A Thought Experiment About the Viability of Communism

[Ecthy]

Another note - if cult of personality is what made those systems bad then you really don't know why you are against them.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Ogie Oglethorpe
That rather is the point of an election.

Yes, but instead of setting up a dictatorship, as you insist all communist revolutions do, they had elections. He won once and lost a second time.

[Saras]

Originally posted by Ecthy
Saras, I believe you're just one of those gone wild after the fall of the Soviets. You think everything with the slightest connection to Marx must be associated with pictures of Soviet tanks in Vilnius and yadda yadda yadda. How

I was genuinely curious

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Ogie Oglethorpe


The point that there has yet to be an example of communistic system that hasn't devlolved into a dictatorial system enshrining the leader with far too much power as opposed to the failed arguing that Washington was the same. Yes I see all too well.

Your claim is extremely inaccurate. Cult of personality is not common with current leaders in most cases. As far as dictatorship, often the communist party or oligarchy has a dictatorship, but not the leader.

[OneFootInTheGrave]

Is China Communist?

Sure it is but it is not Maoist/Stalinist anymore...so Communism is viable, but it needs a "decent" implementation, like in France

[Ecthy]

Originally posted by Saras
I was genuinely curious

And I genuinely answered.

[Arrian]

Originally posted by OneFootInTheGrave
Is China Communist?

Sure it is...

No, it's really not. It may call itself communist, but that's another matter. North Korea calls itself a Democratic (People's) Republic.

-Arrian

[Kidlicious]

China is not communist according to their constitution. Basically they have just not changed the name of their party to reflect what they really stand for.

[OneFootInTheGrave]

aaaa... but USSR called itself communist but it wasn't communist either... much further from "communist
ideals" than either Cuba, or Yugoslavia, or even todays China...

so it depends on how you define "communism" as technically there are many variations on the theme... to me France is really the closest to it in many respects but would not count itself as such... while Cuba and China have it "traditionally", so they should count ...

ultimately it can be viable, and it is viable in at least Chinese implementation... Yugo implementation could have been viable too, but it was built on an unstable mix of nations which ultimately fell apart...

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by OneFootInTheGrave
aaaa... but USSR called itself communist but it wasn't communist either... much further from "communist
ideals" than either Cuba, or Yugoslavia, or even todays China...

so it depends on how you define "communism" as technically there are many variations on the theme... to me France is really the closest to it in many respects but would not count itself as such... while Cuba and China have it "traditionally", so they should count ...

ultimately it can be viable, and it is viable in at least Chinese implementation... Yugo implementation could have been viable too, but it was built on an unstable mix of nations which ultimately fell apart...

China has created legal rights for rich property owners. How can you call yourself communist when you do that?

[GePap]

I believe that at this point, Marx's basic economic ideas have been proven wrong. But his philosophical ideas have not.

Every single regime that has arisen under the name of Communism did so based more on Lenin's ideas than Marx's. All those groups attempted to hijack history as it were with their own hands, and force a change that at least according to the most orthodox Marxists thinking, those states were not ready for.

The question becomes that as Capitalism continues to develop, will Marx's ideas come back. After all, we really don't kow when we will reach the apex of this current system.

[Kidlicious]

Neither Marx or Lenin predicted the problem of alternatives to a market system that are not communism, totalitarianism specifically. I think the question is not when capitalism will run it's course but whether people will be ready for communism or not at that time.

[OneFootInTheGrave]

Originally posted by Kidicious


China has created legal rights for rich property owners. How can you call yourself communist when you do that?

well it is just a development, in France you practically cannot get fired, how can you call yourself capitalist with that :-)

so it is a scale, and ideas/implementations develop, but China is definitely a Commie country with commie traditions both good and bad ones...

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by OneFootInTheGrave
well it is just a development, in France you practically cannot get fired, how can you call yourself capitalist with that :-)

How do you equate the with communism? Do you have a scale that tells you that the more rights employees have the more communist the country is? In that case the US has become progressively communist over the years.

[OneFootInTheGrave]

exactly, depends what you want to focus on... but looking at the basics - did China like Cuba have a commie revolution, yes... is it ruled by communist party, yes... do they consider themself Communist, yes... so for all intents and purposes it's a Commie country and allowing the rich to own property, do business is a communist development, accepted by the party etc...

Like capitalism progressed towards "commie like" ideas of worker protection, extra taxation of the wealthy etc... so on the other side of the spectrum Commie China progressed and realized rich are not pure scum, but have to be accepted into the fold for "the greater good" ... they still differ on great many things from the west, but they are viable, and more so by the minute... The main difference from USSR and China communism is that China on time started to differentiate and develop while USSR did not manage and economically collapsed as a result (both were almost the same communist type in 1950's)...