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

Order from best to worst and explain In short tldr terms
Some might be twice because im not sure what they are


Communist
Soviet russia
Nazi germany
Fidel castero
Gangis khan
Republican
Democrat
King(like UK)

What parties are missing?

Dude, this isn't the MVF gift out of here with this crap. Its like the only thing your tiny brain can come up with is ordering things from best to worse.

Originally posted by TethAdamTheRock
Order from best to worst and explain In short tldr terms
Some might be twice because im not sure what they are


Communist
Soviet russia
Nazi germany
Fidel castero
Gangis khan
Republican
Democrat
King(like UK)

What parties are missing?

You aren't sure what would be on twice? But your first two choices are "Communist" and then "Soviet Russia" lol.

Dude go look at his threads in any other forum, its the same thing.

Order best to worst.

Originally posted by Surtur
You aren't sure what would be on twice? But your first two choices are "Communist" and then "Soviet Russia" lol. so how many are there

Making a thread without knowing the subject matter just to get your "order these" on another page.




Big C

Wasn't Castro also a communist? So essentially communism is listed 3 times.

The thread starter obviously loves communism and bbc

Originally posted by BackFire
Wasn't Castro also a communist? So essentially communism is listed 3 times.

OP what did Genghis Khan *ever* do to you?!

So let's try and turn this into a workable thread. Since the OP mentions communism multiple times let's point the discussion that way.

Do you believe Communism is a workable political philosophy? If so, why? We've seen some form of it tried multiple times, and multiple times it has failed. Today's China seems to be the most successful attempt at it.

If you don't believe Communism is a workable philosphy, is that based exclusively on the thinking of the people that make of today's civilization? I.E. - Do you think it could potentially work in the future.

Personally I find communism a fascinating theory. And while I think it is currently unworkable, I do think that civilization may inevitably move in that direction as time goes on. I think it's a philosophy that requires almost wholesale change in the way we as humans think. We'd need to have a near total abandonment of individualism and that way of thinking. I think that's the only real way it can work. It can't be forced on anyone and needs to be accepted by society as a whole.

I think the first real movement towards that style of government will probably come sooner than later and be when the debate about universal basic income becomes a necessary discussion, probably in the near future, as a result of the inevitable growth of automation. I think once that happens and is approved, whenever that may be, we'll start to see more movement in that direction.

I feel like we need to know what he means by nazi germany. Actual nazi germany, with the actual real Hitler?

Or the fantasy land where Hitler is comparable to Trump?

I assume he means actual Fascism.

Originally posted by BackFire
I assume he means actual Fascism.

Like fascism fascism, or the kind Antifa claims they wanna fight? We gotta be clear lol.

I have no idea about the OP's political leaning, not sure if he's brainwashed into agreeing with their definition of fascism.

I don't know about political parties, but this is how i'd order political ideologies:

1. Liberalism (as in liberal principles, not the colloquial term for the left wing)
2. Libertarianism
3. Conservatism
4. A lot of ideologies in the middle
5. An-cap
6/7 SJW/Alt right
8. Non cap/com forms of anarchy
9. Fascism
10. Naziism
11. ancom
12. totalitarian communism

keep in mind the numbers past 3 would be lower than they are on this list since there are several political ideologies between 3 and 5 I'm either forgetting or blanking on how to order.

Originally posted by Surtur
Like fascism fascism, or the kind Antifa claims they wanna fight? We gotta be clear lol.

I have no idea about the OP's political leaning, not sure if he's brainwashed into agreeing with their definition of fascism.

For the sake of discussion let's say fascism fascism, like Mussolini and Hitler and other Fascist governments that rose in Europe during and around WWII.

Originally posted by BackFire
For the sake of discussion let's say fascism fascism, like Mussolini and Hitler and other Fascist governments that rose in Europe during and around WWII.

So for the sake of discussion we embrace reality, good

Originally posted by Surtur
So for the sake of discussion we embrace reality, good

Yes because I would like to avoid this thread becoming another thread about antifa and their antics. I think talking about political systems in their historical sense would be interesting and isn't something that really happens on this board much.

Originally posted by BackFire
Yes because I would like to avoid this thread becoming another thread about antifa and their antics. I think talking about political systems in their historical sense would be interesting and isn't something that really happens on this board much.

I too would like the thread to avoid embracing fantasies

Speaking of Antifa though....which group has killed the most people? Out of all the groups talked about. From what I've learned here the answer to that question is the answer to the question of which is the worst.

Originally posted by Surtur
I too would like the thread to avoid embracing fantasies

Speaking of Antifa though....which group has killed the most people? Out of all the groups talked about.

I'm not sure. I'm guessing either Communism of Feudalism.

Originally posted by BackFire
I'm not sure. I'm guessing either Communism of Feudalism.

How about this, if given a choice which of these things is the one you MOST would not want to live under?

For the sake of argument assume you are an average person and not part of any specific race/class that would get you targeted more often than normal.

My answer would be Fascism.

Interesting, why?

Originally posted by Surtur
Interesting, why?

I believe it is a wholly unworkable form of government. I believe it is a complete impossibility for that system of government to work without it bringing large scale catastrophe with it. It relies too much on scapegoating and blame to function for an extended period of time. I think Fascism will always inevitably collapse onto itself, and pretty quickly.

Communism, as I said, I believe could theoretically work at some point in the future. There is nothing inherently evil or mean about it. It has simply been employed by bad people and forced upon societies that are unready and unwilling for it.

Feudalism would also be bad, but we've seen evidence of it working for long periods of time throughout history. The same can't be said of Fascism. Though Feudalism being attempted in today's society could be worse than any of them.

Originally posted by BackFire
Communism, as I said, I believe could theoretically work at some point in the future. There is nothing inherently evil or mean about it. It has simply been employed by bad people and forced upon societies that are unready and unwilling for it.
Aside from it's complete lack of respect for property rights, and the immorality of such an extent of wealth redistribution. The word theft comes to mind.

Originally posted by TethAdamTheRock
King(like UK)

Lool didn't even see that, great catch

I'm really not sure why Communism seems more workable than Fascism, tbh. Fascism could've worked, and worked very well, for everyone who happened to be a part of the right race. That's no less plausible than the idea that maybe Communism could have worked out differently. It's all hypothetical.

Even the idea that Communism could work without the kind of totalitarian structure that manifested in the Soviet Union is in itself not self-evident. I've really never heard a convincing case from any Communist exactly how such a society would organize itself. And when they do attempt an answer, usually social engineering is at the center of their model. Which is frankly a reflection of what the actual Communists in Russia thought: that you could erase the past, wipe the slate clean, and start producing exactly the kind of human being that would be a perfect worker bee for the Communist colony.

I feel like Communism only works in ants and bees. And as a result of their collectivist structure, individuality vanishes. The individual ant does not operate as an individual, but as a cog in the machine. Just like a good Bolshevik.

As for anarchy... I think that's a load of horseshit as well.

Originally posted by Surtur
For the sake of argument assume you are an average person and not part of any specific race/class that would get you targeted more often than normal. It depends on what you mean by "average person."

What is the average person in Nazi Germany? Certainly, many average people were sent off to camps. And the same was true in the Soviet Union. And in China. And in North Korea.

Originally posted by BackFire
So let's try and turn this into a workable thread. Since the OP mentions communism multiple times let's point the discussion that way.

Do you believe Communism is a workable political philosophy? If so, why? We've seen some form of it tried multiple times, and multiple times it has failed. Today's China seems to be the most successful attempt at it.

If you don't believe Communism is a workable philosphy, is that based exclusively on the thinking of the people that make of today's civilization? I.E. - Do you think it could potentially work in the future.

Personally I find communism a fascinating theory. And while I think it is currently unworkable, I do think that civilization may inevitably move in that direction as time goes on. I think it's a philosophy that requires almost wholesale change in the way we as humans think. We'd need to have a near total abandonment of individualism and that way of thinking. I think that's the only real way it can work. It can't be forced on anyone and needs to be accepted by society as a whole.

I think the first real movement towards that style of government will probably come sooner than later and be when the debate about universal basic income becomes a necessary discussion, probably in the near future, as a result of the inevitable growth of automation. I think once that happens and is approved, whenever that may be, we'll start to see more movement in that direction. Communism is evil and was invented by Satan.

Originally posted by Emperordmb
Aside from it's complete lack of respect for property rights, and the immorality of such an extent of wealth redistribution. The word theft comes to mind. DMB watching Robin Hood like:

https://media.giphy.com/media/vk7VesvyZEwuI/giphy.gif

Communist for year zero in Cambodia alone, before we get on to Stalin, these are not true communist parties th0ugh as outlined by Marx in the Communist Manifesto and I am always disturbed they are considered communist.

So let me get this straight Steve, do you think communism's a good idea that's still worth trying after we've already lost millions of human lives in the attempts?

I'm not going to put words in your mouth and accuse you of being a communist sympathizer or whatever, but I am going to ask if you are a communist, some other form of marxist, or communist sympathizer.

Steve/Rob/Back/Backfire/DMB?

Could you explain the difference between communism and socialism?

sorry, I'm stupid

Socialism is the stage that precedes Communism in Marx's theory of history. He predicted that the working class in capitalist countries would rise up to establish socialism, in which land and industry are nationalised and there is a government in the form of communes, and workers control of factories. This would eventually mature into communism, a system in which all form of government is withered away and there is a stateless, classless society which has no private property or money.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marx%27s_theory_of_history#Socialism

Of course, this is much easier said than done, as we have seen more than a few times throughout history. The idea of confiscating property will almost always require the use of extreme force and violence, especially if you don't plan to give any compensation and completely disregard the rights of the owners. It's also typically a lot harder to get government bodies to relinquish power, than it is to give it to them.

Originally posted by lazybones
Socialism is the stage that precedes Communism in Marx's theory of history. He predicted that the working class in capitalist countries would rise up to establish socialism, in which land and industry are nationalised and there is a government in the form of communes, and workers control of factories. This would eventually mature into communism, a system in which all form of government is withered away and there is a stateless, classless society which has no private property or money.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marx%27s_theory_of_history#Socialism

Of course, this is much easier said than done, as we have seen more than a few times throughout history. The idea of confiscating property will almost always require the use of extreme force and violence, especially if you don't plan to give any compensation and completely disregard the rights of the owners. It's also typically a lot harder to get government bodies to relinquish power, than it is to give it to them.
Thanks man

I mean both are pretty fundamentally retarded and evil.

Originally posted by Emperordmb
I mean both are pretty fundamentally retarded and evil. A very astute and informed answer. Where did you do your MA?

I'm currently studying Mechanical Engineering at the University of Texas

The problem with Communism and Socialism at the extreme is people or pigs as Animal Farm shows clearly. If you took away the greed equation, the theory is sound... Yeah, why not give it another go sometime, America is doing that for Fascism now!

Originally posted by Emperordmb
I mean both are pretty fundamentally retarded and evil. Damn socialism is now also evil.

I'm beginning to notice a trend. mmm

In regards to the thread, I'm not totally sure how to rank the ideologies. But I think ideologies like Nazism and ideologies under the umbrella of socialism/communism (Stalinism, Leninism etc...) are the most disgusting for their use of mass violence to achieve their goals, and their promotion of either race or class warfare.

Ideologies like anarcho-capitalism and libertarianism are also pretty horrible due to the extreme selfishness that is built into them.

My opinion of conservatives are somewhere between bad to lukewarm. On social issues, I actually agree that a stable family unit is very important, and that abortion should be more of a last resort than a first resort, due to the fetus which is still essentially a human, even if it isn't born yet. Some conservatives go too far on abortion, however, saying that it should be illegal, or so defunded that it becomes impractical for a woman to have one even if she needs it. It should definitely be available, just regulated. I also find myself strongly disagreeing with conservatives on issues like drug prohibition and same sex-marriage. On economic issues, I can sympathise with the wish to have the most efficient state possible, but this is usually easier said than done, and some conservatives can come of as very callous when they are cutting programs that actually help people and provide a net benefit to society. The claim by some conservatives that charity can always step in for a welfare state is also a fantasy.

All in all, I'd say I'm probably closest to social democracy generally practised in Western Europe. I believe that capitalism is the most efficient economic system we have, but it needs to be supported by social programs, and some services (healthcare,railways, energy etc...) should be totally if not at least partially under public control and/or regulation. However, I find myself out of step with the usual centre-left social democrat on the odd social issue, on foreign policy, on free trade to a certain extent, and currently on issues like Brexit. I also think pragmatism should come above ideology on issues like taxation. In my opinion, the rich should definitely pay more than the poor, and the amount of loopholes are obscene, but it is important not to go too far and start taxing too high. If you do that, you may actually reduce revenues that are needed for the social programs. Although extreme conservatives and libertarians promising magic revenue by cutting taxes massively are much worse, to be fair.

So yeah, I find myself having the most in common with ideologies closer to the centre, that are more pragmatic and less ideologically driven, than those on the extremes or those that are solidly left or right with little room to compromise.

Originally posted by Steve Zodiac
The problem with Communism and Socialism at the extreme is people or pigs as Animal Farm shows clearly. If you took away the greed equation, the theory is sound...
Except that "the greed equation" is an inherent part of human nature, and putting governmental authority in charge of all economics incites corruption to a ridiculous degree.

Also, marxism is inherently anti-meritocratic as it only rewards people for work, not for the quality of their work, so it wouldn't give people an incentive to put more effort into their work, as opposed to capitalism where success is rewarded with money.

And lastly, marxism has absolutely no respect for property rights, which is completely immoral. I'm all for a certain extent of welfare as a safety net, but promoting blatant equality of outcome despite the fact that different people's merits in the workforce are not equal is theft. If somebody contributes more to the economy, they deserve to prosper more for their labor.

So marxism is something that inevitably leads to government corruption, it removes the motivation for economic enterprise, and even if it would hypothetically work if you ignored human nature it would still be deeply immoral.

Originally posted by Steve Zodiac
Yeah, why not give it another go sometime, America is doing that for Fascism now!
That's not an excuse. The wars and genocides of the 20th century should have settled the debate between individualism and collectivism, and shown that collectivist philosophies like marxism, fascism, nazism, racial collectivism, etc lead to nothing but the violation of human rights and human suffering. The fact that people in western nations are still waving around either the swastika or the hammer and sickle is truly disgusting, and fascism is not any more an excuse for marxism than marxism is for fascism. They're both terrible, horrid ideologies that shouldn't have survived as living ideologies past the twentieth century.

You wanna see if marxism works? Sorry we already did that and we have tens of millions of corpses to prove that it doesn't, and that's plenty enough for me, and if it's not enough for you you need to do some serious reevaluation of your historical knowledge or moral character.

The various forms of communism/hardline socialism and fascism/Nazism are the left and right hands of oppression so severe that most people in the West can only comprehend it on an academic level. Let's leave them in the graveyard of history, where they belong.