Who here is a communist?

Fredsnephew

@AmericanFurryBoy ;

How would you define a communist?


I would suggest that the ideals of communism are quite sound.

The trouble is. Human nature doesn't allow communist principles to function in reality.

Human beings are naturally hierarchical and selfish.


I would also suggest that for exactly the same reasons, democratic theory falls down in same way as communism.


What we rely on in Western Style Democracies, is not the principles of a conceptual system, but simply the better qualities of human nature.

That is to say,  we do not maintain social order through fear of the State. We maintain social order through a collective and passive acceptance of a fair legislative system.

Ampersand

I'm a Communist because it aims to reach a democratic egalitarian ideal that I think is lacking in Capitalism with massive amounts of death and poverty caused by the systematic problems inherent in a capitalist system.

I'm aware previous examples of socialism in action ended horribly, but then that's not what I'm trying to replicate and I view those as issues of backwards nations with no institutional history of democracy trying to industrialise and adapt to a modern world - nations that went Capitalist in the same scenario ended up in pretty similar situations so I don't hold that it has much to do with their economic orthodoxy.

MayCaesar

While communists like to say that "humans are not smart enough for communism to succeed", I have always seen it as the opposite: humans are too smart for communism to succeed. Communism, as formulated originally by Marx, aims to eliminate the concept of ownage. Not only ownage of private property; it goes much further and advocates, for example, for elimination of family, dictating that the children are raised by the society as a whole.

It is hard to imagine an individual that would voluntarily give up all of his/her possessions and even the most basic rights to the state "for the greater good", hence the need for the communist regimes to employ violence to subdue those who refuse to surrender to the totalitarian ideology. Common people who advocate for communism so eagerly in pre-communist countries, arguing for the good of the society, tend to regret their mistake when they come to the realization that their goods and rights are going to be taken away just as well as those of the rich they so desperately wanted to bring down.

I met quite a few communists, having lived in various post-USSR countries, and they usually did not seem to realize that communism affects everyone, not just the rich and the greedy. Hence, my conclusion is that people like communism because they think that the responsibilities that come with the communism do not apply to them; were they to learn otherwise (and they do learn the hard way in some states), the support of communism would be nearly non-existent.

George_Horse

Just look for them. 

Ampersand

MayCaesar said:

While communists like to say that "humans are not smart enough for communism to succeed", I have always seen it as the opposite: humans are too smart for communism to succeed. Communism, as formulated originally by Marx, aims to eliminate the concept of ownage. Not only ownage of private property; it goes much further and advocates, for example, for elimination of family, dictating that the children are raised by the society as a whole.

It is hard to imagine an individual that would voluntarily give up all of his/her possessions and even the most basic rights to the state "for the greater good", hence the need for the communist regimes to employ violence to subdue those who refuse to surrender to the totalitarian ideology. Common people who advocate for communism so eagerly in pre-communist countries, arguing for the good of the society, tend to regret their mistake when they come to the realization that their goods and rights are going to be taken away just as well as those of the rich they so desperately wanted to bring down.

I met quite a few communists, having lived in various post-USSR countries, and they usually did not seem to realize that communism affects everyone, not just the rich and the greedy. Hence, my conclusion is that people like communism because they think that the responsibilities that come with the communism do not apply to them; were they to learn otherwise (and they do learn the hard way in some states), the support of communism would be nearly non-existent.

Nope, that's incorrect on pretty much every level. It takes away the concept of private ownership of the means of production.

That doesn't mean people can't have a family or raise children normally. Now that's not to say people can't ALSO have radical ideas about how to raise children ala the Kibbutz of Israel, but they can also just raise them normally and Communism is neutral on the subject.

It also doesn't mean you have to give up your own possessions, unless somehow your only possessions is a factory and you own literally nothing else. There would be arguments for some more widespread reappropriation of wealth: for instance famous paints that were owned by Capitalists in their private collections could be taken and put in museums but again it's not central to the system. 

If you disagree, feel free to quote the relevant sections of Marx's work where he makes these claims that you believe in.

Zombieguy1987

Communism.

Sounds great on paper

Can work for say a small village

But on a country?

Cuba, North Korea, Vietnam, U.S.S.R and Laos for example, are terrible places to live in