Discussion about communism

Kenzu · by Kenzu on Sat Feb 14, 2009 8:38 pm

Sandwalker wrote:
Admin wrote:
Sandwalker wrote:Even though you may genuinely and sincerely believe and commit to what you say, people won't believe you as long as they think you stand to gain something thus have an interest in WR having a good public image.

tbh that's only what people one step ahead of the average person will think.
There are also those who think two and some who think even three steps ahead of that statement.

Actually no. That's how people that have discovered suspicion and the roads of personal interest see. I would bet that the vast majority of eastern europeans think that way. I know it's common over here. And yeah, there are levels ahead, there are always levels ahead. I just worded a basic principle: You want to sell a crappy car with beautiful leather interior. You'll only talk about the leather and downsize the importance of a good engine.

@Kenzu: Unless you've seen what communism is and what it means, don't talk about it. Yes, communism is on the negative side in my book. The biggest roadblock to communism is ambition. A person's ambition for better things, a person's desires for more and a tyrant's thirst for power. That's why it's a flawed system. It goes against human nature. We all crave to be special, be it tattoos, clothing, vocabulary, country clubs. And we don't just want to be special. We want to be better, richer, stronger than the person next to us and the next one and the next after that. Incidentally this is a natural order. Who doesn't want to be the alpha dog ? C'mon. Anyway, if you would like to discuss this further, I invite you to a chat on msn or on a different thread, because this is an offtopic subject.

I have not seen what communism is, because it has never been attempted on a countrywide scale. In family scale it seems to work very good.

Communism is a classless socioeconomic system, where all people have equal rights, economic and political freedom, there is no exploitation of workers, because all people who work are considered members of the working class and all means of production are owned by people and their communities, which they use to contribute to the society.

The main idea behind communism is "From each according to his ability, to each according to his need."

The perfect example of a communist society is the family. The parents, who have the highest skill work the most and share their income with their family members. They might have a baby, who has needs, but no skills. Therefore the baby doesnt work at all, but gets all it needs from its family. They might have a teenager who goes to school, but is still too young to work. Since he/she is older, this person might wash the dishes or clean its room from time to time. If there would be also a student in the family, he/she would have more skills and help more, look after the baby, maybe drive to a shopping mall to buy food or do more complex tasks and contribute with his labor to the family. The family works even though some of its members put more effort than they receive during a certain period. They continue to contribute to the society, because they want to be respected by the other family members, they want to be loved and they know that once they will be old, someone will take care after them as well!

october 17 · by october 17 on Tue Apr 21, 2009 12:44 am

let freedom ring!!!!

with socilizim (now theres a chineas riddle for you)

Sandwalker · by Sandwalker on Tue Apr 21, 2009 6:18 am

Kenzu, communism is good as an idea. It is something that sounds good, that sounds promising. However, when you take that idea down and implement it in reality, it loses all value.

Now, you can't give a family as an example. Why, you ask ? Because in a family the parents almost always work FOR their children, their children are the purpose of their lives. That love and devotion is what makes it work, not the fact that the kids wash the dishes. I would rather do my own bloody dishes than feed another person with my work. Replace those kids with people that have no blood ties with the parents and that can't really hold a job for whatever reason. Let's see then if the parents still agree to work for their new house guests.

A family can't be used as an example also because communism is an ideology for governing masses, and large ones at that. You can't govern 3 people and call it communism. And you certainly can't take it as scientific proof of communism working.

And my final point why a family can't be used as an example is because of good old Darwin. There's a gene theory that says that the more genes you have in common with someone, the more you want to help that person and protect them. This is obviously because you're in fact protecting a healthy chunk of your own genes. So it's clear that you would rather help your brother than help a stranger, it's in your best interest (no such thing as philanthropy or charity, but that's a different thing).

As you see, starting on a very low scale, communism is contradicted by our own raw natural instincts (all animals have this).

Communism is an utopian form of community organization. It sounds nice but ambition and personal agendas will ALWAYS triumph over the greater good as it were. It has always happened and will always happen. Any person wants more. Every person wants to be special. It's in our nature. We seek freedom merely because it is the only way to try and reach our potential, to grow unbound by needless rules.

In conclusion, communism is strong in the metaphysical but is severely crippled in the physical.

Kenzu · by Kenzu on Tue Apr 21, 2009 9:36 pm

Sandwalker wrote:Kenzu, communism is good as an idea. It is something that sounds good, that sounds promising. However, when you take that idea down and implement it in reality, it loses all value.

Now, you can't give a family as an example. Why, you ask ? Because in a family the parents almost always work FOR their children, their children are the purpose of their lives. That love and devotion is what makes it work, not the fact that the kids wash the dishes. I would rather do my own bloody dishes than feed another person with my work. Replace those kids with people that have no blood ties with the parents and that can't really hold a job for whatever reason. Let's see then if the parents still agree to work for their new house guests.

Maybe I will not want to take care of them if they are not mine, however if I will be asked to pay taxes knowing that they will be used to take care of them, I will gladly pay them, especially if I know that everyone is paying them.

Sandwalker wrote:A family can't be used as an example also because communism is an ideology for governing masses, and large ones at that.

The sole purpose of communism is to increase the well being of all people, not only of lucky ones born to rich families. Without this ideology, worker's rights and trade unions would be nonexistent until this day.

Sandwalker wrote:You can't govern 3 people and call it communism. And you certainly can't take it as scientific proof of communism working.

Of course I can! Even a two person society can be called a communist society. two people is all it takes to have a community.

Sandwalker wrote:And my final point why a family can't be used as an example is because of good old Darwin. There's a gene theory that says that the more genes you have in common with someone, the more you want to help that person and protect them. This is obviously because you're in fact protecting a healthy chunk of your own genes. So it's clear that you would rather help your brother than help a stranger, it's in your best interest (no such thing as philanthropy or charity, but that's a different thing).

Ins't it simply that people help those, who are similiar to them? Of course you help your family, but you might also be more friendly and help people who have the same interests like you, or they share the same religion with you, or maybe nationality. Maybe both of you are vegetarian, or you both have dogs. You will feel a closer connection to such a person.

Sandwalker wrote:As you see, starting on a very low scale, communism is contradicted by our own raw natural instincts (all animals have this).

Where does it contradict? It is human nature that people want to live better than they live now. They want their living standard to increase, but this cannot be achieved if they always rob each other, fight each other and don't cooperate. I think it is clear that there won't be happiness if people will see that they work hard and stay poor while others work less and live in luxury. People can be only happy if they know that they are all treated with respect and arent being disadvantaged to others. Furthermore it is human nature to bond together, to live together in communities. People are social beings and they cannot live alone.

Sandwalker wrote:Communism is an utopian form of community organization. It sounds nice but ambition and personal agendas will ALWAYS triumph over the greater good as it were. It has always happened and will always happen. Any person wants more. Every person wants to be special. It's in our nature. We seek freedom merely because it is the only way to try and reach our potential, to grow unbound by needless rules.

In conclusion, communism is strong in the metaphysical but is severely crippled in the physical.

I think most people are good, however there are some evil ones. History has shown that the croocked evil people often defeat the good people, even though the good people outnumber the bad ones. The problem is that the evil ones use cold hearted hideous means to achieve victory.

Sandwalker · by Sandwalker on Wed Apr 22, 2009 6:23 am

Kenzu wrote:
Sandwalker wrote:You can't govern 3 people and call it communism. And you certainly can't take it as scientific proof of communism working.

Of course I can! Even a two person society can be called a communist society. two people is all it takes to have a community.

Granted, however it's scientifically inaccurate to use controlled low-scale micro samples to prove a point. That's what I was saying.

Kenzu wrote:
Sandwalker wrote:And my final point why a family can't be used as an example is because of good old Darwin. There's a gene theory that says that the more genes you have in common with someone, the more you want to help that person and protect them. This is obviously because you're in fact protecting a healthy chunk of your own genes. So it's clear that you would rather help your brother than help a stranger, it's in your best interest (no such thing as philanthropy or charity, but that's a different thing).

Ins't it simply that people help those, who are similiar to them? Of course you help your family, but you might also be more friendly and help people who have the same interests like you, or they share the same religion with you, or maybe nationality. Maybe both of you are vegetarian, or you both have dogs. You will feel a closer connection to such a person.

Actually they don't. I was referring to how you react subconsciously according to how close you are in the blood line. I'm not talking about common interests. You will help your brother over someone else 90% of the time, even though you have more in common to the other person. At least that's what tests have shown.

Kenzu wrote:
Sandwalker wrote:As you see, starting on a very low scale, communism is contradicted by our own raw natural instincts (all animals have this).

Where does it contradict? It is human nature that people want to live better than they live now. They want their living standard to increase, but this cannot be achieved if they always rob each other, fight each other and don't cooperate. I think it is clear that there won't be happiness if people will see that they work hard and stay poor while others work less and live in luxury. People can be only happy if they know that they are all treated with respect and arent being disadvantaged to others. Furthermore it is human nature to bond together, to live together in communities. People are social beings and they cannot live alone.

People are social beings, yes. But they tend to form groups within groups. It is contradicted in the fact that you, as a person, cannot treat everyone equally, it's not in your nature. We're deeply subjective beings, as far as I've seen.

Kenzu wrote:
Sandwalker wrote:Communism is an utopian form of community organization. It sounds nice but ambition and personal agendas will ALWAYS triumph over the greater good as it were. It has always happened and will always happen. Any person wants more. Every person wants to be special. It's in our nature. We seek freedom merely because it is the only way to try and reach our potential, to grow unbound by needless rules.

In conclusion, communism is strong in the metaphysical but is severely crippled in the physical.

I think most people are good, however there are some evil ones. History has shown that the croocked evil people often defeat the good people, even though the good people outnumber the bad ones. The problem is that the evil ones use cold hearted hideous means to achieve victory.

People tend to be neutral if they don't have a moral compass hammered into them at early age. By neutral I mean they do what is best for them first. If helping the community is best for them, they'll do it. But when does it end ? When does a person say "I want more." and does it ? That is all it takes and, at least from my personal experience, it doesn't take long for someone to want more.

Also, it would be interesting to have a chat of good vs evil, since there is no such thing. It's all about points of view. After all, I already mentioned we're deeply subjective beings.

Discussion about communism

Discussion about communism

Re: Discussion about communism

Re: Discussion about communism

Re: Discussion about communism

Re: Discussion about communism