Communism..............Works

Great Debates
41

Kirkland brought up a point that I wanted to mention. If we take China, Russia, Cuba and North Korea as examples and compare pre-revolution to post-, standards of living rose. Industrialization was the reason, except in Cuba, which is still agrarian. In Cuba, it was redistribution of resources from an oligarchy to a command economy, spreading the limited wealth available. Their attempts to industrialize have been trounced by a couple of related factors; (1) stubborn trust in Soviet Union to help them create infrastructure with shoddy materials and metric-measured equipment; (2) inability to work with its closest neighbor, the US, in building infrastructure and creating anything other than an agrarian economy.

These problems indicate a problem not with communism per se, rather with an inability to work in a less-than-friendly environment. Had the US supported Cuba’s revolution (US companies lost millions when lands were nationalized), and provided tools for industrialization and infrastructure building, Cuba would be the Sweden of the Carribean (well, aside from all the revolution exporting of the mid-60s).

42

One possible comparison between the Communist and capitalist systems is the Germanies. Having been one country from the mid-1800s to 1945, when they were separately occupied until 1949 when they became two States, so they they proceeded from similar political backgrounds. The Federal Republic of Germany (West), was set up by the Allied Powers as a capitalist federal regime. The German Democratic Republic (East) was Stalinized.

There are some confounding factors: The GDR was mostly composed of old Prussia, which was lightly industrialized, while the FRG contained highly industrialized Bovaria. And the Soviets raped the GDR infrastructure from 1945 to 1949.

However, from 1949 to 1989 both nations were “crown jewels” of their respective systems, doted on by America and the Soviet Union, respectively, lavished with investment (the USSR, for many years, put more money into building the GDR than it did into providing consumer goods for its own people).

And after 40 years in both systems, the FRG was a vibrant, strong, democratic nation with a boyouant economy and good relations with the world. The GDR was a pit, filled with poverty, social unrest, oppression and was a pariah state. Even 13 years after Unification, West Germany is still propping up Prussia, where the standard of living had been cannibalized by Stalinism and Communism.

That’s the closest we’ve ever had for “controlled” test of capitalism vs. Communism, and it doesn’t speak well for the supporters of the old Politburo.

43

See, and this is essentially everything capitalists come up with: We’re better than the commies because we outlived the Soviet Union! This proves capitalism is invincible! Perfect world!

The game is not over yet, if you ask me; this “end of history” thing that was announced after the collapse of the USSR, followed by an everlasting reign of prosperity and capitalism throughout the Western world, was nothing but an illusion (as is the notion that capitalism provides wealth for everybody on Earth - I’m sure you’ll contradict, but global capitalism does exploit the Third World. Which is not to say I’m opposed to globalization - I’m just opposed to the current unfair form of globalization).

The experiment in the Eastern bloc failed, but capitalism, too, is not for eternity - and in fact some people (not just morons - take Eric Hobsbawm) do predict a crisis in capitalism, and not just one in the scale of the Asian crisis a few years ago, but a crisis that might affect the fundamentals of capitalism. Not necessarily a World Revolution in the Marxist sense.

Saying capitalism is perfect because it outlived its adversary do just the same thing a 19th century European imperialist was doing when he announced European culture was superior to all others in the world because Europe was dominating the world. The colonial empires failed, although they appeared to be invincible at that time. So please don’t conclude the eternal superiority of capitalism from capitalism’s current strenght.

44

Who said that capitalism is perfect? No one I saw.

Capitalism is, however, demonstrably superior. Communism failed. It failed to provide for its people. It failed to effect its goal of a Command economy. It failed to foster an environment of equality. It failed to raise the standard of living for people under it at any length beyond the benefits inherent in industrialization. On no scale could any of the world’s Communist regimes be considered a success. They are all oppressive and totalitarian, stifling freedom and individuality, and fail to provide any lasting economic or political stability for their people.

Communist totalitarianism took direct aim at capitalism democracy, and failed, floundered and deservedly died. And all it cost was the lives of tens of millions of people. Thanks, Josef.

45

This is a one troll pony if I ever saw one.

46

Komsomol,
I generally just lurk in Great Debates because there are far better debaters here than I am, but I did want to chime in on this one. I’ll be the first to agree Communism is indeed a wonderful idea in theory, and I could even make a case for trying it with a small group (less than a dozen) of very trusted friends. That said, let me address your earlier posts.

First of all, I dislike being sworn at in civilized debate. I understand being angry, and I’ve gotten angry enough myself I’ve had to stand up, walk away from the computer, and rant. I did not post until I had cooled down.

Second, there is a recorded attempt at Communism as early as the first century CE if you’re willing to accept the book of Acts in the Bible as a cite. To be precise, there’s a passage which describes a system under which “they [the followers of Christ after the resurrection] held all things in common” and distributed them among those who needed them. This group of dedicated people who shared a radical, fundamental belief ran into trouble when Ananias and his wife sold property and did not turn the procedes over to the group. Since what bound the group was religious beliefs, not economic, it didn’t mean the end, obviously, but it demonstrates that even in the conditions I mentioned earlier, Communism may not work.

Second, you said

There were vast differences among living standards before the revolution; there were afterwards. During the 70’s and 80’s I recall reading about there being a tremendous housing shortage in Moscow with 6 people living in a 2 room apartment.

Lines for basic foodstuffs were legendary during the 70’s and 80’s. At the time in the US, I could go to one of 3 grocery stores in my small town and buy milk, butter, eggs, vegetables, etc. with minimal wait and hassle. Food pantries also kept the basics on had for those who were losing their jobs. Oh, and as for redistribution, my company’s about to voluntarily redistribute 11 large boxes of food bought by its employees to a local food bank.

Komsomol, my heritage is pure Lancashire peasant, from Bacup, if you hadn’t worked it out by my last name. Communism is a wonderful idea in theory, and I sometimes wish the US had a bit more of a safety net, but under the Russian system, we’d still be peasants. Under the Chinese system, given my father’s and my inclination to pick up as much education as we can, we’d have been re-educated. Even though I’ve now got to run or be late for my bus, I’m glad capitalism gave us the chance to work up to (overworked) middle class.

CJ Howorth

47

I have to say, I think it’s time for Fenris to warm up the chowder again.

48

Oh, what the hell. I have all these bullets, and that duck is just SITTING there.

**
If you really think communism is the only system willing to implement a system of public education, I suggest you step out of Mommy’s basement for a bit and look around you. Try the biggest economies in the world (the US and Japan). Nary a Commie in sight, and somehow the kiddies manage to learn to read.

**Actually, in communism, everybody was poor. Everybody, that is, except the nomenklatura and their friends, who got first pick at the Western goodies at which everyone else was officially expected to turn their noses up.

**Actually, everyone got to live twelve to an apartment in those lovely, poured-concrete nightmares with electrical wiring that shorted out every second Thursday. Actually, that is hardly true - lots of them lived in the “republics” with no running water or sewer systems.

Actually, the Party WANTED famine. That’s why Stalin engineered the famines in the Ukraine that killed tens of millions of people.

And I am afraid your little idea of putting experienced farmers in charge would not have worked out. The trouble was, Stalin identified the experienced farmers as ‘kulaks’ and murdered them all. This was the only way he felt he could implement collectivization, so that he could steal their (productive) land and make the collective farms.

And -

Oh, never mind.

Silly troll. Go away - debates are for grown-ups.

Regards,
Shodan

49

I sent an e-mail to Fenris about this chap four days ago, advising an addition to his Chowder Gang. Haven’t heard back from him, and I’ve noticed that he seems to have been absent from the board lately.

Getting back to this thread…

Komsomol, you started off this thread with the statement that communism “works”, despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary. So far you have yet to provide any concrete evidence that it is a feasible economic system. Your persistance in hyping communism in other threads is cute in a mosquito-swarm sort of way, but eventually it’s going to result in someone opening up a Pit thread about this nut you’re on.

Face it, comrade: communism is dead. Get over it.

50

Said Ferrous:

Bah. Typical pedantic imperialist running-dog tripe. Under communism, when the dictator or oligarchy asserts something, it becomes true, just as sure as Trotsky can be turned into a stairwell.

51

Although you are a tiring young fellow Mr. K, you are obviously in a tender age of innocence and there is much that we can do for you in the ways of education. So in that spirit I’ll dignify this with the semblance of a reply.

Does it matter? Communism is not only outdated it is obsolete. You might have been busy playing in the sandbox while it happened, but the shipyards have closed, the miners have gone home and machines do most of the plowing these days. We who were around called it the Service Revolution, before we had time to get through it properly; the Information Revolution was all over us. You see this poses a little problem for you Marxists, Leninists and Stalinists. Because, as you point out one of the basic ideas of communism is:

Well Sonny…there ain’t that many ‘workers’ left to share between as the below figures from the CIA :slight_smile: World Factbook might show you:

‘Aha!’ says you, ‘The industrial proletariat has been transformed into a service proletariat!’. Afraid not. The menial workers in the service sector make up less than 20% of the workforce and in the Industry sector only half are actual laborers and most of those have some kind of higher education or training to operate the advanced machinery in today’s manufacturing industry…hence they get somewhat better pay than your average bank clerk. No matter what way you count you’ll find that less than 40% of the work force can even arguably be called ‘workers’ these days.

**‘Aha!’ **says you, ‘The oppression of the proletariat has been hidden behind fancy titles! But we still need to protect the financially ailing masses”. Well…while the communists in general were sleeping, or being taken out of power and you were being potty trained, Western society shifted to be heavily dominated by a growing and increasingly wealthy middle class. This is how the top and bottom layer pans out in the US and UK (BTW all these figures are more or less similar across the EU, Norway, Switzerland, Canada and Australia as well as a good couple of SE Asian states, with sic! China and a few former COMECON states catching up pretty fast)

So fine go ahead, ‘Workers of the World Unite’ and start the revolution. Bring on the proletariat so that you guys can have your dictatorship…but don’t expect us the middle classes (all 60-80% of us), to let you take it all away from us without a pretty heavy fight. BTW we get to have the armed forces, cause since you are the masses you should be able to win anyway on sheer numbers, that’s what Karl said after all.

52

originaly posted by Schnitte

If you would have paid closer attention what I said was

If I can borrow your time machine we can debate “what happened in the future”, as for now all we can work with is REALITY.

If you haven’t got a good case against what I said you make me say something you have a case against? Is that how it works?

ETERNAL superiority is YOUR word not mine. My stance is as follows:

At the current time, all attempts at communism have either failed, or have been surpassed by capitalist systems. Therefore in the real world capitalism works better that communism.

If “outperforms in 80 something odd years of actual real-worlds tests” isn’t a definition of superior I don’t know what is.

53

You really need to read Orwell’s Animal Farm. Shortly after the experienced farmers are put in charge of industry they will become the industrial bureacrats. Why? Because they are no longer farming, they are functioning in a bureacratic capacity. They will become what they fought against. Power corrupts.

Somebody has to decide how the resources are distributed in a communist system. Otherwise, what you have is the “tragedy of the commons” where communal resources are decimated due to greed and hoarding. Everyone will want to get what they can before it’s gone.

So tell me, Komsomol, how would you run your animal farm without a farmer? Pigs?

54

I would suggest Sgt. J we meet again in, say, 30 years (since I unfortunately don’t have a time machine, we can’t takew the shortcut) and take a look.
For now, I suggest quitting this thread since everything that can possibly be said has been said and there are several identical threads running anyway. OK?

55

Whaaaat??? Have you been sampling that bock beer ahead of season Herr Schnitte? Nothing, I repeat nothing has been said that amounts to a plausible argument for the claims made in the OP. Or are you throwing in the towel on Komsomol’s behalf?

And hey… who’s starting all those threads? The commies did it! Sheesh! As much as I hate it, I think we’re going to have to exhume and resurrect old McCarthy to get all this sorted out!

56

Communists predicting the imminent end of capitalism are like those who believe the end of the world is near: they just know it. The fact that it has been predicted ofr so long and the prediction always fails does not deter them as it is a matter of faith.

As long as we are making predictions I might as well make some of my own. My predictions are that in the next 31 years capitalism will not only not fail but will flourish in China and many other countries which were communist. Communism will not gain any new ground on the whole. Cuba and North Korea will not get any better as long as they retain their communist ways. The Sun will continue to rise in the East. The Earth will not be hit by a major asteriod.

57

I’m so glad our pal olenintzero isn’t here to watch this carnage. This new whippersnapper is completely f—ing up his gig.

58

QUOTE]*Originally posted by sailor *
**… Communists predicting the imminent end of capitalism are like those who believe the end of the world is near: they just know it… **
[/QUOTE]

Funny that you mention it. Eschatological studies these days often enough propose that communism is indirectly End Time oriented. Jerry Falwell is a commie!!! :smiley:

59

Yup. That just about sums it up:

“It’s never worked before, but you just wait!”

OK, I’ll wait…
Oh yea, Komsomol, I don’t think you’re a troll. I think you’re young and a little misguided, but it seems to be rooted in idealism, which is a good thing. I apperciate the fact that you’re looking for information and new points of view. Keep it up.

60

On second thought…
I eat a LOT of fast food, I may not be around in 30 years. Somebody please remember to say “I told you so!” in 2032.