Define communism for dum 'ol Lancer

[Lancer]

So, what it is?

My understanding of communism is:

1) a system in which all property belongs to 'the people', which means everything is under the control of the government and nothing belongs to the people.

2) a system where merit is not rewarded, only cronyism is. Since everyone is supposed to be equal, from each according to his ability to each according to their need, nobody gets anywhere no matter how hard they work. The needy pile up because they get tired of busting butt for naught, and just quit trying. Goodies are handed out to undeserving cronies that help top dogs to the next rung.

3) ?

[Ned]

Re: Define communism for dum 'ol Lancer

Originally posted by Lancer
So, what it is?

My understanding of communism is:

1) a system in which all property belongs to 'the people', which means everything is under the control of the government and nothing belongs to the people.

2) a system where merit is not rewarded, only cronyism is. Since everyone is supposed to be equal, from each according to his ability to each according to their need, nobody gets anywhere no matter how hard they work. The needy pile up because they get tired of busting butt for naught, and just quit trying. Goodies are handed out to undeserving cronies that help top dogs to the next rung.

3) ?

Number 2: Sounds like unionism to me. Big issue in Kalifornia this year.

[Ned]

And, BTW, as to point 1 -- land belongs to the "people" meaning it is owned by the "state," which is comprised of a limited ruling elite --

very feulalistic, wouldn't you say?

[Lancer]

Ned, to me unionism has alot in common with communism. I'm for unionism these days. :shudder: The alternative is worse.

[Lancer]

Communism=fuedalism, I like that, it really makes alot of sense.

[Kidlicious]

What is with Lancer and communism lately. I think his on the verge of becoming a communist.

Re: incentives

You can have your own opinion about that. I think people should be paid according to the work they do. "Incentives" should be based on that. Lazy ****ers should get paid less.

[Lancer]

"What is with Lancer and communism lately. I think his on the verge of becoming a communist."



"Re: incentives

You can have your own opinion about that. I think people should be paid according to the work they do. "Incentives" should be based on that. Lazy ****ers should get paid less."

[chequita guevara]

1) An economic system where all productive property, i.e., factories, farmland, mines, banks, are owned collectively. The specific mechanism of whether the ownership is held by those working the property or held in trust by the government.

2) Merit is rewarded through other means, such as public recognition, extra perks, longer vacation.

3) The government is democratically elected, with each level responsible to the level below it, with instant recall for all officials. Campaigns are publicly financed.

[Kidlicious]

Actually I agree with Che. Longer vacations, and non-monetary incentives are better.

[Spiffor]

Re: Define communism for dum 'ol Lancer

Originally posted by Lancer
My understanding of communism is:

1) a system in which all property belongs to 'the people', which means everything is under the control of the government and nothing belongs to the people.

This is not the definition. Communism allows for property, in its ideal marxist form as well as in the form it took in 20th century "communist" regimes. In East Germany, people owned their clothes, TV/radio sets, washing machines, and their car if they were lucky.
What communism bans, however, is the private property of the means of production, e.g. factories. It supports collective ownership on the means of production, and this idea can be interpreted in two ways:
1. The means of production are owned by everybody (which means that the political institution representing "everybody" -historically the State, but not ideally- will own every means of produciton)
2. The means of production are owned by its workers (which means independent companies run as communes)

Communism is also about much more than the commula property of the means of production. It has an agenda on the way politics function, etc. Che will fill you on that better than I can.

[Flubber]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara
1) An economic system where all productive property, i.e., factories, farmland, mines, banks, are owned collectively. The specific mechanism of whether the ownership is held by those working the property or held in trust by the government.

Some property I understand but is my pickup truck productive property?? Does you answer change if I only use it for personal use? How about if I use it to help people move things for a fee??

Originally posted by chegitz guevara


2) Merit is rewarded through other means, such as public recognition, extra perks, longer vacation.

Good but what if I use all my extra free time to work on something else. I mow people's lawns or invent something of value . . This allows me to buy a better house and accumulate additional wealth. I assume that my ability to own "non-productive" things would include the right to pass them on to my children??

Originally posted by chegitz guevara


3) The government is democratically elected, with each level responsible to the level below it, with instant recall for all officials. Campaigns are publicly financed.

Ouch-- so make a necessary but unpopular decision and you are gone eh?? I don't like instant recall in current democracies and don't see how this would be that good . I think that people should be permitted to do the job they were elected to do and absent some threshold of misconduct, a representative should be able to stay in their position

[Lancer]

Gotta go to work comrads. Catch up on this later...

[Flubber]

Originally posted by Kidicious
Actually I agree with Che. Longer vacations, and non-monetary incentives are better.

While I personally see much value in non-monetary incentives, why would they necessarily be better for everyone. If you give someone an extra week off then in theory that's a weeks work that someone else needs to be paid to do. If the person wants the additional pay instead of the extra vacation, where is the harm in giving it to them, if thats what the person wants??

[Ned]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara
1) An economic system where all productive property, i.e., factories, farmland, mines, banks, are owned collectively. The specific mechanism of whether the ownership is held by those working the property or held in trust by the government.

2) Merit is rewarded through other means, such as public recognition, extra perks, longer vacation.

3) The government is democratically elected, with each level responsible to the level below it, with instant recall for all officials. Campaigns are publicly financed.

1) factories "owned" by the workers always fail.

2) perks -- who decides?

3) the central problem with Che's government is that there is no legislature and no judiciary. The people elected decide everything. This is very, very primitive.

[lord of the mark]

The use of the word communism is very confusing.

Marx used the word communism in his "communist manifesto". However later his followers joined in the SOCIALIST International, and tended to call themselves Socialists or Social Democrats. In some places there were Socialists who shared most of the socialist aims with regard to ending private ownership of the means of production, but who were NOT Marxists, for example the Fabian Socialists who founded the UK Labour Party. Lenin established a different POLITICAL approach to attaining socialism, one which returned to the emphasis on revolution rather than gaining power by peaceful means, and which emphasized the role of a vanguard party, organized through "democratic centralism" (the meaning of which is a matter of debate". Lenin revived the use of the word Communist. While many socialists followed Lenin, many, both Marxists and non-Marxists, did not, and in fact strongly opposed Leninism.

Since 1918 Communism has commonly been used to refer to Leninists, and not other Socialists. The old use of Communist to refer to all Marxists, is often invoked by those, on both the right and the left, who wish to elide the difference.

Further confusion is added in that since 1918, the word Social Democrats, has been used both by some pretty militant Socialists, and, especially in the US and in Germany, by people who essentially accept capitalism, but who approach politics from a largely trade unionist POV, with support for an extensive welfare state and some degree of (not particularly militant) class consciousness. Some of the more militant Socialists (again both Marxists and non-Marxists) prefer the term Democratic Socialists, though Im not sure to what extent thats particularly an American thing.

Similarly, many ex-communist parties in western and central europe have adopted names based on "democratic Socialism" Thus in Germany the "Party of Democratic Socialism" is the institutional heir to the Communist Party, though presumably its no longer Leninist, while the Social Democrat Party includes a range of left and center-left opinion.


Take this historical evolution, the range of overlap and complex intellectual and political interrelationships, and try to discuss it with a group of people more interested in flaming each other or proving their own rightness than in making intellectual distinctions, and you will get something that is less than illuminating.