Communism Had Its Chance

[Reagan45]

It is no secret that Communism was a failed experiment. However, I see that many of you have communist sympathies. Tell me, how has every single Comunistic state in history failed if this is such a wonderful system?
Cuba is a hellhole. The people hate Chavez and he is CERTAINLY not working for them, as some of you beilieve.
China has grown economically recently for the very reason that capitalism is starting to take root, and the government is giving in. Christianity is also becoming a great force there.
North Korea lets its people starve.
Russia failed.

I implore you examine your belief system. If anyone has anything to say, please, post. I will be happy to enlighten you on reality.

[TC]

...if Cuba is a hellhole than what do you call every single capitalist third world economy, all of which have significantly lower standard of living indicators than Cuba? Whats America then with an inferior infant mortality and doctor per capita rate when compared to Cuba?


...if people hate Chavez than why do they vote for him by larger margins in each successive election? why does he have an approval rate verified by independent polling agencies higher than any capitalist leaders?

[TC]

edit: moved to opposing ideologies so that Reagan 45 can continue the discussion there after he's restricted.

[bezdomni]

If the people hate Chavez, then why does he win every election with over 60% approval?

[Leo]

Tell me, how has every single Comunistic state in history failed if this is such a wonderful system?

There has never been a communist state in history. Communism, in the end, is a mode of production. Those states were as capitalist as US or Western Europe; state capital is capital too.


Cuba is a hellhole.

Every place on earth is a hellhole for the working class.

[BobKKKindle$]

China has grown economically recently for the very reason that capitalism is starting to take root, and the government is giving in. Christianity is also becoming a great force there.

Increasingly in China due to the Capitalist restoration, workers no longer have access to the most basic goods and services as a result of the privitisation of the system of state-owned-enterprises (SOEs) and peasants are being forced off their land in order to make way for industrial and commercial development by foreign developers. Is this a kind of economic development that would you support? The government has also maintained its dictatorial rule - and why would the growth of christianity (and any other religion) be a good thing?

[Raúl Duke]

Christianity is also becoming a great force there.

I implore you examine your belief system.

I implore you to do the same; specifically about christianity. However, talking about religion now is going off-topic.

No one here treats their political ideology like a "belief system", that stuff is for religions like christianity. By calling it a belief system I could say that your political ideology is also a belief system.

The examples you have mentioned are not universally supported here. Also, none of them aren't communist because classes were not abolished (except replaced, instead of the capitalist we now have the beaurocrat) and the economy ("or the means of production") weren't runned by workers under the principle "From each according to their ability, to each according to their needs( and wants, since most of us wish for an abundance based economy instead of a scarcity one). Some of your examples may be socialist, or attempting to be socialist in my opinion. Others are completly not.

[Matty_UK]

You can define capitalism exclusively as a system where a fragmented group of private owners of production can compete on a free market, but that's a definition and no more. In any meaningful historical sense capitalism is characterised by generalised commodity production on a market.
Red China, USSR etc are merely primitive forms of capitalism where the state organises all commodity production and is responsible for national capital accumulation and industrialisation. This was necassary as the only realistic way to industrialise in some countries, but all advanced capitalist countries (with the exception of maybe England due to it reaching a developed stage of industry first, but I'm not too sure...) rejected laissez-faire ideology in the early days of capitalism and had limited command economies to get to a point where competition with the bourgeoisie of more developed countries is possible.

We support the revolutions of the past as their primitive form of capital accumulation were the only options to develop countries to a more advanced form of capitalism, and they improved the countries a great deal compared to the semi-feudal hellholes that gave birth to these revolutions. We support their revolutions not because they represent the society we think is the future, but because they are progressive. With that same logic we also support bourgeois revolutions like the French Revolution the American Civil War, and all the parliamentary revolutions across western Europe. The "socialist" revolutions are the equivalent to these in non-imperialist countries, as their national bourgeoisie have too much ties to imperialist capital to be capable of carrying out their own revolutions.

[RebelDog]

Christianity is also becoming a great force there.

Your right, when more people believe in talking snakes the living standards increase. This thread is up to the usual standard that should be expected from 'rational' capitalists.