Ironic that the US trades with them but not Cuba who, in my opinion is guilty of far less crimes against humanity.
Do not under estimate the evil of Fidel. My entire family has finally escaped Cuba, save for a few cousins. While they were there we literally supported them. If it we not for us, they would have starved to death. Even the Cubans not typically accept the Cuban Peso as currency; thay want dollars. As for why we trade with China, I consider it yet another Nixon gaff. What an asshole that guy was.
[/quote]
from what i understand, the poverty in Cuba is a result of of the inability to trade with other countries mainly the U.S. and countries that fear the U.S. Yet in spite of this, cuba is able to guarantee jobs, housing, healthcare, and education. Yes, Cuban people do not live like Americans but then again Cuba does not exploit other countries to get rich, the U.S. does.
[quote]gladiatorsteer wrote:
no one has died because of communism. communism is a social economic theory in which the workers control the means of production, in a true communist nation there would be no “state” meaning no government agencies which hold power over the people, which is why there has never existed a communist country.
Ideally under communism, the people would organize themselves in order to have decision making processes concerning their city, state, country, etc. For this reason a lot of people argue that communism is more democratic than capitalism.[/quote]
What are you fucking 12? You sound like my son “You didn’t say hangmy jacket, you just told me to put it in the closet.”
Thanks for the refresher in high school political science.
The U.S. is not a democracy and pure capitolism exisits only in the black market. I hope you feel better now that we have cleared that up. Most of us already understand that socialist leaning, goverment centric governments are not pure communism. They just have communist leanings.
[quote]gladiatorsteer wrote:
from what i understand, the poverty in Cuba is a result of of the inability to trade with other countries mainly the U.S. and countries that fear the U.S. Yet in spite of this, cuba is able to guarantee jobs, housing, healthcare, and education. Yes, Cuban people do not live like Americans but then again Cuba does not exploit other countries to get rich, the U.S. does. [/quote]
Well then you understand little. Cuba has had open trade with China, the USSR and it’s satelite republics up until 1990. They still had open trade with China and many South American countries. The Cuban people are poor because Castro keeps all the money, period. The cubans may have jobs but those jobs don’t even pay enough money to feed the families.
People don’t try to escape Cuba because it’s a paradise.
Why don’t you ask a cuban who has had to escape and leave their home how nice it is to live there.
You haven’t been to prison camps for not liking the government. You haven’t had to dig sugar cane fields and rice fields, where your dinner consists of rice and the flies around you are more numerous than the grains of rice in your dirty fucking bowl; just because you want an education. You, more than likely have exchanged Christmas presents ever year of your life, you weren’t arrested for putting up a christmas tree, were you.
[quote]pat36 wrote:
You haven’t been to prison camps for not liking the government. You haven’t had to dig sugar cane fields and rice fields, where your dinner consists of rice and the flies around you are more numerous than the grains of rice in your dirty fucking bowl; just because you want an education. You, more than likely have exchanged Christmas presents ever year of your life, you weren’t arrested for putting up a christmas tree, were you. [/quote]
I think what he’s trying to argue is that communism is not responsible for peoples’ suffering…it is the authoritarian governments that call themselves communists that are responsible. Politics and economics, though tied to each other, are two different philosophies.
You are arguing against the government not the economic policy. Pure communism would have to be democratic and probably more so because, as he stated, it is about the survival of the group not the individual–this is Darwin to the core.
There are not too many species that exist as individuals–with the exception of the predatory species–that have evolved past extiction. Group living works–i.e., communism.
All this talk of true communism is BS. There is no true communism. There is no true capitalism. There are no true democracies. You cannot hide behind the Cuba is not “real” communism.
Every country communism was tried was a complete failure. It cannot work. It crushes the human spirit. It must be imposed at gunpoint.
Could you imagine a system where everyone got paid the same no matter what?
Yes, but the problem with that is that there is no incentive to perform. Why bust your ass if you’re going to get the same wage as your lazy-ass neighbor? Why take some risk with a new idea you have if the state is going to “acquire” it for itself (or “the people”) and give you nothing more in return. Better to emigrate to the US and try to make it big there, no?
this is why capitalism is dangerous. because it makes the worker think only about themselves as an individual. why do you only worry about your welfare? what about the rest of your country or the rest of the world. why work as an individual to attain individual wealth when you can work as a community to attain the wealth of the community. Please do not think only of yourself. work for the betterment of everyone not just yourself.[/quote]
No, this is why capitalism works.
Everybody takes care of himself and tries to better his situation and an invisible hand turns all that work into the common good.
What you call communism is just a desire for a closed society, collectivism if you will, where the horde rules and the individual means nothing.
Interesting that most talented people have to be forced at gunpoint to join such a system.
Plus, you are aware that you are basically talking about a religious belief, while the free market, private property, i.e capitalism was an emergent structure, meaning it developed because people are what they are and not what you would like them to be.
[quote]gladiatorsteer wrote:
This is why capitalism is dangerous. because it makes the worker think only about themselves as an individual. why do you only worry about your welfare? what about the rest of your country or the rest of the world. why work as an individual to attain individual wealth when you can work as a community to attain the wealth of the community. Please do not think only of yourself. work for the betterment of everyone not just yourself.[/quote]
I disagree with that. There is nothing inherent in capitalism that prevents you from thinking about others. In fact, I can’t think of a single example of human society where the community is not an important aspect.
The difference between capitalism and communism is better explained, I think, as the encouragement of competition vs. the stifling of it. Capitalism encourages and thrives on competition. Communism prevents it. In a society where everyone is to be considered equal, trying to ‘compete’ is seen as trying to elevate yourself above your peers; as not wanting to be ‘equal’ anymore and as such it is frowned upon.
Capitalism is built on competition, that why capitalist society get better services, better products, better standards of living. If you excel at what you do, you’ll be rewarded. If you don’t, your life will be harder. If you truly suck, you’ll eventually give up and find something you’re good at so that you can get a better life.
Even as you’re competing, you can still care about the well being of others. You can even see it in a selfish light: Having more people employed is good, because it means more customers for your goods or services. Having more people healthy is good because your workers need less sick days, etc.
[quote]pookie wrote:
I disagree with that. There is nothing inherent in capitalism that prevents you from thinking about others. In fact, I can’t think of a single example of human society where the community is not an important aspect.
The difference between capitalism and communism is better explained, I think, as the encouragement of competition vs. the stifling of it. Capitalism encourages and thrives on competition. Communism prevents it.
In a society where everyone is to be considered equal, trying to ‘compete’ is seen as trying to elevate yourself above your peers; as not wanting to be ‘equal’ anymore and as such it is frowned upon.
Capitalism is built on competition, that why capitalist society get better services, better products, better standards of living. If you excel at what you do, you’ll be rewarded. If you don’t, your life will be harder. If you truly suck, you’ll eventually give up and find something you’re good at so that you can get a better life.
Even as you’re competing, you can still care about the well being of others. You can even see it in a selfish light: Having more people employed is good, because it means more customers for your goods or services. Having more people healthy is good because your workers need less sick days, etc.
[/quote]
Pookie,
This is the inherent great lie of capitalism. Individuals cannot exist in communities where we rely on others for our survival–this means every society. We can have individualistic thinkers but we cannot have people who act in their own interests.
Anyone who thinks they made “it” on their own is completely deluded because we all require others for our survival. This is what Adam Smith refers to as the “division of labor” in the Wealth of Nations. We all do the job we are best suited for and contribute to the “good” of society. We thus end up being more productive and ensuring the survival of our community.
A CEO of a company does not act in his own interests. It is in the interests of the company and its investors that he must act. Even with respect to big business individualism cannot exist. Business is the ultimate example of where communistic values are applied. Sure, we can call it “free enterprise” when we allow individuals to own the means of production but this cannot truly happen in democratic societies.
The argument that communism holds the individual back may be true but this also makes the assumption that people acting in their own self interest is what is best for a group. When we finally come to realize that we cannot exist as individuals and therefore cannot act with individualistic intentions I think we will be better off as a society.
Why is competition only a manifestation of capitalism? This is an argument I don’t understand. Communism doesn’t have anything to do with stifling competition. All it it is stifling is the means of production so that no one person, group, or entity can be the sole owner of it. This is what big business is usually after; albeit, by indirect means thru competition within industry.
It is ironic to me that capitalists argue that competition makes production better but the ultimate end result of competition is to be the sole producer which means competition no longer exists. Does this not affect the quality of the product in the long run? Just because communists believe in sharing the means and the ends does not mean it is not suited for competition.
Commune-ism is simply a society wherein the individuals live for the sake of the ‘community’, whatever that is.
Since ‘community’ does not exist (over and above the individuals in ‘it’), it therefore follows that some members work for the benefit of other members. The word ‘communism’ is thus simply slavery with a new name. Marx’s goal was to trick everyone into forming a society of slavery, but rigging it so the people who provide the bonanza feel morally compelled to provide for the others. One of the best jokes ever played on humanity…
Fascism, Communism, Socialism, and all such ‘isms’ are simply a leash meant to be put on our necks.
[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
This is the inherent great lie of capitalism. Individuals cannot exist in communities where we rely on others for our survival–this means every society. We can have individualistic thinkers but we cannot have people who act in their own interests.[/quote]
What? It seems to me that pretty much everyone acts in their self-interest.
And while I depend on thousands of people for my day-to-day survival, I can act in my own interest (ie, working to get a paycheck) while proving a useful service to society.
Agreed. But some systems will reward personal effort more than others.
[quote]This is what Adam Smith refers to as the “division of labor” in the Wealth of Nations. We all do the job we are best suited for and contribute to the “good” of society. We thus end up being more productive and ensuring the survival of our community.
A CEO of a company does not act in his own interests. It is in the interests of the company and its investors that he must act. Even with respect to big business individualism cannot exist. Business is the ultimate example of where communistic values are applied. Sure, we can call it “free enterprise” when we allow individuals to own the means of production but this cannot truly happen in democratic societies.[/quote]
I’m not following you here. I work at a company because A) I like what I do, but mostly B) because they give me a paycheck every week. If they didn’t, I’d go do what I like somewhere else.
In that way, I can act in my own interest (ie, do something I find interesting and earn money for it) and contribute to society (by proving working computer systems to a company who then offers products and services to the public).
We have to make a distinction between ethical self-interest, where your gains are not necessarily someone else’s loss vs. sociopathic self-interest where you rape, kill, pillage and burn on a whim.
We are individuals first and foremost. We can work as societies to get a synergy from our efforts. No individual, no matter how talented, can outcompete a group of similarly talented individuals working as a team. Capitalism doesn’t prone “individualism” as being the end goal; rather it encourages the search for more efficiency through competition.
Communism doesn’t reward competition. There’s no incentive to try and do better, so less people will be motivated to do so. Even if you bust your ass, work 16 hour days, 7 days a week, come up with a bunch of new ideas, you get nothing more than your fellow. Maybe the “community” would profit, but there aren’t that many people willing to bust their asses day in, day out for others to profit.
Monopolies can be a problem in capitalist societies. That’s one area where government regulation and intervention can be useful.
With communism, you basically get one big monopoly (the state) that owns and controls everything. It’s been noted time and again than monopolies stifle innovation and progress, and tend to give customers crappier, more expensive products. With communism, you’re fixing the bar there from the outset.
Unless there are natural or artificial barriers to entry, a market is always open to competitor who come up with a better idea.
Until we reach the monopolistic end result (if ever), competition ensure we, as customers, will be given choices among products and services. Prices will be lower and quality higher.
It’s not that competition is impossible in communism, but that it is pointless. There is no reward for it, no incentive. You might get a few heroic individuals who’ll spend their lives for the good of their fellow men, but I think those individuals are few and far between. Capitalism directly rewards a better competitor with cold hard cash. Plus, society still benefits.
[quote]Headhunter wrote:
Commune-ism is simply a society wherein the individuals live for the sake of the ‘community’, whatever that is.
Since ‘community’ does not exist (over and above the individuals in ‘it’), it therefore follows that some members work for the benefit of other members. The word ‘communism’ is thus simply slavery with a new name. Marx’s goal was to trick everyone into forming a society of slavery, but rigging it so the people who provide the bonanza feel morally compelled to provide for the others. One of the best jokes ever played on humanity…
Fascism, Communism, Socialism, and all such ‘isms’ are simply a leash meant to be put on our necks.
[/quote]
HH,
I think you are wrong here. Communism isn’t “simply slavery with a new name”. How can you argue that community doesn’t exist? The notion of community is very abstract; it involves everything from our neighbors to the people who produce the goods we use on a daily basis. You can make a rhetorical argument about “commune-ism” but it doesn’t do anything for the fact that you rely on community for survival. Where does your petrol come from? Where does your food come from?
The idea of pitching in to help the group is as old as humanity itself. Not only was it the preferred way to live it was the only way to live–survival required it. The real trick is that individualism has led the modern capitalists to believe that there is no other “truth” than the ego. I agree that we owe much of the greatness of our modernizations to the human ego but it does no good to for me to act purely out of self interest.
I no more agree in the socially-imposed morality that communism lends itself to than I believe in the selfishness of individualism. The pure fact of the matter is that humans are social animals and in order to live with each other have to learn how to reconcile individuality with community.
I think you are wrong here. Communism isn’t “simply slavery with a new name”. How can you argue that community doesn’t exist? The notion of community is very abstract; it involves everything from our neighbors to the people who produce the goods we use on a daily basis. You can make a rhetorical argument about “commune-ism” but it doesn’t do anything for the fact that you rely on community for survival. Where does your petrol come from? Where does your food come from?
The idea of pitching in to help the group is as old as humanity itself. Not only was it the preferred way to live it was the only way to live–survival required it. The real trick is that individualism has led the modern capitalists to believe that there is no other “truth” than the ego. I agree that we owe much of the greatness of our modernizations to the human ego but it does no good to for me to act purely out of self interest.
I no more agree in the socially-imposed morality that communism lends itself to than I believe in the selfishness of individualism. The pure fact of the matter is that humans are social animals and in order to live with each other have to learn how to reconcile individuality with community.
[/quote]
There is a huge difference between pitching in the help your community and having your wealth redistributed into it; be held back in material achievement so that you cannot have more than you fellow man. It is not incumbant on the government to provide for people. It is incumbant on people to provide for themselves. Doing for yourself, is in a sense helping the community because then they don’t have take care of your sorry ass too. Governments should not be in the charity business.
Like you said, community is an abstract concept, you cannot legislate community anymore than you can legislate love. That’s why it takes the end of a gun to make it work. Again, if you want to see it in action watch Venezuela, it is changing from a democracy to a socialistic dictatorship. Next on the agenda, wealth redistribution.
BTW, most opponents to Chavez don’t live very long. But Venezuela is a beautiful country and the meat is top notch, so I think you’ll like it there despite the ever increasing oprresion. Fortunately, I was there when Chavez was first “elected”, so it wasn’t an American hate-fest just yet. Acutally they were relying on the Americans for aid at that time because of the December 1999 flood that killed 30,000 people. I was “fortunate” enough to have been there right when it happened. I got to sleep on a cement bench at the airport with, no food, no electricity, no running water, no phones, no english and very bad spanish, and no way out. I did eventually get out, though.
[quote]pookie wrote:
Communism doesn’t reward competition. There’s no incentive to try and do better, so less people will be motivated to do so. Even if you bust your ass, work 16 hour days, 7 days a week, come up with a bunch of new ideas, you get nothing more than your fellow. Maybe the “community” would profit, but there aren’t that many people willing to bust their asses day in, day out for others to profit.
[/quote]
I don’t have time to respond to the entire thread but just wanted to comment on this piece.
Communism does reward competition. The group competes within the industry; the group succeeds; the group gets rewarded. Communism does not reward individual effort since there is no such thing as the individual.
This is a philosophical “truth”. Individuality does not exist out side our own minds. Everything is symbiotic. Your thoughts are the only thing that are individual to you–and that?s not always the case because we have to answer the question as to how those thoughts came to be there in the first place.
The question that should be asked is what philosophical basis exists to argue individuals should be rewarded for their own productivity when it is impossible to be productive as an individual?
[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
pookie wrote:
Communism doesn’t reward competition. There’s no incentive to try and do better, so less people will be motivated to do so. Even if you bust your ass, work 16 hour days, 7 days a week, come up with a bunch of new ideas, you get nothing more than your fellow. Maybe the “community” would profit, but there aren’t that many people willing to bust their asses day in, day out for others to profit.
I don’t have time to respond to the entire thread but just wanted to comment on this piece.
Communism does reward competition. The group competes within the industry; the group succeeds; the group gets rewarded. Communism does not reward individual effort since there is no such thing as the individual.
This is a philosophical “truth”. Individuality does not exist out side our own minds. Everything is symbiotic. Your thoughts are the only thing that are individual to you–and that?s not always the case because we have to answer the question as to how those thoughts came to be there in the first place.
The question that should be asked is what philosophical basis exists to argue individuals should be rewarded for their own productivity when it is impossible to be productive as an individual?[/quote]
It is not impossible to be productive as an individual.
If we both go hunting I might be better than you.
If we both work fields and plant potatoes with nothing but our bare hands you might be better, i.E more productive than me.
We could do that and measure different productivites without any society or group whatsoever.
Now we do live in societies and you can only choose of serving other people, which means a free market system, or being forced by or force other people, which means anything else.
So capitalism is about selfish co-operation which is its strenght, communism is about coerced co-operation which is on of its many weaknesses.
The thing is that you can get by living off your fellow human beings in a communist society whereas you are mercilessly punished if you do not think about your fellow men in a market society.
Seems to me that capitalism and trade in general encourages civilized manners while making allmost everybody better off and what is even more important, it works with the people we have instead of shinynew ones we first need to re-educate.
[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
Communism does not reward individual effort since there is no such thing as the individual.
[/quote]
That’s the scariest thing about communism. Once you accept the above as fact, how the heck are you going to turn around and protect individual rights. If the individual is not recognized, what is the argument for his rights?
No, the “Party” will eventually need to, and justify, stamping out rights which lead to individual based expression, thought, and action. Are you an individual? Or, just some cog in the machine?
[quote]Sloth wrote:
LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
Communism does not reward individual effort since there is no such thing as the individual.
That’s the scariest thing about communism. Once you accept the above as fact, how the heck are you going to turn around and protect individual rights. If the individual is not recognized, what is the argument for his rights?
No, the “Party” will eventually need to, and justify, stamping out rights which lead to individual based expression, thought, and action. Are you an individual? Or, just some cog in the machine?
[/quote]
Good point.
If there are no “individuals”, the worth of most individuals equals that of a clipped toe nail…
Funny that collectives allways seem to need individuals to make the decisions for them…
I couldnt be bothered to waste my time arguing with any defender of communism. Any thinking man in 2007 realizes what a failed idea it is, complete with mountains
of real world proof.
Now I am going to start a thread about the world being flat…
