Originally posted by SoothfastPie in the sky in other words. A fantasy entertained by persons like Redmike who dreams of one day becoming an SSP commissar in his native Glasgow.
They don't exist. No genuinely Communist state of any stripe has ever existed. Only dictatorships that sell themselves as "communist" or "socialist" have existed (or continue to exist). As I've said before, a lot of things are done in the name of "Communism" just as a lot of things are done in the name of "Christianity" or "Islam". Dictatorships don't generally get started by selling themselves as dictatorships.
Originally posted by StarValleyWyI think that one important factor in the maintenance of these oppressive regiemes is the propaganda value of the fear of their enemies. This prevents the voice of reason evolving the system.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/6215815.stm
How long do you think the human race will tolerate the various totalitarian movements that are perpetrated under the guise of the Communist religion?
Have you noticed the vim and vigor of the commies on rph today? They are again in near ecstasy over the possibility of another police state making str ...[text shortened]... ? Please note that the phrase "any thoughts", pretty much precludes commies from posting here.
Just like Stupivalley propagates an irrational fear of Muslims, these loonies generate an irrational fear of the West. Often these fears are based on truths, like North Korea point to the War. Russia used to point to how the West funded the White Army and China similarly pointed to the right wing scum funded by the West.
In times of fear people take sides and do not argue. Good in the short term, bad in the long term. This form of totalitarism "Communism" will always fail for precisely the reason that genius Marx put forward 150 years ago. It is not an economically viable model.
Originally posted by Thales2Socialism will be free or it will not be at all. You conflate it with Stalinism, which typically is indicative of a weak understanding of communistic theories (there are many) as a result of life-long faith in propaganda crafted by the Powers That Be so they may remain the Powers That Be.
Pie in the sky in other words. A fantasy entertained by persons like Redmike who dreams of one day becoming an SSP commissar in his native Glasgow.
Originally posted by SoothfastYou show yourself to be 'conflated' with a feeble mind; indeed bordering on idiocy.
Socialism will be free or it will not be at all. You conflate it with Stalinism, which typically is indicative of a weak understanding of communistic theories (there are many) as a result of life-long faith in propaganda crafted by the Powers That Be so they may remain the Powers That Be.
Originally posted by zeeblebotI intend someday to devote an entire thread to considering a particular brand of "communism" in contrast with other brands, and outlining some of its broader elements. Not today though. Maybe a month or so when I find myself with more time.
hmm.
communism (some possible attributes):
- theoretical.
- unachievable.
- feasible only as an excuse for a revolution to be followed by an oligarchy or dictatorship.
- or if it happened to be achieved, would at some point be followed by an oligarchy or dictatorship.
questions:
does "No genuinely Communist state of any stripe has ever exist ...[text shortened]... ent Greek island "", etc.?
is urbanism inherently incompatible with communism/socialism?
Originally posted by SoothfastI'd like to see that. I rather think it to be theoretical with little chance of real success in the real world but I am projecting so am probably full of shyte. Just seems the more the state owns the less the individual can own or accomplish. Like the Chinese skaters in the olympics, all they could talk about was what their accomplishments did for the state, never ever about their own deeds. I felt sad for them that they were denied individual honor.
I intend someday to devote an entire thread to considering a particular brand of "communism" in contrast with other brands, and outlining some of its broader elements. Not today though. Maybe a month or so when I find myself with more time.
Originally posted by sonhouseIn my vision, derived from writings by those more imaginative than I, the "state" as it is currently conceived the world over would be done away with first and foremost by creating "layers" of citizens' councils with rotating memberships, each "layer" (from the local to the global level) only very modestly more "powerful" than the one immediately below it so as to greatly hinder a runaway accumulation of authority at the top. Anyway the main idea is to give individuals maximum freedom to live a life worth living whilst at the same time being a meaningful participant in political and economic decision-making. If you want a slogan, one of them would be that the economy would run for the benefit of the people and not the other way around.
I'd like to see that. I rather think it to be theoretical with little chance of real success in the real world but I am projecting so am probably full of shyte. Just seems the more the state owns the less the individual can own or accomplish. Like the Chinese skaters in the olympics, all they could talk about was what their accomplishments did for the state, never ever about their own deeds. I felt sad for them that they were denied individual honor.
Originally posted by SoothfastI'v have always wondered what the daily life of a communist citizen would be like ( not the communism of todays Russia or China but true communism). Would they own there own businesses or property? Who would they work for? Do they get paid, by whom? How would the economy work? I can see everyone being equal in social status and pay as long as the living was good and everyone wasn't just equally poor. Need serious answer!
In my vision, derived from writings by those more imaginative than I, the "state" as it is currently conceived the world over would be done away with first and foremost by creating "layers" of citizens' councils with rotating memberships, each "layer" (from the local to the global level) only very modestly more "powerful" than the one immediately below it ...[text shortened]... that the economy would run for the benefit of the people and not the other way around.
1 edit
Originally posted by smw6869The driving source in the society will be the production of goods and services that are needed or desired to enable each individual to live a life free of want and the fear of destitution. The way in which this would be accomplished is through workers' syndicates, which are essentially "democratized" corporations in which the member workers elect the leaders and have a say in how things are to be done.
I'v have always wondered what the daily life of a communist citizen would be like ( not the communism of todays Russia or China but true communism). Would they own there own businesses or property? Who would they work for? Do they get paid, by whom? How would the economy work? I can see everyone being equal in social status and pay as long as the living was good and everyone wasn't just equally poor. Need serious answer!
Some might jump on this and say the syndicate would be inefficient because it would be lead by committee, but the fact is that that is how capitalist corporations themselves are run. Indeed under capitalism the private tyrannies known as corporations are terribly inefficient because they're typically steered by investors with "controlling shares" whose primary interest is in quickly boosting stock values so they can sell high and bail out -- leaving everyone behind in the lurch. Let's not even get into the obscene amounts that CEOs and their in-house cronies siphon off each year in "earnings" -- even if they're doing a terrible and incompetent job.
A syndicate steered by the workers making it up would be capable of long-term planning beyond the wildest dreams of corporations run by ego-driven elites whose golden parachutes always guarantee them a soft-landing no matter how badly they wreck a business.
I've only scratched the surface here. As I've said elsewhere I don't yet have the requisite time to go into too many details. Some here, some there -- but a Grand Panarama will take much thinking and writing.
Originally posted by smw6869in china, if you had your own shop, you'd likely lose it, and possibly be kept on as counter help. if you had a flat or house, it would likely be divided up, and you'd get one room for your whole family, with the other rooms going to other families (i understand the same system was in effect in east europe). your workday would include mandatory indoctrination sessions. if you were whitecollar, expect your new social status (and salary) after the resolution to be lower than the peasants. if you were an intellectual (professor, student, etc.) you might be invited to a mandatory meeting to tell the communist party what you really thought of them, i.e., how they could improve. if you were honest (and dumb) enough to suggest improvements, you could be looking at 20 years in a work camp. lucky you if it wasn't in a cold place. in any event, students and academics (esp. doctors) would be assigned to work camps for a year or a few. hope you like sweet potatoes, coz if that was what was grown at the place you were assigned to, you'd be eating a lot of them.
I'v have always wondered what the daily life of a communist citizen would be like ( not the communism of todays Russia or China but true communism). Would they own there own businesses or property? Who would they work for? Do they get paid, by whom? How would the economy work? I can see everyone being equal in social status and pay as long as the living was good and everyone wasn't just equally poor. Need serious answer!
central planning meant mistakes made centrally (from inexperience or hubris) had nationwide impact, so you had a good chance of dying from hunger, or spending your precious time and energy making useless lumps of "steel" in your backyard smelter. expect minimal rations (as in, ration tickets for rice and a bit of meat, or maybe not), and if you were a city dweller, expect to depend on care baskets sent from relatives in the countryside, if you were lucky enough to have relatives there.
then and now, all land in china is owned by the govt and leased out. indeterminate as to what happens when the lease runs out, i think. but the people speculating in land in china right now may find out in 50 years or so when the lease runs out.
this guy fell in a coma under communism, woke up to democracy last week or so:
http://observer.guardian.co.uk/world/story/0,,2094390,00.html?gusrc=rss&feed=12
"Where are the food queues, asks Polish man after 19-year coma
Brendan Montague
Sunday June 3, 2007
The Observer
...
Grzebski, a father of four from Dzialdowo, northern Poland, who remains confined to a wheelchair, was in his mid-forties living under a regime of food shortages when he slipped into the coma. Now that he has regained consciousness, however, he has observed that the dramatic transformation of the Polish economy and the invention of modern technologies such as the mobile phone appears to have done little to cheer his countrymen up. He had been living under President Wojciech Jaruzelski's regime of food shortages, and queues for petrol in a country which was almost completely cut off from the west by the Iron Curtain.
'When I went into a coma there was only tea and vinegar in the shops, meat was rationed and huge petrol queues were everywhere,' he told the Polish news channel TVN24.
... "
this just up on wikipedia's Did You Know?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_for_trade
"Battle for trade (Polish: Bitwa o handel; also translated as trade battle or battle over trade) refers to the early period of communist takeover of Poland (1946–49) when new laws and regulations succeeded in significantly decreasing the size of the private sector in Polish trade, in order to facilitate the transformation of Polish economy from capitalism to Soviet communism's planned economy. The private shops were nationalized or closed, and government-owned chains (Państwowe Domy Handlowe) and cooperatives were created to replace them; this was however inefficient as more shops were closed than opened and led to lasting difficulties for Polish people in obtaining consumer goods. ..."