At what level does Communism work?

[Burgold]

At what level does it break down?

Family: I think communism works pretty well for individual families. Some level of ownership is generally needed, but in general it's work for the betterment of the whole and share all the resources with all the members.

Kibutz: It works really well in an isolated small community with limited resources where everyone has to work together to survive. Kibutz also may work well because many of the members are guests and so work hard for a short period of time and the jealousies and greed of humanity don't really have time to germinate. In Kibutz life there is no ownership and all work towards the common goal and share everything.

Neighborhood: I think it already starts to breakdown here. The moment you have a Jones to keep up with, competitiveness will break it down. There are also going to be different levels of work or different perceptions of the value of work and therefore resentment begins to fester. Communism fails.

Office: Yeah... sure... next.

City level: Corruption and the temptation of leaders to be a little more equal is too tempting. It fails.

Nationally: Has never worked. Too many competing interests, dreams, and ambitions. There has never been a communist nation in the way the word was defined. I doubt there ever will be one and I for one wouldn't really want to live in one.

Thoughts?

[Zguy28]

On a small scale it can work. Such as a commune farm. Although even that can go downhill due to corruption, look at David Koresh and the Branch Davidians, I believe that started out as communism.

An example of one that worked is in the Bible. Acts chapter 2-3, the early church shared all possessions and people sold all of their belongings for the greater good of the group. That is until they were persecuted and scattered.

Just like any form of government, it can't last forever, eventually man's selfishness will destroy it.

[Mass_SkinsFan]

On what level CAN it work? Probably nothing above the family/homestead level.

On what level SHOULD it be tried? No level. It's inapropriate and disgusting at all levels.

Then again I'm the guy who believes in ultra-capitalism. For example....

If I were one of three survivors of a plane crash and happened to be the only one to have survival supplies and food, the other two better have something pretty good to trade or they're going to die very quickly.

[JohnLockesGhost]

I'm sorry, but a family system isn't analogous to communism. It has no interest in production and not all members share equally in the resources. Families are feudal in nature.

[PleaseBlitz]

On what level CAN it work? Probably nothing above the family/homestead level.

Not even there. Dad's always get the big piece of chicken.

/Chris Rock.

[Beaudry]

On what level CAN it work? Probably nothing above the family/homestead level.

It already works in some small communities, like the huderites.

On what level SHOULD it be tried? No level. It's inapropriate and disgusting at all levels.

Even on the family/homestead level?

If I were one of three survivors of a plane crash and happened to be the only one to have survival supplies and food, the other two better have something pretty good to trade or they're going to die very quickly.

That isn't being "ultra-capitalistic", that is being a scumbag.

[chomerics]

I'm sorry, but a family system isn't analogous to communism. It has no interest in production and not all members share equally in the resources. Families are feudal in nature.

Yes, I agree.

I do not think communisim can ever work because of corruption and power. It was a grand Marxist ideology to make every man equal, but in essence, all it does is create a ruling class and a classless society. I prefer a modified Warnerian class system based on a representative democracy.

Now, socialism CAN work if you take some of the aspects out of the system, and modify it to suit your needs. SSI is a good case for how a social program can benefit society, which is based on socialism to some extent. But true communisim? I don't think it is good for anyone. The workers end up getting screwed because it depresses wages, the businessman is screwed because of government interference/regulation and the only people it benefits are the dregs of society or the ruling class. There are a lot of similarities to a plutocracy and communism, as well as a plutocracy and fascism. It is how I believe the political scale rotates and evolves, it is spherical in nature.

[luckydevil]

Then again I'm the guy who believes in ultra-capitalism. For example....

I am sorry, but you don't. You are against immigration and free trade

EDIT: . You are not an ultra-capitalist..... you are a social darwinist

[PokerPacker]

i think that communism could work if you specifically chose certain people to go start a new society. it won't work as a change, but if there were a colony on another planet, i'm sure communism would work great between the scientists working there. but eventually after the planet has been broken in (at least a few hundred years) capitalism rise to the top once more.

[The End]

Q: On what level does communism work?

A. On paper.

[chomerics]

i think that communism could work if you specifically chose certain people to go start a new society. it won't work as a change, but if there were a colony on another planet, i'm sure communism would work great between the scientists working there. but eventually after the planet has been broken in (at least a few hundred years) capitalism rise to the top once more.

It all depends on who you are talking about. if you are talking about the average person, then no way would I agree with you. If you are talking about society as a whole, and getting a society to behave and do something great (ala the pyramids in egypt) then a dictatorship style of communisim can work. It does not benefit the people at all, but it will benifit the overall society in terms of advancement of a certain technology.

[luckydevil]

Communism can work as long as it is voluntary.

[JohnLockesGhost]

Yes, I agree.

I do not think communisim can ever work because of corruption and power. It was a grand Marxist ideology to make every man equal, but in essence, all it does is create a ruling class and a classless society. I prefer a modified Warnerian class system based on a representative democracy.

Well, I hate communism because it promotes traits I don't like. People become beggars and thieves instead of productive, competent citizens. Political skill and ruthlessness are the norm instead of skill and intelligence.

[rincewind]

Well, I hate communism because it promotes traits I don't like. People become beggars and thieves instead of productive, competent citizens. Political skill and ruthlessness are the norm instead of skill and intelligence.

True - but I find it unfortunate that those traits get blamed on communism instead of on the people who turn to them.

[Baculus]

It's really a matter of Communism vs communism - the political ideology and system vs a community that pools resources and efforts. I believe these are really two different issues which we are examining in this situation. The only commonality may be the common ownership of community resources, which, to this day, you still see in communities across the world, and in a functional, working condition.

You can see "communism" on a small scale, as an example, in PA, with the Amish. Of course, this does not mean that "communism" will function on a larger model. And, of course, this isn't the same as political "Communism."

Communism is a flawed system that did not always work (though, whether we realize it or not, the system did help to elevate Russian into the 20th century and produced a large educated population), and communism does work, though it probably isn't effective beyond community models, and, in particular, agrian-based communities.

What is interesting is that we often use "communism" along with free market practices - as an example, folks contributing money to a common pool which is then used for the

entire community. But this is starting to split hairs with definitions...

[JohnLockesGhost]

True - but I find it unfortunate that those traits get blamed on communism instead of on the people who turn to them.

How can you blame people who are starving for stealing?

People react according to their own best interest with what their environment allows. If they are not allowed to own their own stuff and must rely on the outside intervention of others, then how can you blame them for begging and pleading for what they need to survive.

[rincewind]

How can you blame people who are starving for stealing?

People react according to their own best interest with what their environment allows. If they are not allowed to own their own stuff and must rely on the outside intervention of others, then how can you blame them for begging and pleading for what they need to survive.

I always blame people for their own actions - good or bad, need or not. I just think the basic premise of communism could work - it just doesn't because ****ed up people always seem to be the one's running the show. So, communism gets the reputation of corrupting - but, if you had the right people/person in charge (though that person may have never existed) it wouldn't become corrupt. Therefore, I feel, it is the people not the system that is to blame.

[Zguy28]

I always blame people for their own actions - good or bad, need or not. I just think the basic premise of communism could work - it just doesn't because ****ed up people always seem to be the one's running the show. So, communism gets the reputation of corrupting - but, if you had the right people/person in charge (though that person may have never existed) it wouldn't become corrupt. Therefore, I feel, it is the people not the system that is to blame.

That's a valid argument, but its not a sound one because your premise is "that with the right people in charge." Well, I hate to break this to you, but that will never happen, humanity is fundamentally corrupt because the wrong people are the ones who are ruthless, cunning, and power hungry, and they ALWAYS eventually run things.

[DjTj]

How can you blame people who are starving for stealing?

People react according to their own best interest with what their environment allows. If they are not allowed to own their own stuff and must rely on the outside intervention of others, then how can you blame them for begging and pleading for what they need to survive.

By the same token, you could blame capitalism for people who deal drugs or steal in our country. They're just trying to make money, right?

Capitalism inherently creates individuals who have less than others, and this forces some people to turn to crime. The same way you're blaming communism for these problems, kids in Cuba are hearing the same story about capitalism.

It's probably better, as rince says, to hold the individuals accountable.

[Mass_SkinsFan]

It already works in some small communities, like the huderites.

I wouldn't say that any communist system "works". It may be done, but I wouldn't say it works.

Even on the family/homestead level?.

Yes, even though I believe it can succeed on that level, it is still not appropriate under any condition, therefore it is not appropriate in the family/homestead situation.

That isn't being "ultra-capitalistic", that is being a scumbag.

You say po-tA-to, I say po-ta-to, let's call the whole thing off.

[Mass_SkinsFan]

I am sorry, but you don't. You are against immigration and free trade

EDIT: . You are not an ultra-capitalist..... you are a social darwinist

Actually, after reading a little on social darwinism (which I'd never heard of before), you're probably right. Though I do believe in a very open form of Capitalism inside the closed society known as America.

[JohnLockesGhost]

I always blame people for their own actions - good or bad, need or not. I just think the basic premise of communism could work - it just doesn't because ****ed up people always seem to be the one's running the show. So, communism gets the reputation of corrupting - but, if you had the right people/person in charge (though that person may have never existed) it wouldn't become corrupt. Therefore, I feel, it is the people not the system that is to blame.

Oy vey. So many things here. So you're claiming the Soviet Union was a failure because of corruption? Even though every Communist state has a major problem with corruption, it isn't the reason for failure. Communism doesn't work because of the incentives it gives individuals. Productivity is discouraged, while sloth is encouraged. Frugality is discouraged for waste. Et cetera.

[Burgold]

I want to commend everyone... this has been a good read so far.

[PokerPacker]

It all depends on who you are talking about. if you are talking about the average person, then no way would I agree with you. If you are talking about society as a whole, and getting a society to behave and do something great (ala the pyramids in egypt) then a dictatorship style of communisim can work. It does not benefit the people at all, but it will benifit the overall society in terms of advancement of a certain technology.

that's why i said you would pick and choose certain people, and being that in my hypothetical situation, they are on mars or some other planet without an outside atmosphere, it would be fairly necissary for survival for everyone to work together.

keep in mind, i think that there is no possible way communism could ever work in this world as other forms of government have already taken root and with a government as loose as this one, the people wouldn't be able to keep themselves in line.

[JohnLockesGhost]

By the same token, you could blame capitalism for people who deal drugs or steal in our country. They're just trying to make money, right?

Capitalism inherently creates individuals who have less than others, and this forces some people to turn to crime. The same way you're blaming communism for these problems, kids in Cuba are hearing the same story about capitalism.

It's probably better, as rince says, to hold the individuals accountable.

That's such utter BS. Don't tell me a drug-dealer hasn't CHOSEN to become a drug-dealer. Of course he has, for whatever reason. Maybe it's the money, the women, the mystique, or whatever. He could have chosen legitimate work, but didn't. This is where morality DOES play a role, in helping us make good choices when we have choices.