Babylon and on - the new capitalism/communism thread

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by Sava
In communism, the state doesn't exist... the public has control over production

In communism, the state DOES exist... it's supposedly controlled by the people. The "state" is the set of people who administer the country.

[Velociryx]

It is certainly true that in the past, there have been problems with labor-corporate relations, because corporate held all the cards. It is not true in our society today. We've got so many lawyers salivating at the prospect of nailing a company to the wall that the dynamics of power between the two groups is almost perfectly equalized, and if anything, has swayed the other direction.

Companies live in fear of the next lawsuit, and you won't find many that would be willing to risk their very existence to squeeze a few more hours out of the rank and file.

-=Vel=-

[Sava]

Originally posted by skywalker


In communism, the state DOES exist... it's supposedly controlled by the people. The "state" is the set of people who administer the country.

nope... ask Che, or read Marx if you don't believe me...

[Velociryx]

Sava, for the record I agree with you and said as much in the other thread. So the question....since communism doesn't take the human element into consideration, and since it has failed when tried, why not....try something else? Why keep chanting the same old tired party line if it's unattainable?

-=Vel=-

[Zero]

Originally posted by skywalker


That IS fascism... except that fascism also includes a right-wing economic policy.

It's the 2-dimensional political graph.

no what you mentioned IS product of ultra right wing policy. Not fascism with right wing economic policy.

fascists privatize everything, real world communists mandated govt to own everything... the end result is the same. The government ends up with the control of all industry business etc. Thats WHAT im trying to point out. Its more fascist than communist (since ideal of communism isnt fascist or pro gov! )

[Kuciwalker]

Sava... who administers everything then? What's the difference between communism and anarchy? What prevents Locke's predictions, that from anarchy a government will always arise?

[Sava]

Why keep chanting the same old tired party line if it's unattainable?

I don't chant in the party line. I don't believe in Communism. And I can't speak for any others. I would generalize REAL Communists as fool-hearty idealists. **note this doesn't apply to anyone here, and I'm not referring to anyone on these boards... but mostly people I've met throughout my life.

[The Templar]

Originally posted by Velociryx
Okay, Templar....I'll bite. Tell me WHY it's attacking a strawman. We have seen communism in action in a variety of places around the world, first and most notably in Russia.

And in that communist experiment, isn't that *exactly* what occured? Kill those in opposition to the party, round up the dissidents and send them off someplace remote.

Why would the new dog and pony show shake out differently??

-=Vel=-

Russia. Under communism - a potemkin village. After communism, a capitalist potemkin village.

The more interesting question, in my opinion, is why Europe and America have enjoyed much greater prosperity than the Soviets, Cubans, Chinese, etc.

I would argue that the keys to success are political checks and ballances and the rule of law. The Soviets did not have co-equal branches of government that could check each other. And the law was a flexible as the leader needed it to be. In other words, the failure of communist nations were political failings collateral to the communist economic system.

We have seen capitalist nations with weak rule of law tank just as badly as communist nations. Look at Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Mexico, Taiwan, etc. etc. Based on these countries, capitalism is a failure.

I would conclude then that the problem is political in nature. Of course to test my theory we would need a politically advanced state with a communist economic system. Moreover, I do admit that this is an empirical question. But, based on the fact that rule of law is a better indicator of prosperity than economic system, I'll stick with my theory for now.

[Sava]

Originally posted by skywalker
Sava... who administers everything then? What's the difference between communism and anarchy?

Nobody. In Communism, the theory is that a community spirit will arise, everyone will look out for each other, and we'll all sit and sing "Kum Ba Ya". That's why it's not a political system. It's more a set of social morals and values. Ironically, a Communist world would be similar to what the world would be like if everyone followed the teachings of Jesus Christ and lived by the values in the Bible. More or less.

Communism is Anarchy, for lack of a better term, but instead of mass chaos, everyone would be a good person without the need for laws and government.

[Kuciwalker]

that's stupid

EDIT: it's also really, really dumb

[Sava]

I agree... that's why I don't believe in it

[Zero]

Originally posted by Sava

Communism is Anarchy,

which is why I said to skywalker that his example isnt communism.

I still argue that family is a perfect example of working communism

[The Templar]

[QUOTE] Originally posted by Velociryx
It is certainly true that in the past, there have been problems with labor-corporate relations, because corporate held all the cards. It is not true in our society today. We've got so many lawyers salivating at the prospect of nailing a company to the wall that the dynamics of power between the two groups is almost perfectly equalized, and if anything, has swayed the other direction.[QUOTE]

The better lawyers mostly work for the big law firms that represent corporate America. Weakened labor law enforcement has also tilted power away from the unions and labor.

And frankly, if a company does something wrong, it deserves to get nailed to the wall.

Companies live in fear of the next lawsuit, and you won't find many that would be willing to risk their very existence to squeeze a few more hours out of the rank and file.
-=Vel=-

That's a misperception. Just look at the current Wal-Mart debacle where they've been saving money not though computerized inventory systems but by squeezing off the clock labor out of employees. Every factory I ever worked at prefered damanding overtime (usually out of temps and contractors) then hiring a whole new shift.

[Kuciwalker]

No, family is a perfect example of a dysfunctional dictatorship undergoing any number of revolts - commonly known as "children"

[Velociryx]

Granted, capitalism has had it's failures too, however, right now, *today* we can point to thriving capitalist-oriented nations as proof positive that it works. But where are the shining examples of Communism?

As I understand it, communism needs (and is all about) centralized control. That is at odds with co-equal branches of government.

One of the chief benefits of capitalism is its nimbleness. The market reacts swiftly to changing conditions.

On paper, so does a centrally planned economy, but only IF there is one overpowering branch of the government to control it. You introduce co-equal branches of the government to check each other, you destroy what little speed the command economy can muster, thanks to debate! (and let's face it, if you assign control of the economy to one specific branch of government in the system you outline, it will be the dominant power, with the rest being a shallow veneer, not having sufficient power to truly challenge those who whole the keys to the economic engine).

That's the breakdown then (or at least one of them). The communist system NEEDS that central control, but also needs power sharing governmental branches. Trouble is, if it gets both, then it is essentially paralyzed from day one, and that's not even beginning to go into the mess you create when you confiscate the wealth of the nation and have to figure out what to do with those who are....less than pleased about it.

If you want the system to work, and to be popularly accepted, there's gotta be a better way than banishment and mass murder to get the ball rolling, no?

-=Vel=-