View Poll Results: Is communism possible in the USA?

Voters
113. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes, Soviet type of communism

    12 10.62%
  • Yes, community type of communism

    14 12.39%
  • Yes, religious type of communism

    2 1.77%
  • Yes, other type of communism

    14 12.39%
  • No, not possible

    61 53.98%
  • Dunno

    3 2.65%
  • Other

    7 6.19%
Page 21 of 62 FirstFirst ... 11192021222331 ... LastLast
Results 201 to 210 of 617

Thread: Is communism possible in the USA?

  1. #201
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Theoretical Physics Lab
    Last Seen
    01-06-15 @ 11:06 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    25,120

    Re: Is communism possible in the USA?

    Quote Originally Posted by Paschendale View Post
    I can't name a single time anyone actually really tried socialism. The prominent examples you're thinking of were fascist dictatorships that falsely labeled themselves socialist. But you're entirely wrong if you think that the problem is "government screwing with the marketplace". Real liberty in this country disappeared the moment that government was put up for sale on the market. We certainly regulate our capitalism, but not for the benefit of anyone but the most powerful capitalists. They remain wholly unregulated, and they have the bought and paid for congress to prove it.
    I've named a ton before, ranging from Allende's Chile to the Eastern European bloc of the 80s, amongst numerous others.

    Socialism's been tried. Socialism's failed.

  2. #202
    Advisor douglas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Last Seen
    06-29-16 @ 03:43 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    458

    Re: Is communism possible in the USA?

    Quote Originally Posted by Cyrylek View Post
    Absolutely possible. It will not be called "Communism", it will be called something else. But the envy, the lust for power, the collectivism...they are simply elements of our human nature. The ones we have to suppress, if we want to stay civilized - and, in the long term - survive.
    Envy and Power-Lust? No. Collectivism is about selflessness by definition. That's like saying, "We shouldn't teach kids to share, that'll lead to envy and power-lust." What is so uncivilized about sharing?

    Quote Originally Posted by marywollstonecraft View Post
    we all know that Marx said "religion is the opium of the people" but in reality, communism can sit quite comfortably alongside religion. the catholic church is alive and well in Cuba, in post Stalinist USSR, several orthodox churches were revived, and while most religion was suppressed in Vietnam, one branch of Buddhism was acceptable.
    Yup, Marx and most early Communists had a very distinct dislike of religion. That really has absolutely nothing to do with Communism itself, though. Modern Communist/Socialists/Marxists/etc. tend to be fairly tolerant of religion; those who attack Collectivism as a threat towards religion are just rabble-rousers. It's the age-old game of making a devil out of the other guy.
    Quote Originally Posted by Bob Blaylock View Post
    Which is a strange argument, given how many times it has been tried, in different parts of the world, with different people from different cultures being involved in the attempt. Do any Communist apologists claim that somewhere in the world, there is a group of people different from all those who have tried it so far, who would produce a different result than that which came of every other attempt to implement Communism?

    One cannot easily avoid being reminded of the cliché about insanity being defined as doing what has been done before, and expecting a different result.
    Communism has never been attempted. That's not our delusion, it's just a fact. There are a lot of dictators who used the words and imagery of Communism to give themselves a political edge, but that doesn't make them Communists. It's no more different than our Politicians who use the words and imagery of Christianity for political gains; when our country fails, is that a failure of Christianity, The American Dream, our Constitution, or of the men who try to implement them? We shouldn't blame a theory or an idea for the way another person will twist it to fit their agenda.

    Oh, and that old Cliche is just that. Was Edison insane when he kept trying to invent the light bulb, or the Wright Bros. with their airplane, or just about any great inventor with their great ideas? Every dedicated person is insane until they succeed.

    Quote Originally Posted by polisciguy View Post
    Interesting point. Marx always spoke of the "temporary dictatorship" during the regime change, but I certainly cannot think of a country that ever got past that point.
    Bingo! It's not Communism that fails but the "temporary" part of a dictatorship. Barring coups and revolutions, has there ever been a "temporary" dictatorship? It's practically an oxy-moron! That's one place where modern Communists/Collectivism have proposed other solutions, typically with democracy. Marx, Engels, and Lenin truly believed that there could be a beneficial dictatorship, but we know that it's simply not possible. Modern Communism/Collectivism should not be connected with Authoritarian government; most of us are proponents of volunteerism and democracy. To link modern collectivism with totalitarianism would be like linking modern capitalism with child labor or slavery.

    Quote Originally Posted by Bob Blaylock View Post
    That's pretty much the standard apologetic for Communism—to claim that since every attempt failed so disastrously, that those who tried to implement it must have gone about it the wrong way, and that therefore, what they did doesn't count as a genuine attempt to put Communism into practice.
    There has never been a communist nation on the face of this planet. Even with the most rigid definition of classical Marxist Communism, there has never been an attempt to actually follow his plan. The major flaw was his and Lenin's idea of a "temporary dictatorship". As I mentioned just above this quote, modern collectivism proposes other paths to reach a communist end. It's not "Communism" that's the problem, it's the path to get there.

    Quote Originally Posted by Paschendale View Post
    Not only is it possible, it is inevitable. We are slowly moving towards a more egalitarian system. Those who panic about the loss of what make this country great don't realize that a commitment to equality and curbing abuses of power (the hallmark of a real socialist system) are what make it great. The only think that could truly destroy this nation would be to sell control of it to a new aristocracy. Which is, of course, what the conservative factions are trying to do, even if they don't all realize it. That's certainly what the billionaires who fund those factions are trying to do.
    Exactly, this is the biggest flaw of the typical Conservative argument; they don't remember how bad it was. The free market was not a beacon of hope or great success of our economy. The free market meant slavery, extreme wealth inequality, and the lowest health statistics our country has ever had. All the problems of our modern economy can be linked with an over-populated labor force, not a regulated market. For most of the early 20th century, the labor force was less than a third of the eligible population; most women weren't working and most children lived at home well in to their twenties. With the various acts that enabled equal employment of all Americans, there came a negative consequence of an expectation that more people should work; we now have more than 2/3 of our eligible population working. Just because all Americans can work, doesn't mean they should work. That could be fixed with a social force towards staying at home and seeking education.

    Although I do have a college education, I don't support it as true source of knowledge or experience; it's just a stupid piece of paper. But, I still think more people should seek an education, for the sole purpose of removing themselves from the labor force. We need less competition for jobs and more skilled workers for the future, and colleges provide for both. But, our current system still isn't providing jobs for these skilled workers; we need a new system. College education and other labor force deflators will "fix" the economy for the short term, but the problem will keep returning until we fix capitalism itself.

    Quote Originally Posted by Gonzo Rodeo View Post
    Neither communism nor socialism is possible, anywhere, as long as scarcity exists.
    Yes, this is the biggest issue in all systems. Communism addresses scarcity in passing, but it never really sets forth a path to removing it. It's a chicken and the egg situation; you can't get post-scarcity from capitalism, but you can't leave capitalism without post-scarcity. I am a proponent of technological utopianism, which hinges on a singularity event in society and technology; the idea being that we will build a new system (spontaneously?) that is post-scarcity. Some propose that this event will occur by 2040, but futurists have a talent for getting things wrong. (where's my flying car?)

    Quote Originally Posted by DVSentinel View Post
    No, I support a meritocracy not an aristocracy. Aristocracy is inherited and remains stagnant regardless of the actions of the individual, a meritocracy will see rises and failings based upon the merits of the individual. The working class takes money from the owner class also. How much a particular worker earns is based upon the value the worker gives and his value in a competitive market. The owner pays a "fair" wage, which really means he pays either the minimum to get the work done or he pays more to receive greater value from the work.

    If a worker is only qualified for a McJob and there are 100 of them for each job, "fair" wage isn't going to be much. If however you need a pipeline welder which requires great skill and there are 100 jobs for each welder, then that worker, the welder, is going to do pretty darned good.

    Merit, the skills and attitude to do a job controls the workers wage, not owners. The owners who need the work done will pay what is necessary to get the work done. When the cost of labor for the owner exceeds what the consumer is willing to pay, then the business fails, period. How much profit a business gets is controlled by how much competition there is in the market for the product sold/produced. Reduce competition and profit/wealth concentrate with the few instead of spread out over the many. The reduction also reduces the number of jobs available and thus lowers the pay for workers because there are more workers available than jobs.

    No form of socialism can change those dynamics without totally breaking the whole system. Over Regulated capitalism interferes with the proper working of that dynamic. Under regulated capitalism/corporatism can to monopolies and greatly concentrate wealth.

    But since socialism is not only economic but social, it tries to "balance" what each person gets instead of letting each person receive what they have earned. In doing so, it subjugates the productive/earners to the none-productive/earners.
    The problem is that "merit" is in the eye of the beholder. Every free-market capitalist I've talked to has said that they promote a meritocracy, except that they get to decide what "merit" is. Quite literally, in a free market you are "better" if you have more money, no matter how you got it. A gold miner is "better" if they hit a lode (by chance), a child is "better" if they have a rich parent (by chance), a company is better if they hit the trend (by chance). A capitalist society is the only way a man can get rich by selling pet rocks, and that guy is considered to be a "genius" by capitalists. Money is the worst way to measure merit if ever I saw one.

    The idea that a person will be paid for their skills is 100% dependent on their being open jobs for that skill (which isn't the case for most people), and on the tendency for employers to pay what you're worth (not the case, ever). Most employers pay an equally low amount for any particular position, and there is no force to raise the average wage for any particular position. The idea that companies "compete" for workers is simply untrue, as long as there is unemployment. Fixing unemployment is key to reviving a capitalist system, but it simply doesn't address the issue of "merit" vs "wealth"; only a collectivist/social-minded system tries to raise wages for the sake of paying people what they are worth.

    It all comes down to the fact that a company can't profit from paying people what they are worth. It's a simple fact of "profit" in general. If you have an hour or so to spare, check out this video; it's a breakdown of the evolution of various socio-economic systems and how they relate to Marxism. It's fairly interesting, and frames the argument the way most modern Marxists see this issue; especially wages vs. "worth". The ending shows a relatively elegant solution to implementing Marxist ideas within Capitalism, using employee owned/operated non-profit companies.

    Crisis and Openings: Introduction to Marxism - Richard D Wolff - YouTube

  3. #203
    Banned
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Last Seen
    09-08-13 @ 02:07 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    2,655

    Re: Is communism possible in the USA?

    Quote Originally Posted by DVSentinel View Post
    How in the world can capitalism wipe out the species?
    The first world's, and increasingly 2nd world's, insatiable consumerism on which capitalism depends is likely to destroy our environment, in turn us ...

  4. #204
    Sage
    rabbitcaebannog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Massachusetts
    Last Seen
    12-09-17 @ 08:35 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    10,918

    Re: Is communism possible in the USA?

    Quote Originally Posted by DVSentinel View Post
    Apparently you have confused the current/past US economy with some form of unregulated capitalism. The government has been screwing with it for a very long time. Industrialist/corporatist started trying to control the market and limit competition at least as early as the late 1800s, probably if you dig deep enough, from the very beginning.

    Lets see, in history, there has never been a particularly successful attempt at socialism and the top economy has always been a market/capitalist based system. Name a single attempt at socialism in a whole society that was ever been "successful" and did anything but impoverish everyone in that society, except those leading the socialism.
    What would you call the Sweden or Denmark's economy? I think it's fairly socialistic in nature.

  5. #205
    double secret probation AngryOldGuy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    Phx,Az
    Last Seen
    03-31-14 @ 10:55 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    2,917

    Re: Is communism possible in the USA?

    "Communism has never been attempted."
    hah yeah and that's cuz there's no such thing
    wait which Communism is he referring too ?

    never mind neither version works so it's all the same

    dang it really must be something really cool for all these people to keep wanting it
    kinda like eternal life, salvation & 72 virgins (or is it just 70+ ) ?

  6. #206
    double secret probation AngryOldGuy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    Phx,Az
    Last Seen
    03-31-14 @ 10:55 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    2,917

    Re: Is communism possible in the USA?

    rabbitcaebannog when you consider their size(s)
    I wouldn't 'call' them at all

  7. #207
    Sage
    rabbitcaebannog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Massachusetts
    Last Seen
    12-09-17 @ 08:35 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    10,918

    Re: Is communism possible in the USA?

    I agree with the poster who said this country is likely to head toward Fascism.

  8. #208
    Sage
    rabbitcaebannog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Massachusetts
    Last Seen
    12-09-17 @ 08:35 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    10,918

    Re: Is communism possible in the USA?

    Quote Originally Posted by AngryOldGuy View Post
    rabbitcaebannog when you consider their size(s)
    I wouldn't 'call' them at all
    Why does size matter

  9. #209
    double secret probation AngryOldGuy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    Phx,Az
    Last Seen
    03-31-14 @ 10:55 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    2,917

    Re: Is communism possible in the USA?

    'size matters'
    ha ha ha and this is coming from a woman?

    ok I'll play what would you like to say in regards to the unbelievably smashing success of socialism in those two countries?

  10. #210
    Uncanny
    Paschendale's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    New York City
    Last Seen
    03-31-16 @ 04:08 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Socialist
    Posts
    12,510

    Re: Is communism possible in the USA?

    Quote Originally Posted by Gipper View Post
    I've named a ton before, ranging from Allende's Chile to the Eastern European bloc of the 80s, amongst numerous others.

    Socialism's been tried. Socialism's failed.
    Capitalism failed. It promised a real change from the aristocracies of the past. The only difference was which ruling class was in charge, and the illusion that they weren't.
    Liberté. Égalité. Fraternité.

Page 21 of 62 FirstFirst ... 11192021222331 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •