• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Is communism possible in the USA?

Is communism possible in the USA?

  • Yes, Soviet type of communism

    Votes: 9 9.1%

  • Yes, community type of communism

    Votes: 10 10.1%

  • Yes, religious type of communism

    Votes: 2 2.0%

  • Yes, other type of communism

    Votes: 12 12.1%

  • No, not possible

    Votes: 57 57.6%

  • Dunno

    Votes: 3 3.0%

  • Other

    Votes: 6 6.1%
  • Total voters
    99
Artevelde said:
You are the left-wing variant of a holocaust denier. Not much use debating people who deny reality.
Click to expand...
You don't get to redefine basic and acknowledged terminology, dude. Btw, it comes as no surprise that the political myopia of your Wing should result in your difficulties with classification. You're as blind as the Libs you believe you differ from.
 
Canell said:
To save the poll from influence, I will spare my opinion for the time being. :)

So, is communism possible in the USA?
Click to expand...

No, it would take a massive paradigm shift amongst our independent-minded and capitalist-indoctrinated citizenry before communism had even the slightest chance of success. It would pretty much require a complete collapse of our current society, followed by a period of interregnum, and then a successful re-conquest by a communist clique.

Concurrently during the conquest, the clique would have to institute an educational indoctrination program starting at the lowest level of childhood learning, perhaps from birth in State-run creche's. This indoctrination program would need to idealize selflessness and self-sacrifice for the common good; and reinforce repression of the drive to advance oneself and profit by it.

Not a very likely scenario.
 
Last edited:
Captain Adverse said:
No, it would take a massive paradigm shift amongst our independent-minded and capitalist-indoctrinated citizenry before communism had even the slightest chance of success. It would pretty much require a complete collapse of our current society, followed by a period of interregnum, and then a successful re-conquest by a communist clique.

Concurrently during the conquest, the clique would have to institute an educational indoctrination program starting at the lowest level of childhood learning, perhaps from birth in State-run creche's. This indoctrination program would need to idealize selflessness and self-sacrifice for the common good; and reinforce repression of the drive to advance oneself and profit by it.

Not a very likely scenario.
Click to expand...
The interim in question being Socialism, during which attitudes would change generationally. Of course, for Cons there is no difference between the two, since they're in the habit of tossing around terms they do not comprehend. I don't believe contention is an innate feature of humanity. Only reactions to conditions. Things like fear, desperation and insecurity might provoke a negative response, but by no means should this be taken as being indicative of a hard-wired response.
 
NoC_T said:
The interim in question being Socialism, during which attitudes would change generationally. Of course, for Cons there is no difference between the two, since they're in the habit of tossing around terms they do not comprehend. I don't believe contention is an innate feature of humanity. Only reactions to conditions. Things like fear, desperation and insecurity might provoke a negative response, but by no means should this be taken as being indicative of a hard-wired response.
Click to expand...

Well socialism and feudalism are the two most likely systems to develop in small communities after the collapse of a large society. Once easy access to goods and services provided by the larger society disappears, social reorganization develops around local survival strategies. Either a community pulls together by pooling resources, or a dominant person in charge of a supporting force will impose control.
 
Captain Adverse said:
Well socialism and feudalism are the two most likely systems to develop in small communities after the collapse of a large society. Once easy access to goods and services provided by the larger society disappears, social reorganization develops around local survival strategies. Either a community pulls together by pooling resources, or a dominant person in charge of a supporting force will impose control.
Click to expand...
Immediately following the collapse of the old order, we could expect to see the forces of production re-oriented along Socialist lines. I don't believe society would revert to some feudal state. There would be no need. A factory operates the same way, regardless of ideology. Only the respective allocation of resources differs.
 
NoC_T said:
Immediately following the collapse of the old order, we could expect to see the forces of production re-oriented along Socialist lines. I don't believe society would revert to some feudal state. There would be no need. A factory operates the same way, regardless of ideology. Only the respective allocation of resources differs.
Click to expand...

I guess the problem involves semantics. What I meant by collapse was not simply a changing of the guard in government, like the Soviet Union model (although similarities exist in how ethnic segments took the opportunity to secede), but a complete social collapse as well. Otherwise, at least in the USA, Capitalism would not lose it's luster for many people. They would just blame the old guard for screwing it up and start a new guard to try again.

In a complete collapse states and even local communities would secede and struggle for power in conflicts between each other for independence or dominance, leading to even more social fracturing. Wars disrupt the flow of goods, services and materials creating limits on local availability. Meanwhile, communities would need to either form socialist cooperatives or strongmen of their own to survive. That's my take on it anyway. :twocents:
 
Captain Adverse said:
I guess the problem involves semantics. What I meant by collapse was not simply a changing of the guard in government, like the Soviet Union model (although similarities exist in how ethnic segments took the opportunity to secede), but a complete social collapse as well. Otherwise, at least in the USA, Capitalism would not lose it's luster for many people. They would just blame the old guard for screwing it up and start a new guard to try again.

In a complete collapse states and even local communities would secede and struggle for power in conflicts between each other for independence or dominance, leading to even more social fracturing. Wars disrupt the flow of goods, services and materials creating limits on local availability. Meanwhile, communities would need to either form socialist cooperatives or strongmen of their own to survive. That's my take on it anyway. :twocents:
Click to expand...
It's mostly theoretical, but I'd assume that, having been party to the greater collapse, local communities would simply organise themselves in such a manner as to take their cues from the new administration and perform cohesively, forthwith. As for localities that seceded entirely, my guess is as good as yours. I'd only add that, wherever they're positioned geographically would be a factor; they could not be permitted to secede where their location was central, as in an enclave. Such as a satellite? Maybe so. In any case, a global system is required for Socialism to make the transition to Communism.
 
Artevelde said:
The idea of claiming that Christ espoused a particular ârty political ideology is ridiculous.
Click to expand...

Indeed. He went to lengths, in fact, to make rather clear that was not His intent.

Funny, though, how those so intent on trying to shove Him onto the political platform of Give To The Poor seem less interested in Separation of Church and State or Pauls', He Who Will Not Work Let Him Not Eat.
 
Anywho, as to the OP. No, Communism would not work in the U.S.; mostly for the basic reasons that it has no "worked" (in the sense of returning benefits) anywhere - Socialism is a failed ideology, with tens and tens of millions of dead sacrificed to the doomed effort to keep it alive.
 
NoC_T said:
It's mostly theoretical, but I'd assume that, having been party to the greater collapse, local communities would simply organise themselves in such a manner as to take their cues from the new administration and perform cohesively, forthwith. As for localities that seceded entirely, my guess is as good as yours. I'd only add that, wherever they're positioned geographically would be a factor; they could not be permitted to secede where their location was central, as in an enclave. Such as a satellite? Maybe so. In any case, a global system is required for Socialism to make the transition to Communism.
Click to expand...

The thing is I don't confuse communism and socialism. I think it is quite possible, as population grows and there is a greater gulf between rich and poor that any society can evolve into a socialist model, or at least free-market semi-socialism like Norway and Sweden.
 
Captain Adverse said:
The thing is I don't confuse communism and socialism. I think it is quite possible, as population grows and there is a greater gulf between rich and poor that any society can evolve into a socialist model, or at least free-market semi-socialism like Norway and Sweden.
Click to expand...
Some form of halfway house? I doubt it, the ideologies being about as contradistinctive as it gets. From the foundation upwards, these approaches undermine each other every step of the way. Limited Socialism probably isn't an option. That would be like Capitalism avoiding profit.
 
NoC_T said:
Some form of halfway house? I doubt it, the ideologies being about as contradistinctive as it gets. From the foundation upwards, these approaches undermine each other every step of the way. Limited Socialism probably isn't an option. That would be like Capitalism avoiding profit.
Click to expand...

LOL I understand. I was simply providing what I thought would be possible under a society as currently committed to capitalism as we are.
 
Captain Adverse said:
LOL I understand. I was simply providing what I thought would be possible under a society as currently committed to capitalism as we are.
Click to expand...
Of course. I don't doubt that Capitalism can be modified; even during it's lifespan to date, it evolved into an international system. I only meant that it's most fundamental prerogatives cannot be altered. Competition and capital in the form of profit are integral, or it could not be Capitalism.
 
Canell said:
To save the poll from influence, I will spare my opinion for the time being. :)

So, is communism possible in the USA?
Click to expand...



Well, hmmm. Let's see.


Communism was created by a German Racialist workers unionist who thought non Europeans were sub human and needed to be exterminated.


Hmmm.


No it couldn't work in the U.S.


Lol..

 
Last edited:
Rainman05 said:
You can't have a democracy if you have a single party state.
Click to expand...

A country could be quite democratic whilst still being a one party state. Elections for party representatives and party leaders, etc. Sometimes there can be bigger differences between candidates in the same party than between different parties.
 
Possible, but highly unlikely. Especially with people like me still running around. I see 'em everywhere. People who believe in profit from labor also believe that not everything is measured in money and power. Okay. Most of 'em. Okay, okay. Some of 'em. Don't keep pushing me. And no, I don't run much. I walk. So, with people like me walking around...Damn, people are picky here.
 
cpwill said:
Indeed. He went to lengths, in fact, to make rather clear that was not His intent.

Funny, though, how those so intent on trying to shove Him onto the political platform of Give To The Poor seem less interested in Separation of Church and State or Pauls', He Who Will Not Work Let Him Not Eat.
Click to expand...

But that was in pre-capitalist times. Capitalism requires a surplus of labour (unemployed people) to keep wages down through supply and demand. If you're going to operate an economic system in which a certain level of unemployment is required, you then have to 'compensate' those people who can't get a job.

Unemployment levels in the US have never fallen below circa 3%, whilst in socialist Hungary for example, it reached 0.5%.
 
People can't stand anything the government does, how could we ever go communist?
 
Canell said:
To save the poll from influence, I will spare my opinion for the time being. :)

So, is communism possible in the USA?
Click to expand...

Are we not already fascist? The state owns the banks. The state takes half of our money every year, and then limits our choices on everything else.
 
communism only works in small tribes. this is because in a small tribe, every member is directly accountable to the rest of the tribe. add more people, and that accountability fades to anonymity.

communism on the nation scale fails because it doesn't take human greed into account. capitalism succeeds because it depends on greed. at this point in our societal evolution, heavily regulated capitalism is the best system.
 
100% impossible. Communism cannot exist on a large scale, and the USA is what...the 4th most populous nation in the world?

Oh, and anyone who thinks that the USSR was communist is retarded.
 
if the Usa faces communism one day it means the doomsday is coming soon
 
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.

phattonez said:
Are we not already fascist? The banks own the state. The state takes half of our money every year, and then gives it to the banks.
Click to expand...

Fixed that for ya.
 
Last edited:
Paschendale said:
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.
Click to expand...

You'd have to hope for a very large populace to lose enough IQ points to believe that economic stagnation is a much less evil than wealth disparity.
 
Gipper said:
You'd have to hope for a very large populace to lose enough IQ points to believe that economic stagnation is a much less evil than wealth disparity.
Click to expand...

That populace lost a lot of IQ already. Hence why they think that egalitarianism leads to stagnation.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom