Band Name!
<looking around at his clean country with the high standard of living and low unemployment rate>
Are you sure you’re talking about the same capitalism the rest of the world is talking about?
Or is this the alternate-reality capitalism that exists in Marxists’ minds?
Well, enlighten us then.
:shrug: You could replace the name of the ideology with “libertarianism”, or with almost any other intellectual construct for that matter, and say the same things about their real-world functionality. The only difference would be which ones have actually been used as a cover name by a totalitarian regime and which have not.
Ideologues keep the faith because that’s how ideologues’ minds work. There isn’t much more to it than that.
I’m trying to avoid the ‘Capitalism works’ stuff and get to the core of why folks still have faith in Communism. You seem to be implying that that Marxism COULD happen and work. Where do you derive that, even though you say its ‘unlikely’? Communism has been pretty much a universal failure. Are you suggesting that if somehow Capitalism fails that only then would Marxism have its shot?
Well, I didn’t really make an attempt to REPRESENT the idea of communism in this OP. What I was looking for is why do people continue to hold to the ideas of Communism. However, if you think communism has been misrepresented then post that…could spark the discussion.
-XT
Of course, it got that way through market regulations and such non-capitalist ideals like universal health care, welfare, publicly subsidized schooling, etc.
One of the key problems in Marxism is that there’s no reason why anyone would want it. Despite Marx’s fancies, there’s very little evidence that lower-class people want to blow away all the rich people and establish an equalitarian utopia. They want to join the upper class instead. A good nation gives the brightest and hardworking ones a chance to do so.
Re: Capitalist vs. communist keeping of the faith
Capitalism and the free market are ideals, true, but many seem to treat the field of economics as though it were also an ideal. The field of economics, in which many capitalists and free market-ists are versed, does in fact allow for measuring and studying things like income disparity, externalities like pollution, economic mobility of individuals, and so on. Capitalists, free-market lovers and economists are not against measures designed to ameliorate those problems, just against those measures which (according to more than 200 years of economic understanding) won’t work.
When it comes to “keeping the faith”, which subscribers to any ideology must do, it doesn’t require much actual faith. A person need only leek at examples of free economies vs. (the only other type we know of) command economies. The closer a society comes to a free economy, the more prosperous all its people seem to be in aggregate. The closer to a command economy a country gets, well, the more problems arise. For example China, for all its central planning could not come close to gauging demand, and ultimately did a very poor job of protecting its workers from foreign competition.
“Keeping the faith” for those who believe in free enterprise requires looking at the whole economic picture and studying it in a rational manner. Doing so for marxists requires looking at a partial economic picture and judging it almost entirely by emotion.
Or they could even look at examples[…] :rolleyes:
Let’s assume for a moment that this isall true. Are you saying that communism works well as long as it’s regulated properly? If not, then faith in capitalism, as you put it, is surely not the same as faith in communism. No?
Thats true…its one of Capitalisms great strengths in fact, being able to adapt itself, to incorporate new ideas into itself and continue to prosper. Motivated self interest and all that…no ‘faith’ required. Communism has shown itself singularly incapable of such self adaption…or when it does adapt by trying to incorporate Capitalist aspects into itself it inevitably comes into a conflict where only one can survive. In China there is a calm before the storm (IMO)…eventually either the Capitalistic aspects they have incorporated to make their economy work at all will kill off the Chinese Communist government, or the Chinese Communist government will attempt to shut down these Capitalistic aspects and kill their economy off.
I guess enough folks have weighed in now that the OP has been answered…Communists keep the faith in their system despite mountains of data to the contrary the same way flat earthers, UFO belivers or bible literallist do. Makes things much more difficult when they are constantly doing drive by’s in any thread that touches on the economy, trade, capitalism, labor, etc. Oh well…I’m sure the guys who constantly debate Evolution can relate with all the bible literalist drive bys and ID or creationist rhetoric.
-XT
Any system can work well if it’s regulated properly, has the proper infrastructure set up, has a minimum of corruption and a fairly well-educated populace, IMO. I think that sensibly regulated capitalism is a very good economic tool and one that is probably easier to administer than communism. The problem with past “communist” governments is that they were just a means for political elites to gain and hold onto power and comfort at the expense of the general public - not much different feudalism, really, or capitalism under a corrupt dictatorship. And it was directly opposed to the communist ideal of a classless society.
To answer your question, the latter. I wouldn’t call it “alternate-reality” capitalism. More like “selective evidence”. The point being, a devout Marxist is going to find the evidence that capitalism is a failure (like Lib said), whether or not you would agree with their evidence.
Neither did I. Imagine an atheist saying “I can’t understand why Christians continue to believe in an old bearded white God living in the sky. Considering that our space probes have detected no such thing/person/phenomenon.” A rather simplistic view of religion, right? “I can’t understand why people continue to believe in Communism, after all, Communisn killed 100 million people in the 20th century”. Same thing, IMHO.
Why is that we have many, many examples of successful capitalist societies (regulated, but still capitalist at the core) and yet not one single example of a successful communist society? Is it really just the lack of proper regulation? No. Communism makes enormous errors about human nature and what motivates people. People are not willing to work simply for the bennefit of other people they don’t even know. For that reason alone, communism can’t exist in a free society.
Well, I made no reference to the number of folks killed by communist governments in the OP or in any of my subsequent posts so this is kind of a strawman you are setting up. I made reference to the fact that communist nations are invariably economic disaster areas. I don’t think this is in the same league as your simplification of religion vs your characature of an atheist position. You claimed that “I would also note that posts 1 - 5 misunderstand and misrepresent the idea of communism. The same way that (like Sam Stone once said) leftists “don’t understand” the market or atheists “don’t understand” Christianity.” How was communism misrepresented? Even taking the strawman position you built for me…how is the fact that communist nations in the 20th century killed X million of its own folks a misrepresentation? Could you go into some detail about how communism has been misrepresented to the point it invalidates whats been said? Or are you just nitpicking?
-XT
This is how Communists keep the faith (although obviously not the same faith).
“Faults? What faults? Everything is perfect.”
“Look, right there, there’s a fault.”
“That fault? Well obviously if that’s a fault it doesn’t belong to my belief system. My belief system is perfect and has no faults.”
Some people can believe in the historical inevitability of the world revolution in the same way that other people can believe the Microsoft is participating in a free market system.
Dogma. May be true, but its still solid dogma. “Human nature”? That is a definable fact? “People are not willing…benefit of other people…” I am. Does that mean I’m not “people”, or am I merely an abberation to be explained away. Not a “true Scotsman”, not an authentic representation of human nature?
I would hate to think that you are proposing that humane compassion is some sort of pathology. Makes Baby Jesus cry, you know.
So… they keep they faith by denying that communism has faults? Even when they are obvious?
Okay.
Note–Communism is effectively dead…until…
enough time goes by in formerly-Communist countries for 1 generation to be born & grow up without first-hand memories of it.
And then, a few old die-hards will whisper into the ears of the kids, & it will all start again.
There have been such things as Collective Farms; there has never been such a thing as Collective Memory.
The question is why do pro-communists “keep the faith?”.
Well, the simple answer is that “it sounds good on paper”. In the Marxist society, each according to his need. It paints a very pretty picture of an economy that successfully meets all (or at least the important) needs of everyone.
Theoretically, it is not as cutthroat as capitalism. People work together to make sure everyone’s needs are met instead of undercutting each other to have their own needs met.
Communism has a certain Robin Hood-esq “for the people” idealism to it. It plays well in corupt societies with large income disparities because people buy into the idea of taking wealth from rich fat cats who don’t deserve it and giving it to the people.
Perhaps poor wording on my part, by saying “simply” instead of “solely”. Or perhaps you edited my statement down to a strawman postion (my bolding in your quote above). But note that I also said “for the benefit of people they don’t even know”. Do you deny that most people are more charitable towards their family and neighbors than they are towards stranges thousands of miles away? Not devoid of charity, but less charitable.
Human nature is not knowable in the same sense that we understand about biological process, but it’s not completely unknowable, either.