prove to me that communism isn't immoral as heck

[PLATO]

Originally posted by Urban Ranger


Exceptions are mostly of people who can produce less due to a variety of conditions such as diseases, mental disorders, and so forth.

Perhaps true,but not an answer to the question asked.

Value is not the same as $$$. How do you assign $$$ to work such as protecting the environment?

I agree...that is why I said value. The value of people's work does differ.

Assign two eligible person randomly to identical tasks in identical environments, their productivity is extremely likely to be similar.

I have...there not. As a matter of a fact, it is amazing the various levels of productivity that I have observed over that time period. I don't know about the theory, but the empirical evidence does not support your statement.

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by PLATO
Perhaps true,but not an answer to the question asked.

Didn't you ask for who the exceptions are?

Originally posted by PLATO
I agree...that is why I said value. The value of people's work does differ.

Okay, since we agree that there is an intrinsic value to people's work even if you cannot assign a price tag to it, how then would you compensate them materially?

[PLATO]

Originally posted by MrFun


No -- everyone gets the same game piece for this game, to prevent any status differentiation among players.

The game piece is a piece of dog sh*t.

I knew there wouldn't be a danm boat!! #&*!@^% Communist!!!

*PLATO redeems his political soul*

[PLATO]

Originally posted by Urban Ranger


Didn't you ask for who the exceptions are?

Yes, but on both sides of the coin. You describe those that benefit by providing less value to the society, not those that are penalized by it.

Okay, since we agree that there is an intrinsic value to people's work even if you cannot assign a price tag to it, how then would you compensate them materially?

I don't see how you can without some type of exchange unit. Regardless of what you call that, it is money. How then do you adequately exchange with someone for the value they produce?

[Kidlicious]

Are the capitalists coming up with any decent arguments, or the same old ones. I want to know if I should participate.

[Jules]

Here's my argument for capitalism:

[chequita guevara]

This thread is chegitz bait, isn't it. You just want me to spend my whole work day posting instead of doing my job, bastard, trying to get me fired.

[Immortal Wombat]

This thread turned out exactly how I dreamed it would. No, I *actually* dreamed it.

It's gone from "Communism is immoral" to "Communism is unworkable". Which is because it isn't immoral, and it is unworkable. Oh well.

Originally posted by PLATO
I don't see how you can without some type of exchange unit.

Same way any tribal system works, only on a larger scale.

Originally posted by skywalker right at the start
So I'm forced to provide my labor for free to other people?

Thus I'm still a slave.

To whom? The people who also provide their services for free to you? There are more of them that there are of you, thus in fact, you get much more for free than you give for free. You are King.

[Agathon]

Re: prove to me that communism isn't immoral as heck

Originally posted by skywalker
Here's your chance. Explain why what I'm about to say is wrong.

Communism is immoral, because it is slavery. I produce a commodity, my labor. I sell that commodity in exchange for money. If you require that I give that money to other people who have less money, then you are really requiring me to give my labor, without compensation, to them. Thus, I am their slave. Slavery is immoral.

That's a bad choice of words. I take it you have heard of the Labour Theory of Value?

The LTOV specifies that each person receive the value of his labour and not have it taken from him (or alienated) by some other person, that other person typically being an owner of capital. The compensation you recieve must be proportional to the labour you expend. That is the core of the Marxist position. In some cases we will have to redistribute income to those who cannot work, but that does not affect the core of the argument.

If you use purloined labour as your argument, then you are actually using the communists' own argument, which is pretty funny IMHO.

[Ned]

After the USSR, Maoist China, North Korea, Vietnam, Cambodia, Cuba, Albania, and the other litany of communist paradises that were/are little more than police states and where the common folk had/have nothing but slavery or death, their choice, it is amazing that anyone can seriously continue to call themselves communists. I almost think that communism must be some sort of mental disease.

[chequita guevara]

Cuba don't belong in that list, Neddie. Cubans aren't slaves and there were no mass killings (at least not of people who didn't deserve it, as opposed to the 500 or so torturerers and murderers who got shot after the revolution).

[Curiosity]

Originally posted by Ned
After the USSR, Maoist China, North Korea, Vietnam, Cambodia, Cuba, Albania, and the other litany of communist paradises that were/are little more than police states and where the common folk had/have nothing but slavery or death, their choice, it is amazing that anyone can seriously continue to call themselves communists. I almost think that communism must be some sort of mental disease.

Let's look through the list.

USSR: Russian was a third world country when the communists came to power, fresh out of an Imperial dictatorship and with a democratic government that no-one would have expected to last. Over the next 50 years it experienced growth beyond anyone's wildest dreams, building a superpower out of a nation of goatherds and distillers, even while fighting and taking massive damage in two world wars. It permanently changed the way economies all over the world are run by making the idea of planning an economy mainstream.
Eventually, it's one-party system was changed to a westernized democracy by means of politics, with minimal blooshed.

Maoist China: Again, the Imperial system was falling into ruins with revolution threatening to tear the country apart. The communists united the country, ended the threat of interminable civil wars, and gave the people more of a say in the running of their country than at any other time in their history. Now the country is experiencing an economic boom, and again, it looks like becoming a superpower in the next 20-30 years.

North Korea, Vietnam, Cambodia - True, though these are more examples of dictatorships with communist rhetoric than of communist states.

Cuba: After replacing a fascist dictatorship the Cuban government was forced to endure the threat of invasion, being a pawn in the cold war, and a trade embargo which has meant that Cubans must pull themselvs up by their own bootstraps. In spite of that, while few are well off, no-one starves or is denied medical care, something the USA has not managed to achieve. If they are ever treated fairly then Cuba has the educated population and cheap labour to take off economically.

Albania - no idea

The point is that, by and large, communist states have done much better than their contemporaries in a despotic form of government. Sure it's great to have a westernized democracy. Unfortunately democracy in most places has been merely a short interlude before the takover of the next Generalissimo. Communism has provided long-term stability and disipline in the the military - both vital if democracy is ever to stand a chance.


And of course there's always the hope that you can combine the best of both worlds - there's always a first time.

[Rasbelin]

Originally posted by GePap

Outer Mongolia?

Just the virtual world of the Civ III DG.

[Immortal Wombat]

Maybe an easier way would be to prove that "heck" is even more immoral than slavery.

"heck" rapes babies. dead babies. QED.

[SKILORD]

Re: prove to me that capitalism isn't immoral as heck

Originally posted by Comrade Tassadar


Here's your chance. Explain why what I'm about to say is wrong.

Capitalism is immoral because it is slavery. Someone produces a commodity, and begins to manufature it. As they hire more and more workers, they begin to branch out. They begin putting down factories in other countries like China or India or Burma, where they force workers to work for a few cents each day. They cannot leave lest they starve, thus they are the corperations slaves. Slavery is immoral.

(And, just for effect: ) I spit on your covetousness, I spit on your jests. I spit on you each as individuals, not as a mass. I spit on your dogma, your blind faith in the righteousness of the strong.

I know, it's a really bad troll BUT.....So were they

Slavery is immoral, but is also contradictory to the tenets of Capitalism. Capitalism in Ideal at least states thast all men should be paid according to the work which they accomplish wheras Communism, in Ideal, states that you should work for the good of your brothers while ensuring that no man exceeds you.

In practicality the lack of a Union system in the third world is the only thing that allows them to be raped by american corporations. They will soon realise that the corporations need them, just as European and American workers discovered long ago and will take what is fairly theirs.