"My parents didn't fight off communism..."

No you are wrong, ancient people had leaders, they were the strongest, they set the rules, and they had war among themselves to become the leader. I believe those civilizations may have clung to their gods and their stick, spear, or insert any man made weapon here. They sacrificed their own and yes they were even cannibals. Your supposed to be preaching progress here...

Originally posted by hippomchippo

Originally posted by Hefficide

Originally posted by hippomchippo
I find it strange to attack a fine theory that could work with a change of mind simply because men of today are corrupt and greedy.

Not that men of today are greedy. But, rather, that men have been, are, and always will be. It's part of our biological imperative to hoard. All mammals engage in this behavior.

Yes, but you don't think that we can change this? Perhaps not now or even in 20 or 30 years, but eventually, I think it's possible to change our ways of thinking.

We lived in a communistic society when we were hunter gatherers, but somehow we've become lost on a track where all we do is seek material goods, at the expense of others.

edit on 2-10-2010 by hippomchippo because: (no reason given)

OP: you need to move away from your computer, walk out your door and go visit some communist countries. Go visit some that have failed and observe for yourself the aftermath. Go talk to some people who have lived under that system. Can't believe you have actually done that or you wouldn't be so cavalier about a truly spiritually oppressive system.

Your veiled references to Obamacare are also misplaced. How does a health care system written by insurance company lobbyists who stand first in line to profit handily have anything to do with anything but fascism?

Someone needs to tell the Chinese that communism doesn't work and maybe that will bring an end to their incredible economic fortunes.

Consider this...... An Imperial army sets forth to attack and defeat a Fascist army. Wins, and returns home to Democratically elect a Socialist government.

According to my history books post war Britain was a shinning example of social change and was put inplace by the men who fought for your right to exist as freemen.

Some socialist principles that they applied where. Free education, free health care, subsidised housing. They hoped to make sure that future generations would be educated, fed, and housed by the institutions that they created.

Maybe these three simple things have no place in a capitalist society but in terms of human endevour they are trully noble in intent.

reply to post by Seeker PI

"Someone needs to tell the Chinese that communism doesn't work and maybe that will bring an end to their incredible economic fortunes."

Are you referring to the Ho Chi Min trail manned by the C.I.A. selling cadmium, lead and other poisons and unpalatables to the U.S.?

reply to post by luxordelphi


No luxordelphi, I'am refering to the Communist government of China that currently has America by its economic balls. That China the one with the big red flag.

reply to post by Seeker PI


A visual argument against the notion that China is, in actuality, a communist country...



McDonalds in Beijing. Corporatism. A hand in the proverbial cookie jar. Not communism by proper definition.

reply to post by Seeker PI

So, Pi, you're referring to the population of China making 8 cents a day and committing suicided in droves?

Or someone could tell the Chinese worker that it does....

iPhone Makers Reportedly Vow Not to Kill Themselves
Published May 27, 2010
Reuters

A 10th employee of iPhone-maker Foxconn jumped to his death late Wednesday, just hours after the company's chairman promised to make life better for employees at the sprawling production site in southern China.

Originally posted by Seeker PI
Someone needs to tell the Chinese that communism doesn't work and maybe that will bring an end to their incredible economic fortunes.

Originally posted by Jean Paul Zodeaux
reply to post by Brood

 

Simply applying critical thought to the ideal; "to each according to their needs, from each according to their capabilities", reveals numerous flaws.

Yes... and capitalism is not an effective fight against this. Capitalism changes it to simply "From/To each accord to their capabilities" instead of "to each according to their needs, from those who can afford it; to each according to their own accord for profit beyond this".

First of all, the obvious question that arises from such an ideal is who ultimately decides what these needs are and who is most capable?

This is exactly why capitalism doesn't work, but let's not pretend communism was completely evil with no ideas whatsoever that we could use in modern society.

Next, when thinking critically, what should be clear is that those who need the most are rarely those who are capable, and under such a paradigm what happens is that those who are capable are punished for being so, while those not capable are rewarded for being so needy.

Wow. I'm worth 6 million dollars when my parents kick the can. I worked for none of it. My oldest friend has worked 6 days a week since he was 15 years old; paycheck to paycheck. He was barely supporting himself then, now he has 2 children and still just scraping by. He can't afford health insurance; if one of his daughters were to get an infection or virus that they needed antibiotics for, who do you think he came to? His friend... with money? Guess capitalism's huge vice exists in capitalism too. He's lucky he has a friend who has money and isn't a corrupt neanderthal that is incapable of showing acceptance to the middle class for their struggles for this life that is, quite literally, just a huge game of luck. If you were born with downs syndrome, how well do you think you would be in the business world? You're right, those who need the most are rarely those who are capable, which is exactly why capitalism fails, because it demands action of those who are incapable of providing it. By the way, I have no such friend, just some actual perspective. I am worth 6 million, though, and I would be thrilled to pay 5% extra tax for having a higher than 100k income to assure that everyone has food, shelter, water, and somewhere to go to the bathroom. I also think responsibility of employment should not be solely on the citizens, especially in a society that is run by money. This whole "every man for himself" method is very stupid if you think about it critically.

Under such a paradigm, what is to stop those most capable from disguising their capabilities in order to qualify as needy?

Diagnosis of physical and mental diseases? Things have change since the time of Marx, try applying his teachings instead of regurgitating them. And let's not pretend its impossible to have communist ideas like providing obs for the citizens without having the state take away the right to choose where you work.

Their is, quite simply, no real motivation to produce under communism. The need for a Leviathan state would remain constant as someone would have to force people to produce.

Even in this highly capitalist country, we have non-profit organisations to fund ideas that people have. People will still express their ideas through the business world -- I know, I am in a creative profession and I do it in my spare time just to create and see what people do with it; the problem here, again, is not with communism, but the way it is enforced. They must be allowed to produce to actually produce -- that is the only problem it has had in the past. Also, the government could issue grants to people who come up with innovative ideas to promote growth. No forcing involved, except, of course, in forcing the public to know that such a communist idea could work.

That is, if communism were to be implemented across the board in a society. However, under the principles of a free market, small groups of individuals could very easily take the ideal of communism and create a commune and succeed or fail based upon the merits of communism without forcing the rest of society to succeed or fail with them. Conversely, under the principles of communism, small groups of individuals could not very easily take the ideals of a free market and create a group of capitalists as such a thing would be prohibited by the rules of communism.

Not a good enough reason to forget the whole idea of communism entirely, though.

Originally posted by ljtg123
Or someone could tell the Chinese worker that it does....

This is incredibly selective. I'm sure nobody in a capitalist country has ever killed themselves because of the Western business world , stress at work is a communist-isolated phenomenon, right? Again, blaming communism for people. Is there an echo in here?

Originally posted by Seeker PI
reply to post by luxordelphi

 

No luxordelphi, I'am refering to the Communist government of China that currently has America by its economic balls. That China the one with the big red flag.

Very few people in China are rich, while the vast majority, especially when compared to international standards, is very, very poor. In fact, the wealth gap in China is so great it only undermines the assertion that capitalism creates this wealth gap, if we are to believe that China Inc., is in actuality a communist nation.

In Pictures: China's Wealth Gap

China's wealth gap the largest since economic reforms began:

China has recorded its widest wealth gap since economic reforms began in 1978, a split that is a "serious threat to social stability", the government has said.

...

The increasing split between China's prosperous cities and its vast interior is a "serious threat to social stability", according to the government, which has linked a spate of public protests to perceptions of social inequality.

Perhaps one of the most telling attributes of China's most recent economic success can be found in article about China's Premier Wen Jiabao from a Chinese website:

Wen went on quoting Adam Smith's Theory of Moral Sentiments, saying that if the wealth of a society is concentrated in the hands of a small number of people, then this is against the popular will, and the society is bound to be unstable.

news.xinhuanet.com...

Adam Smith is hardly known for his unabashed advocacy of communism.

Also consider this:

But five-year plans are only one side of the coin in China's vast realm. The other is a wildly unfettered capitalism geared solely toward naked profit. And when it comes to turning a profit, hardly anything seems sacred anymore, not even for China's communists. The Great Hall of the People in Beijing is a case in point. If the National People's Congress doesn't happen to be in session or President Hu isn't using the magnificent building -- with its more than 300 rooms and enormous paintings depicting scenes from the revolution -- to receive foreign dignitaries, the government simply rents it out. Recently, US automaker Ford used the building to unveil its latest line of car models, and fast food giant Kentucky Fried Chicken opted for the elegance of the Great Hall to hold a meeting of its more than 2,100 Chinese restaurant managers.

Ironically enough, while economists in Europe and the United States advocate "less government" and "open markets" as a response to globalization and the Chinese challenge, the Marxist-Leninist party that rules China blatantly avails itself of every advantage of capitalism while steadfastly refusing to give up state control over the economy.

www.spiegel.de...

Whatever model China is currently using to fuel its success it has little to do with communism.

reply to post by Brood

Yes there is an echo throughout the empty spaces of your argument. Obamacare is not communism - it's fascism. Your money will benefit the insurance companies and the administration needed to make sure everyone is fined for not paying premiums. I don't think this counts as charity at St. Peter's gates.

Originally posted by luxordelphi
reply to post by Seeker PI

 

So, Pi, you're referring to the population of China making 8 cents a day and committing suicided in droves?

Yep, thats the one luxordelphi. The China that has a suicide rate of 13.0 per 100,000 males compared to the suicide rate of 17.6 per 100,000 males in the States. At least thats what the WHO tells us.

Go figure eh.


www.who.int...

reply to post by Seeker PI

Hi, PI, please note the immediacy of my reply: I don't get my facts from the internet. It's been hijacked or hadn't you heard? News coming out of China is heavily censored or hadn't you heard? Best way to go is word of mouth. Time honored and you get to look the conveyor in the eye. Radio free is also a good bet.

reply to post by luxordelphi


Does that mean I should not believe anything at all on the net because it has been manipulated by TPTB ?

It really is not my intent to argue with you on this point, but word of mouth is a bit medievil don't you think, and was exactly what we where left with in the Dark Ages when only those who could read held knowledge.

Originally posted by luxordelphi
reply to post by Seeker PI

 

Hi, PI, please note the immediacy of my reply: I don't get my facts from the internet. It's been hijacked or hadn't you heard?

Actually, I hadn't. It's weird, since my sister has been there for 3 months now; she's the blond one in Shanghai on all the billboards; she'll be the one taking pictures back of all the chinese crowds taking pictures of her . I talk to her every day, its almost as if the Chinese government isn't controlling the internet and you don't know what you're talking about.

Not that this has dick to do with the topic or anything.

reply to post by Seeker PI

Goodnight, PI, time for me to hit the hay. Did learn something from you though. Thanks for the proper spelling of medieval. Who knew? I'm all for it - hit the libraries and read something sensical. Tomorrow we'll figure out who's really profiting from the Ho Chi Min trail.

reply to post by Brood

Sorry to hear about your virtual sister. Point on topic taken...it was Obamacare, wasn't it?

reply to post by Brood


This has to take the cake for the most retarded thread I have ever seen on ATS. You even admit it is a failed system. I hate to tell you the past is the best way to see into the future. I bet you are a teenager who has been filled with this crap the school systems teach today.

Hierarchies are evolutionarily ingrained in the primate kingdom. There will always be the alpha male or female to contend with. Somebody will always take control and somebody will always give up control. Thus is how hierarchies self assemble over time.