On Communism!!!!!

Chi chi

Honestly, I feel lost in what is true and justified!!!!

I used to firmly believe in something so enthusiastically that you guys possibly can't imagine. Each time I took belief in something, I later would find that as wrong.

So now I'm much calm and peaceful dealing with things I would take as true. After the period of being resistant to what was told to me, I have come into the status of being cofused for now.

Various voices are here, there, everywhere.... Nobody's gonna teach me about the right or wrong. Even the most obviously rediculously untrue voices are spreading too.... I want to seek for the truth. When there was conversation with me and people around me on this theme, I never knew what they considered because I could feel they only told me things they assumed I would like to listen to (and the assumption was wrong), rather than the true opinions. And was that under the excuse of respecting my assumptive religion?



In our education, communism describes a very promising world. In that world, anybody is purely kind hearted, selflessness, and ready to sacrifice for the higher good when needed. We've been taught to be prepared to sacrifice ourselves for the higher good and never be selfish or evil. Under such a condition or premise, resources can be distributed according to needs. Because nobody's gonna be corrupted by personal desires or lust so that resources can be distributed reasonably.

It is something like, I don't charge my parents for reparing the computer for them and they never keep a debt as how much of the accumulation they spend for me even after I was eighteen. And when I begin to make money, my properties would be theirs too without a doubt.

Conficious taught us that we ought to help every single person into benevolence. We are also taught that "our deeds should always square with our words".

Then the problem begins. I abandoned my old belief and there used to be a period when I was even angry. The master's course here only teaches me about science and technology regarding my major. The ocean of publications and the internet are filled with so many so different voices, some of which are apparently not the truth and still allowed despite being well awared by the public.

I need a religion, a value system, after the old one was gone.... So what is truth and justice and morality? Yes, I am even suspecting about morality, because so many things happened that surprised me and I felt I had to reconsider what exactly happened!

meathstevie

If your looking for a moral or ethical code to live by I found that this simple one works most if not all the time : treat others like you want to be treated yourself. On a higher level a sense of fairness goes a long way and in my opinion western european democracy goes a long way towards it.

Ostrom

Chi chi wrote: »

In our education, communism describes a very promising world. In that world, anybody is purely kind hearted, selflessness, and ready to sacrifice for the higher good when needed. Because nobody's gonna be corrupted by personal desires or lust so that resources can be distributed reasonably

Historical evidence suggests otherwise

Joey the lips

If you type the words "Communism" into the search it was done in so much detail I had to unsubscribe from the thread. Just to help.

meathstevie

meathstevie wrote: »

If your looking for a moral or ethical code to live by I found that this simple one works most if not all the time : treat others like you want to be treated yourself. On a higher level a sense of fairness goes a long way and in my opinion western european democracy goes a long way towards it.

Yes...Thats a moral code to live by..I would disagree with the second part of your statement...modern western european democracy has been living the high life on the back of what they've done to the third world for the last 100 years..Taking their natural resources, ruining their internal markets with extra produce produced by their subsidised farmers etc..

Communism has only ever existed in the face of western Capitalism..It never got a good run I think...And when people in the soviet states and the like saw that their life could be better with big macs and the like on the other side of the wall, well, the modern human is pretty much a selfish animal..(Although, again, moreso in the western world where with the rise of identity politics and the advertising industry etc, It has been somewhat manipulated into a more pronounced state of this..)

DoireNod

Chi chi wrote: »

I used to firmly believe in something so enthusiastically that you guys possibly can't imagine. Each time I took belief in something, I later would find that as wrong.

Disillusionment is never cool.

In our education, communism describes a very promising world. In that world, anybody is purely kind hearted, selflessness, and ready to sacrifice for the higher good when needed. We've been taught to be prepared to sacrifice ourselves for the higher good and never be selfish or evil. Under such a condition or premise, resources can be distributed according to needs. Because nobody's gonna be corrupted by personal desires or lust so that resources can be distributed reasonably.

That's the ideal I suppose. Even Anarchy is an attractive ideology, but people ruin it.

It is something like, I don't charge my parents for reparing the computer for them and they never keep a debt as how much of the accumulation they spend for me even after I was eighteen. And when I begin to make money, my properties would be theirs too without a doubt

.
The concept of 'family' is the closest to tribal existence, where each person more or less looks out for the other and there is a head of the tribe, or matriarch or patriarch of the family. It's a simple concept which is easy to follow, but even family values are being lost in this society.

efla wrote: »

Historical evidence suggests otherwise

Are you speaking of examples such as Soviet Russia etc.? That's not communism. That's a bastardisation of it.

Ostrom

DoireNod wrote: »

Are you speaking of examples such as Soviet Russia etc.? That's not communism. That's a bastardisation of it.

Where is/was the 'real' communism?

DoireNod

efla wrote: »

Where is/was the 'real' communism?

There is no 'real' communism in practice. It's a basic concept of government. It is also hard to say whether Marxism has ever existed in practice or if it's just a concept. Perhaps the communism that you speak of as something more akin to Stalinism(something which is a bastardisation of Marxism/communism)?

turgon

efla wrote: »

Where is/was the 'real' communism?

It has never happened, despite many, many attempts. And despite these many, many attempts, which all failed, we will no doubt be soon told that the new communists will make it work. Somehow. They wont actually tell you how. You just got to trust them is all.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

ChocolateSauce

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Try simply never reading the paper. I've never read any of those (bar Orwell 1984) and I made the transition from being a commie 14 year-old to my current economically moderate-liberal in just 4 years, and I have the news to thank for it mainly. Seeing the world unfold was enough to make me understand how things should be, or at least how they shouldn't be.

Ostrom

DoireNod wrote: »

There is no 'real' communism in practice. It's a basic concept of government. It is also hard to say whether Marxism has ever existed in practice or if it's just a concept. Perhaps the communism that you speak of as something more akin to Stalinism(something which is a bastardisation of Marxism/communism)?

Marx never outlined what communism would look like in practice.

Enduro

efla wrote: »

Where is/was the 'real' communism?

Historically, I reckon the khmer Rouge came closest to doing what was necessary to implement communism at its purest. The North Koreans seem to be getting quite close to it as well. Most of them apparently live fairly equal lives, and what food is available is apparently distributed quite fairly (once the ruling elite and the military have been looked after, obviously, as nobody has managed to get near any kind of pure communist implementaton without those).

elpresdentde

iv spent a lot of time studying communism when i was young was a convinced Marxism by 15. it mainly appealed to side of me which like to boss people around but marx or any of the societies which implemented communism it never mastered convincing people to work hard for the greater good except at gunpoint. iv come to the conclusion that it could only ever work in a situation were all the work or at least all the dirty dangerous hard work could be done by robots or genetically modified serfs.(sound like feudal system right) it might happen in situations like large spaceships where the survival of the group is depended on everyone working together.

elpresdentde

Enduro wrote: »

Historically, I reckon the khmer Rouge came closest to doing what was necessary to implement communism at its purest. The North Koreans seem to be getting quite close to it as well. Most of them apparently live fairly equal lives, and what food is available is apparently distributed quite fairly (once the ruling elite and the military have been looked after, obviously, as nobody has managed to get near any kind of pure communist implementaton without those).

the khmer Rouge also killed 2million out of a population of 8 million and were invaded and destroyed by other communists (Vietnam) disgusted by their antics

ChocolateSauce

elpresdentde wrote: »

iv come to the conclusion that it could only ever work in a situation were all the work or at least all the dirty dangerous hard work could be done by robots or genetically modified serfs.(sound like feudal system right)

No, it sounds like a sci-fi writer was drinking on the job.

peasant

The secret to communism is in the name itself ...it only works in communes, i.e. in groupings of likeminded people that share a common goal.
The bigger the group, the less common the goal becomes.

elpresdentde

ChocolateSauce wrote: »

No, it sounds like a sci-fi writer was drinking on the job.

maybe but if you have a better idea of how a communist society could function without force or the threat of force i would like to hear it

OldJay

efla wrote: »

Marx never outlined what communism would look like in practice.

Ask any Eastern Bloc citizen over the age of 25 how Communism was in their own countries if you want a look at how it is in practice.

Chi chi

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn's commencement address at Harvard
surprisingly shows much unsatisfaction with captilism and
democracy too despite his winning nobel prize for his
indictment of Stalin's ruling.... I guess it's because he focuses more
on virtues, on human natures regarding good and justice.
It means, possibly what he wanted to see was that people
didn't commit crimes or immoral offences due to internal kindness rather
than restricions of laws or morality. Yes, morality is what
people can take advantage of just as the law. Here moral victory means
perhaps tricky ways to get support from public voices through immoral
means (compassion from the public for themselves, criticism from the public
for their opponents e.g.).
And human natures don't confirm always to his such expectations -- when
entrepreneurs are focusing on profits rather than benevolence, when people
are seeking protections from laws and moralities sometimes with tricky ways
rather than learn to be just from that (e.g. When the press is held unaccountable
in the name of journalistic freedom). I believe some Stoic with self conscience
can be absolutely free from desires, selfishness and evil. But not all people
are like that.

"Power corrupts. Absolute power corrupts absolutely." might need to be rephrased
as "Selfishness with no external restrictions corrupts."
And in George Orwell's 1984 world, this "big brother" certainly corrupts, yet his
people are flooded with songs of praises for him. In this world "Thoughtcrime does not entail
death: thoughtcrime is death." In his Animal Farm, the animals firstly suffered from colony
ruling like invasions, and then suffered from the internal corruption and competition.
The seven commandments of their world turned out to be irony for the adherents as "good citizens".
The only constant for the animals is enduring pain.

Our textbook says in social evolution, we need to go through tribalism, slavery, feudalism, captalism,
socialism, and finnally communism! The economic foundation determines the social form we take. It says
each form is a step forward, more advanced than the previous one. In communism, there is enough resource
for anyone in this world. People just work willingly and get allocated with resources according to needs.
The work people do wouldn't be for the purpose of getting resources no more.
Perhaps, when people have changes, after which, nobody is selfish any more, every one sees each other as
in one family. In this way, power doesn't corrupt no more because there is no selfishness any more. Nobody has
desires for private property any more. Isn't that pure kindess with no evil? Doesn't that sound fantastic?
Then the redemption would come and Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn wouldn't criticize no more. Is it possible that
human nature evolves as purified one day? I like the commandment in Animal Farm as "All animals are equal." without
the supplement that "But some animals are more equal than others." Maybe it is not a proper time for communism
regarding the current circumstance. And if human nature ever evolves to that purified manner and resources are
exceeding our needs, communism would arrive.

Or should I accept the eternal weakness of human nature, and understand Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn's indictment for
both Stalin's ruling and captalism.

Chi chi

“Do unto others what you would have them do unto you.” seems to conflict with what I believed as my priciples. I thought maybe when I do someone a favour, it should be purely help. If I consider something for return, it is not pure help any more. It is trading....

Also, people and I have different values towards priorities in life. e.g. Just that I feel suicidal doesn't mean I can ignore the values of lives for other people and take it reasonable to hurt them. Also, as a female, we are taught to sacrifice for the family regardless of conditions.

I am not afraid to be useful and am happy for that. But I am afraid to be used.

Maybe I need to change....

---

Communism never was in practice yet. Soviet Union and China were in Socialism. China is currently in the officially called "Socialism with Chinese Characteristics". In this theory of evolution, Communism would be the ideal goal after Socialism.

---

Some say that Patriotism is the ruler class's tool for getting people's attention from the domestic problems to the hatred of foreign western countries. Actually the inequity in the tradings between invisible technology and natural resources really exist rather than made up. Not all things legal are moral. "All animals are equal. But some animals are more equal than others."

Ostrom

Justind wrote: »

Ask any Eastern Bloc citizen over the age of 25 how Communism was in their own countries if you want a look at how it is in practice.

I'm well aware.

However, a typical defense of 'communism' (as mentioned above) explains away incompatibilites by way of reference to an original 'true' form of communism. It performs the dual function of explaining away past failings as mis-interpretations, and also placing some blame on the reader. By experience, Marx tends to be the magic bearer of the elusive communist roadmap. It's even more useful to resort to an intrinsic Marx, as post-capital theorists of civil society or state (Gramsci or Stalin for example) can be removed from the equation - cleansing Marx and ignoring the fact that these ideas emerged in response to social change.

Dannyboy83

Enduro wrote: »

The North Koreans seem to be getting quite close to it as well. Most of them apparently live fairly equal lives, and what food is available is apparently distributed quite fairly

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=1875007335054132657&hl=en

Enduro

elpresdentde wrote: »

the khmer Rouge also killed 2million out of a population of 8 million and were invaded and destroyed by other communists (Vietnam) disgusted by their antics

Errrmm.... exactly. As I said, they did what was necessary. Its those pesky humans with their free will, emotions, family bonds, and desires that get in the way of implementing a pure form of communism. The Khmer rouge took the necessary decisions to try and fix this slight problem that occasionaly turns up if you try and implement a pure form of communism by eliminating the problematic humans and their pesky traits.

Also, I don't think that's why the vietnamese invaded. I think it may have been slightly more to do with the raids that the khmer rouge conducted into Vietnamese territory, rather than some inter-communist ideological disagreement.

Enduro

Dannyboy83 wrote: »

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=1875007335054132657&hl=en

Just judging from the first few stats in the first minute or so of the video, it sounds like the starvation is very widely spread throughout the country. The vast majority of the people appear to have similar access to the (un)available resources. Surely thats a more pure form of communism than in countries like china where starvation is confined to a much much smaller proportion of the population. The north Koreans are at least ensuring that there is an equality of famine. Marx would be proud I'm sure.

DoireNod

efla wrote: »

I'm well aware.

However, a typical defense of 'communism' (as mentioned above) explains away incompatibilites by way of reference to an original 'true' form of communism. It performs the dual function of explaining away past failings as mis-interpretations, and also placing some blame on the reader. By experience, Marx tends to be the magic bearer of the elusive communist roadmap. It's even more useful to resort to an intrinsic Marx, as post-capital theorists of civil society or state (Gramsci or Stalin for example) can be removed from the equation - cleansing Marx and ignoring the fact that these ideas emerged in response to social change.

I wasn't 'defending' communism. History has proved that people can't implement communism on a national (or even global) scale, not that communism doesn't work. Perhaps it does work in a commune or in smaller groups - I don't know. I also never suggested that Marx was the 'magic bearer of the elusive communist roadmap'. What I did do however, was ask if the historical reference to what you believe is communism 'not working', was actually the likes of Stalinism and other such perversions of the concept.

DoireNod wrote: »

There is no 'real' communism in practice. It's a basic concept of government. It is also hard to say whether Marxism has ever existed in practice or if it's just a concept. Perhaps the communism that you speak of as something more akin to Stalinism(something which is a bastardisation of Marxism/communism)?

Dannyboy83

Enduro wrote: »

Just judging from the first few stats in the first minute or so of the video, it sounds like the starvation is very widely spread throughout the country. The vast majority of the people appear to have similar access to the (un)available resources. Surely thats a more pure form of communism than in countries like china where starvation is confined to a much much smaller proportion of the population. The north Koreans are at least ensuring that there is an equality of famine. Marx would be proud I'm sure.

I understand its time consuming so you wouldn't have time to watch the video mate, but the people did not have equal access to the resources at all it would seem.

Many hundreds of thousands of orphans, children whose parents had starved to death, had no access to food at all.

Later in the video, it goes on to explain that people were being murdered and their bodies were being sold as pork. Suddenly in a total absence of food, large quantities of pork start appearing from nowhere.
It also shows children escaping to South Korea and coming back to bring food/money to their parents in the North.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-3742145385913859804
This video shows tourists given full meals at hotels in Pyongyang, while most of the rest of the country is in starvation.
It also explains that the beautiful children are picked to perfom in the palaces and the ugly children are left to rot in the countryside.

There is another documentary on the internet about Joe Dresnok (sorry I don't have the link) and the other 3 soldiers who defected to North Korea in the 50s. He says that he was given special treatment over the Asians.

Anyway, North Korea is more of a Theocracy or Mortocracy considering their incumbent leader has been deceased for 2 decades.
Communism never seems to stick to its ideological path, it always gets perverted.
Communism seems like a good idea, but it never seems to work in reality tho.
Even Cuba, which arguably is the best example, is an economic disaster.

Perhaps we will have to wait until we are ruled by Vulcans or robot overlords before it is correctly implemented.
I think its fundamentally broken tho.

elpresdentde

Enduro wrote: »

Errrmm.... exactly. As I said, they did what was necessary. Its those pesky humans with their free will, emotions, family bonds, and desires that get in the way of implementing a pure form of communism. The Khmer rouge took the necessary decisions to try and fix this slight problem that occasionaly turns up if you try and implement a pure form of communism by eliminating the problematic humans and their pesky traits.

Also, I don't think that's why the vietnamese invaded. I think it may have been slightly more to do with the raids that the khmer rouge conducted into Vietnamese territory, rather than some inter-communist ideological disagreement.

your right of course on the reasons of the war. i wasn't sure of the exact reason that's why i used a catchall phrase like antics anyway here is the wikki article
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cambodian%E2%80%93Vietnamese_War

Ostrom

Chi chi wrote: »

I used to firmly believe in something so enthusiastically that you guys possibly can't imagine. Each time I took belief in something, I later would find that as wrong.

In our education, communism describes a very promising world. In that world, anybody is purely kind hearted, selflessness, and ready to sacrifice for the higher good when needed. We've been taught to be prepared to sacrifice ourselves for the higher good and never be selfish or evil.

Where are you from, and how was this taught to you?

Enduro

Dannyboy, thanks for all that info. When I have more time I'm going to watch those videos.

The point I was trying to make is that the NK regime has done a more successful job of implementing communism than most as almost the entire nation is impovorished, which is as good as you're going to get if you try to implement equality with human beings. But I didn't realise that there were such distinctive layers to the impoverishment. Oh well. I guess the Khmer Rouge were much closer to pure communism then.

(In case you haven't already guessed, I'm no fan of communism, the NK regime, or the KR regime... quite the opposite).

Chi chi

efla wrote: »

Where are you from, and how was this taught to you?

I'm from China, currently a student here in Ireland (23 yrs old).