Communism sucks and free market is the way to go

[iNcog]

-- deleted post --

[oxaloacetate]

I know what follows isn't exactly what you are refering to in your opening post here, Incog, but in order to make the thread materialize into something, I'd like your opinion on the following.

I dislike dichotomies, and there is doubtly no better example than ye old communism vs. capitalism.
Discussing concepts innate to the two economical systems is of course valid, but highly theoretical. However, economical systems do not exist in vacuums and when one does start including other contributing factors (when talking about the classical communism-capitalism dichotomy, this is just extremely faulty since it had more to do with political allegiance than to do with economical systems in many cases) it becomes a mess.

Also, most laymen would probably agree that 'communism lost' and sure, you can probably make a convincing case for that, but I feel it almost could have been foreseen based on other factors rather their economical systems. That the economical systems perhaps actually the core of the issue, more a mask.

A trivial example to underscore my rhetoric would for instance be the GDP gap between the U.S. and the USSR. Would you attribute the difference in GDP between the two countries to their economical systems or to the innate availability of natural resources and cheap labour for instance?
The GDP difference was large before the cold war, throughout- and after it.

I am in no way an expert on the matter, besides being a hobby-historian in my younger years, but what I find intriguing is how the tendency of humans for pattern recognition goes beyond the visual (i.e. the famous case of the "face on Mars") and extends into every aspect of research. Which makes sense, I guess, because it's all about making connections. Problem is that the connection are faulty most of the time.


Addendum: To the OP directly I would like to say that I think different economical systems (dare I say socioeconomical systems) are appropriate in different situations. If someone were to suggest a New Deal-prgoram in France today, with massive investment undertaken by the government in an effort to fight unemployment, would you think it to be on the side of too much governmental intervention? A lot of republicans did it back in the days, but how would the communist-capitalism dichotomy look like today without it?


TL;DR: Dichotomies and oversimplifications (especially within complicated pseudoscience territory) are dangerous.

[forgrin]

The main problem that causes communism to fall behind economically I think is a failure to mobilize human ambition. Capitalism is (mostly) more successful because it allows people to follow what their biology tells them; to make themselves the most viable mating partner, which usually manifests as having the nicest things, topping the societal ladder etc etc. Communism forces most people to go against that instinct since movement up or down the proverbial ladder is so restricted/not present. If humans were herd-based grazers then I think communism would likely be more effective.


Edit: to present the counterargument, capitalism is inherently flawed in its assumptions about the nature of the economy and the world, firstly in that it assumes infinite resources and secondly in the necessity for an infinite number of small firms to continuously compete, with the consumer always having the proper information to make an informed decision on products. The fact of the modern world is that both of these requirements of true free market capitalism are false, and therefore the market requires control by governance. The main debate today is really not about communism vs capitalism, it's about how much control of the free market is necessary by governments to make a pseudo-capitalism. This is called democratic socialism in some places though nowhere is truly representative of this. Pretty much every country practices something I'd call "democratic capitalism," including the US, they just do so on a sliding scale and some include state ownership or control of certain industries if those industries cannot be managed under the guise of the free market.

[iNcog]

-- deleted post --

[Method_man714]

Why do you have to go so deep, on a forum that exists purely to measure penis size

[Laurence Drake]

Communism will be relevant when robots become more productive than humans at everything.

[oxaloacetate]

Why do you have to go so deep, on a forum that exists purely to measure penis size

Forgot my ruler at school.

[iNcog]

-- deleted post --

[deleted_user0]

not if you are signed up on it :O

[deleted_user0]

Communism will be relevant when robots become more productive than humans at everything.

could be, most likely were going to have a few superrich who control all means of production and resource distribution, and because humans are no longer relevant from a production pov, nor do they have the means to rise up in violence against robot soldiers, they will have lost all leverage and will be actually powerless, as opposed to the illusion of impotence we cling on to now so we can remain idle.

[yurashic]

Communism is bread. Capitalism is chocolate mixed with dirt.

My parents say that years when they lived in USSR under communism were the best time of their life. People were not afraid of each other, enjoyed simple things. Salaries were low, but cars and appartments were given for free, all education was free, you could spend your holidays in socialist Western Europe for free.

Communism can not exist in it's original form nowadays in post-industrial society, but if you ask those who were born and lived in USSR whether it was good or not, they will say that they miss those times.

[Mimsy for President]

AoE2 syndrome.

[Laurence Drake]

Communism is bread. Capitalism is chocolate mixed with dirt.

My parents say that years when they lived in USSR under communism were the best time of their life. People were not afraid of each other, enjoyed simple things. Salaries were low, but cars and appartments were given for free, all education was free, you could spend your holidays in socialist Western Europe for free.

Communism can not exist in it's original form nowadays in post-industrial society, but if you ask those who were born and lived in USSR whether it was good or not, they will say that they miss those times.

Russia isn't a free-market economy.

[iNcog]

-- deleted post --

[Kaiserklein]

Communism is bread. Capitalism is chocolate mixed with dirt.

My parents say that years when they lived in USSR under communism were the best time of their life. People were not afraid of each other, enjoyed simple things. Salaries were low, but cars and appartments were given for free, all education was free, you could spend your holidays in socialist Western Europe for free.

It wasn't communism though. They called it communism, but they never managed to reached that point where nobody owes anything and everything is free and shared, etc. USSR could merely reach a state of dictatorship that was supposedly a transition before being able to actually set up communism, but that never happened.

Communism can not exist in it's original form nowadays in post-industrial society, but if you ask those who were born and lived in USSR whether it was good or not, they will say that they miss those times.

What about the ~20 million people who died because of Stalin ?

[gibson]

Yea real communism has never happened on a nationwide scale and never will.....

[yurashic]

It wasn't communism though. They called it communism, but they never managed to reached that point where nobody owes anything and everything is free and shared, etc. USSR could merely reach a state of dictatorship that was supposedly a transition before being able to actually set up communism, but that never happened.

All companies belonged to the state, private business was illegal, the state kept the national currency at the same level, nowadays people still remember prices of goods because those never changed. As I have already mentioned, salaries were low but many things were free. I don't think it is possible to reach the point you are talking about simply because of human nature.

What about the ~20 million people who died because of Stalin ?

Great empires are not built on kindness and tolerance.

[deleted_user0]

Lol

[oxaloacetate]

Great empires are not built on kindness and tolerance.

[Insert pompous, arrogant and totally misleading one-liner.]

[evilcheadar]

Fuck communism just like we fucked bin laden.

[momuuu]

The anti-communism position that the USA has had for years is completely misplaced.

Communism is an inherently good system that accidentally messes up the economy while capitalism is an inherently evil system in which the economy thrives. Placing communism as the pure evil itself is ridiculous imo.

That being said, most communistic regines have mostly excelled in being dictatorial rather than communistic.

[Kaiserklein]

All companies belonged to the state, private business was illegal, the state kept the national currency at the same level, nowadays people still remember prices of goods because those never changed. As I have already mentioned, salaries were low but many things were free. I don't think it is possible to reach the point you are talking about simply because of human nature.

Yes, stuff was made illegal, and the state was dealing with things to make it look like communism. But communism means no state lol... It wasn't communism, just a dictatorship.

Great empires are not built on kindness and tolerance.

Lmao, so you think it's normal to kill 20 million people to reach your goal ? I don't even understand how people can be happy in a state where people get killed like that. Is cheap prices more important than human rights ? Then it's basically capitalism in much more extreme lol, nice
Btw USSR, a "great empire" lol ? No comment xD

[Kaiserklein]

Communism is an inherently good system that accidentally messes up the economy while capitalism is an inherently evil system in which the economy thrives. Placing communism as the pure evil itself is ridiculous imo.

Plz more "good and evil" philosophy

[Laurence Drake]

The anti-communism position that the USA has had for years is completely misplaced.

Communism is an inherently good system that accidentally messes up the economy while capitalism is an inherently evil system in which the economy thrives. Placing communism as the pure evil itself is ridiculous imo.

That being said, most communistic regines have mostly excelled in being dictatorial rather than communistic.

Communism is an inherently evil system that purposefully messes up the economy while capitalism is an inherently good system in which the economy thrives. Placing capitalism as the pure evil itself is ridiculous imo.

There. Now what?

[iNcog]

-- deleted post --