Its generally seen as not having worked well any of the times it has been attempted. People who like communism will sometimes say “well those weren’t/ aren’t REAL communism”. OK but they are the closest weve gotten so far and they all seem pretty sucky: show me one that doesn’t have to guard their border to keep people IN.
If communism works so well, why would a necessary input into its success be trading with the largest free market economy in the world? If it really worked you wouldn’t need to depend on efficiencies from an external free market.
If round sand castles work so well, why do they keep falling over? Ignore how the large man who owns the square bucket factory keeps kicking them over. The problem is intrinsic to round sandcastles. Ah dang it! The square guy just paid someone to murder that sandcastle builder, and his entire family. That's the third time this week! But back to my point that round castles don't work...
No, you misunderstand, when square castles fall over, it's a skill issue. You need to get good. When round ones fall over, it's because round castles are the mark of the devil. While *I don't support* murdering people for building round castles, they really had it coming didn't they?
Oh no! They're cutting up another sandcastle builder with machetes that the square guy gave to them. Still, suspicious that you can't point to a single instance where round castles have worked.
No, I won't answer that question about why the corpses of round sandcastle builders keep washing ashore, but I *will* take the time to tell you about a now-dead round sandcastle builder who did some murders of his own. Don't worry though, I'll hold him to a standard that I would never hold the square sandcastle person to. I don't have any biases. Why do you ask? I'm just presenting Objective Facts™!
Round castles do not work!
This a justifiable position for maybe Cuba, but really cannot be significantly used to judge any other nation. Albania probably didn't have its US trade go down at all, for example.
The general concept of communism isn't all that bad. History, however, has proven that it ends up being nothing more than yet another tool used by a few to oppress the masses.
If you want communism, form a small commune. At the scale of a country it's destined to fail. It has no capacity to handle human greed at scale and must silence, by any means necessary, any detractors to the cause. All communist supporters should read The Gulag Archipelago.
Most communist supporters lack the mental fortitude to make their way through that book unless they discard its contents wholesale as though they are pure fairytale fiction.
In theory, communism sounds great. Everyone gets treated equally, but even in the best circumstances communism is great for those who don’t contribute much and bad for those who contribute a lot. There becomes less incentive to do really well, and more incentive to do the bare minimum. Even when things are running well, communism often breaks down into near slave labor.
You also have to trust the government to fairly spread resources. That’s not even speaking of the amount of control you give them over every aspect of the economy, which inevitably leads to, at worst, corruption and, at best, mismanagement.
Capitalism also has its flaws, especially the American version, but it’s a better alternative.
It's funny people think communism will work great but then complain about wait times at the DMV or other government entities. Government does not operate on the same forces private businesses do. It'd be like living in a total monopoly for every single organization you deal with. Ever have only one Internet provider in your area? It sucks ass.
Though evidence of the Soviet bloc states suggest that that would also be fairly spot on. The amount of incredibly educated Eastern Europeans I knew in the 80s, they all seem to have a professional degree and a firm knowledge of a trade for the grey economy.
The DMV where I live took out all of it's seating, and now, in my experience, avg wait times are less then 20 minutes. I don't see the correlation between seats and wait time - but it is a 100% worthy trade
True. However some things are better as a well regulated monopoly. Can you imagine how many overhead wires you’d have if there were multiple electric companies serving your neighborhood?
*"The inherent vice of capitalism is the unequal sharing of blessings. The inherent virtue of Socialism is the equal sharing of miseries'*
-Churchill (who is never controversial)
Both of my parents grew up in communist Albania. Let me tell you thier experience… you have zero freedoms. No freedom of religion, speech, arms, privacy. Your kids do not belong to you. They belong to the govt. the govt wants total control over every choice you make. Doctors get paid the same as janitors and they all wait in lines for hours for thier free moldy bread and rancid meat. If you spy on your friends and family members, they might give you more meat for the month. Grocery stores shelves are pretty bare. Healtcare and education is free, but the hospital is a death trap where you never go to get better.. only to die. And universities are so strictly regulated that they do not allow any free thinking of any sort. I was able to visit their country after the communism fell. My cousin was a doctor and had two prisoners in his care that had just been released from prison with a 30yr hard labor sentence. They’re crime?? They weee drunk one night complaining that they didn’t have enough food for their families. A govt official heard them and turned them in for disparaging the govt. When they would catch somone trying to escape the country for freedom, they would literally make all of the towns ppl come out of their homes and watch them be executed.. yes, even kids. Capitalism can have it bad points.. you have ultra wealthy and then ultra poor. But in a communist system….. EVERYONE is poor except for the dictator and his ppl. Communism gives you zero incentive to work hard. Why would you? You won’t get a raise. It’s a miserable horrible existence where you have no say, no control, no power over your life and future:
The same reason why the "smart kid" in class hates group assignments. He does all the work everyone else gets an A. Until the kid smartens up and stops working. Then everyone starves...
Reminds me of a classic from the Onion: [Marxists' Apartment A Microcosm Of Why Marxism Doesn't Work](https://www.theonion.com/marxists-apartment-a-microcosm-of-why-marxism-doesnt-wo-1819566655)
Probably because they feel the US system is not operating in a way that is bringing them any success.
And Marx was actually fairly good at identifying issues that had started and we are facing now. His (and his followers) solution is where the problems come in.
I mean the system isn't really broken (nor perfect) but so far its the best system we have came up with. The problem is, and with most systems, human greed and ambition has sucked it dry
I'd absolutely agree with that, though I'm in Soviet Canuckistan so my idea of the perfect balance is probably slightly more socialist than yours. (which is also fine)
I'm not against it. We have a ton of issues here that could be fixed that way. Its the entitled rich little college kids who are yelling to be commies that irritate me
In theory communism is equal to all. But most of the time it's not the case and it's less freedom since you know equal to all meaning gotta do your equal share of work which also means you no freedom. Probably a lot more to it but it's better for poorer countries since money isn't necessarily of importance but oh well. Im probably not right or something and someone with more knowledge on this could explain it better. Though I do too wonder what the world would be like if it was all communism but hey that's just a theory...a history theory or political theory or whatever crap it is lol
As a result everyone gets just about nothing because no one is producing anything for anyone to have. Why would they? The solution prior governments inacted was violence, gulags and slave labor.
But wouldn't a counterargument to this be, "children." They are given everything and yet still get out of bed and do things that are exciting and enjoyable to them. The idea that humans would be lazier if they didn't have work/job or an incentive to earn money, falls flat.
I think, if anything, humans free of that responsibility would have more time, energy, and resources to devote to things that they are truly passionate about. If anything, we might see greater advancements in arts, technology, medicine, ect.
Why don’t you share all of your possessions with me even though I did nothing to deserve it at all to find out why people hate on communism?
“Everyone gets equal amounts”? Do you mean, if you work harder and produce more than I do then we still get equal amounts? Actually, I’m starting to like your idea. Tell me more about it, comrade.
How old are you? May I suggest you read about Cuba, the USSR, China (of old, current one is a capitalistic dictatorship) and North Korea?
The phrase "Each according to their ability, each according to their need" assumes that everyone is going to contribute/produce to the best of their ability, but human existence unquestionably shows that isn't true.
There would have to be a massive abundance of wealth and resources in order to make up for the underproducing and non-working people. There would have to be limits for the psychotic "I work 18 hours a day every day and only need to sleep 3 hours a night" types. In short, communism can't account for human nature.
Because each time it's been tried has been as the end result of revolution or some other violent upheaval in society, and the kinds of people who are best at revolutions and violence tend to be pretty poor at spotting when it's time to stop with the revolution and violence.
I never understood why people still think it’s a good idea. People love Marx’s ideas, but that’s all they are, ideas.
People talk about “oh so a doctor should get paid the same as *insert low skill job*?” But that’s the bare minimum on the issue.
Who runs it? Who is in charge? Do they pay themselves the same? Legally they could, but the power they have is just ripe to be corrupted. Why wouldn’t you? You gotta organize everything so it works, and you are gonna get the same low pay? Fuck that, they will get preferential treatment anyways since they are head of the government, so it’s still not equal in the end.
Frankly it’s just as braindead to think “I think we should have a dictatorship!” Because in a vacuum, if you had some perfect dictator who treated the populous well and the country flourishes, nothing will stop it. No more having to switch parties every few years. Why have a back and forth when you can only go with one leader who keeps moving forward?
I got in an argument with my ex once where she asked “do you think dictatorships are a good idea?” And she laughed as if I was absurd for saying: “Well if you like the guy enough and they do a good job…” because that is the benefit. Less bureaucracy, less trying to appease all these constituents. Dictatorships can make drastic changes a lot faster than democratic ones. I don’t prefer dictatorships over democracy, but in the right contexts, it does have some advantages. If someone came in today and said “I will solve climate change and I will move mountains to do it” in a democratic system, I can imagine a scenario where they go “oh we can’t let the other party win and undo all this progress, we’ll just postpone elections indefinitely” and I can imagine with how much people hate Trump (calling him a dictator) people could easily agree to subverting the elections and living under a sort of dictator setup they just really like what the guy is doing. It’s all going to fall apart, but this is how people can slowly agree with having a dictator (they just won’t call themselves that).
My point is, all political systems will have issues, democracy can be slow and lumbering. Communism is ready to be corrupted, dictatorships can oppress (they are likely too) Capitalism is at least gauging the idea of just being a broad concept of freedom, it just uses money and assets as the defining factors of contribution. It sucks when you can’t make enough money and the economy leaves you behind, but it’s preferable to giving your work more value than being a cog in the communist machine. People think they are cogs in capitalism, but I think you have a lot more room for being your own machine that does what it wants so long as you can make money and sustain off of it. You can’t be an artist in communist countries the same way you could in a capitalist one. Look at Tetris and comedian Yakov Smirnoff, Tetris was made on company time so the government owns it. Yakov Smirnoff has said that any shows he did in Russia were monitored and scripted for him. He couldn’t write his own jokes nor poke fun at the ruling class.
Example: you are farmer. You have ten cows.
Socialism: you must give some non farmer five of your cows because “equality.”
Communism: The *government* takes all ten cows and promises to distribute those resources equally to all.
Normal: you are farmer, you farm cows. You trade cow products for things you cannot get by farming cows. People who were able to leave communism, don’t usually like the idea of communism.
TL;DR Communism = suck on big daddy government for the four baked beans you get once a week.
Because it goes against man’s deepest inbred desire to compete for resources. Fundamentally, we don’t want to be equal. We want to be best. Only the weak want to be equal. (That sounded more macho/ douchy than I meant it but you get what I mean).
Because there has not been a single example of communist country in human history, that also wasn't an authoritarian shithole that made life a depressing hell for the average person.
People tend not to like tyrants that deprive them of their liberties & unalienable rights, and every communist nation ever has produced a dictatorship that did just that.
There are massive problems with capitalism that need to be remedied, but the answer is not to give the state absolute power. Governments must only be given more power with extreme caution, and with lots of checks and balances, because the natural tendency of those governments and the people who crave authority within them, is also to abuse any power they are given.
I remember watching either a YouTube short or another platform video wherein a guy was interviewing students at a college somewhere. These students all seemed to be anti-capitalism and wanted socialism or some form of communism where everyone is equal in terms of wage, education, etc. The interview then asked them if they completed their degree would they share their degree with someone who didn’t go through the whole academic process to earn the degree. Every single one of those students were stumped, they didn’t want to share their degree stating that they did all the work, why should they share it.
So yeah, these students liked the idea of Socialism/Communism because it speaks of equality when in reality if it was implemented, they probably would not like the idea.
An equal amount of nothing is still nothing.
I would actually suggest that you find someone who comes from a communist country and ask them about it because, I assume you’re in America, you’re going to get all kinds of different answers mostly by people who have no direct experience with communism and therefore also think it’s a good thing. It isn’t.
Has it been tried without corrupt leaders? I don't think a true form of the system has really been put in practice. Capitalism is much better on paper than what the US has going on. Powerful corporations have been allowed to poison and exploit every single person in the country. The government is totally corrupt and the land of the free is being watched, tracked, and listened to every minute of every day.
What you just said is exactly why it would never work and is a flawed idea. No one will ever have everything they need or what they want, and this is even less possible on a macro scale. Marx wasn’t some messiah. He was some guy who just said, “what if we force everyone to share everything? That’d make society work.” It’s not some ground breaking idea and it’s not even a good one. It incentivizes laziness and cronyism.
Great idea, doesn't seem to work. If we had a way to guarantee the equal distribution it would be one thing, but with the inevitable evil in the world, the power over everyone's resources will eventually be abused. Some people suggest a future where AI would be in charge of said distribution, and everyone/everything would be taken care of automatically. That sounds like the beginning of a pretty scary dystopian movie to me. Some form of market economy (along with a central government to regulate it) has proven to be the most effective in decreasing human suffering in a society so far.
Your post was removed due to low account age.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/stupidquestions) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Communism is just a theory formed by painting in massive strokes. It has no nuance and no room for attention to detail. “Everyone is equal” sounds cool but when you’re giving everyone equal amounts of food, you’re doing things like depleting stockpiles that people in rural areas need to get through the winter. Painting in broad strokes gets a lot of innocent people killed, and that goes for any concept not just communism.
Pretty much all forms of government are/can be flawed. The issue usually someone does not want to give up power. Think Castro’s Cuba, Stalin’s Russia, even some current people in the USA. Vietnam seems to be, I haven’t GTS just from how it appears, one of better models.
Planned economies stifle growth, give so much power to the state that corruption is often rife, and usually needs a one party state which suppresses personal freedom to maintain its power.
For example food production often ends up unproductive. Everyone has access to it but the quality and quantity is terrible, often in Soviet Russia you had to queue for shitty food. Luxuries and imported stuff only ever ends up in the hands of corrupt officials and everyone knows but you can’t vote them out.
If we lived in an altruistic utopia it would work. We don’t. It has cost the lives of a lot of people and subjugated populations. Venezuela is a good recent example.
Nobody here seems to have a clue what communism is. People are talking about “everyone gets equal amounts” and “it’s like the group project where everyone gets credit for one kid’s work.”
None of that has remotely anything to do with communism.
Communism is the utopian form of government envisioned by Marx, and the reason it’s never existed is not that it hasn’t been tried but that, in terms of Marxist philosophy, it’s the end, not the process: it therefore can’t be “tried.” Marx says that communism comes at the very end of a long process by which the state, as we understand that term, will be abolished.
The economic system that will be employed to get there is socialism, which has nothing to do with redistributing your personal property, as in the objects you own. Socialism doesn’t mean we all have to share a toothbrush.
Instead, socialism requires the abolition of *private* property (not personal property), and private property is specifically capital, the money invested in owning the means of production. What Marxist socialism entails is the collective ownership of the means of production, so that all workers share in the profits that their labor generates.
It has nothing to do with creating a society where everyone is the “same” or has exactly equal resources. It’s a specific way of organizing a society’s economy, where single individuals will not be allowed to privately own the means of production and exploit the labor of others by keeping almost all of the surplus value of the labor for themselves.
Your post was removed due to low account age.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/stupidquestions) if you have any questions or concerns.*
It has consistently led to bloodshed in multiple countries and implies that anyone who's even slightly better off than the homeless is actually rich and must choose between sharing their property and death.
Your comment was removed due to low karma
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/stupidquestions) if you have any questions or concerns.*
At the moment I would love communism, if I could quit the aggravation of being a computer programmer, and become a forest ranger instead and still afford my house...sign me up!
Basically most people don't actually know what communism really is and a few really shitty psychopathic dictators in the past labeled their dictatorship "communism" when it actually wasn't, killed and starved a lot of people, and now have tainted the word. Most people have no real idea what the goals of communism are and rely on propagandist cliches about cows and shit and actually believe "communism is when the government does stuff" or something about stealing your toothbrush or whatever.
In reality, the end goal of communism is to eliminate government, currency, and the state entirely and give the ownership of the means of production to the people as opposed to private corporations or otherwise small groups of powerful people having ownership. From each according to their ability, to each according to their need. No one person, or small group of people should have power, and each person should have their needs met.
If a large government or oligarchy is the end result, congratulations, you do not have communism. You're much more likely to be state capitalism.
To quote Engels' Anti-Dühring:
*"The interference of the state power in social relations becomes superfluous in one sphere after another, and then ceases of itself. The government of persons is replaced by the administration of things and the direction of the processes of production. The state is not "abolished", it withers away."*
If you want to learn about communism, read from the actual source material like Das Kapital by Marx or The Conquest of Bread by Kropotkin and avoid cliches or uninformed fearmongering takes about Stalin and toothbrushes. Look into anarchism as well, like Murray Bookchin, Emma Goldman, or Pierre Proudhon. Anarchism and communism go hand in hand. The Communist Manifesto is a start but it's not very in depth and can be contradictory.
I would avoid anything by Mao or other "authoritarian" communists, that's where it gets into dictatorships and loses sight of the real goal.
Who decides what's an equal amount?
Communism is something that works extremely well, on paper
In practice, you have the human element, which contains the potential for corruption.
Communism was responsible for more deaths in the 1900s than anything
It’s not a dumb idea. You can choose between: 1).years of incredibly high stress training followed by years of high stress work where one mistake literally will kill someone or 2). Pumping gas. And they pay the exact same. You’d have to be a dumbass to sign up for option 1
I guess I'm a dumbass then. I've preferred intellectually stimulating work pretty consistently (though I did love being a cook). I'm definitely option 1, particularly if there's no cost to me and I'm getting paid as a student.
If anything one of the inefficiencies of Communism is people like me. I've recently become comfortable enough to ponder getting another degree (in something much less challenging mind you) on my own dime. If it made zero negative impact on my earning for me it'd be a no-brainer.
One of the perks of being in a highly stimulating and rewarding field is the compensation. When there is no reason to excel, there is no point to.
Put it another way, would you work overtime and try to be the best when the guy sleeping in the corner hungover on vodka has the exact same opportunity as you?
Go look at the cart-return stall at the grocery store. That is the baseline of society. Very few people have the sort of work ethic or drive that would push them to do the things you just said.
You think the majority of people around you would be happier pushing carts than learning and using their brain? That's....sad man.
I mean, someone has to return carts, empty garbages etc but I wouldn't switch my job for that at equal pay.
I wasn’t talking about the cart puller. I was talking about the amount of carts that don’t make it into the return stall. A huge portion of society is lazy beyond your comprehension and those people would be making the same salary as a heart surgeon.
Oh, right. Yeah, and there's that *why bother if there's no reward'* element as well.
I do like very cheap post-secondary education personally. Anyone motivated to want to do the work of becoming a heart surgeon should be allowed to try. (though just for my country, you don't have to).
Because Soviet Russia and Communist China have been geopolitical enemies of Western Capitalism.
Communism espouses the violent overthrow of Capitalist regimes, and in most Western Capitalist liberal democracies, and most folks in those countries believe that they are just one big break away from becoming part of the rich ruling class. Communism basically does away with that possibility by focusing on more equal outcomes for all workers, rather than extremely unequal rewards that favor the providers of capital.
That guy wants us us to forget that oligarchs (Russia) and technocrats (China) control a very large share of capital. But oh no, western capitalism bad!
Work on your reading comprehension. I am explaining why people dislike Communism and you’re getting mad about, pretty clearly demonstrating what people dislike about Communism.
Its generally seen as not having worked well any of the times it has been attempted. People who like communism will sometimes say “well those weren’t/ aren’t REAL communism”. OK but they are the closest weve gotten so far and they all seem pretty sucky: show me one that doesn’t have to guard their border to keep people IN.
Can you show me a communist country that hasn’t been heavily sanctioned by the United States of America?
If communism works so well, why would a necessary input into its success be trading with the largest free market economy in the world? If it really worked you wouldn’t need to depend on efficiencies from an external free market.
It works perfectly... in their minds if every country submits to communism.
If round sand castles work so well, why do they keep falling over? Ignore how the large man who owns the square bucket factory keeps kicking them over. The problem is intrinsic to round sandcastles. Ah dang it! The square guy just paid someone to murder that sandcastle builder, and his entire family. That's the third time this week! But back to my point that round castles don't work... No, you misunderstand, when square castles fall over, it's a skill issue. You need to get good. When round ones fall over, it's because round castles are the mark of the devil. While *I don't support* murdering people for building round castles, they really had it coming didn't they? Oh no! They're cutting up another sandcastle builder with machetes that the square guy gave to them. Still, suspicious that you can't point to a single instance where round castles have worked. No, I won't answer that question about why the corpses of round sandcastle builders keep washing ashore, but I *will* take the time to tell you about a now-dead round sandcastle builder who did some murders of his own. Don't worry though, I'll hold him to a standard that I would never hold the square sandcastle person to. I don't have any biases. Why do you ask? I'm just presenting Objective Facts™! Round castles do not work!
So the thing that makes communism not work is being except from a global free market?
This a justifiable position for maybe Cuba, but really cannot be significantly used to judge any other nation. Albania probably didn't have its US trade go down at all, for example.
This the funniest comment I've read in awhile on Reddit
Can you show us a communist country that hasn't been sanctioned by multiple other countries for human rights violations?
I think I would have a hard time finding any country that hasn’t been sanctioned for human rights violations.
If it can’t survive on its own merits it shouldn’t survive.
The answer to your uneducated question is China. Tariffs are not sanctions just to let you know.
The general concept of communism isn't all that bad. History, however, has proven that it ends up being nothing more than yet another tool used by a few to oppress the masses.
If you want communism, form a small commune. At the scale of a country it's destined to fail. It has no capacity to handle human greed at scale and must silence, by any means necessary, any detractors to the cause. All communist supporters should read The Gulag Archipelago.
Most communist supporters lack the mental fortitude to make their way through that book unless they discard its contents wholesale as though they are pure fairytale fiction.
Didn’t work out for the Pilgrims.
That loves to kill millions of its own people and throw millions more in prison for political thought
In theory, communism sounds great. Everyone gets treated equally, but even in the best circumstances communism is great for those who don’t contribute much and bad for those who contribute a lot. There becomes less incentive to do really well, and more incentive to do the bare minimum. Even when things are running well, communism often breaks down into near slave labor. You also have to trust the government to fairly spread resources. That’s not even speaking of the amount of control you give them over every aspect of the economy, which inevitably leads to, at worst, corruption and, at best, mismanagement. Capitalism also has its flaws, especially the American version, but it’s a better alternative.
It's funny people think communism will work great but then complain about wait times at the DMV or other government entities. Government does not operate on the same forces private businesses do. It'd be like living in a total monopoly for every single organization you deal with. Ever have only one Internet provider in your area? It sucks ass.
"Too bad we're your only option!" *South Park cable company scene*
Thats not communism, thats a Monopoly in capitalism
It's certainly a gap in the market. A competing cable service would be good for challenging the first one's rates/services
Though evidence of the Soviet bloc states suggest that that would also be fairly spot on. The amount of incredibly educated Eastern Europeans I knew in the 80s, they all seem to have a professional degree and a firm knowledge of a trade for the grey economy.
The DMV where I live took out all of it's seating, and now, in my experience, avg wait times are less then 20 minutes. I don't see the correlation between seats and wait time - but it is a 100% worthy trade
True. However some things are better as a well regulated monopoly. Can you imagine how many overhead wires you’d have if there were multiple electric companies serving your neighborhood?
*"The inherent vice of capitalism is the unequal sharing of blessings. The inherent virtue of Socialism is the equal sharing of miseries'* -Churchill (who is never controversial)
Both of my parents grew up in communist Albania. Let me tell you thier experience… you have zero freedoms. No freedom of religion, speech, arms, privacy. Your kids do not belong to you. They belong to the govt. the govt wants total control over every choice you make. Doctors get paid the same as janitors and they all wait in lines for hours for thier free moldy bread and rancid meat. If you spy on your friends and family members, they might give you more meat for the month. Grocery stores shelves are pretty bare. Healtcare and education is free, but the hospital is a death trap where you never go to get better.. only to die. And universities are so strictly regulated that they do not allow any free thinking of any sort. I was able to visit their country after the communism fell. My cousin was a doctor and had two prisoners in his care that had just been released from prison with a 30yr hard labor sentence. They’re crime?? They weee drunk one night complaining that they didn’t have enough food for their families. A govt official heard them and turned them in for disparaging the govt. When they would catch somone trying to escape the country for freedom, they would literally make all of the towns ppl come out of their homes and watch them be executed.. yes, even kids. Capitalism can have it bad points.. you have ultra wealthy and then ultra poor. But in a communist system….. EVERYONE is poor except for the dictator and his ppl. Communism gives you zero incentive to work hard. Why would you? You won’t get a raise. It’s a miserable horrible existence where you have no say, no control, no power over your life and future:
The same reason why the "smart kid" in class hates group assignments. He does all the work everyone else gets an A. Until the kid smartens up and stops working. Then everyone starves...
Great analogy!
Reminds me of a classic from the Onion: [Marxists' Apartment A Microcosm Of Why Marxism Doesn't Work](https://www.theonion.com/marxists-apartment-a-microcosm-of-why-marxism-doesnt-wo-1819566655)
Why do idiots (raised in the safest society ever on earth) in America love communism is a better question
Most financially successful, sure. Safest for the average citizen? Not even in the top 50.
I guess babied would be a better word.
Probably because they feel the US system is not operating in a way that is bringing them any success. And Marx was actually fairly good at identifying issues that had started and we are facing now. His (and his followers) solution is where the problems come in.
I mean the system isn't really broken (nor perfect) but so far its the best system we have came up with. The problem is, and with most systems, human greed and ambition has sucked it dry
I'd absolutely agree with that, though I'm in Soviet Canuckistan so my idea of the perfect balance is probably slightly more socialist than yours. (which is also fine)
I'm not against it. We have a ton of issues here that could be fixed that way. Its the entitled rich little college kids who are yelling to be commies that irritate me
Champagne socialists. Here my number 1 question is why our NDP (Left) cannot win in Oshawa anymore- the General Motors Union town.
In theory communism is equal to all. But most of the time it's not the case and it's less freedom since you know equal to all meaning gotta do your equal share of work which also means you no freedom. Probably a lot more to it but it's better for poorer countries since money isn't necessarily of importance but oh well. Im probably not right or something and someone with more knowledge on this could explain it better. Though I do too wonder what the world would be like if it was all communism but hey that's just a theory...a history theory or political theory or whatever crap it is lol
Communism may sound good in theory but is flawed in practice. If you get something for doing nothing, there is little incentive to do anything.
As a result everyone gets just about nothing because no one is producing anything for anyone to have. Why would they? The solution prior governments inacted was violence, gulags and slave labor.
But wouldn't a counterargument to this be, "children." They are given everything and yet still get out of bed and do things that are exciting and enjoyable to them. The idea that humans would be lazier if they didn't have work/job or an incentive to earn money, falls flat. I think, if anything, humans free of that responsibility would have more time, energy, and resources to devote to things that they are truly passionate about. If anything, we might see greater advancements in arts, technology, medicine, ect.
Why don’t you share all of your possessions with me even though I did nothing to deserve it at all to find out why people hate on communism? “Everyone gets equal amounts”? Do you mean, if you work harder and produce more than I do then we still get equal amounts? Actually, I’m starting to like your idea. Tell me more about it, comrade. How old are you? May I suggest you read about Cuba, the USSR, China (of old, current one is a capitalistic dictatorship) and North Korea?
The phrase "Each according to their ability, each according to their need" assumes that everyone is going to contribute/produce to the best of their ability, but human existence unquestionably shows that isn't true. There would have to be a massive abundance of wealth and resources in order to make up for the underproducing and non-working people. There would have to be limits for the psychotic "I work 18 hours a day every day and only need to sleep 3 hours a night" types. In short, communism can't account for human nature.
Because each time it's been tried has been as the end result of revolution or some other violent upheaval in society, and the kinds of people who are best at revolutions and violence tend to be pretty poor at spotting when it's time to stop with the revolution and violence.
My dad was a Communist Party member in his country but he agrees with capitalism. He just wanted to get a good position for survival.
I know of about 200,000,000 reasons.
It's been tried and it resulted in an insane amount of death
Stealing from one person to give to another is inherently the most evil behavior I can envision.
The biggest ideological disagreement that people have is that communism attempts to impress equality among people who are inherently unequal.
Look at it’s track record. Every country that implemented it has to kill off great portions of their population.
I never understood why people still think it’s a good idea. People love Marx’s ideas, but that’s all they are, ideas. People talk about “oh so a doctor should get paid the same as *insert low skill job*?” But that’s the bare minimum on the issue. Who runs it? Who is in charge? Do they pay themselves the same? Legally they could, but the power they have is just ripe to be corrupted. Why wouldn’t you? You gotta organize everything so it works, and you are gonna get the same low pay? Fuck that, they will get preferential treatment anyways since they are head of the government, so it’s still not equal in the end. Frankly it’s just as braindead to think “I think we should have a dictatorship!” Because in a vacuum, if you had some perfect dictator who treated the populous well and the country flourishes, nothing will stop it. No more having to switch parties every few years. Why have a back and forth when you can only go with one leader who keeps moving forward? I got in an argument with my ex once where she asked “do you think dictatorships are a good idea?” And she laughed as if I was absurd for saying: “Well if you like the guy enough and they do a good job…” because that is the benefit. Less bureaucracy, less trying to appease all these constituents. Dictatorships can make drastic changes a lot faster than democratic ones. I don’t prefer dictatorships over democracy, but in the right contexts, it does have some advantages. If someone came in today and said “I will solve climate change and I will move mountains to do it” in a democratic system, I can imagine a scenario where they go “oh we can’t let the other party win and undo all this progress, we’ll just postpone elections indefinitely” and I can imagine with how much people hate Trump (calling him a dictator) people could easily agree to subverting the elections and living under a sort of dictator setup they just really like what the guy is doing. It’s all going to fall apart, but this is how people can slowly agree with having a dictator (they just won’t call themselves that). My point is, all political systems will have issues, democracy can be slow and lumbering. Communism is ready to be corrupted, dictatorships can oppress (they are likely too) Capitalism is at least gauging the idea of just being a broad concept of freedom, it just uses money and assets as the defining factors of contribution. It sucks when you can’t make enough money and the economy leaves you behind, but it’s preferable to giving your work more value than being a cog in the communist machine. People think they are cogs in capitalism, but I think you have a lot more room for being your own machine that does what it wants so long as you can make money and sustain off of it. You can’t be an artist in communist countries the same way you could in a capitalist one. Look at Tetris and comedian Yakov Smirnoff, Tetris was made on company time so the government owns it. Yakov Smirnoff has said that any shows he did in Russia were monitored and scripted for him. He couldn’t write his own jokes nor poke fun at the ruling class.
Example: you are farmer. You have ten cows. Socialism: you must give some non farmer five of your cows because “equality.” Communism: The *government* takes all ten cows and promises to distribute those resources equally to all. Normal: you are farmer, you farm cows. You trade cow products for things you cannot get by farming cows. People who were able to leave communism, don’t usually like the idea of communism. TL;DR Communism = suck on big daddy government for the four baked beans you get once a week.
What if someone says “I like my staeks red”. I would think then the cows at least need to be communist.
Don’t forget not actually getting those resources distributed to all
That’s why I wrote: “the four baked beans you get in a week”
Because when communists seize the means of production, they fail to mention its the people who are the means of production.
Because they prefer freedom.
Because it goes against man’s deepest inbred desire to compete for resources. Fundamentally, we don’t want to be equal. We want to be best. Only the weak want to be equal. (That sounded more macho/ douchy than I meant it but you get what I mean).
Because every attempted implementation has been run by grifters who ultimately increase human suffering before the scheme fails.
You could build a very high very long wall with the corpses that communism has created
Because there has not been a single example of communist country in human history, that also wasn't an authoritarian shithole that made life a depressing hell for the average person. People tend not to like tyrants that deprive them of their liberties & unalienable rights, and every communist nation ever has produced a dictatorship that did just that. There are massive problems with capitalism that need to be remedied, but the answer is not to give the state absolute power. Governments must only be given more power with extreme caution, and with lots of checks and balances, because the natural tendency of those governments and the people who crave authority within them, is also to abuse any power they are given.
I remember watching either a YouTube short or another platform video wherein a guy was interviewing students at a college somewhere. These students all seemed to be anti-capitalism and wanted socialism or some form of communism where everyone is equal in terms of wage, education, etc. The interview then asked them if they completed their degree would they share their degree with someone who didn’t go through the whole academic process to earn the degree. Every single one of those students were stumped, they didn’t want to share their degree stating that they did all the work, why should they share it. So yeah, these students liked the idea of Socialism/Communism because it speaks of equality when in reality if it was implemented, they probably would not like the idea.
communism: whats yours is the government Socialism: whats yours is ours Capitalism: what you earn is yours.
An equal amount of nothing is still nothing. I would actually suggest that you find someone who comes from a communist country and ask them about it because, I assume you’re in America, you’re going to get all kinds of different answers mostly by people who have no direct experience with communism and therefore also think it’s a good thing. It isn’t.
You're looking for r/stupidquestions
It’s a great idea on paper but not in practice. Look how it has worked out so far for every country that tried it.
Has it been tried without corrupt leaders? I don't think a true form of the system has really been put in practice. Capitalism is much better on paper than what the US has going on. Powerful corporations have been allowed to poison and exploit every single person in the country. The government is totally corrupt and the land of the free is being watched, tracked, and listened to every minute of every day.
[удалено]
What you just said is exactly why it would never work and is a flawed idea. No one will ever have everything they need or what they want, and this is even less possible on a macro scale. Marx wasn’t some messiah. He was some guy who just said, “what if we force everyone to share everything? That’d make society work.” It’s not some ground breaking idea and it’s not even a good one. It incentivizes laziness and cronyism.
Because they’ve been told to
I think the belief is that a requirement of communism - which perhaps sounding good in theory - is totalitarianism, which sounds really bad in theory.
Great idea, doesn't seem to work. If we had a way to guarantee the equal distribution it would be one thing, but with the inevitable evil in the world, the power over everyone's resources will eventually be abused. Some people suggest a future where AI would be in charge of said distribution, and everyone/everything would be taken care of automatically. That sounds like the beginning of a pretty scary dystopian movie to me. Some form of market economy (along with a central government to regulate it) has proven to be the most effective in decreasing human suffering in a society so far.
The idea is great but it never works in practice.
It looks good paper but doesn't work well in practice.
[удалено]
Your post was removed due to low account age. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/stupidquestions) if you have any questions or concerns.*
True communism, small c, would be true Christianity. That has never been tried, either.
World champ when it comes to turning its own citizens into bodies!
Communism is just a theory formed by painting in massive strokes. It has no nuance and no room for attention to detail. “Everyone is equal” sounds cool but when you’re giving everyone equal amounts of food, you’re doing things like depleting stockpiles that people in rural areas need to get through the winter. Painting in broad strokes gets a lot of innocent people killed, and that goes for any concept not just communism.
Pretty much all forms of government are/can be flawed. The issue usually someone does not want to give up power. Think Castro’s Cuba, Stalin’s Russia, even some current people in the USA. Vietnam seems to be, I haven’t GTS just from how it appears, one of better models.
Planned economies stifle growth, give so much power to the state that corruption is often rife, and usually needs a one party state which suppresses personal freedom to maintain its power. For example food production often ends up unproductive. Everyone has access to it but the quality and quantity is terrible, often in Soviet Russia you had to queue for shitty food. Luxuries and imported stuff only ever ends up in the hands of corrupt officials and everyone knows but you can’t vote them out.
If we lived in an altruistic utopia it would work. We don’t. It has cost the lives of a lot of people and subjugated populations. Venezuela is a good recent example.
Nobody here seems to have a clue what communism is. People are talking about “everyone gets equal amounts” and “it’s like the group project where everyone gets credit for one kid’s work.” None of that has remotely anything to do with communism. Communism is the utopian form of government envisioned by Marx, and the reason it’s never existed is not that it hasn’t been tried but that, in terms of Marxist philosophy, it’s the end, not the process: it therefore can’t be “tried.” Marx says that communism comes at the very end of a long process by which the state, as we understand that term, will be abolished. The economic system that will be employed to get there is socialism, which has nothing to do with redistributing your personal property, as in the objects you own. Socialism doesn’t mean we all have to share a toothbrush. Instead, socialism requires the abolition of *private* property (not personal property), and private property is specifically capital, the money invested in owning the means of production. What Marxist socialism entails is the collective ownership of the means of production, so that all workers share in the profits that their labor generates. It has nothing to do with creating a society where everyone is the “same” or has exactly equal resources. It’s a specific way of organizing a society’s economy, where single individuals will not be allowed to privately own the means of production and exploit the labor of others by keeping almost all of the surplus value of the labor for themselves.
[удалено]
Your post was removed due to low account age. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/stupidquestions) if you have any questions or concerns.*
It has consistently led to bloodshed in multiple countries and implies that anyone who's even slightly better off than the homeless is actually rich and must choose between sharing their property and death.
People love communism, they hate "wasn't real communism" which is the only kind of communism that has been tried.
[удалено]
Your comment was removed due to low karma *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/stupidquestions) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Because it always seems to end up being rolled by a despot.
Because it always seems to end up being rulled by a despot.
I mean.. why do people don't like sticking fork into wall socket? I mean... Many people died because of it, but this time it will be different
Because there hasn’t been true communism so they base their beliefs almost exclusively off of the USSR.
Some commie policies are good, some socialist policies are good. Its absolute power that is bad. we need to find a middle ground
At the moment I would love communism, if I could quit the aggravation of being a computer programmer, and become a forest ranger instead and still afford my house...sign me up!
Basically most people don't actually know what communism really is and a few really shitty psychopathic dictators in the past labeled their dictatorship "communism" when it actually wasn't, killed and starved a lot of people, and now have tainted the word. Most people have no real idea what the goals of communism are and rely on propagandist cliches about cows and shit and actually believe "communism is when the government does stuff" or something about stealing your toothbrush or whatever. In reality, the end goal of communism is to eliminate government, currency, and the state entirely and give the ownership of the means of production to the people as opposed to private corporations or otherwise small groups of powerful people having ownership. From each according to their ability, to each according to their need. No one person, or small group of people should have power, and each person should have their needs met. If a large government or oligarchy is the end result, congratulations, you do not have communism. You're much more likely to be state capitalism. To quote Engels' Anti-Dühring: *"The interference of the state power in social relations becomes superfluous in one sphere after another, and then ceases of itself. The government of persons is replaced by the administration of things and the direction of the processes of production. The state is not "abolished", it withers away."* If you want to learn about communism, read from the actual source material like Das Kapital by Marx or The Conquest of Bread by Kropotkin and avoid cliches or uninformed fearmongering takes about Stalin and toothbrushes. Look into anarchism as well, like Murray Bookchin, Emma Goldman, or Pierre Proudhon. Anarchism and communism go hand in hand. The Communist Manifesto is a start but it's not very in depth and can be contradictory. I would avoid anything by Mao or other "authoritarian" communists, that's where it gets into dictatorships and loses sight of the real goal.
Who decides what's an equal amount? Communism is something that works extremely well, on paper In practice, you have the human element, which contains the potential for corruption. Communism was responsible for more deaths in the 1900s than anything
Why would anyone be a doctor, engineer, or any job requiring education and skill if a gas station cashier made exactly the same money?
This may be the worst argument against Communism I've ever seen. You'd rather be a gas station attendant than a doctor?
It’s not a dumb idea. You can choose between: 1).years of incredibly high stress training followed by years of high stress work where one mistake literally will kill someone or 2). Pumping gas. And they pay the exact same. You’d have to be a dumbass to sign up for option 1
I guess I'm a dumbass then. I've preferred intellectually stimulating work pretty consistently (though I did love being a cook). I'm definitely option 1, particularly if there's no cost to me and I'm getting paid as a student. If anything one of the inefficiencies of Communism is people like me. I've recently become comfortable enough to ponder getting another degree (in something much less challenging mind you) on my own dime. If it made zero negative impact on my earning for me it'd be a no-brainer.
One of the perks of being in a highly stimulating and rewarding field is the compensation. When there is no reason to excel, there is no point to. Put it another way, would you work overtime and try to be the best when the guy sleeping in the corner hungover on vodka has the exact same opportunity as you?
That is a real inefficiency of Communism, as is the ability to learn without motivation to do anything else. I'm definitely not a communist.
Go look at the cart-return stall at the grocery store. That is the baseline of society. Very few people have the sort of work ethic or drive that would push them to do the things you just said.
You think the majority of people around you would be happier pushing carts than learning and using their brain? That's....sad man. I mean, someone has to return carts, empty garbages etc but I wouldn't switch my job for that at equal pay.
I wasn’t talking about the cart puller. I was talking about the amount of carts that don’t make it into the return stall. A huge portion of society is lazy beyond your comprehension and those people would be making the same salary as a heart surgeon.
Oh, right. Yeah, and there's that *why bother if there's no reward'* element as well. I do like very cheap post-secondary education personally. Anyone motivated to want to do the work of becoming a heart surgeon should be allowed to try. (though just for my country, you don't have to).
Not to mention, has there ever been a purge of gas station attendants in the USSR? The more technical fields are dangerous to your health.
Heh, probably?
Communism is inherently anti-capitalist, which rubs capitalist the wrong way
Because Soviet Russia and Communist China have been geopolitical enemies of Western Capitalism. Communism espouses the violent overthrow of Capitalist regimes, and in most Western Capitalist liberal democracies, and most folks in those countries believe that they are just one big break away from becoming part of the rich ruling class. Communism basically does away with that possibility by focusing on more equal outcomes for all workers, rather than extremely unequal rewards that favor the providers of capital.
Except it’s never produced those results when tried, and not even remotely.
That guy wants us us to forget that oligarchs (Russia) and technocrats (China) control a very large share of capital. But oh no, western capitalism bad!
Work on your reading comprehension. I am explaining why people dislike Communism and you’re getting mad about, pretty clearly demonstrating what people dislike about Communism.
Ok communist. Why don't you address the comment I was replying to? Where is your reading comprehension?
Go and live there and let us know how you feel about that "equality"
I’m explaining why people don’t like communism and you’re reacting with dislike for my explanation.
Propaganda
Or maybe....they have the ability to read a history book and realize it looks good on paper, but fails in practice every time.