Should Socialism - Communism be condemned like Nazim?

Alfons said:

Can you imagine yourselves that everybody may wear swastika, laugh about Auschwitz, say "Hail Hitler" and broadcast "Main Kampf" as a positive teaching?

Click to expand...

Can I just point out, that under that little thing called the first amendment, people can do all those things.

TheDemSocialist, you err by meaning a post is "unintelligent", instead of the user conveying the message. Assuming you now understand this, you still err by now attacking the user's intellect instead of wisely refuting his claim.

Insult professionaly. Better: do not insult at all.

Wake said:

TheDemSocialist, you err by meaning a post is "unintelligent", instead of the user conveying the message. Assuming you now understand this, you still err by now attacking the here's intellect instead of wisely refuting his claim.

Insult professionaly. Better: do not insult at all.

Click to expand...

WTF does "err" mean?
Are you a robot or something?

TheDemSocialist said:

WTF does "err" mean?
Are you a robot or something?

Click to expand...

To err means to make mistakes.

Robots cannot have bias. I no longer have bias, yet I am no robot.

Wow..........

Are you serious?

tessaesque said:

Child labor isn't a very solid argument. Children, elderly, and infirm citizens are working for pennies a day in sweat shops in communist countries all over the world. Most often, they're working in dangerous, unhealthy conditions with few rights.

Click to expand...

You're right about that.

But that's not the point of my post.

The point of my post is more "Well, if we condemn socialism and communism like nazism because of all the negatives, then we'd have to condemn capitalism because of all the negatives as well."

Also, to focus on despotic communism used in Russia and Asia is to ignore the cases of democratic socialism used in other areas such as in Europe and Scandanavia where they haven't used gulags or done pogroms against its people.

The question is without any nuance whatsoever and therefore is a faulty argument.

tessaesque said:

Child labor isn't a very solid argument. Children, elderly, and infirm citizens are working for pennies a day in sweat shops in communist countries all over the world. Most often, they're working in dangerous, unhealthy conditions with few rights.

Click to expand...

Yep, if the pendulum swings too far in either direction, people tend to get screwed over.

samsmart said:

Also, to focus on despotic communism used in Russia and Asia is to ignore the cases of democratic socialism used in other areas such as in Europe and Scandanavia where they haven't used gulags or done pogroms against its people.

Click to expand...

Neither Europe nor Scandinavia has democratic socialism.

Actually, as far as I know, we have never had democratic socialism. Simply because democratic socialism would reduce people standard of living if ever implemented in a developed country. If implemented in a poor country, then it will just end up corrupt.

A problem I see in this debate is the lack of properly defined terms. What exactly is "socialism", and what is "communism"?

Many Americans are used to lumping all kind of concepts together under the label "socialism", including i.e. German "social democracy".

But historically, German social democrats, who still were Marxist at that time, were the strongest force in favor of a democratic, constitutional state and the most bitter enemy of authoritarians on all sides. The Marxist German social democrats fought monarchists, communists and Nazis alike and were the only party to vote against Hitler's Enabling Act in 1933. The Social Democrats established the free Weimar Republic in 1919.

If you asked a communist/revolutionary Marxist in the 1920s who is their worst enemy, they wouldn't have said "Nazis", "monarchists" or "capitalists", but "social democrats". Commies bitterly hated the Marxist Social Democrats. And no other party/movement stood so strongly in favor of freedom, democracy and constitutional values as the Marxist Social Democrats (in Germany).

Yet Americans lump it together with anti-constitutional, revolutionary Marxists and communists under the label "socialism". That doesn't compute for me. I'd say not Marxism or socialism is the problem, it never was, but the attitude the respective party/group has towards constitutional values, democracy and freedom. Some socialists are staunch supporters of freedom, others are not. And those who are are better than righties who don't support freedom.

Is it not enough that millions have died under the names of both Naziism and Communism?

If not, why...?

Belief truly is the death of intelligence.

Camlon said:

Neither Europe nor Scandinavia has democratic socialism.

Actually, as far as I know, we have never had democratic socialism. Simply because democratic socialism would reduce people standard of living if ever implemented in a developed country. If implemented in a poor country, then it will just end up corrupt.

Click to expand...

I would like to see the knowledge behind this...

Wake said:

Is it not enough that millions have died under the names of both Naziism and Communism?

If not, why...?

Belief truly is the death of intelligence.

Click to expand...

People die in any system that places ideology over people.

megaprogman said:

People die in any system that places ideology over people.

Click to expand...

Does that make it right, megaprogram?

As a whole, no. Having said that, I'd like to see some return to McCarthyism-like witch hunts in America. Quite frankly, if you live in America and don't appreciate capitalism, get the hell out. There are many other socialist hellholes that would welcome your ilk. Unfortunately, there aren't many global options like America where you can avoid hyper-taxation and excessive governmental control.

If you think country X is ideal, go to country X. Don't make the people of country X suffer because of your delusions, especially when there are more country Ys in the world than Xs.

It pretty much is, except among those who cling to a utopian vision.

Wake said:

Does that make it right, megaprogram?

Click to expand...

Not sure what you mean by the question. I tend to be pragmatic when it comes to these things and tend go with what works for the most over any sort of purity of belief. My view is that the point of society is to serve those in it and as far as the details of how that works, I am flexible.

I don't know if its right or not to someone's point of view and I don't really care. My view is that it is probably not completely right for everyone for one reason or another, but we long as we don't have slum towns, massive disease issues, horrible violence, social instability, death, etc, we are probably doing ok and the rest (and frankly most of what we talk about here) is purely academic, but useful in the pursuit of new ideas and models to try.

Also, I tend to think (and we have seen innumerable historical examples of this) that a lot of forms of morality and interpretation of ideas tends to follow what ends up working best for people in general. This is one of the reasons why culture tends to change over time, we are simply adapting to new situations and technologies. However, much of morality is really just methods of achieving core principals such as do nor murder, do not steal, etc, the basic stuff that lasts over time.

samsmart said:

No.

Capitalism has killed just as many, if not more. Take for example children who have been killed from occupational hazards as a result of lack of regulations in work spaces or requirements for safe working conditions because it would raise the prices of goods and services.

So no, socialism and communism should not be condemned like nazism is.

Click to expand...

Capitalism has killed more people than Communism/Socialism? Please enlighten me on where you got this statistic from, the national enquirer?

According to anyone on the dumb side of center, anyone who dies from anything remotely considered a natural cause died of capitalism.

They think starving Africans are a giant poster for anti-globalism.

DontDoIt said:

Capitalism has killed more people than Communism/Socialism? Please enlighten me on where you got this statistic from, the national enquirer?

Click to expand...

Personally, I don't know, since when people die from not enough to eat while there is plenty of food in the market or they die from disease when the hospitals can treat it, I doubt the statistic is often recorded. We are beginning to make an attempt to these days, but its a problematic number to capture.

By the arbitrary measuring stick they use, you could easily blame communism for more because medicine, technology, and science would dwindle down.

Communism is the spirit of anti-competition. To think that people would always "do the right thing" without incentivization is just downright stupid.

Gipper said:

By the arbitrary measuring stick they use, you could easily blame communism for more because medicine, technology, and science would dwindle down.

Click to expand...

I agree, west berlin vs east berlin in the 80s is an example of this.

Gipper said:

Communism is the spirit of anti-competition. To think that people would always "do the right thing" without incentivization is just downright stupid.

Click to expand...

I also agree, some people will do the right thing on their own, some won't. Some will do it some days and not others, depending on mood or whatever, etc. However, incentives alone will not cause people to do the right thing all the time either. We also have to look at ability, maturity, freedom and constraints of their decisions, etc.

megaprogman said:

I also agree, some people will do the right thing on their own, some won't. Some will do it some days and not others, depending on mood or whatever, etc. However, incentives alone will not cause people to do the right thing all the time either. We also have to look at ability, maturity, freedom and constraints of their decisions, etc.

Click to expand...

Well yes, I agree. You can't dissect it in a vacuum, nor can you say profit is 100% of motivation. However, I would argue that it is the great bulk of it, and that other factors such as ones you listed, can help tip the scale in a certain direction but probably will not be the driving force.

Gipper said:

Well yes, I agree. You can't dissect it in a vacuum, nor can you say profit is 100% of motivation. However, I would argue that it is the great bulk of it, and that other factors such as ones you listed, can help tip the scale in a certain direction but probably will not be the driving force.

Click to expand...

I am not so sure I agree that it is the great bulk of it either. People often settle for less money if they can get other things they want. For example, companies that tell their employees what they want to hear and coo at them with meaningless rewards for a job well done while paying them comparatively less tend to have good turnover rates. I could get paid more in the Atlanta, but its a heck of a drive in the mornings, instead I live 10 minutes away from my job.

People tend to respond to what gives them a sense of well-being, sometimes that is money and sometimes it isn't.