Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 16

Thread: The Fall of Communism

  1. #1
    Ubi dubium ibi libertas Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    04 Sep 03
    Location
    Boston, MA, USPRA
    Posts
    4,789

    The Fall of Communism

    "Above all, we must realize that no arsenal, or no weapon in the arsenals of the world, is so formidable as the will and moral courage of free men and women. It is a weapon our adversaries in today's world do not have."
    "The nine most terrifying words in the English language are, 'I'm from the government and I'm here to help.'"

    NEVER FORGET

  2. #2
    Regular
    Join Date
    30 Oct 04
    Posts
    46
    a huge majority of western population stereotypically connecting Stalin with Communism. This however proved not to be the case. Lenin, Khushchev,Gorbachev all proved to be great revolutionaries and leaders who care about the people.

  3. #3
    Staff Emeritus
    Join Date
    03 Aug 03
    Location
    Toronto, Canada
    Posts
    2,042
    That has nothing to do with whether Stalin was a communist or not. Benevolent dictators have existed before, it does not change the system they are apart of. For example, there were kind and there were cruel Roman Emperors, but to say that the cruel ones (or the kind ones) were not emperors is obviously a fallacy. The same thing is true for communism. A communist leader can be kind or evil and still be a communist. Communism is an economic system (a stupid, slapped togethor, and unworkable one), not a state of mind that you call "caring about the people". And besides that. you are assuming Lenin and Kruschev were decent men. Obviously neither was the butcher or madman Stalin was, but that is not setting the bar very high. I believe Gorbachev was a decent man, but I don't know if he even really believed in communism.

  4. #4
    Ubi dubium ibi libertas Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    04 Sep 03
    Location
    Boston, MA, USPRA
    Posts
    4,789
    Quote Originally Posted by pinetreescanada
    a huge majority of western population stereotypically connecting Stalin with Communism. This however proved not to be the case. Lenin, Khushchev,Gorbachev all proved to be great revolutionaries and leaders who care about the people.
    That would be false, but since you provided proof, I'll provide none as well.
    "Above all, we must realize that no arsenal, or no weapon in the arsenals of the world, is so formidable as the will and moral courage of free men and women. It is a weapon our adversaries in today's world do not have."
    "The nine most terrifying words in the English language are, 'I'm from the government and I'm here to help.'"

    NEVER FORGET

  5. #5
    Contributor barrowaj's Avatar
    Join Date
    22 Aug 04
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Posts
    706
    Quote Originally Posted by Leader
    That would be false, but since you provided proof, I'll provide none as well.
    Kruschev wasn't such a bad guy.
    Here's an example: He actually initiated the above ground nuclear test ban treaty at the urgining of wordwide scientists and academia. He just had a bad temper, that's why he was removed from power.

  6. #6
    Ubi dubium ibi libertas Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    04 Sep 03
    Location
    Boston, MA, USPRA
    Posts
    4,789
    Quote Originally Posted by barrowaj
    Kruschev wasn't such a bad guy.
    Here's an example: He actually initiated the above ground nuclear test ban treaty at the urgining of wordwide scientists and academia. He just had a bad temper, that's why he was removed from power.
    Note that doing some good things doesn't make you a good person. Khrushchev for example may have done good things, but I can't see those things out weighing the oppression of nearly 200 million people. He could have done something to elevate some of that oppression. He didn't.
    "Above all, we must realize that no arsenal, or no weapon in the arsenals of the world, is so formidable as the will and moral courage of free men and women. It is a weapon our adversaries in today's world do not have."
    "The nine most terrifying words in the English language are, 'I'm from the government and I'm here to help.'"

    NEVER FORGET

  7. #7
    Banned
    Join Date
    10 Nov 04
    Posts
    34
    Communism is an economic system (a stupid, slapped togethor, and unworkable one), not a state of mind that you call "caring about the people".
    I believe that communism is not a purely economic system, It is a hybrid, kind of politico-economy system where the ruler is a dictator and economy is socialistic.

    A socialistic economy ruled by a parlimentary style or presidential style democracy can not be labeled communist.

    Example would be many of the western european countries as well as Canada, though none of these economies are purely socialistic in nature.

  8. #8
    Military Professional Ray's Avatar
    Join Date
    20 Aug 03
    Posts
    19,624
    Krushchev is also a brave chap.

    He is the only person in the world who has banged the podium in the UN with his Russian shoe and it did not tear!

    Red Salute, my Comrades!

    I am now red in the face! Held my breath while saluting to get the right hue on the face!


    "Some have learnt many Tricks of sly Evasion, Instead of Truth they use Equivocation, And eke it out with mental Reservation, Which is to good Men an Abomination."

    I don't have to attend every argument I'm invited to.

    HAKUNA MATATA

  9. #9
    Staff Emeritus
    Join Date
    03 Aug 03
    Location
    Toronto, Canada
    Posts
    2,042
    I believe that communism is not a purely economic system, It is a hybrid, kind of politico-economy system where the ruler is a dictator and economy is socialistic.

    A socialistic economy ruled by a parlimentary style or presidential style democracy can not be labeled communist.

    Example would be many of the western european countries as well as Canada, though none of these economies are purely socialistic in nature.
    A democratic socialist society will never fulfill the entire communist economic program. While nationalization of certain major industries can occur democratically, people will never forfeit ALL the fruits of their labour to a bureaucracy who gives them food, shelter, and clothing and pockets the rest. The abolition of all private property will never occur democratically because those with land would obviously not want to give it up, and those without land want it for themselves. Marx obviously forsaw this which is why he determined the political system would have to be a dictatorship. So while you are right that communism is not just economic, its only because the economic system it demands will not be utilized in a democratic socieyt. Canada and Western Europe do not have communist economic systems, they have mixed-capitalist systems. And in fact the goal in the last 15 years or so has been to move towards capitalism as much as possible. Lots of privatization programs in Europe and Canada. Very little support for nationalization or renationalization.

  10. #10
    Banned
    Join Date
    29 Aug 03
    Location
    everywhere
    Posts
    767
    Quote Originally Posted by Leader
    Note that doing some good things doesn't make you a good person. Khrushchev for example may have done good things, but I can't see those things out weighing the oppression of nearly 200 million people. He could have done something to elevate some of that oppression. He didn't.

    You obviously have no idea of what you are on about, next.

  11. #11
    Regular Pyken's Avatar
    Join Date
    09 Nov 04
    Posts
    71
    Quote Originally Posted by ZFBoxcar
    Communism is an economic system, not a state of mind that you call "caring about the people".
    Couple things I have to say here.

    #1 The same thing a few others have said, it is more than an economic system. It is a way of life, politics, economics, and the rights of the citizen are all important. Equality is the main concern, what's so wrong about that (in theory)

    #2
    Quote Originally Posted by ZFBoxcar
    (a stupid, slapped togethor, and unworkable one)
    Do you honestly know much about Communism? In theory, Communism is a spectacular work of art, a society where all people are equal. I personally disagree with Communism, but that doesn't mean I cannot appreciate it. You should read some Carl Marx before you pass judgement. Oh, and before you say it's unworkable, let's remember that countries like Cuba and China seem to disagree with you (although China isn't really Marxism).
    Quis Custodiet ipsos custodes?

  12. #12
    Staff Emeritus
    Join Date
    03 Aug 03
    Location
    Toronto, Canada
    Posts
    2,042
    I have read some of the works of Marx (not all of it because there is so much of it). And its not a work of art, Marx was more focused on the historical dialectic and proving the inevitability of the failure of capitalism, he didn't really have a plan for communism, even the Communist Manifesto is more just a vague outline mixed with yet another critique of capitalism. The planning of what a communist state (since the abolition of the nation state which Marx also backed is complete garbage) was worked out by later communists. Marx's intelligence was directed towards the past and the present. The future was thought about by people like Lenin, Mao, Castro, etc.

    And by your own admission, China is not Marxist. China is booming because of foreign CAPITAL investment. Cuba was only doing okay when they received generous Soviet aid packages. Now the Cuban people can only buy anything on the black (or as I would call it, free) market, using foreign currency.

  13. #13
    Regular Pyken's Avatar
    Join Date
    09 Nov 04
    Posts
    71
    Quote Originally Posted by ZFBoxcar
    I have read some of the works of Marx (not all of it because there is so much of it). And its not a work of art, Marx was more focused on the historical dialectic and proving the inevitability of the failure of capitalism, he didn't really have a plan for communism, even the Communist Manifesto is more just a vague outline mixed with yet another critique of capitalism. The planning of what a communist state (since the abolition of the nation state which Marx also backed is complete garbage) was worked out by later communists. Marx's intelligence was directed towards the past and the present. The future was thought about by people like Lenin, Mao, Castro, etc.
    If you care to go to the trouble of actually understanding the principles behind the system of Communism, you will find that the initial statement I disagreed with in my last post was outrageous, laden with personal opinion, and not accurate. Phrases like
    Quote Originally Posted by ZFBoxcar
    stupid, slapped togethor, and unworkable
    , and
    Quote Originally Posted by ZFBoxcar
    complete garbage
    do not become you, nor do they make you sound like the intelligent, educated person I am sure you are. Keep in mind the purpose of this forum.

    Quote Originally Posted by ZFBoxcar
    And by your own admission, China is not Marxist. China is booming because of foreign CAPITAL investment. Cuba was only doing okay when they received generous Soviet aid packages. Now the Cuban people can only buy anything on the black (or as I would call it, free) market, using foreign currency.
    Just because China is not Marxist doesn't mean it isn't communist. Yes, foreign capital is contributing, but so what? It is predicted that China will become the leading economy in the world, partially because of capital investment, but mostly because of distribution of wealth and the size of the population. Cuba is a different story, which I do not know much about, so I'll not pretend and speak like I do.
    Quis Custodiet ipsos custodes?

  14. #14
    Staff Emeritus
    Join Date
    03 Aug 03
    Location
    Toronto, Canada
    Posts
    2,042
    If you care to go to the trouble of actually understanding the principles behind the system of Communism, you will find that the initial statement I disagreed with in my last post was outrageous, laden with personal opinion, and not accurate. Phrases like
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by ZFBoxcar
    stupid, slapped togethor, and unworkable
    , and
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by ZFBoxcar
    complete garbage
    do not become you, nor do they make you sound like the intelligent, educated person I am sure you are. Keep in mind the purpose of this forum.
    It was an opinion. You have not explained to me why me opinion is outrageous or innaccurate. It is not a counter-argument to say I'm opinionated.

    Just because China is not Marxist doesn't mean it isn't communist. Yes, foreign capital is contributing, but so what? It is predicted that China will become the leading economy in the world, partially because of capital investment, but mostly because of distribution of wealth and the size of the population. Cuba is a different story, which I do not know much about, so I'll not pretend and speak like I do.
    Please explain the connection between the distribution of wealth and China becoming the leading economy of the world. Besides, the fact of the matter is, the impovershed rural west of China pays more taxes than they can afford in order to support the economic boom of the east, who's money is NOT distributed much. And no, China is not communist. After Deng Xiopeng's reforms, China stopped being communist, and also become slightly less totalitarian (although the democracy movements cause the government to clamp down every once in a while). The Chinese economy may become the strongest in the world because of capitalism, and ironically, a communist party that is preventing the creation of a welfare state, which is usually the product of democracy. The money is all coming from outside China, not from within. Even if China was communist, which it isn't, it just proves that communism cannot be run unless it is funded by capitalism. China resembles the east Asian economies of a few decades ago. No welfare state, low taxes, but organized enough to draw in the Western capital that was fleeing the West due to our own attempts at socialism.

  15. #15
    Ubi dubium ibi libertas Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    04 Sep 03
    Location
    Boston, MA, USPRA
    Posts
    4,789
    Quote Originally Posted by s_qwert63
    You obviously have no idea of what you are on about, next.
    Notice you're full of sh*t, never make rational arguments, and should have been banned several times, next.
    "Above all, we must realize that no arsenal, or no weapon in the arsenals of the world, is so formidable as the will and moral courage of free men and women. It is a weapon our adversaries in today's world do not have."
    "The nine most terrifying words in the English language are, 'I'm from the government and I'm here to help.'"

    NEVER FORGET

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Does Communism Work After All?
    By Ray in forum International Economy
    Replies: 92
    Last Post: 07 Dec 07,, 03:35
  2. The confusion that is communism, socialism, and fascism.
    By ExNavyAmerican in forum International Economy
    Replies: 36
    Last Post: 12 Mar 07,, 15:28
  3. Chinese communism on its way out?
    By Ray in forum International Economy
    Replies: 30
    Last Post: 20 Sep 06,, 05:20
  4. The Fall of Tony Blair
    By astralis in forum International Politics
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 10 Sep 06,, 21:36
  5. The fall of France
    By tarek in forum International Politics
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 28 Sep 04,, 00:26

Share this thread with friends:

Share this thread with friends:

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •