Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Go  |
New |
Find |
Notify |
|
Reply |
|
Admin |
New PM! |
Registered: August 14, 2001
Posts: 742
|
Well, I don't look up to the upper class much. A lot of people, both lower and middle, like to gripe about them. I think we have wealthy presidents because they can afford all the campaigning, TV commercials, and such that it takes to get recognized in the run for office these days. I think it's too much, and it prevents people with less wealth from running.  Plus, if you say there is no slavery in capitalism... wasn't there slavery in America before the Civil War?? Hmm... |
Registered: February 22, 2002
Posts: 2066
|
There is no slavery in capitilism. If someone doesn't like their job, they can quit. If someone is willing to work hard enough they can become richer and richer and climb the social ladder. Are we slave to what you, redjill, call the 'all-mighty dollar'? No. Why because people, in capitalism, do not have to work and can still get bye. A prime example of this is stay at home moms. People don't look up to the lower class. Only the lower class looks up the middle class. Both the lower and the middle class look up to the upper class. that is why we only have upper class presidents. |
Registered: August 14, 2001
Posts: 742
|
Perhaps... but some might argue that capitalism can be a form of slavery, because the wealthy have more power over those with lower incomes. Have you ever seen, in recent years, a poor person (or even middle class person) run for president? Let alone win the election... Also, someone might also argue that people are slaves to the "all-might dollar" in a capitialist system. I'm not saying you don't have a point, but I think both systems have problems... Plus I'm just adding some balance here.  |
Registered: February 22, 2002
Posts: 2066
|
Pure communism can NEVER exists so it is completley ridiculous to argue what would happen in a pure communists state. Sure, in a pure communists state the WORKERS would vote on every political decision. What about the fact that every communist state that has ever existed doesn't let every worker vote on every decision? We can not base our arguements on what should happen or on some fantasy political belief that has never come into reality (you said your self Strangelove, you like to base things off what you can see and touch.). We can only base our arguement on what the facts are, The bottom line is communism is SLAVERY. Communism as we know it is SLAVERY. Communism as the world knows it, and has all ways know it, is SLAVERY. |
Registered: August 14, 2001
Posts: 742
|
I really appreciate your views on this. I can see both sides to this issue; I'm not big on the government completely controlling the economy, but at the same time I think some control is needed in some areas to prevent monopolies and keep big corporations from becoming too powerful and corrupt. Take the energy crisis: I live in California, and before the crisis, the energy industry was deregulated. I think it was a really bad idea. The consumers have had to pay ridiculous amounts of money for something they had to have (like in a monopoly), and the companies that messed the system up in order to make a profit have gotten away scot-free! And then there's the whole Enron scandal... I think it works both ways. Communism doesn't work (or hasn't worked so far) because it gives too much power to the government and doesn't reward people who are talented and work hard, plus it's very utopian and doesn't recognize enough the inherent evils of people. Capitalism gives too much power to those who have money and exploit the weaker groups to make even more money, and it often rewards those wealthy people who are lazy while overlooking those impovershed people who work hard. If only there were a system in which all of the wealthy (not just some) cared enough to help the less fortunate, or in which the hard-workers were rich while the lazy people were poor. ...But in a system like that, I'D most likely be very poor... + |
Registered: March 13, 2002
Posts: 3477
|
It is also true that in a pure communistic society the government would be completely controlled by the people. Thus it would not truely be salvery. However the tyranny of the majority would be a severe problem.
But it's all a moot point, a pure democratic communism is impossible.
|
Registered: February 22, 2002
Posts: 2066
|
In communism, in its purest form, the government tells what buisness what they should produce. The government tells people where to work. The government owns everything. The government tells people what things they can use. The government tells people what rations they have each week. That is not a way of life, that is slavery. I would rather die than fall under the slavery of communism.
|
Registered: March 13, 2002
Posts: 3477
|
In any case, Communism as a governmental system is fiction. It is utterly impossible to implement a true communism over large countries and numbers of people. Why? Because we are not robots. The fundemental differences in humanity that CANNOT be changed will lead to the collapse of the system into an elitist's playground. In order for any country to be ruled in a true communistic way, everyone must have a say on everything done, which, quite frankly, is impossible. The only solution to this problem would have to be a beurocratic system assigned by elected officials. Now that we've established a beurocracy, things already are turning very bad (at least in a communist system) eventually power will corrupt, and you'll see the same pattern repeated in all the "red" nations. However, communism has it's applications. Where you ask? In companies. Keep the free market system, alow competition to fuel prosperity. Worker Co-ops are essentialy companies run like communists governments. The workers have nearly equal stocks in the company, and they make major decisions. They regulate thier pay, product quality, and everything else. The reason it would work here is because communism is applied on a small, specialized scale. You want to produce cars? Then everyone in the company knows the basics on car manufacture and can decide when the time comes.
Co-ops also are safer than full fledged communist systems. If one company becomes corrupt, then it fails and fades away or is shut down in the end only a small portion of the populous is affected.
If the whole government is communistic, and it fails, much pain and oppression usually insues for decades before it fails. Oh, and the world is about what everyone thinks, however some people are horribly wrong or stupid. Remeber that the average IQ is only 100 That means, statisticaly, that 50% of all people have an IQ of under 100. Which is quite scary, thank God everyone doesn't vote. |
|
Registered: August 04, 2001
Posts: 157
|
I am plenty patriotic to democracy, but that does not mean that I am going to denounce another governmental theory that has possibility, as pure evil. And Marine, I am talking about pure communism, which is unrelated to the so-called communist states of today. Perhaps, we should both research the origins of communism a bit more thoroughly before we debate. I have been presenting facts as best as I can so far, but I'd still like to know more.
|
|
Registered: February 26, 2002
Posts: 14
|
quote:
Originally posted by marine16:
I love life to. But a life that has no freedom is not worth living.
I agree, the government controlling every aspect of one's life would be terrible, and I would rather die than have that happen. |
Registered: February 22, 2002
Posts: 2066
|
I love life to. But a life that has no freedom is not worth living.
|
|
Registered: January 16, 2002
Posts: 559
|
I was just saying that I would rather live and be told what to do than to starve. and I would want my family to live. I value my life and my families
|
Registered: February 22, 2002
Posts: 2066
|
It is sad that people would want the government telling them what to do. Because freedom, is exactly the opposite of that. How could anyone oppose freedom? Having nothing but havin choices is one thing. Having nothing and not having choices is another thing: it is a sad and scary thing. Democracy is the answer. Democracy is the only answer.
|
|
Registered: January 16, 2002
Posts: 559
|
I would like my government telling me what to eat and where to work if my only other choice was nothing. Many people in those countries have nothing.
|
Registered: February 22, 2002
Posts: 2066
|
Communism is wrong. Hoewevr much a 'social Darwin' I am, I am right. Find me one communists state that doesn't steal money from the rich and give it to the poor. That is one of the basis of communism. Ever notice that in a communists state there are only a couple of rich people, the dictator and his cabnit? And they, were all poor at one point. What happened to the people who were rich before they became communism? They are all killed or imprisoned and their assets were given to the people. Communism is wrong because communism goes against everything this country was founded on. I ask again, how would you like the government telling you where to work? How would you like the government to tell you what you could and could not own? How would you like the government to tell you where to live? How would you like to work in a job that had ZERO room for improvment? How would you like to have the same job at the same minimum wage the rests of your life? I would not! To agree with communism is unpatriotic. |
|
Registered: January 16, 2002
Posts: 559
|
That is it exactly heaven
|
|
Registered: August 04, 2001
Posts: 157
|
Did you guys know that the Smurfs was based on communism? I have always been the one student in the class that has stuck up for communism, although I agree that it would probably not work. And Marin, you're idea that the poor just aren't helping them selves is soo typical of social darwinism. Ever since the Europeans started using that excuse to justify why it was okay that they were rich and stepping all over the poor and suffering, and colonizing Africa, in effect destroying thousands of cultures and heritages, and eventually leading to slavery, this has been nothing but just that, an excuse. Even in the 20th century, when the American rich were lighting cigars with 100 dollar bills while the poor class was growing, their excuse was social darwinism, and that the poor just aren't helping themselves, and aren't as talented. Although, communism most likely wouldn't work for some reasons that others stated already, it is the basis for an excellent idea, that could definitely use some revisions, but certainly shouldn't be denounced as complete evil. |
|
Registered: January 16, 2002
Posts: 559
|
can you give me a specific ex of communists that were poor? (as in the leader of hte country).
and another comment...most places where communism comes in effect had 1% rich people htat make money by forcing everyone to wokr for like a dollar an hour. They are the ones that owned the factories nad money was never earned by the poor. Not because they did not work hard but because the government they had (ussually dictatorships) used and abused them. In most countries like afghanistan people are poor because there are droughts and warand people lose jobs. In america there is things that will comensate the people for natural disasters and wars but there is nothing in the poor coutnries to help. The people with money have gotten the money from exploiting the other people and from drugs.
Countries that go through the above mentioned process ussally have a shift in gov (afghainistan became the way they are because taliban came in after war and drought when the country was vonerable)and many coutnries after war have gone to communism (i.e. east germany)
The only reason communism does not work is because the people htat abuse it. Most of the people that abuse it are the rich politicians.
|
Registered: September 19, 2001
Posts: 2202
|
It doesn't matter if the wealthy people got their money from working hard or from and inheiritance, it is their money and to dictate or even suggest that they should spend their money in a certain manner is wrong. This shoud never be done no matter what the circumstances. "Freedom is not Free"-Korean War Memorial, Washington DC. |
Registered: August 14, 2001
Posts: 742
|
Uh, I don't really like communism much myself (it transfers power from the wealthy elites to the government elites), but to say that the rich worked hard to earn their money is very often not true. Many of the wealthy were BORN into it; some have hardly ever had to work a day in their lives! And many poor people work several jobs at once just to make ends meet, and they never escape their circumstances. They remain in debt and in poverty. Do you think the poor and the homeless WANT to remain in the state they're in? Of course not! My mom works two jobs at once, and she'll work three total in a few months, but we still remain (and will most likely to continue to remain) middle-class... while there are so many wealthy kids I knew in elementary school whose moms never worked at all! It'd be great if those that worked the hardest had the best living, and those that were lazy didn't get more than anyone else, but it's a complete myth that this is the way our society works. Jill |
 | Please Wait. Your request is being processed... |
|
