Why are we trying to resurrect Communism?

[bugsbunny]

People who believe in free markets see government intervention as a step towards Communism.

Nomura market strategist: Why Are Our Leaders ‘Trying to Resurrect’ Communism? (http://www.theblaze.com/stories/market-strategist-why-are-we-trying-to-resurrect-communism/)

Excerpt:



Personally I am absolutely certain that the kind of totalitarianism being pushed on us by our leaders will – if allowed to persist and fester – end with consequences which are way beyond anything the printing presses of our central banks could ever hope to contain. Communism failed badly. Why then are we arguably trying to resurrect a version of it, particularly in Europe? Are the banks so powerful that we are all beholden to them and the biggest nonsense of all – that defaults should never happen (unless said defaults are trivial or largely meaningless)?


To people who believe in free markets, any sort of government intervention in the economy is a step towards Socialism. Free market people, like anarchists distrust government.

The idea of bail-outs of big business is appalling. If companies make mistakes (and mistakes are inevitable), they must be allowed to fail no matter how big they are.

[Os Cangaceiros]

Those people who view any and all regulation as "resurrecting communism" are either 1) those who are to capitalism what the Taliban are to Islam (aka the Mises Institute people), or 2) morons.

[eric922]

Those people who view any and all regulation as "resurrecting communism" are either 1) those who are to capitalism what the Taliban are to Islam (aka the Mises Institute people), or 2) morons.
Those aren't always mutually exclusive.

[Caj]

To people who believe in free markets, any sort of government intervention in the economy is a stop towards Socialism. Free market people, like anarchists distrust government.

Since when do anarchists support free markets?

[PC LOAD LETTER]

Since when do anarchists support free markets?
To be fair, (s)he's relating that Misesians and Anarchists are both against "government", not that anarchists support free market. I'm glad there's finally a capitalist that (at least passively) understands anarchism and capitalism are not compatible by separating them. Misesian capitalism is more accurately referred to as "Temporarily Stateless Capitalism" or "Nuts" ... to separate it from the ideology of anarchism.

Murrray Rothbard even stated ...
"Considering the dominant anarchists, it is obvious that the question "are libertarians anarchists?" must be answered unhesitatingly in the negative. We are at completely opposite poles"Yet for some fucking reason I constantly come across self-described "anarcho-capitalists" on the internet. *sigh*

(S)he's (bugsbunny) wrong in that Misesians support an economic system that will lead to the (re)formation of de facto states (even if they are in denial of this) by preserving wage labor, commodity production, and private land ownership (through accumulation of capital, market centralization, rent, potential formal indentured servitude, etc). And anarchists are not at all against governance (as opposed to a state) (unless they have a Mad Max fetish).

[roy]

When has the government ever not intervened in the 'free' market?:confused:

[RGacky3]

Fight against government intervention, starting with corporations.

[bugsbunny]

I am a fan of Mises. At the same time, I am not against states. We need states to implement rule of law.

Trying to unite the world into a world government is impractical. China and India would end up controlling the world and of course will suck away the wealth of the rich countries.

[RGacky3]

Your a fan of Misis????

Have you read misis?

[Tim Cornelis]

I am a fan of Mises. At the same time, I am not against states. We need states to implement rule of law.

In other words, you're in favour of communism yourself (by extension of your own logic). If government intervention = resurrecting communism, then public police, public law, public enforcement, and what not is communism. If I start a private law-enforcement business that will compete with government then I would not be allowed to do so, and there would thus be no free market, and therefore it must be communism.

... :rolleyes:

So we should probably de-restrict you for being a communist.

I am also surprised no one has told you yet that communism is in fact stateless, and classless, and that government intervention would not exist in communism.


Trying to unite the world into a world government is impractical.

No one here is advocating an illuminati global takeover, so to whom is this addressed?


China and India ... of course will suck away the wealth of the rich countries.

How atrocious, two third world/developing countries sucking away the wealth of first world/developed countries. Oh, the horror of equality! I cannot bear the thought of India and China becoming well off.

[Rafiq]

There are various free market territory in third world countries. All are bigger shit holes than any form of socialism to exist.

[Azraella]

Since when do anarchists support free markets?

Meet Kevin Carson! (http://mutualist.blogspot.com/) Individualist anarchists are in support of free markets.

[Revolution starts with U]

This may be a little off topic but

You know... I've never thought ancap would revert to modern capitalism. I feel it will revert to a neon feudalism.

[PC LOAD LETTER]

This may be a little off topic but

You know... I've never thought ancap would revert to modern capitalism. I feel it will revert to a neon feudalism.
This makes sense ... with the whole regions-controlled-by-competing-warlords phenomenon in Somalia. Although that typo conjured up images of warlords in rave-dress on a background of repetitive music in my head ... with serfs to support their partying.

[Deicide]

Miseans make me want to slam my face into my desk.

http://thechive.files.wordpress.com/2008/12/funny-face-plant49.jpg?w=500&h=382

Like this, but into a metal desk.

[GoddessCleoLover]

Ancap would probably revert to barbarism.

[Franz Fanonipants]

calling what i want to do to the market "regulation" is like calling murder "adjustment"

[Night Ripper]

with the whole regions-controlled-by-competing-warlords phenomenon in Somalia

Yes because all ancap societies look like Somalia just like all governments look like Iran and all communist societies look like Soviet Russia. *facepalm*


Miseans make me want to slam my face into my desk.

That's probably about as productive as the "lolbertarian/ZOMG Somalia" tripe that's paraded around here.

[Krano]

When has the government ever not intervened in the 'free' market?:confused:
Somalia.

[RGacky3]

Well Night ripper, Somalia HAS no government and no government interferance in markets.

Soviet Russia on the other hand did NOT have economic democracy ...

[CommunityBeliever]

Why are we trying to resurrect Communism?

Nobody is trying "resurrect Communism" since there haven't been any communist societies yet. Communism is a very high state of human development that is characterised by the complete lack of any classes, states, national boundaries, coercion, oppression, money or scarcity.

[Ocean Seal]

Yes because all ancap societies look like Somalia just like all governments look like Iran and all communist societies look like Soviet Russia. *facepalm*
That's probably about as productive as the "lolbertarian/ZOMG Somalia" tripe that's paraded around here.
I will say this, anarcho-capitalism will not look like Somalia. I think that's an unfair comparison to make because anarcho-capitalism will never exist.

Not all governments look like Iran because if you look around you, there ARE other governments, many of which don't look like Iran.

Soviet Russia never claimed to be a communist society.

And if you made me choose between Soviet Russia, Iran, and Somalia. I would pick them in that order.

[danyboy27]

when i saw that the link was dirrected to the glenn beck website i facepalmed myself so hard.

For the 1000000 times, governement regulations and welfare programs are not a threat to capitalism, if it really was, the world would have collapsed after ww1 AKA the end of economic liberalism (laissé faire capitalism).


No radical modifications in the current property right=status quo(NOT COMMUNISM).

[bugsbunny]

Nobody is trying "resurrect Communism" since there haven't been any communist societies yet. Communism is a very high state of human development that is characterised by the complete lack of any classes, states, national boundaries, coercion, oppression, money or scarcity.

Such a high state that it can never exist. Humanly impossible.

Its a heaven on earth. That's why I have always felt that Marxism is a quasi religion.

"The Christian... imagines the better future of the human species... in the image of heavenly joy... We, on the other hand, will have this heaven on earth." ... Moses Hess (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moses_Hess).

[Omsk]

@Night:

'Soviet Russia' is actually: "Russian Soviet Federative Socialist Republic " And i think you wanted to say : "Soviet Union".

Please dont make mistakes such as that.

- The Soviet Union was one of the most proggresive countries in the history of man,[not counting the revisionist period and the stagnation period under Brezhnev and the period after him.] and i really dont understand why do you list it as some sort of a 'bad' example.

And,plus,it was not a communist country,a communist country is a contradiction.

[danyboy27]

Such a high state that it can never exist. Humanly impossible.

Its not impossible to create a system that is more fair, and its not impossible to redefine proprety right.

Its impossible to stop all form of warfare, but its possible to keep it to a minimum, its impossible to cure all disease but its possible to cure aid.

Property right are not something set in stone, its something that can be redefined at will.

[bugsbunny]

@Night:

'Soviet Russia' is actually: "Russian Soviet Federative Socialist Republic " And i think you wanted to say : "Soviet Union".

Please dont make mistakes such as that.

- The Soviet Union was one of the most proggresive countries in the history of man,[not counting the revisionist period and the stagnation period under Brezhnev and the period after him.] and i really dont understand why do you list it as some sort of a 'bad' example.

And,plus,it was not a communist country,a communist country is a contradiction.

What's so progressive about it? Millions starved to death or sent to the firing squads.

[Omsk]

You dont understand what progress is.

[Tim Cornelis]

Such a high state that it can never exist. Humanly impossible.

Its a heaven on earth. That's why I have always felt that Marxism is a quasi religion.

"The Christian... imagines the better future of the human species... in the image of heavenly joy... We, on the other hand, will have this heaven on earth." ... Moses Hess (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moses_Hess).

No it's absolutely not. I suspect you haven't even bothered to read any communist/anarchist/socialist literature. No one is literally claiming that communism will be, or is supposed to be, a human paradise. It's neither an impossibility, nor perfect.

[danyboy27]

What's so progressive about it? Millions starved to death or sent to the firing squads.

SPOILER:i am not a Marxist-leninist.

Most marxist-leninist think the soviet union was the best thing that ever happened to humanity for pretty much the same reason people like you claimed that the U.S is the best place in the world in the 60s: good living standard.

while you cant really compare the living standard of the U.S with the soviet union, nobody cant deny that there was no public hospital, fews schools and almost no industrial capacity before the ''communists'' took over the place.

in a matter of a fews year dams where built, canal where built, school where built, agriculture was industrialised and electricity became something everyone could enjoy.

while most of american where roaming the state in research for a job in the 30s, soviet citizen had jobs, running water, schools, electrctiy, medical facilities.

I mean fuck, even with half of their population killed and most of their infrastructures destroyed after ww2 they still managed to rebuild the whole damn country AND back poland, bulgaria and east germany for reconstruction.

has i said earlier, i am not a M-L, to be frank i despise their authoritarian attitude, but i have to admit, the soviet union achieved a lot of things for the time it lasted.

[Omsk]

Most marxist-leninist think the soviet union was the best thing that ever happened to humanity for pretty much the same reason people like you claimed that the U.S is the best place in the world in the 60s: good living standard.

People who base their views of the USSR on: "good living standards" are not real Marxists-Leninists.

[danyboy27]

People who base their views of the USSR on: "good living standards" are not real Marxists-Leninists.

Well most of the discussions i had with M-L about the soviet union always ended up with them showing me endless chart about the Living standards of the soviet union, its their wild card, they swear by this.

[CommunityBeliever]

Such a high state that it can never exist. Humanly impossible.

There already is a form of communism in front of all us: digital communism. With the Internet everyone can access all the world's information unrestricted by national boundaries or money. Communism is not only possible, it is inevitable.


in a matter of a fews year dams where built, canal where built, school where built, agriculture was industrialised and electricity became something everyone could enjoy.

We are in a new world, so we shouldn't exactly emulate the 20th century Marxist-Leninist experience. Nonetheless, these historical experiences are testament to how much we can accomplish if we just focus on satisfying social needs instead of personal greed.

[Renegade Saint]

Yes because all ancap societies look like Somalia just like all governments look like Iran and all communist societies look like Soviet Russia. *facepalm*

Where are these anarcho-capitalist societies?

And M-L nearly always point to the decline in living standards for most people after 1991 in the former USSR as proof that it was a workers' state.

[arilando]

Since when do anarchists support free markets?
Funny i read it as meaning, free market people, just like anarchist, are distrustful of government, not that anarchists are free market people.

[RGacky3]

Just to be clear.

NO ONE HERE (not even the marxist-leninists) are trying to bring back the old USSR style state.