Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

MODS: take Note, NOT A POLITICAL DEBATE OR ANYTHING


Anybody Know What Are the Differences BEtween Comunism IN theory And Applied? I Really REALLY need to know (I missed a history class and now its due in the morn, or Zero)

bit late to be asking now

in theory its complete equality but i think its far from it...anyhow you cant get rich or poor..a steel worker makes as much as a scientiest

I tried my best, I can't really use the notes from class cause I WAS NOT THERE. And I didn't even know there was an assignment, despit me asking the teacher, then him telling me, go ask some one else

.|..
__ To the teacher. (name WILL remain annonymous)

Thanks, but I pretty much know that part, from websites that did not help at all. Just, everyone, Tell me all you know!

His name is Will?

Sorry, jk. I dont know this stuff yet. I've got my mind chock full of math anyways.

y, you got a math midterm comin up?

wtf is "chock"

i didnt know there was really any more to it? but i barley graduated anyhow....dodnt listen to me

PLEEHEHEHEEASE!!!! I need a page and I only got 1 argument down!!! :cry:

In theory communism relies on the government to basically intervene to stop one group from gaining more power and/or wealth than another. Basically in order for it to work people themselves have to believe they're equal to everyone else..simple concept yeah

but when applied to the real world communism doesn't work because it gives a government and the people in it to much power itself therefore completely nullifying the purpose/goal of communism. It just becomes a society based on a powerful centralized government and inevitably becomes a dictatorship. Past communist governments have been unsuccessful because there is no competitive economy so the value of everything goes down while the government spends the money on basically itself (i.e. building up military power i would say as the main one) As the government spends more and more money it isn't getting the money from anywhere to compensate for the loss. So the government will print more money which is pointless cause then the value of everything goes down then throws the country into poverty.


ok i could be way off, but that's my primitive understanding of it

feel free to correct me anyone who really knows there stuff about this

also it doesn't work when it's applied due to human nature. greed causes people to break with the basic tenets of communism which weakens it.

oh, and by the way, communism does not include government (not one i remember anyway). i think the theory states that they should establish a central power at first and eventually do away with it. the countries that have tried it have never gotten past that stage, and therefore are not truly communist. they're just socialist.

yeah that's the main reason...it sparks the idea of centralized government anyway...one person usually wants to get to the top and people usually accept them (not knowing what the person is capable of) depending on if they are charismatic or not. Even if the person doesn't mean to acquire too much power they usually do anyway because the people rely on the leader.

Sounds about right, and the reason the money isn't coming in
is because of the spurning of capitalism, which is the thing that
destroyed Soviet communism, while China, who EMBRACED
capitalism, has become very economically independent because
of their trade agreement.

This allows them to flood the market with their goods, (dollar stores take note....)and the fact that that money is being taken from the people, but with extra residuals from the trade goods. Like most dictatorships, money is still being take from the people, but at least
they have some to live on....had the Russians embraced capitalism
they could have been well off too. but to sum up the age old squestion of theory VS. applied, let's just say that it all looks good on paper, but in practice it falls apart. Isn't that always the way?

too lazy to read it all, so I'll write it in short:

PURE communism (NOT leninism or stalinism) is that all are equal and that we share everything so that there are no powerful guys anymore but that everything is equally powerful

now, applied, it just does not work at all for the simple reason: men is not good enough to pull it off, they stop working (cause they don't need to cause everyone shares) and such.

So, to me, communism is the best you can get...
"Communism works ... in theory"

Thanks a lot guys. I am concentrating more on Russia, with Lenin in Stalin (He IS worst then Hitler, but lets not go on that) What was the thingy about the goverenment taking hold of the private industries, the people would burn there own land so they wouldn't get to it....what was that....?

Well one of the main points of Communism is that they do not allow for private goods, almost everything is common good (read owned by the gouverment) So the Sovjets (Lenin and Stalin both) applied this theory to almost any industry the difference is that Lenin would actualy not try to improve his militairy power but was trying to improve the life of the people living in his country (he started the industrial revolution in Russia)
Where as Stalin was a raging psychotic, there are some good books about Stalin and his psychotic illnesses available. Stalin brought the terror into the regime, he used the gouvermental economy to drive his machines of war, But the russian Militairy tactics have always depended on massive amounts of people. For those people he needed Food and other supplies. So Stalin started what is muchless widely known as the agraric revolution, and he took people from everywhere, small peasants, workers and unemployed people from the cities and had them work in large gouverment owned Farms. Problem was the machines and techniques were so out of date that it just didn't help the people from starving. For these large farms they needed large lands, so since private propertie was forbidden they took the land from the small time farmers and used it for the gouvermental farms, that's why ppl burned their own land.

Tho your term is pretty vague, it could also be they ment the scorching earth tactic, on the source you got this from. but that's something else and has nothing to do with communism

Damn fire, i was just gonna say that!

hehe, that's nothing I can ask my dad, and then I can type a 10,000 character long post

So far there have been some very good opinions on communism in this thread. Let me add some more:

Communism greatest contributors were Marx and Engels. Both men created the infamous Communist Manifesto in which a declaration of rigths for the proletariat were demanded. Because of this Marx was kick out of France and Germany and finally moved to England were his works were permitted to be publicize. Marx was a thinker and much more philosophical than any other self proclaim communist today.

Already in his Communist Manifesto, Marx had formulated his basic doctrine, which he considered in many ways original (Actually Moore wrote in his book Utopia something similar to Communism). He is quoted with this "What I did that was new was to prove 1. that the existence of classes is only bound up with particular historic phases in the development of production; 2. that the class struggle necessarily leads to the dictatorship of the proletariat; 3.that the dictatorship itself only constitutes the transition to the abolotion of all classes, and to a classless society." It may seen to be a lot and it is so to make it easier communism is a theory so large that it takes a long time to understand. My best suggestion to you is that when you refer to communism, just remenber the works of Marx and Engels as a basis of Communism.

btw, that communist manifesto was first written in brussels