Why does this country freak about communism?

[Skidmore]

It only means sharing with the greater community. I believe that sharing is a Christian value. I don't understand the knee jerk reaction.

[Fridays Child]

1. Maybe because of its association with the non-communist communism...

...of the Soviet Union?

[nankerphelge]

2. Dude!

Perhaps you missed a little film called "Red Dawn..." The evil communist Cuban army was paratrooping right into America's heartland. Fortunately, we had some plucky high school students, including both Patrick Swayze and Jennifer Grey of Dirty Dancing fame, that were able to take on the communists.

[Name removed]

3. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[ck4829]

23. I must disagree

1. It has never worked because America would not let it work

2. The 100 million deaths is a statistic that comes from the John Birch Society (Fascism has without a doubt killed more people)

Americans are afraid of Communism because they have basically been conditioned to be afraid of it.

[tlsmith1963]

29. I Have Learned...

...that every system has its' good traits & bad traits. There are some things about communism that I don't like, but the fact that they tend to be pro-worker is the part I do like. Capitalism seemed to work better when I was younger, but something changed. It now seems to be only for the rich. It might scare some Americans but maybe we need a little socialism, if only to rein in the neocons & their pro-rich policies.

Tammy

[Dave Reynolds]

37. I have thought the same,

and welcome to DU if no one has said it already.

I work with a lady who grew up in Poland under the Soviets. She has no complaints about their socialized medicine programs, as her mother recently was ill and received quick and good care.

FDR used a little bit of socialism to help us out of the Great Depression.

[lostinacause]

46. It would not work anyways. There are so many problems with resource

allocation and division of power that it is an impossible state, a state that cannot exist.

[julianer]

58. As opposed to the resource allocation

problems under capitalism that no one gives a damn about? These resource allocation and division of power problems leave half the world in poverty. Even those of us who are 'rich' are often one step away from relative destitution.

What we need is to drop the old ideas and come up with a problem solving way of feeding the world without destroying the environment or democratic freedom.

I think that the internet gives humanity a way to organise itself that would make communism work.

Look at DU for an example of distributed decision making and power sharing. If we were all individual producers and consumers we would surely be able to work out some way to get our produce to whoever needed it and to arrange amongst ourselves what else needed to be done.

It is only when we have 'leaders' and structures of authority that we get unequal divisions of resources and power. We don't need them.

[lostinacause]

82. The reason why these people are in poverty has little to do with

capitalistic forces. The problem is greed driven oppression. This is a very important distinction. As you probably know the countries that have had a large increase in standard of living have been countries that have embraced capitalistic principles. China and India provide evidence of this.

There are some problems with capitalism. Equality is not granted under capitalism because of some of the deterministic properties of wealth and market imperfections. While part of this problem is systematic part of it is also cultural.

There are also problems know as "Market failures". I won't go into much detail on what market failure entails. Things like public goods and monopolization are market failures. These can usually be elevated by some sort of intervention but sometimes the cure is worse then the disease as these have to be accepted.

While DU does have some "communistic" behaviors, it is built up on things that exist because of capitalism. Capitalism has driven much of the computer industry. (Open sourcing has sped the process up as well.) There are also many shortcomings in decission making that come from the nature of a community that DU is. There is no coherant purpose to DU so people go satisfy their own goals. While this is not a bad thing for a forum it is if the work is something that is beneficial to the wellbeing of society. There is also no consequence for failure to achieve the goals that DU has, if indeed it does have goals.

[julianer]

84. Capitalism is all about greed driven oppression

Thus it is everything to do with poverty. I haven't heard of this idea that capitalism is somehow distinct from the corruption, greed and devastation it creates. To me it is all part of the same picture. You can't have capitalism without greed, corruption, war and crime.

All of those things concern property - whether it is getting more of it, or keeping what you've got - and our societies are modelled such that those who are most ruthless, the best exploiters, in short the most greedy and oppressive, will be the most 'successful'.

We can moderate the effects of capitalism, as was done before by previous generations, but recent history has told us that the logic of capitalism will always threaten social gains and will eventually strip them away.

So poverty is ameliorated when capitalism is constrained and exacerbated when it is unrestrained.

But at all times capitalism is extremely wasteful and very inefficient in distributing resources - that's because it cannot concern itself with anything but the greatest possible profit.

By the way I wasn't really saying that DU was 'communistic' I was saying that it is an example of the sort of technology that will make rational, democratic government possible - in the past problems with attempts at socialism have involved concentration of power into authoritarian bureaucracies and the same old problems of greed and oppression have reappeared but in different hands.

[lostinacause]

88. Greed and oppression are two things that existed before Capitalism

and it will likely exist indefinitely. Greed and lust for power are both part of human nature.

I disagree with your assertion that the most successful people are the best exploiters. It has been my experience that the people who participate in this behavior generally don't have the success that the hard worker does. This of course depends on various characteristics of the market. America rewards predatory behavior much more then Canada does; thus even with increasingly similar regulatory systems Canada still retains a higher degree of equality.

Your view that capitalism will always threaten social gains is largely based on where you live right now and your government’s inability to adequately prepare for and respond to the issues of globalization. Canada has done quite a bit better. Europe, too, has taken the necessary steps to embrace globalization. The developing nations who have prepared well such as China and India have had massive increases in their standard of living (even though the Chinese government is still oppressive in many ways).

Your perception that Capitalism is wasteful comes largely from people with higher levels of wealth using inexpensive resources in a way dictated by their price and availability. Gold and Diamonds are typically not treated the same there is not as much to be able to waste.

A direct democracy will never be the ideal type of democracy because of various shortcomings in the application of it such as the finite knowledge of individuals. I just recently wrote an article in my blog that further explains why I think this way. Here is a link to it: http://possiblylogical.com/blog/ You are welcome to bring anything from that article into this discussion.

[lostinacause]

91. I also made a thread about direct democracy.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x4456322

Edit: The link may be a good idea

[Redstone]

26. Oh, you're in trouble now. Pointing out that communism

has never worked, and never will, generally gets you all kindsa flaming and irrational blather about how no country has ever had "real" communism, yackita, yackita, yackita.

There are a whole bunch of people who simply do not want to understand that you can't motivate people (real ones) to work hard for the greater glory of a theory. Ever seen anything made in Russia, or in China before they went capitalist in everything but name?

Redstone

[ptolle]

42. migs-T34s- AKs

I'd presume you're referring strictly to "consumer goods". But the items mentioned in my lead seem to have been built pretty well.Nothing was for sure pretty, designed for slick marketing or dolled up but it was well engineered and hell for stout.I own a contemporary Ural motorcycle and for what it does would not trade it for anything except maybe a mint condition brit classic like say a Vincent, Ariel square four, or Norton.

[julianer]

59. You are talking nonsense

But the problem is you don't realise it. If this 'irrational blather' is not true perhaps you could point to a socialist country that has been allowed to develop without external threat.

Venezuela is a good extant example. Chavez is not actually hurting anyone except the wealthy but he is being destabilised and threatened.

You are also talking rubbish about motivation. Are you really saying that people are only motivated by money? Why do people join together to run charities?

Most people are motivated by a desire to do good and help others. That is the aim of communism.

It would be nice to have a debate without johnny-no-nothings repeating, to use your insightful words 'yackita, yackita, yackita'.

[Redleg]

86. Sure you can.

People work for non-profit, social service, and governmental organzations every day so that they can make a difference in something they believe in. To suggest that people cannot be motivated to work for a theory is not accurate.

[Dave Reynolds]

4. It has been used as an insult and epithet

since the early days of the cold war.

My son-in-law uses "communist" as an insult, and when I asked him what the word meant he could only come up with "someone who likes communism". The dumbass did not even know that it was just an economic system.

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

11. My husband flunked a history class

because he told the teacher that democracy is a political system and communism is an economic system. (The teacher had asked the class to compare democracy and communism). Instead of reading his paper or finding out that he was right, the teacher failed him. And yes, this took place in Texas.

[Dave Reynolds]

14. Bad teacher,

the whole socialism, communism, and capitalism differences were laid out for us in high school.

That teacher must have been absent for those lessons.

[Nobody]

34. You actually got to learn what Communism was?

They didn't teach that in my HS, only that it was evil, bad, and no good Christian likes it.

That only sent me running to the library to check out the Communist Manifesto and Das Kapital. I hid them under a pile of other books also brought home from the library so my parents wouldn't find them.

[Dave Reynolds]

35. It really was not too in-depth,

but our econ teacher did tell us the basics, total government control vs. some government control vs. "free enterprise".

He had to put a little spin on it, in hindsight (this was 25 years ago) he probably was not encouraged to talk too much detail.

[julianer]

60. Poor ignorant teacher!

Communism is explicitly about having no government whatsoever apart from the self-government of the people.

He obviously confused communism with what went on in the Soviet Union.

[Yupster]

40. In my little college,

all five history professors were communist so that wouldn't happen.

Debates when I was a history major were between Trotskyism and Maoism, not democracy and communism.

This was in the late 70's when communism was taking over seemingly in another country every year.

It seemed to be so on the march, and then just a few years later, it was gone, and everyone said they saw it coming for years. Well no one ever said anything to me about how it was about to die when I was in college in the late 70's.

[lostinacause]

47. Communism is both a political and economic system.

[Inland]

63. I don't think you can call "communism" a political "system"

As Marx was an economic determinist, it was enough for the proletariat to be in charge. The "system" that got worked out would be something that all the proletariat easily agree upon because, in marx's view, they all had the same interest. The state would, in fact, wither away as useless.

It took Lenin and Mao to create political systems--temporary, for the period before the withering.

[lostinacause]

81. The absence of a ruling body still defines the political atmosphere.

This is perhaps the weakest part of communism; the belief that the possibility of having no leaders exists.

[Inland]

87. But that's not a political system.

Marxist theory doesn't tell how anything is decided, leaders, no leaders, whatever. As an economic determinist, he thinks that the mere fact of eliminating classes eliminates any disagreement or dispute and or will create something on its own. But he never said what it would look like.

[lostinacause]

89. My understanding is he stated no ruleing class. Thus no leaders.

(Perhaps this is why Orwell wrote the book "Animal Farm". Expressing the true nature of power.)

[Cocoa]

5. it is a fundamental challenge to our system

it's not as utopian as you describe, it's an actual system of government that is drastically different that the one we're living under.

[jsamuel]

27. it isn't a system of government as much as it is an economic system

[The2ndWheel]

6. Because power told them to

It was never about Capitalism or Communism. It's about power. One center of power and another.

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

7. Communism was the bogeyman of the '50s

when the US freaked out with the launching of Sputnik. We were certain the Russians were going to nuke us or fire missles from the moon (I heard this when I was a kid). Fighting Communism was the excuse for all the follies of the military industrial complex. With the fall of the Soviet Union, certain conservative elements have continued to use the word "communist" as a perjorative, mainly because they aren't smart enough to realize any real truth about people who disagree with them. Just today, I heard that Muslims and Communists were in league with one another to take down the US.....yeah, right.

[Inland]

8. Stalin, pol pot, and a variety of other dictators.

And communism DOESN'T just mean sharing with the greater community. Sharing implies something belongs to you that you voluntarily give up. In communism, not much belongs to you and not much is voluntary, either.

[Yupster]

41. That is the difference with Christianity

A Christian is judged by his works. You give to the poor because you want to follow Jesus' example of voluntary giving.

If you are forced to give up your stuff at gunpoint, then it is not a test of your works and deeds. You are just an oppressed slave.

The place where communism has fallen down in the past is the idea that everyone will work not for their own benefit, but for the benefit of the whole.

"To each according to his needs."

The problem comes when people won't work.

What then?

That's were communism has fallen apart. The answer has always been "we'll make you work," and communist countries have become brutal and tyranical dictatorships, not of the proletariate, but of the guys who are in charge.

I came out of college a communist as we history majors all were back 30 years ago.

It only took a few years working at various jobs to realize how inpractical the system is.

I could understand the professors believing in it. Most of them never left the student world and went into a job in business. They were students, then grad students, then grad assistants, then instructors, then professors.

I wonder if toyay how those professors reacted to the fall of communism. They were all so smug and confident that it was oon to take over, and that was just 30 years go.

[Inland]

56. As Freddy Engels said,

"The test of the pudding is in the eating". Communism didn't work, at least not in the way that was theorized.

But I don't know how many people, even thirty years ago, bought the whole kit and kaboodle of communism. I think it mostly expressed itself, as the original poster did, as a gentle form of societal purpose and equalitarianism.

[julianer]

65. This depends if you are

talking about what happened in the SU or what the meaning of communism is.

No one would want to communalise personal possessions - it is the means of production, distribution and exchange(factories, shops, railways etc) that would be owned communally. The other main idea of communism is that power is held at the lowest levels - that there are no leaders to order you around.

[Inland]

73. Well, that's why I quoted Engels.

The theory doesn't work. It doesn't work, even if one is allowed to keep personal possessions (which, by the way, sort of depends what "personal" and "keep" means in practice, as the leaders are allowed the use of the people's dachas and huge cars and others are allowed to own whatever color lampshade is in the store that day).

The real problem of any of the communist countries is that the control of the means of production also screwed it all up. This is the fault of theoretical marxism, which failed to find a way to adequately assess the costs and benefits of capital and the means of production. As a result, the SU built huge dams, entire cities, and factories that didn't produce value equal to their cost. China did the same. Both eliminated their most productive classes.

Aside from military production, which is suited to a command economy (even in the US, the military economy is hardly a market economy), the SU had lost ground on the West from the time of the Czars. It would be one thing if the loss of personal freedom and the death of millions had actually brought peace, prosperity and the socialist utopia. But it didn't.

[julianer]

85. The problem here is that you

say communism didn't work because the 'theory' is inherently faulty but you seem to think theory is expressed by what happened in the SU, which is quite a long way from any previously existing theory.

The point is that there is a body of communist theory if anyone is interested. I'm not particularly. There is also the existing state of affairs which you'll have to agree is pretty bad - billions starving, resource wars, massive exploitation.

What are we going to do about it? I think some sort of socialism is the only answer, but hardly anyone advocates the recreation of some sort of Stalinist hell. What we need is to ditch the old preconceptions and work out real solutions for ourselves - I want to see as direct a democracy as is possible, in the framework of the public ownership of all the really important industries.

I can't see any other way of avoiding both environmental and/or economic disaster.

[CottonBear]

9. We seem to like the Chinese brand of Communism. n/t

[lostinacause]

48. It isn't really communism

[TwilightZone]

10. Probably because the most obvious example of it for most people was the

Soviet Union. And, we know how well they turned out.

Note: yes, I do realize that the SU wasn't truly communist, but to the average American, they were the epitome of communism.

[Tom Yossarian Joad]

12. Geez, ask big Pharma, Oil & Energy Industry, the Medical Industry...

etc.

It would greatly reduce the monetary pocket linings of the people in power.

[Cleita]

13. Back during the cold war communist Soviet Russian and Russian

bloc nations were our mortal enemy, never mind that the Soviet version is not pure communism. So the RW lemmings have a fit everytime the word is mentioned, like communism will lead to the gates of hell or something. They don't even bother to find out what communism really is and that many religious sects are communist in practice.

I have often been accused of being a communist because I have the nerve to suggest that many programs like universal health care would be better run by a single payer government program. Gee, you'd think I suggested giving away top government secrets by suggesting it.

[slutticus]

15. The people around me who freak out most about it are my friends from...

...Romania and Russia.

They don't have a high regard for it.

[Deja Q]

16. 'communism' has been paralleled to governments that Russia and CHINA

represent and personify. (aka fascist, corrupt entities that curtail personal freedom and liberty. Both of which transcend money, by the way... :D )

Funny how we exploit them both and think they're too stupid to catch on... China wasn't. O8)

[zippy890]

17. Its the opposite of capitalism

and therefore unAmurkin

No PROFITS you see, no AMASSING WEALTH, so what's the point of living? I mean you'd be working everyday so that everybody had decent housing, health care, education and NOT in order to buy buy buy, consume consume, more stuff bigger house and all for ME!

and that, my friend, is not only unAmurkin its downright communist.

;-)

[Hamlette]

18. loss of the worship of god and money

two ways to control the masses....lost. Gotta keep people obedient and focused on something besides the government. Easier to get away with stuff.

[barb162]

19. If you were brought up a long time ago, you were taught

that everything you worked for was taken from you and given to others. Did you ever see or read "Doctor Zhivago" as it was written by a Russian (Pasternak) and in Russia the rich and middle class had everything taken from them. People in this country really feared communism. How it read in Marx and how it was practiced in communist countries were two different stories

[bluestateguy]

20. Communism had its chance

Everything sounds nice in theory. Results are what matter.

The records of Stalin, Pol Pot, Mao, Castro and Ceausescu are not in the slightest bit progressive.

[julianer]

66. I am willing to bet that

you know next to nothing about communist theory. That won't stop you judging it though, eh?

[bonito]

21. The way I think about it

capitalism motivates people and keeps us productive for personal gain, but when your depleting natural resources or polluting the environment there has to be a governing body to make sure theres a balance and to tax those business's and oversee what damage is being done by funding, replenishing the natural resources or in finding alternative resources for the benefit and welfare of all.

[Imagevision]

22. what do you call what Bush is doing for big biz??

and what he's doing for the middle class and the people not that fortunate?? BUSH: Fuckemism?

[leftofthedial]

24. 50 years of lies, hysteria, demonizing and training

[TechBear_Seattle]

25. American history, that's why

In the last decades of the 19th century and the first few of the 20th, socialism was very, very big. It was the ideology of the first labor unions and it was the driving force behind most of the social reform movements of that period: prison reform, public education, extending the right to vote to women, the Pure Food and Drug Act, even the income tax (Amendment 16, ratified 1913.)

While political leaders such as Eugene Debs were never a major threat to the status quo, the ideas of socialism and latter communism were greatly feared by the elite who held power. Worse was the minority of socialists and communists who believed that change would only come about through violent revolution. It was scarey enough for an industrialist to find all work stopped at his factory while 500 workers marched through town; It was much worse when a few Wobblies burned the factory down or lobbed bombs at the industrialist's home.

In response to this fear, the ruling elite took steps. They made it a federal felony to incite work stoppages among miners, factory workers and others whose labor was considered "essential to the national interest." They had it declared treason to interfere with US military operations by, among other things, protesting the draft (1). And the whole point of the election reforms they put in place between 1880 and 1920 -- voter registration, laws regulating political parties, poll workers and the like -- was to eliminate minor parties such as the Socialists and Communists to prevent them for doing further harm to the people who held America's reigns of power.

The bloodiness of the Russian Revolution also frightened America's leaders. If a small group of agitators could stir up rebellion and brutally overthrow Russia's rich and powerful ruling class, could the same thing happen to America's rich and powerful ruling class? After World War I, many of the surviving Axis countries became socialist, mostly because war reparations devestated their economies. "Home front" war propaganda in the United States firmly linked the socialist systems in Germany and Italy with violence, brutality and a mindlessly obeying populace (never mind the fact that rationing and other war-time measures in the US were every bit as socialist.)

After the war, our former ally, the USSR, retained control of the governments and economies of many "buffer states" in a fear of US hegemony. The US -- rightly, I believe -- saw this as the first step towards the world domination that had been Hitler's goal, adding imperialism-by-conquest to the American definition of Communism. As Stalin became more and more antagonistic to the west, followed by Russia's refusal to allow Korea to be reunified and then the Communist victory in the Chinese Civil War in 1949, the meme that communism was the opposite of all American virtues and values was born. Like all memes, it has taken on a life of its own and has proven very difficult to change.

[JohnnyBoots]

28. We're a Capitalist and a starting to resemble an Imperialist nation,

The Capitalist is in direct opposition to Communism or Socialism.

[JanMichael]

30. Like the word Atheist it's been demonized.

So people don't have to think, just buy shit to keep the economy rolling for the Plutocracy.

[Blue_Tires]

31. thanks to conditioning, people just freak out at the word

never knowing that many socialist principles are already practiced in many of our daily lives....And trying to keep themselves afloat, a lot of major corporations practice communism better than anyone (mergers, protectionist legislation, government bailouts/tax incentives/benefits etc.)

and for those quick to sprout that '100 million people killed', number, just ask how many have been killed from:

1. Religion 2. Imperial/Colonialist expansion 3. Capitalism

[Peace Patriot]

32. The communist revolutions in Russia and China scared the beejeebers

out of the predatory capitalists of the western world. That's one of the reasons we got labor unions here in the U.S. (after the "reds" were purged). Be nice to your workers; they might just rise up and seize the means of production, and SHARE the profits around!

The capitalists were just nuts on the issue in the '50s--with McCarthyism (a "communist" under every bed!), and the "Christian Anti-Communist Crusade" (from memories of my youth). Godless Russia! The Internationale! (--there was an "international communist conspiracy" to infiltrate capitalist countries and brainwash the workers, and create communist zombies everywhere, don't you know?).

And that was the supposed purpose of the Vietnam slaughter--stopping "communism" in Southeast Asia. (The infamous "Domino Theory.") No matter that Vietnam's president Ho Chi Minh was democratically elected in 1954, in a U.N. monitored election, and more patriot than communist. The Vietnamese had just thrown the French out of their country, after centuries of colonial rule. (--and in stepped the CIA!). Ho Chi Minh quoted Thomas Jefferson in letters to our government pleading for support for Vietnamese independence--"just like in America." (I weep!)

There is absolutely nothing wrong with communism--and a good argument could be made that Jesus was a communist (in how he lived, and what he said about the rich and the poor--to the rich, "if you would be perfect," give it all away to the poor!). --as long as it is not dictated to people, comes naturally by will of the majority (with protection of minority rights). Property ownership, riches and capitalism do not necessarily have to be wedded to democracy. You can have democracy and an entirely communist economy, in which the rule is: "from each according to his ability, to each according to his need."

The problem with communism, as it worked out in these large countries (Russia, China) which had absolutely no democratic history or traditions, was that it was imposed by force and violence. Rich people were slain and their property confiscated. There is a much gentler and more gradual way that it could be done--and many societies now have at least some elements of socialism, if not outright communism (from the word "commune," meaning a communally owned business or farm). Social Security was called "communistic" when it was first proposed (and still is, in some circles). Medicare. The minimum wage. Workers' compensation. Headstart! England's, Canada's, France's and Germany's comprehensive, communally funded, health care for all has been 'accused' of being "communist" or "socialist", and has been the subject of relentless ridicule by U.S. corporate news monopolies--but it works out quite well for the people in those countries.

Capitalists very much RISK a communist revolution when they behave as badly as they are behaving now in the U.S.--as predators and robber barons. It's just like the 1920s all over again: prime conditions for revolution. In the U.S., and other western countries, a compromise was made (after much politically bloodletting)--a compromise that has worked out much better in places like Germany, France, England, and Canada (more benefits for the people)--in which taxation and worker protections are used to "distribute the wealth" a bit more fairly (than the rich just owning and controlling everything). Reagan BROKE THAT AGREEMENT in the 1980s, with a very unfair re-write of the tax code, union- busting, and the looting of peoples' savings in Savings and Loan institutions. And things have been going downhill in the U.S. ever since.

Hopefully, a new progressive compromise will emerge from this nightmare of the Bush Cartel junta. But the capitalists don't have the cold fear of Russian and Chinese communism any more, to force them to compromise. (Well, maybe a little bit, with China--hard to know what's really going on there, re: capitalism vs. communism.) I think this is one of the reasons that U.S.-based capitalists hate and revile Hugo Chavez in Venezuela--not only because of the oil, but also because Chavez is working out a really good compromise between the needs of business and the needs of the vast poor population, using some of the oil wealth (which was already nationalized) for the people, giving peasants spare, unused lands, and not assaulting the rich or taking their Jaguars away. He's setting a very good example of what government should be doing for the poor and for the majority--peacefully, as the result of highly-monitored and verified elections.

And I think it's why this epithet "communist!" is making a comeback in rightwing circles. They are ANTICIPATING a revolt. And they will be quick to accuse any new progressive, leftist, socialist, or "common good" ideas as "communist." There is such a long, bitter history associated with that word--communist--and such fear does it inspire in both capitalists' greedy little hearts, and in some poor ignorant folk who don't really know what it is, that it can be used this way to put down any ideas of sharing or of sensible regulation of global corporate predators, or other such ideas. (--and fascist wars!). (You don't support our fascist, resource-grabbing war--you are a "communist.")

Why "communism" got associated with "godlessness" is a long complex story, much dependent on circumstances--mainly that the Churches often allied themselves with the rich, and owned vast properties. Thus, many communist activists saw religion as an enemy (" the opiate of the people"), and when dictators came to power in Russia and China, religion was suppressed.

Most people in the world--in my estimation--are both religious AND would prefer a more socialist, if not communist, form of government. There is nothing inherently anti-religious about communism. (Catholic monasteries and nunneries are all communistic.) It's just the history, and the kinds of government that got associated with communism (Stalinism--a brutal tyranny)--that makes the word itself so resonant and negative to some people.

No one wants to live under any kind of tyranny--communist, capitalist or fascist (fascism = the state and the capitalists becoming one power--much as we see now in the U.S.). The key is democracy! And maybe also compassion, and just common sense. Business and trade are good things, not to be suppressed. Making a little profit or surplus from your own ingenuity and hard work, or from communal effort, and enjoying a bit of ease and prosperity, is a good thing--not to be banned by ideologues. Making sensible market decisions--what do people really need, how to provide it--is just native human wisdom, not to be reviled with stupid, anti-capitalist rhetoric, or grossly interfered with.

The trouble is that, when they rich get too rich--as they are now in the U.S.--they get violent and horribly greedy for more, and it's very difficult to change them, and to re-balance the society without great turmoil.

I know enough about the history of bloody revolutions to know that I DON'T WANT THAT HERE under any circumstances. Violence breeds violence. That's all there is to it. It is pretty much an iron rule of human history. Only a very few times--in very small countries, and, amazingly, in our own country--has a violent revolution resulted in anything but violent rule. One oppressor is replaced by the next. We MUST to find a better way to achieve justice!* And there is really only one way to achieve peace. And that is through peace.

-------

*Note: Democracy is a damn good way to achieve justice and fairness--the best way ever devised by human beings. We just don't have it right now. The fascists have seized control of our election system--with the new electronic voting machines run on SECRET, PROPRIETARY programming code (owned and controlled by Bushites!). We MUST change that, while we still have the power to do so. We need to RESTORE our right to vote, and RETURN to the democratic path. Election reform is our best chance for throwing this junta off. (--and we will get much better Democrats, too!)

[PassingFair]

33. Thank you very much, Peace Patriot!

An excellent post. I enjoyed reading it, and concur!

[tomg]

52. Excellent post, Peace Patriot nt

[LoZoccolo]

36. Because it's never really worked.

When you see people wanting to try something again that's never worked, saying they're gonna get it right this time, and usually being obnoxious about it, you're like "ugh!"

Plus it's authoritarian.

[lostinacause]

49. That isn't the reason. People were really scared about communism

so there would have to be the threat of it taking hold of America.

[LoZoccolo]

51. No, not really.

Lenin had this idea that a vanguard party of the few should take over and "fix" everything. You don't have to have mass appeal to be afraid of a group of self-righteous know-it-alls taking over everything and putting people in the ground. You can see that train wreck before it happens.

I'd be willing to bet if someone could observe people within a communist group and how they act for a few weeks without risk of them getting recruited or coerced...say in a fly-on-the-wall manner...they could see all sorts of stuff that would make them think that these people should never take over.

[lostinacause]

57. The spread of ideas is not dictated by rationality.

Communism had a huge following in other nations. It was not tested and economic theory is not as strong as it is now. People feared for what would happen if it did start to catch on.

[wli]

38. it doesn't, it's just the rethugs and the DLC (and neocons, too) n/t

[DerBeppo]

39. it's contrary to human nature

oh, and though sharing is good, being forced to share at the barrel of a gun isn't.

[mixedview]

54. Bingo. Communism is an economic system which undermines

democracy, because only FORCE can suppress the free market - the desire for people to own property, work and trade.

[julianer]

67. Could you just run past me one more time

exactly what human nature is and how exactly it is not compatible with communism.

I am looking forward to your insights.

[axollot]

43. I do not think communism would work.....

I have lived in a few different countries and believe that a mixture of a socialist/capitalist system would be more effective.

And, if we are leaning toward anything in this country it is fascism rather than imperialism.

Our checks and balances in this country are way in the fuckin red (think accounting RED - metaphoric ly speaking). Ahh fuck it the books are just plain cooked!

There is nothing wrong with someone becoming rich because he is a decent business man with a fair business model. What is wrong is when those workers are exploited to get there - the government gives ridiculous tax breaks (and I do not mean for start up costs) and the ol' corporate parachute, what a fucking joke!.

What we are seeing in this country for the last 50 or more years is a total lack of control over giant corporations. Corporations should be given HUGE penalties for pulling plants/jobs out of America to pay pennies on the dollar for wages and yet still see an increase in the cost of items. Certainly, the American public does not see any savings by major corporate factories saving money on wages. :puke:

We in America are also to be blamed :cry: - we should DEMAND AND BOYCOTT non American made goods - Australians will pay more for an item if it is Aussie made and have proven buying Australian made only, CAN and DOES WORK at sending a message to those business' that think they can pull jobs out - in fact Australia is the #1 country in buying items made in their own country FIRST before all others (it was listed here somewhere a month or so back - hubby is a long time supporter/reader of DU!! And passed the info on to me to see if I knew that fact too LOL I did ;-))

In the end the very word 'Capitalist' is a dirty word and you can see why it is said with such hate by many other countries - including the Middle East. Our current government shows us to the world as all being capitalist pigs!

The whole "they hate us for our FREEDOMS" crap :puke: - No * they hate us for our GREED. I mean for fuck sake, I have never seen bigger vehicles than in the US and having lived in Australia - you can certainly use them there - but even then - the farm utes (trucks) pale in comparison to here - yet they still seem to do the job and are not an extension of their penis as it would seem they are here in the States.

Alternative fuels? What is that? Australia (and other more advanced eco wise countries have a form of Kerosene gas (with the aid of a converter) that cost much less and burns cleaner (of course it does not beat the Hybrid or total electric car. It is available at nearly every petrol/gas station. The initial cost to have it installed is worth the savings, the major drawback was it just didn't have that 0-60mph POWER - so NOT needed anyway. It could still get you a speeding ticket on the highway or city LOL!!

I loved the fact that in Australia - the yearly registration cost for a four cylinder sedan 6 years ago in QLD was 350 dollars BUT was higher if you had a 6 or 8 cylinder vehicle or a sports car. However, you got exemptions even then with a "kero kit" installed - you could get exemptions also if you needed more grunt for business/farm needs too. Also, included in your yearly registration was BASIC INSURANCE - so if your car was properly registered it had basic insurance PERIOD. That of course did not cover theft and cost of a damaged vehicle and you still had plenty of independently owned insurance companies out there for full coverage in the event of theft etc, but it still beats the shit out of ZERO insurance thousands of peeps go around in the US with.

Australia is also a leader in Solar power - for an initial outlay between 10 - 15 grand, your entire home, fridge, microwave, puter the lot ran on solar power with no need for any "power co" back up. The bat cells needed to be replaced on average of every 10 years or so. So do not let them fool you that it cannot be done - it can. Research the Rainbow Power CO Nimbin, NSW, Australia.

Then there is the issue of Socialized medicine there. Of course, just like the US people complain "they never get sick so why do *I* have to pay for those that do" Bullshit. The fact is, Australia's public health system is one of the leader's in Socialized medicine in the world. It is an example of a system that can WORK, it is not perfect, but hell, it beats the current system in the US (the poor die, the rich live - oh sorry - the poor and MIDDLE CLASS die)

Only the basics are covered, Emergency operations (any operation needed that will not kill you, will put you on a waiting list), ER care is covered, All doctor visits are covered. Prescriptions are NOT covered but are capped so you do not have the insane cost of scripts like you do here in the states. There are many 24 hour doctor's so you do not need to go to the ER if your 2 year old has an ear infection at 4am. OH and they are open weekends also - those are centers run with a staff of 10 or more docs NOT one or 2 rich ones. Basic dental is NOT covered (except for all school aged children!!) - unless a tooth extraction is absolutely necessary, eye exams are covered - but not nice frames (think military issue & cheap wire ones - better than none at all though!) Chiropractic is not covered - you get the picture. Nor is ambulance covered (but for a low yearly fee you ride for free)

However, for less than you pay a month for your work covered insurance (that is if your lucky enough to HAVE work insurance) you can get dental covered and pay a small co-pay, plus all the other things mentioned.

For an even higher fee - you do not have to slum it at the public hospital, you get your own private doctor who has his 1 doctor practice, plus you get your own private room in at the private hospital which resembles more of a Hilton than a hospital (champagne was served by the nurses to a friend of mine and her family after she had her baby once she was back in her room and rested enough)
All that and the cost was roughly 1500 a year for a family!

Rich or poor though you could still use the public system if you needed to and you do pay for it in your taxes, X amount does go to what is called 'medicare' and there is no break on that.

Taxes on cars, cigs, beer, jewelry, major appliances, perfume, make up, designer clothing is higher than in the states,(all though the GST was supposed to change the "luxury tax", I have not been back since it went in effect so I do not know how much that part has changed)
but electricity, food, rent/mortgages EVEN land tax (where i was at it was about 2g a year and that included, trash, water (up to a limit but unless you had a serious leak or a pool you were not likely to go over the limit) sewage, fire fund - all in the US we pay separate bills for - OH and that was not based on the value of your house, but per parcel of land - the more expensive 'hood paid more per year than the middle class 'hood and that would vary by shire or county as refereed to in the states) is a great deal cheaper than it is in the states.

I am sure I can live without a number of the 'higher' tax items - as long as I can feed my family and keep a roof over their heads. Bummer, I would not be able to afford a luxury car - but I could afford a decent 4 banger sedan at least!

The fed income tax equiv is slightly higher - but do not be fooled by those that say it is 42 cents on every dollar. It can be - if you do not want to provide them with what is called a "tax file number" the US equiv of a SS# - and it is against the law to ask for that number for any other reason besides, payroll, unemployment and the such.

It is also against the law in the US to DENY you service (say for phone, doctor, cable, electricity blah blah blah because you refuse to give them one just an FYI - since it is not widely advertised that and even your VET these days wants your social....)

AND for the grand finale of my :rant: - YOU GET PAID VACATIONS IN AUSTRALIA - AVERAGE OF 6 WEEKS PER YEAR!!!!!
So does most of if not all of Europe and even Japan!!

To me, while Australia is a Commonwealth country with the top figure head being Queen Lizzie herself, it is completely self ruled and rarely if ever do they intervene on Australian issues. Australia seems to have a better mix of that Socialist/Capitalist combination that works - less stress, better quality of life and why Australian's still (and always will) call Australia home.....no matter how far they roam (a rip off take of a Qantas Ad and famous Aussie song...)

Cheers from
an Aussie/American and proud of both (I wish Australia just did not need to kiss *'s ass but lil Johnny Howard is * JR anyway and no way did I vote for that lil fuckers ass either!):rant::rant::rant:

[NinetySix]

44. In a nutshell: RACE

The most virulent anti-Communists were largely Southern Democrats whose greatest interest was segregation. Communism by definition involves a fundamental equality of all citizens (even if Stalinism strayed from this principle). Separate but Equal was a patently bullshit line from the moment it was first uttered, and was the plutocratic white gentry's most useful tool to divide the poor by maintaining a wall between the dominant white population and a subjugated black one. Communism extended the specter of social, political, and economic equality for all citizens, and in the Deep South (as well as elsewhere in the country), that was simply unacceptable.


A South politician preaches to the poor white man,
"You got more than the blacks, don't complain.
You're better than them, you been born with white skin," they explain.
And the Negro's name
Is used it is plain
For the politician's gain
As he rises to fame
And the poor white remains
On the caboose of the train
But it ain't him to blame
He's only a pawn in their game.
--Bob Dylan

[NoSheep]

45. I am assuming that is a rhetorical question. In case it isn't:

The rich cannot gain one damn thing from a communist state. Our country is controlled by the rich. The rich own the media. The media tell the poor folks that communism will take their god away. Scares the hell out of the poor folks because then they will not have any money nor any god! It's that simple.

[kskiska]

50. It used to be worse

I remember back in 1960 or so having to swear on a job application that I "am not or never have been a member of the Communist Party."

I remember my parents whispering about certain neighbors of ours who were rumored to having been "investigated." I made it a point to knock on these neighbors' door at Halloween out of curiosity to check it out for myself. I didn't see anything of interest, though. They looked like normal people to me.

I also remember the propaganda in junior high school. We were pointedly taught about Soviet Union and their 5-year plans, and how many hours a Soviet worker had to work to buy things such as a pair of shoes or a loaf of bread.

Along came Sputnik and all hell broke loose. Then Eisenhower blatantly lied about our U-2 spy planes until after the Soviets captured U-2 pilot Francis Gary Powers, when Ike had to admit we were spying on them after all.

[Xithras]

53. Communism = Theft

Communism is the taking of one mans toil for the benefit of another. The fate of a persons labor, and the products of it, should be up to the person, not the state or community.

In order for state sponsored communism to work, it must also control where and how labor is applied. This, by definition, removes freedom from the workers. Communism creates equality at the expense of freedom and individuality.

Socialism, or regulated capitalism, is a far better system. It allows the people to impose limits on the market to prevent it from harming the populace, but still allows citizens the freedom to control their own labor and set the value of their own creations.

[mixedview]

55. what you describe is not socialism, but a mixed economy

which is the only type of economic system possible within a real democracy.

Of course, people can disagree on the mixture.

[ikri]

76. And yet

You can rephrase your opening sentence as:

Capitalism is the taking of one worker's toil for the benefit of the owner.

How is communism worse than capitalism? In communism a person's work, in theory, benefits the whole of society, whereas in capitalism a person's work benefits only the owner.

[Greyhound]

61. 60 years of brain-washing. n/t

[K-W]

62. 100 years of propaganda. EOM

[Siena]

64. Because it has never worked the way it's supposed to.

The dictator never wants to give up his power.

[julianer]

68. That's true

And it is also why we owe it to humanity to come up with something that does work and pretty damned quickly too.

[anarch]

69. aww, why don't you move to Russia, you damn commie...

oh wait, I mean Cuba. Or, ummmmm, Venezuela. Why do you hate America?

...

j/k.

I think it probably has something to do with a century's worth of indoctrination. Communism = BAD. Capitalism = the greatest economic system ever devised. Never mind the fact that our current so-called 'Free Market' is basically a system of smoke and mirrors designed to keep pumping wealth toward those who are already wealthy, and to make sure real competition is crushed before it can even get off the ground.

Anyway, as much as I myself am pretty much a commie in many respects, I do believe that private property (define that in whatever way you feel appropriate) is necessary for human dignity. So, pure communism would never work for me....

[jokerman93]

70. one reason "communism" is such a bogeyman

One obvious reason is that the people who most often bandy the term about are, for the most part, utterly ignorant of its meaning, and are merely parroting what they've heard from their pulpit and hate radio masters.

I liked what one DUer said the other day. Calling someone a communist as an epithet these days is about as meaningful as calling someone a member of the Whig party.

oookaaaay...

:wtf:

[maxsolomon]

71. they freak about SOCIALISM

and anything that smells faintly like it.

americans prefer ignorance to anything except high fructose corn syrup (see post #7, angry obese lady thread).

[Javaman]

72. As long as capitalizm exists, communism doesn't work.

[txaslftist]

74. We don't anymore, not really.

With the fall of the Berlin Wall, the breakup of the Soviet Union and the rise of capitalism in such places as China, Maoism, Stalinism and Leninism (the real bogeymen of communism) are dragons that have been, if not slain, at least reduced to helplessness.

We used to be scared shitless of it for basically two reasons: One, the Russians beat us into Berlin and the Red Army was ginormous. The point that the Russkies bore the brunt of WWII losses AND victories (at least in the European theatre) can be argued back and forth, but the prospect of the looting raping murdering (all true, unfortunately - although the Nazis were certainly worse)Red Army continuing westward or being unleashed into the more civilized west was very, very scary.

Second, they had the bomb. I was only old enough to have done one 'bomb drill' in elementary school, but I grew up hearing about doomsday and the end of the world loomed large in my thinking. That's a fairly scary thing, and the 'communists' in Russia (we were told) were our enemies.

There are still those on the right who throw around the word communist as an epithet they think will be taken as a smear, but by and large the terrible dread of communism that held the US through the latter part of the twentieth century is gone. We have new things to be scared of, like 'radical islam' or 'muslim extremism'. Next century it will be 'those anarchistic libertarians' or 'the dreaded oriental capitalists'.

We are a nation that loves to be scared into doing things we know shouldn't but secretly want to, like bomb the shit out of some third world country.

[jeffrey_X]

75. Because we were brainwashed/programmed in the 70's and 80's

At least I was a child and teenager. Didn't know any details other than it was "bad."

Similar to what happened to the word liberal during the same time period.

[moondust]

77. Stalin.

The world might have accepted the revolution to ditch the feckless Russian aristocracy but Stalin's savagery was way over the top. Since then Pol Pot, Tianenmen Square, etc., have added fuel to the fire.

I believe most Americans do not know or care to know the difference between socialism and communism. They say "it has never worked anyplace so forget it." The RW has done everything it knows to blur the differences between the two, lumping them together into one big leftist demon.

[Coventina]

78. Bingo. He made Hitler look like an amateur.

He wasn't practicing communism, but mass murder on a scale we can't even begin to comprehend.

Unfortunately, I don't think the valid aspects of communism will ever recover their reputation from Stalin's reign of terror.

[Amonester]

79. Commie is a "dirty" word now (one idiots just love to smear...)

So why not invent a new (old) one that makes sharing a human value and just "call" it humanism since the "new" (old) name says it all. My 2 cents.

[KingFlorez]

80. Some degree of socialism is already used

And a nation can't survive without it. Taxation is socialist, because it pays for roads, schools, the military, etc. If we didn't have some form of socialism, we'd have toll roads and fees for children to go to school people couldn't afford. A large number of people fail to realize socialism, is nothing but an economic theory.

[KansDem]

83. "Communism?" That's so "20th century..."

"Terrorism" is now the boogieman the industrial-military complex is counting on to rob the US Treasury. Get with the program!

[Ladyhawk]

90. All my brother has to do to "win" an argument is call someone he

doesn't agree with a "commie." It would be amusing if it weren't so sad.