Would you say

[YogiBear]

Would you say Communism only works in cretin countries? Such as China, North Korea and Cuba, because most of their population is below the poverty line? See my theory is people only need the greater good if the good isn’t greater. Because capitalism is based on a boom and bust economy the poorer countries will have a bigger Bust then Boom there for can not fully recover. While Communism is a steady rise. Would you agree if so what other countries should emplace Communism?

[ComradeR]

Lenin talks about this in he's theory of Imperialism, here's a piece from a Wikipedia article on Leninism.


Imperialism
One of the central concepts of Leninism is the view that imperialism is the highest stage of the capitalist economic system. Lenin developed a theory of imperialism aimed to improve and update Marx's work by explaining a phenomenon which Marx predicted: the shift of capitalism towards becoming a global system (hence the slogan "Workers of the world, unite!"). At the core of this theory of imperialism lies the idea that advanced capitalist industrial nations increasingly come to export capital to captive colonial countries. They then exploit those colonies for their resources and investment opportunities. This superexploitation of poorer countries allows the advanced capitalist industrial nations to keep at least some of their own workers content, by providing them with slightly higher living standards. (See labor aristocracy; globalization.)

For these reasons, Lenin argued that a proletarian revolution could not occur in the developed capitalist countries as long as the global system of imperialism remained intact. Thus, he believed that a lesser-developed country would have to be the location of the first proletarian revolution. A particularly good candidate, in his view, was Russia - which Lenin considered to be the "weakest link" in global capitalism at the time.[citation needed] At the time, Russia's economy was primarily agrarian (outside of the large cities of St. Petersburg and Moscow), still driven by peasant manual and animal labor, and very underdeveloped compared to the industrialized economies of western Europe and North America.

However, if the revolution could only start in a poor, underdeveloped country, this posed a challenge: According to Marx, such an underdeveloped country would not be able to develop a socialist system (in Marxist theory, socialism is the stage of development that comes after capitalism but before communism), because capitalism hasn't run its full course yet in that country, and because foreign powers will try to crush the revolution at any cost. To solve this problem, Leninism proposes two possible solutions.

One option would be for the revolution in the underdeveloped country to spark off a revolution in a developed capitalist nation. The developed country would then establish socialism and help the underdeveloped country do the same. Lenin hoped that the Russian Revolution would spark a revolution in Germany; indeed it did, but the German uprisings were quickly suppressed. (see Spartacist League and Bavarian Soviet Republic)

Another option would be for the revolution to happen in a large number of underdeveloped countries at the same time or in quick succession; the underdeveloped countries would then join together into a federal state capable of fighting off the great capitalist powers and establishing socialism. This was the original idea behind the foundation of the Soviet Union. What differentiates this from Maoism is that under Leninism, even in the underdeveloped countries, the urban proletariat remains the main source of revolution.

Thanks to neocolonialism the western Imperial powers are able to maintain the superexploitation of the third-world, and thus maintain the labor aristocracy. But we are beginning to see a shift today in the third-world that might cause a blow to neocolonial Imperialism, and a possible economic collapse in the first-world (thanks to the dwindling supplies of oil and the fact that the capitalist oil corporations are refusing to allow a switch to alternative fuels because it would cut into their profits). This would shake the first-world proletarians out of their apathy and could open up the path to a revolution in the first-world.

[Janus]

such as China, North Korea and Cuba, because most of their population is below the poverty line?
"Communism" is not working in those countries.

The requirements for communism not only lie with an industrialized nation but also one in which capitalism has advanced to its highest stage. Of course, most people believe that the collapse of capitalism would also be necessary for communism to occur.

[MrDoom]

Nobody calls Cuba, China, or North Korea communist except the Western capitalist dictatorships.

[Jazzratt]

Originally posted by [email protected] 19, 2007 11:13 am
Would you say Communism only works in cretin countries? Such as China, North Korea and Cuba,
Was the word cretin there deliberate or a typo?

Assuming it was a typo:
No communism can work anywhere in the world, but is most economically viable in the first world countries for obvious reasons (they already have the all the necessary infrastructure and industries to support a large population in an egalitarian manner.).

Assuming it wasn't:
What the fuck makes poor countries "cretinious" just because they don't dominate the fucking markets? Are you implying that they are poor because they're populated by idiots or run by idiots? You're a **** have fun in OI.

(Not in all liklehood the first paragraph is going to be the one that's relevent to you (I like to have an optimistic view of people) but if you could tell me which is, so that I can delete whichever is necessary to delete? Cheers)

[Y Chwyldro Comiwnyddol Cymraeg]

As we impoet stuff from these countries with"communist potential" if they become communist they will have no need for money to export in exchange for and will kick the U for instances corparate companies out and nationalise them. The UK would either exploit another country, making it fit fir revolution and end up opening factories itself and then itself create many proleteriats.

If you understood that!!