| |
| ▲ | mcphage 3 days ago | parent | next [-] | | I'm not sure there's very many of those. | |
| ▲ | Jensson 3 days ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Communism gives politicians 100% control over the country instead of roughly half like they have in capitalist democracies, So people wont vote for communism because its autocratic. You never want all power to be in the hands of a single group of people, capitalist democracies separates private from public, so politicians regulating companies are not the same people who are owning those companies. Communism can never work since its an autocratic system with a single player, you need multiple actors. And yes, in some capitalist democracies company leaders are close bedfellows with politicians, we call that corruption, it isn't like that in all countries. | | |
| ▲ | 9rx 3 days ago | parent [-] | | > Communism gives politicians 100% control over the country Impossible. Communism has no concept of state (nor money, nor class). That's, like, its defining feature. Of course, you can't just wish for class, state, and money to go away. They are necessary features of our current world. Communism is the imagined outcome of what happens after we achieve post-scarcity. It is a work of science fiction. Star Trek is a more modern adaptation on the same idea. > Communism can never work since its an autocratic system If it were more than science fiction, it is literally the opposite, but, again, depends on post-scarcity. You are likely confusing communism with the Communist Party, who believe in an autocratic system being necessary to pave the way to achieving post-scarcity, with, on paper, a desire to get there. | | |
| ▲ | JoeAltmaier 3 days ago | parent [-] | | Maybe a little pedantic. Socialism then, or any existing embodiment of the first stages of Communism. Imposed by force on a population accustomed to another way. Usually accompanied by state confiscation of large businesses, the accompanied corruption, waste and ultimate food riots that often occur. Then a military takeover that's decried as crushing the utopian communist ideal! But actually, just getting everybody fed again. | | |
| ▲ | 9rx 3 days ago | parent [-] | | > Socialism then While the Communist Party does believe in socialism, that does not sum it up either. That would be like trying to tie the Republican Party up in a capitalism bow. They do believe in capitalism, but so does the Democratic Party. Yet they are clearly different parties with some very different ideas. > or any existing embodiment of the first stages of Communism. The USA is the country most in the first stages of communism. Its technical innovation has nearly pushed food into post-scarcity territory (some argue it is already there), and it is working hard, harder than any other country, to do the same in other areas of production. While some of your points resonate with what Trump is doing, for the most part he is an aberration and there isn't yet much indication that he — or anyone in the future — will get away with it. |
|
|
| |
| ▲ | victorbjorklund 3 days ago | parent | prev [-] | | Can you list any such countries where a communist state would not result in oppression and dictatorship? | | |
| ▲ | Filligree 10 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Norway or Sweden, maybe? | |
| ▲ | 9rx 3 days ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Chile once democratically elected a marxist to lead the country, and while not technically a member of the Communist Party himself, the Communist Party was part of his coalition. For all intents and purposes, I expect this meets what the previous commenter was talking about. It did not become a dictatorship during that time. Ironically, it did become a dictatorship after the USA staged a military coup and overthrew said government, but anyway... | | |
| ▲ | victorbjorklund 3 days ago | parent [-] | | And Chile was a communistic paradise and everyone had everything communism promises? | | |
| ▲ | 9rx 2 days ago | parent [-] | | You seem mighty confused. Communism is impossible without achieving post-scarcity, and you know full well we haven't achieved that yet. Communism doesn't exactly promise anything. It is a sci-fi imagining of what the world will look like in a post-scarcity world. Star Trek is a more modern adaptation on the same idea. Would you say Star Trek promises us something? Notably what communism does imagine, though, is that there is no state. If you read back in the comments, you'll see we're not talking talking about communism at all, rather "communist state". As before, communism rejects the concept of having a state, so you know we cannot possibly be talking about communism. Instead, "communist state" usually refers to a country under rule by the Communist Party. As Chile was ruled by a Marxist inside a Communist Party coalition we said that was likely close enough for what the earlier commenter was trying to convey. Chile was a technocratic democracy then. Is that paradise? That is in the eye of the beholder, I suppose, but it must have been pretty good else why would the USA have wanted it to dismantle it so badly, undoing what was, at the time, one of the most stable democracies around? |
|
| |
| ▲ | 3 days ago | parent | prev [-] | | [deleted] |
|
|
