CAPS LOCK IS CRUISE CONTROL FOR COOL! Seriously move your finger 7/16ths of an inch and turn it off. This will result in you not looking like a complete moron from the get go. Now as to your actual post...

quote:

IT IS ONLY PORTRAYED AS BAD BECAUSE ALL THE POLITICAL FAT CATS ARE TOO AFRAID OF LOSING THEIR JOBS.

To start the political fatcats actually have a far more stable life under communism. At least any communism that's been succesfully implemented on this planet. Have you ever heard of "the party"? yeah that's the political fatcats only they have unlimited power to control the people and you can't vote them out of office.
The power of the politician lies in the power of his goverment, communism is all power to the goverment, instead of in a democracy/republic where the power (for the most part) is with the people.

quote:

SHOULD TRY AND THINK FOR THEMSELVES,

Yeah you should work on that and actually read some historical texts about real communism instead of just parroting some BS that I'm willing to bet you picked up from one of the "cool" rebels at school. I'm also willing to bet that I've read more Marx then you have.

quote:

It's what allows you to feel empathy and identify with others.

Hmmm sounds like a waste of space, not to mention one of those purely social relations you were speaking of.

quote:

that certain pieces of paper are worth a lot of work, effort, and tangible physical goods.

Actually those pieces of paper are related back to resource based wealth, the standard of course being gold. In the majority of cash systems 1 unit of currency = x amount of gold. Now it's a given that man has been using gold as a form of currency since we found the stuff, modern currency is an extension of that, with the change that I don't need a mule/several servants to haul my wallet around for me.

COMMUNISM IS NOT BAD. IT IS ONLY PORTRAYED AS BAD BECAUSE ALL THE POLITICAL FAT CATS ARE TOO AFRAID OF LOSING THEIR JOBS.

PEOPLE WHO BLINDLY ACCEPT THAT COMMUNISM IS WRONG BECAUSE THEY HAVE BEEN TOLD SO, SHOULD TRY AND THINK FOR THEMSELVES, AND THEN FORMULATE THEIR OWN OPINION.

quote:

Originally posted by speed:
If for some reason or other(namely unfavorable conditions, poverty, abuse, etc...) people cease to beleive in the value of money and merely apropriate what is necessary to live(food, water, shelter, leisure time, some comodities) as a right, the same as their right to live, the current value scale ceases to make sense.

True enough, but that's not about to happen in any first world country, is it? What you're proposing is anarchy, which generally results in bad things. No large scale human society can pull off anarchy without major problems (especially when some people don't want to give up what they already have).

quote:

what's a heart? sounds like an extra useless 5 pounds or so to haul around

It's what allows you to feel empathy and identify with others.
I'll let you decide wether or not that was sarcasm.

quote:

I'm also a libertarian and I very much like my free economy.

No matter how much you dislike Marx and are contrary to his ideas you have to admit that capital is not a real entity but merely a social relation. The value of private property, and money itself, hinges completely on the fact that people are willing to beleive that certain pieces of paper are worth a lot of work, effort, and tangible physical goods.
If for some reason or other(namely unfavorable conditions, poverty, abuse, etc...) people cease to beleive in the value of money and merely apropriate what is necessary to live(food, water, shelter, leisure time, some comodities) as a right, the same as their right to live, the current value scale ceases to make sense.

It works great in theory, but on a large scale people in power abuse their position. Money is stolen, power abused, dissidents imprisoned and police states created.

If you want to go start a commune with a few friends, go for it. It can work on that scale.

quote:

I used to be a hardcore libertarian, but then I grew a heart. (Inside joke).

what's a heart? sounds like an extra useless 5 pounds or so to haul around [/Libertarian Joke]

The Soviet Union was fascist, plain and simple. They may have been ruled by a Communist party and called themselves socialist, but they were a perfect example of fascism. That's why Soviet citizens didn't have freedoms and why the Soviet Union collapsed. An economy that is, in theory based around no one really owning anything but, in practice based around the state controlling everything is not exactly what you'd call "stable"...

I don't happen to care for communism that much, but it's mostly because I don't see how a society where people give their services out for free and are supported out of the kindness of everyone else's hearts can last very long. I'm a bit cynical, yes. I'm also a libertarian and I very much like my free economy.

I'm an Anarcho-Communist.

I used to be a hardcore libertarian, but then I grew a heart. (Inside joke).

Communism is viewed as bad because of the Cold War. Unless you're a banker, economist, or heavy libertarian, then that's most likely why you'd think Communism is bad. The Soviets were horrible people, and they were communist, so communism must be bad.

The problem is, the Soviets weren't Communist. They were Socialist. (United Soviet Socialist Republics. USSR. Not USCR.) They also grew out of a piss-poor country (The Czars didn't run a good job of the country, and World War I screwed the country over. Then the Allies all but abandoned the Soviets and Stalin after World War II, the line of Communist leaders [Khrushchev, Pavlov, Brezhnev, etc.] were all fairly ineffective in digging the country out of the hole, because of the economic pressures put on it by the US. Finally when Gorbachev came around, the country found a way to dig itself out, but has failed to do so. Putin is slowly dragging the country back down the way it came.) and had to resort to what they had. Take the AK-47 as an example. It's a crude, but effective weapon, that's cheap to make. The same thing with a Hind, and a T-55.

The Soviet Union then became far too militaristic to even be called Socialism, and was more or less a hybrid of Socialism and Capitalism. So it wasn't even true Socialism at that. Sort of like China is today. Yet, they continued to call themselves Communist, and now the general stereotype is Soviets = Communism, and by extension Soviets = Bad, finally Communism = Bad.

Communism can have freedom. The difference between Socialism and Communism is that Socialism has a state and a system of class involved in with it. Chamakliyo, if you knew about "True Communism", you would have realized Marx was talking about a class-less existence, after the Proletarian revolution. True Communism must inherently be defined by a stateless AND classless society, AND by a proletarian revolution. A totalitarian dictator must NOT exist for a true communist society to exist.

The problem with communism is something a lot of people have pointed out. It doesn't work on a large scale, because in a large scale humans are stupid. (See The History of the Earth, Year 0 to now). Humanity puts too much sentimental value in the actual possession of the things, and not the utility of things. Communism focuses around the utility of things, and that how you survive. For instance, in a capitalist society, the garbage man is paid less than the athlete. That's because society places their value on the athlete. Under Communism they wouldn't be paid, and instead would both be provided for, because society needs someone to pick up their trash, and be entertained.

Take a look at the Kibbutz in Israel. Kibbutzim worked fairly well. They couldn't be completely self-sufficient, but they could get damn near close. It was only until the 1970s that they started collapsing in to Capitalism.

Communism doesn't mean "no individuality" either. I can be a communist, and do as I please. Say we were living in a communist society. My specialties include psychology, computer maintenance, and basic health care like sanitation. These are three things that interest me. I could go around and offer my services to anyone I damn well please. As long as I am rendering services to the best of my ability, I am being taken care of. Since it is extremely unlikely everyone is going to want to do the same job I am, there will always be an opportunity to work, and be an individual at the same time.

Communism isn't bad. It's just a pain in the butt to put in to practice.

That sounds more like communo-fascism, not true communism.[/QUOTE]

But true communism is a Totalitarian dictator form of government that uses socialism instead of capital... I think you are thinking about democracy Socialism. Socialist can have freedom. Communist, no freedom

quote:

Freedom of jobs, freedom of travelling. Government tells you what to do and collects the money.

That sounds more like communo-fascism, not true communism.

Iss BAD because the people have no freedom... Freedom of jobs, freedom of travelling. Government tells you what to do and collects the money.

and the Individualism, Communist HAtes it because it allows some to be noticed more than others (NOT-equal). Like in čzech Rebublik all the buildings HAD to be grey or brown... no pink.

quote:

Originally posted by CuervoQuixotic:
Correct, but isn't the question null-void if true communism cannot be achieved then?

The question is not asking if communism can be achieved, but asking if it's "bad".

Read 'The Communist Manifesto' before making any judgments on communism. What you hear from your history teachers is usually wrong.

Correct, but isn't the question null-void if true communism cannot be achieved then?

quote:

Yet, isn't corrupt communism part of communism as a whole?

no... they are different.

quote:

, communism rarely work out they way it is supposed to.

Communism never works the way it is supposed to.

Corrupt communism (dictatorship mascarading as communism)=bad

communism= not bad

Yes we are talking about whether or not commuinism is bad. Yet, isn't corrupt communism part of communism as a whole?

The point that I was trying to reaffirm was that, while good in thought, communism rarely work out they way it is supposed to.

quote:

I was under the assumption that true communism, though a good thought/plan, typically becomes a dictatorship.

No. Communism in the form we know it happens only when a dictator perverts the ideology behind communism.

quote:

It also destroys any sense of national heritage previous to the communist government

No. It destroys the class system and with that the tradition of exploiting the underprivilaged.

quote:

Yes, I was saying to refer to those books to get a better understanding of corrupt communistic states.(

So corrupt communistic states are bad... I belive the question was about communism not the corruption of it.

Yes, I was saying to refer to those books to get a better understanding of corrupt communistic states.(Considering that most, if not all, communist states either start or become corrupt.) Seeing as Orwell, or Blair if you prefer, was a socialist pointing out the flaws of "his own communist ideals", one would believe he would be a good source to turn to.

quote:

Read Animal Farm, Anthem, or 1984 it gives you an insight on such things...

Eric Arthur Blair, better known as George Orwell, was an antistalinist socialist. People pointing to his work when they attack socialism is stupid. He wrote those books as a criticism of the corruption of his own communist ideals by the soviet union and stalinism.

It's bad because it is. Don't question the statements of your betters.

I'm only kidding. Or am I?

ah ok