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.
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.
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 SurturIt depends on what you mean by "average person."
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.
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 BackFireCommunism is evil and was invented by Satan. 😠
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.
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.
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.