Was the USSR Communist?

Was the USSR Communist

Overwhelmingly, most people’s understanding of what Communism is, comes from an extremely propagandistic presentation of the Soviet Union, generally by US right-wing sources. This would give you the idea that communism is supposed to be very authoritarian, rigidly collectivistic and anti-democratic. This misconception is unfortunately so wide-spread that it’s not infrequent to be called a mass murderer wannabe for simply bringing it up and even though it is trivial to find out what Communism really is and how it works, this exasperatingly wrong view of it nevertheless persists in even otherwise brilliant minds.

This is an amazing article explaining the misconceptions that people have a Communism and Socialism. I would like for all you to read this amazing article!

I always thought if done properly Communism could work, I was talking about it with a friend and he said who would regulate and lead it and who would regulate and keep them/that person in check

i

Originally posted by TheNewKid
I always thought if done properly Communism could work, I was talking about it with a friend and he said who would regulate and lead it and who would regulate and keep them/that person in check

i

It can't work, it's the human factor. I know what comunism is. It was an experiment in the east, the east block was an experiment. It failed. For comunism to work you would need robots. If we are all robots what is the point in walking around. The idea of a social class is not to built on only laws. You see for it to work you must want it to work, to feel the need to give a helping hand without the law request. This has gone wrong, and if they want to implement it all over the world it will fail. When it fails you will get a flood or an ice age. Then it's off to building again, stupid little fools. I want to live like "commun people" you know that song now you get the idea.
I want to be sheeple, I do not have ideas, I'm just a robot.

When you hear it, A new "Idea" a new world order, it will be the last idea among humanity.
You will be like a zombie feeding on the product already in place, the little robot, the little snich, god I can't wait for the ice age. I'm for a little bit of that, a little bit of this and it all works.

reply to post by pepsi78


I don't even think it would work with robots. Without a diversity of competing parts, winners and losers an economy will become stagnant. That's why in the United States we (used to) break up monopolies. The robots would eventually fall behind in their ability to adapt to natural disasters, climate change, lack of resources, because there wouldn't be enough organic, unplanned, growth.

The arguments that people use against communism always confuse me a little.

It's usually, communism can't work because people are greedy and corrupt, but people are greedy and corrupt within any system it's just that in capitalism greed is a positive attribute to have, in fact greed is almost the whole point of capitalism.
So communism can't work because of peoples greed so lets instead have a system that has greed built into it from the start... I dont get it

There has never been a communist state on the face of this planet, and I doubt there will be one in the next 300 years.

what a perfect thread for me
thank you for posting
i am a very open socialist or communist for the uneducated
and pepsi78
socialism would work
imagine a government ran by us for us (kinda the skinheaded really)
ever one get paid equilly no super rich people we where all literally equil.
we get provided house
the only thing i have with the socialism is the job thing we should beable to choose our jobs not just have it give to us

but in this economie i think we`d take what was givin to us...
any way you have any question for me u2u me ill get back asap

reply to post by davespanners


one way to think about this contradiction that you've noticed is to look at sources of power in a society.

if a society encourages multiple, decentralized sources of power then one person's greed will be competing with many other people's greed. in order to make more money, therefore you either have to work harder, make better products, advance technology, or sell things for cheaper.

if a society acknowledges only one source of power or, for instance, limits how much you can make according to only your need, then that competition can never take place. you'll have government planners or intellectuals trying to figure out a unified course on technology, products, pricing, etc.

throw greed into the second system and you'll just have a stagnant system, with few new ideas, and everyone grabbing what they can while the ship sinks.

Originally posted by davespanners
The arguments that people use against communism always confuse me a little.

It's usually, communism can't work because people are greedy and corrupt, but people are greedy and corrupt within any system it's just that in capitalism greed is a positive attribute to have, in fact greed is almost the whole point of capitalism.
So communism can't work because of peoples greed so lets instead have a system that has greed built into it from the start... I dont get it

this is what i was trying to say but couldn't word it

Originally posted by snusfanatic
reply to post by pepsi78

 

I don't even think it would work with robots. Without a diversity of competing parts, winners and losers an economy will become stagnant

It's not competing, it's about the gentle flow, the self. The major flaw is the lack of the spiritual side, the feeling.
You see the notion of words are okay, but without words you are pure feeling, you don't have to say it's wrong because you are already feeling it.

To take a look on an aspect for example there are bad words, just like bad feelings anger or hate.
Robots do bad things just like humans. The worst case is if you are a robot you do not feel you are doing bad, because you can not percive it, you only do what you are told "the collective" comunism to it's fullest.
As a feeling you can sense it, it's in you. Without your touch you could cause suffering to others thinking
you are doing the right thing, because you are just proccesing.

Have you ever seen a proccesing plant ? It has an order, it will just proccess on and on and on.
A machine, you give it other instructions it does what you tell it.
The very notion of comunism is that.
The collective may only work by idividual collective, the will of the self.
They will never pull it off, because "it's a bad idea" built on bad ideas, they want to get this broken ship going just like this. Capitan had to go hunt his wale, well capitan has to pay the price.

They thought they were doing the good thing, follow instructions. Left their feeling self aside. Best example, the individual will notice when things are wrong based on what he or she feels.

reply to post by pepsi78


Dude, you just kicked this into poetic overdrive. haha. You seriously have a knack for beautiful writing.

What I was trying to say is that civilization is really about survival, production is just one of the ways we survive. Through out human history, when things were allowed to progress organically, disasters and calamities were some of the most powerful driving forces toward advancement. Even when disasters were just disasters it was our non robot like abilities that helped us get through them.

So, robots might be uber good at a command and control economy, or even communism. They may produce, produce, produce, without any feeling and play their equality game. But the minute an astroid wipes out a resource or climate change necessitates new technologies, there won't be competition and structures in place to find that next big solution, that next big way to produce and survive. Robots or humans it doesn't really matter, we'd all be screwed as a species without the million scrambling parts, fighting and competing when faced with giant problems.

Originally posted by davespanners
The arguments that people use against communism always confuse me a little.

It's usually, communism can't work because people are greedy and corrupt, but people are greedy and corrupt within any system it's just that in capitalism greed is a positive attribute to have, in fact greed is almost the whole point of capitalism.
So communism can't work because of peoples greed so lets instead have a system that has greed built into it from the start... I dont get it

I dont see anything wrong with that, its sound logic:
1. people are greedy and corrupt within any system, we cant change that
2. optimal route is then to design a system which exploits this inherent greed to produce positive things for the society and motivate people to work for the society, since people are allowed to fulfill their greed only by contributing (capitalism). Designing a system which either ignores (Venus) or punishes this inherent greed (Communism) would be illogical, since you cant go against nature and change people to robots.

Its perfectly logical to have something you cannot change built into the system from the start, and design the system with it in mind. Its pointless to try to change something you cannot change, or pretend it doesnt exist (Venus).

reply to post by Maslo


Hmm you and snusfanatic both make a good point..

I will have to do some rethinking here

History:
communism came to power in russia during and right after WW1 .. and only 3 years after the US allowed the Federal Feserve to start handling the currency!
the original commie theories were written and executed by Mark/Engles, Lenin/Trotsky.
all four were Jewish! (as were Stalin AND HITLER) BELEIVE IT OR NOT!!!

communism quickly became a super-police force in russia and other surrounding nations.

it has worked perfect for all the big money boys .. regardless of what nation or type of government - with few exceptions - usually nations where the economy is nominal (like Cuba).

just look at today's financial system.

communism in REALITY isn't much different than any other system.

all "modern" systems are based on a central bank in almost all nations except for only a couple, like Iran, N.Korea, etc.

even Iraq and Afghanistan have World Bank controlled central banks (despite the Islam thing).
Iraq and Afghanistan's central banks were established recently (after the Allied military invasions).

when the USSR decided to let communism fall, guess who rewrote the financial systems and established new countries and borders in the "former" Soviet Bloc?

it was written by big investment banks with "mergers and aquisitions" departments.
(Goldman Sachs, Rothschilds, etc etc)
(they use "backdoor" consulting companies and "phantom" contractors and law firms)

(they also invented the European Union) (politicians arn't "estute" enough to do something this complicated!)

now, we see "open" corruption as opposed to "closed" corruption in all the "former" communist nations in Europe!

all this "big money" dealing seems to point back to the Bank of England (the oldest central bank in the world)!

while communism may seem worthy in theory, it never worked for the common person.

that's why they wrote it to sound like it was good ...

communism was just another tool for the big money factions that control almost every nation today.

p.s. Chinese communism is similar, but has much less "Jewish Infuence", they seem to keep better control of their central banking, even with close to 2 billion people!

if communism was soooo bad, why does the US do so much business with the remaining communist nations?

simple answer: its all about money - nothing else!

Originally posted by TheOneElectric
There has never been a communist state on the face of this planet, and I doubt there will be one in the next 300 years.

correct, they only have been calling it communism ..
for big money purposes only.

reply to post by Romantic_Rebel


the above link to the artical is pretty good.

seems to come right to the point.

It's been a pretty long time since my college days when I read the manifesto and Das Kapital, and the realities of trying to earn a few coins have mostly overwritten any political ideals I had in that area so there is now big gaps in my knowledge.

Can any one remind me, is there actually anything in the "rules" of communism that necessitate the state being a dictatorship? Can there be such a thing as a communist democracy?

reply to post by davespanners


take a real close look at the current USA!
the answer may be right in front of us!
the US has combined all the big money capital along with all the "social" programs,
even elected a president that openly appoints communists to US Govt cabinet posts!
the US has a suppressed work force (low wages) with big corporations.
(cabinets have "closed doors" too!)

reply to post by Romantic_Rebel


A country run by the "Communist Party" is generally considered to be a communist country. But once you get to high school civics in a few years, they'll teach you this, unless, of course, you attend a public school.

Originally posted by davespanners
Can any one remind me, is there actually anything in the "rules" of communism that necessitate the state being a dictatorship? Can there be such a thing as a communist democracy?

No.

And Marx is only part of the picture, not the be-all and end-all of communism. He didn't invent communism or socialism, he just had HIS idea of how they should be implemented.

Communism IS democratic, just like socialism. They are both systems that work on grass roots level democratic, non-authoritative systems.

What you had in Russia, China etc., was capitalism, they still had private ownership of the means of production.
The differences we see are simply cultural, not economical.

True communism is a system with no economy and everything is produced for peoples need, and are equally shared. Socialism is when the means of production are owned by the workers, so instead of 'profit' going to the 'private owner' it goes to the workers, and it can have a monetary economy. You can't look at Russia, China etc., and say communism doesn't work, because they are not an example of communism, or socialism. It is to the Wests capitalists interest to paint those countries, and communism/socialism as bad, as they are in competition for domination of markets and socialism/communism are a direct threat to capitalists. In order for capitalists to maintain power the workers have to be submissive.
It all stems from the workers revolution, starting before WWI and ending with Spain in '39 and WWII. The power the working class was gaining was a direct threat to the capitalists (private owners of the means of production). The PTB (capitalists) were scared, it's why we ended up with 2 world wars. Since then we have been passivized with TV etc.