Calling on all EU citizens: NO to anti-communist resolution!

The Corinthian

certain people wrote:

It doesn't matter what it says, it's a proximity issue. It's putting the word "communist" in the same vicinity as human rights violations etc. And this only adds to the "commie bad, capitalist good" impression that Western governments want us to have. Which is wrong.

Of course for that to be a consistent argument, you would have to also say the same thing for Fascism. Otherwise you’d simply be partisan.

This is what i'm trying to say, that while evil has been done in the name of communism, evil has also been done in the name of capitalism, freedom, and democracy.

What you’re trying to suggest is we cannot condemn one ideology because all other ideologies are not squeaky clean, and this argument simply does not stand up to examination.

No one has suggested that the liberal democracy is blameless, but we can say that on balance it is good as the good heavily outweighs the evil. Communism the reverse is true, and as much as you want to compare the Gulag to Guantamino Bay, they’re simply not in the same league.

Of course, one could point to the USSR and argue that this was simply one ‘bad egg’. Unfortunately, pretty close to all of them appear to be bad eggs, from repression of dissidents in the former Yugoslavia and in Cuba, through to the genocides carried out by the Communist regimes of the Sandinista in Nicaragua and the Khmer Rouge in Cambodia.

certain people

well, i disagree with you. I think you're also missing my point. Which is, people can do anything in the name of an ideology, it doesn't mean that ideology is to blame, and it doesn't mean we should condemn the ideology for it, or associate the ideology with the crimes.

Would you condemn Robert Mugabe for "liberal democratic crimes?

The Corinthian

certain people wrote:

well, i disagree with you. I think you're also missing my point. Which is, people can do anything in the name of an ideology, it doesn't mean that ideology is to blame, and it doesn't mean we should condemn the ideology for it, or associate the ideology with the crimes.

I understand your point; it simply does not hold water. We can show that as an ideology Communism has failed, and brought about misery, time and again whenever it has been attempted. It’s a pretty straightforward concept - this ideology is continuously failing, not because it’s repeatedly ‘badly implemented’ or ‘due to foreign intervention’ but because it’s just not a good ideology.

If at first you don’t succeed, try, try again. Then for goodness sake give up, ‘cos you’re wasting your time.

Would you condemn Robert Mugabe for "liberal democratic crimes?

No, because he’s actually a Communist.

Ray777

Victor wrote:

Isn't Bertie a scoailist? :v: :v: :v:

Bertie is everything you want him to be.

samb

The Corinthian wrote:

Of course, one could point to the USSR and argue that this was simply one ‘bad egg’. Unfortunately, pretty close to all of them appear to be bad eggs, from repression of dissidents in the former Yugoslavia and in Cuba, through to the genocides carried out by the Communist regimes of the Sandinista in Nicaragua and the Khmer Rouge in Cambodia.

A Communist party has never been elected. If one had enough support to be elected then it could work. If enough people would co-operate with any system then I think it could work. The main problem is however that if any country did decide (even democratically) to try to implement the communist economic model it would be austracised and therefore would fail.

We can show that as an ideology Communism has failed, and brought about misery, time and again whenever it has been attempted. It’s a pretty straightforward concept - this ideology is continuously failing, not because it’s repeatedly ‘badly implemented’ or ‘due to foreign intervention’ but because it’s just not a good ideology.

How? In all cases these attempts were thwarted by the US and many other countries. In each case it was forced on an unwilling population by brutal totalitarian regimes. Besides how many times has it been attempted, not enough to PROVE anything, even if there were not the problems mentioned above.
You haven't explained or examined your position yet. All you have said is; This ideology is conitnuously failing, its just not a good ideology. How can you say that in many years circumstances could change enough for a communist style society to work.

The Corinthian

samb wrote:

How? In all cases these attempts were thwarted by the US and many other countries.

That’s not entirely accurate or, for that matter, relevant. The US on a number of occasions even tacitly supported some of these regimes, notably in Romania and Cambodia, and even when she did oppose them, this effect was typically more than compensated by Soviet bankrolling of those same regimes.

But even were foreign influence a factor in their demise, it is no excuse, as one measure of a Society is how stable it is in the face of external pressures and influences.

In each case it was forced on an unwilling population by brutal totalitarian regimes.

What does that tell you about the ideology? We are of course talking about an ideology predicated upon the idea of proletarian revolution - where one group in Society imposes its will on every other. It’s very difficult to get away from the fact that Communism is - by definition - not terribly concerned in whether a population is willing or not.

Besides how many times has it been attempted, not enough to PROVE anything, even if there were not the problems mentioned above.

Had it been a half dozen times in a short time span, I’d agree, but there have been 43 attempts, of which only 5 survive (barely), and of which, one - China - is arguably no longer Communist.

The problem I see in the ideology is that it hasn’t really evolved all that much. It’s gone down a few roads (dead ends mainly), such as Maoism, Stalinism and Juchism, but it’s not questioned many of its fundamentals, even when many have long been discredited (e.g. Marx’s Labour theory of value).

No one is denying that the basic egalitarian ideals of Socialism are laudable or to be admired (the same can be argued with Fascism), but it really is time to give up the ghost and go back to the drawing board on the rest of it.

You haven't explained or examined your position yet.

I have on this topic.

All you have said is; This ideology is conitnuously failing, its just not a good ideology. How can you say that in many years circumstances could change enough for a communist style society to work.

Sure it could, but its not bloody likely.