fundamental ideology stays the same while laws and such are altered to face current situations. By radically change, I mean the introduction of capitalism or free trade, etc. into a system of government which, in theory, should be completely opposed to that. Perhaps some day a true communist utopia will develop. If people are happy and it shows a track record of maintaining itself for an indefinate period of time, then I guess one would deem it a success. There are plenty of 'positive' arguments that can be made in favor of the community, all for one and one for all concept. Just so far, it hasn't worked, where at least democracy/republic has consistently maintained a presence since the dawn of civilization. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moonlapse Posted June 25, 2004 Report Share Posted June 25, 2004 These ideas, like people have implied already, become less practical as population continues to grow. If people could be successfully localized, then the traditional concept of community may still be applied, but with the speed of communications and travel today, its almost a lost cause. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Primus Pilus Posted June 25, 2004 Report Share Posted June 25, 2004 Personally I prefer a dictatorship or monarchy, with me in charge =P Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Viggen Posted June 26, 2004 Report Share Posted June 26, 2004 Lets face it, communism is a political theory that doesn't work in real life.... (proven by 100 years of failure) regards viggen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
journaldan Posted June 28, 2004 Report Share Posted June 28, 2004 What form of government would you say the hunter-gatherers of centuries past operated. Was this not a form of communism that served them well for centuries, before they got steamrolled by "progress?" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
journaldan Posted June 28, 2004 Report Share Posted June 28, 2004 Speaking of democracy, et al.... Canada is having national elections today. The Liberals and Conservatives are so evenly split, each with about 35 percent of the vote in pre-election polling, it appears that the Bloc Quebecois (sp?) may turn out to be in a position of significant authority. The BQ only runs candidates in Quebec and actively seeks the removal of Quebec from the dominion. In a case of high irony, the party that seeks the end of federal involvement in its home territory likely will have to be courted by one of the "mainstream" parties in order to be able to form a federal government. There is a far-left wing party in the mix as well, the NDLP. All in all, things could get interesting in Ottawa. (For those who forgot their international-government-styles-decoder ring at home, Canada has a parliamentary system of gov't.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Primus Pilus Posted June 28, 2004 Report Share Posted June 28, 2004 What form of government would you say the hunter-gatherers of centuries past operated. Was this not a form of communism that served them well for centuries, before they got steamrolled by "progress?" I don't think I'd call it communism. While some similarities exist to a communal environment, wouldn't pre-history people be classified as living within family groups/clans? These groups would aways have a patriarch or matriarch, I'm sure. Mind you, my knowledge of pre-historic human society is limited to 15th hand knowledge of some theory passed down by a procession of anthropologists, biologists, historians and some plain old scientists Going farther, even more in-depth clan and tribal societies would still have chiefs or elders. Still I suppose nearly all members of the society functioned within essentially the same existance. I suppose it depends on how strictly we classify communism. Would the best hunter of the group keeping the best meat, or trophies to symbolize his kills, (thereby recognizing his individual effort) still be considered communist? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moonlapse Posted June 28, 2004 Report Share Posted June 28, 2004 Social animals always have leaders and heirarchy... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Primus Pilus Posted June 28, 2004 Report Share Posted June 28, 2004 True, true, I suppose I am simplifying it too much. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.