Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Why is it that people with no knowledge of communism are so against it?

page: 15
15
<< 12  13  14    16  17 >>

log in

join

posted on Jan, 4 2013 @ 06:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by WaterBottle
Because they are ignorant and too lazy to actually read about communism.


Yeah.

Lazy.

That's me.

It's hard to concentrate on reading about all the skittles and unicorns communism gives to those fortunate enough to be graced with it when you're busy ducking the bullets they toss at you. Bullets tend to break the concentration.

I'll see if I can't work on that laziness issue I've got going on.




posted on Jan, 4 2013 @ 06:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by chrome413
To the OP, after carefully reading your original question again, I have some thoughts.

First, based on your question and some of your reply posts, I would assume that you do have a knowledge about what true communism is. Having that knowledge then, you would know before even asking the question that so many people confuse the "Communist" nations like the USSR and people like Stalin with what the true theory of communism actually is.

You would also know that communism is itself a theory. A philosophy even? You would also know that there is a progression that, according to the theory, must occur in a particular order. You can't skip a step. You can't force a step. It happens when it happens and the time is right.

I guess that in a way what I am getting at here is that, to answer your question, there is no actually being for or against communism. And by communism I mean the true, non perverted theory that was laid out so long ago. I think someone could be a believer in the theory. A believer that someday all this will come to pass, when the time is right. Someone could also believe the theory is flawed and could in no way come to pass. But to go and proclaim the virtues of communism is in itself actually forcing a step. Forcing something that must occur naturally and in it's own time. In a way, it's almost like what happened in Russia and China, when a perverted theory was pushed upon the most vulnerable in society in order to achieve a goal that had absolutely nothing in common with the true theory of communism.

One last thought, I do not think there is any being For or Against communism. I think there is Belief in the theory, or Disbelief in the theory. And neither belief nor disbelief will matter, because true communism will happen when the time is right and nobody will be able to stop it. Or, if the theory is flawed, then it won't ever happen, whether you believe in it or not.


Very good and interesting point. What you say is basically true, though I haven't really been thinking of it like that. Communism, to me, is the inevitable, logical, 'ending point' of the progression of our economic/social systems. It's not so much about 'convincing people' that it's right, although that probably plays a part. As you say, as the theory is laid out, it pretty much demonstrates its inevitability, not simply that it 'should' happen.



posted on Jan, 4 2013 @ 07:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by dontreally
reply to post by NoHierarchy
 


What the hell are you on? Hayek advocated at most a mixed system, with some concessions to government interference, i.e in waste management, and stuff like that. To claim otherwise is patent bull$hit.

I'll mention something else. People with leftist sympathies i.e. liberal, spiritual universalism, have no qualms about using totalitarian powers to force their viewpoint on others.

Hayek as well as Milton Friedman also pointed out the irony that in a capitalist society, socialists are allowed to pursue their subversive political goals, whereas in a socialist society, no such presence exists because the government forbids any and all subversive political activity.

If that doesn't prove capitalisms moral superiority, I don't know what does.

Also, the difference between capitalism and communism could be interpreted as the fight between quality and quantity. Marxism thinks all things are economical. Humans are turned into mere economic pawns in it's system. We have no higher interests then to have "enough" to live. By giving people an equal share, socialism also undermines human choice: people are now subject to educational institutions, a media, and government that pushes the official philosophy. Individuals are undercut. The individual is disdained. To create peace, people must be deprived of the blessing of individual choice.

Conversely, capitalism, which makes use of capital, paradoxically defends individual freedoms. Its paradoxical how that works. That socialisms economic focus on equality ends up irreparably harming individuals, thereby reducing diversity and thus quality of living (who would like just a red carpet versus a beautiful mosaic?). Capitalism, which seeks to reward individual merit and so create conditions of inequality, nevertheless preserves diversity by keeping the governments hands far away from meddling too much.


And THIS^^^ is why right-wingers/Capitalists are thought of as utterly stupid/uninformed.

BECAUSE YOU ARE!

What you're lambasting is a specific despotic State-Communist society AND NOT SOCIALISM.

If you actually study Socialism, most of your claims will fall away for many of its incarnations. So... try again, fascist.



posted on Jan, 4 2013 @ 07:36 PM
link   
what we are experiencing now is not democracy, its a balance between a gigantic corporate oligarchy and a constitutional republic, the world is a little more complicated nowadays and things change fairly quickly.

confining yourself to whatever "definition" of government you choose is more detrimental to society than looking at every situation case by case and using different means for different problems.

with labels we limit our minds to what is possible and instead begin to find solutions we personally agree with. In a society as big as ours, this will result in the same gridlocking of opinions the public is currently experiencing.

And in all reality Communism was simply a responsive solution to the times Lenin was living in, what responsive solutions could we come up with today that would make a difference today yet mean nothing 80 years from now?



posted on Jan, 4 2013 @ 08:13 PM
link   
reply to post by NoHierarchy
 


Keep on dreaming about moonbeams and ponies......reading about communism is like reading a book of fiction. Never going to happen.





No one has stated that communism is wrong, it is just impossible to implement.

(and with people like you who are stating that right wing / capitalists are stupid and the OP who wants people that disagree to disappear / do not comment - no wonder we doubt your "for the people" claim, in any communists / socialist society eventually an individual with those very attitudes will show up and the rest of us will be # out of luck)



posted on Jan, 4 2013 @ 08:43 PM
link   
reply to post by NysgjerrigDame
 


Communism is the eradication of all private property. This is not something to be welcomed but instead dreaded. Individual sovereignty is non existent without private property. Individual freedom is crucial to society that would like to exist without coercive force. Private property is essential for this.



posted on Jan, 4 2013 @ 08:53 PM
link   
reply to post by NoHierarchy
 





And THIS^^^ is why right-wingers/Capitalists are thought of as utterly stupid/uninformed.



Way to forget what you wrote.You said "your reading" of Hayek appeared to be advocating socialism, populism, etc. I said that's bull$hit, since, as someone with 7 Hayek books on my bookshelf, having studied his writings, I know that to interpret Hayek in such a light is as insane as claiming Darwn advocated creationism. In other words, what you claimed about Hayek is the exact opposite of what Hayek believed. The fact that you haven't expanded upon that claim shows you either haven't read hs writings, and only know of him, or are Bull$#ting for the thrill of it.




If you actually study Socialism, most of your claims will fall away for many of its incarnations. So... try again, fascist.



That is so pathetically weak. If you're able, address each of my points about the dangers of socialism. If my worries are unfounded, address them. Elucidate, instead of decrying my ignorance of socialism (which I know quite well).



posted on Jan, 4 2013 @ 09:36 PM
link   
Most of the hate is the same as hatred of hippies, 'Negros', Arabs. 'Chinks' etc. They hate who the government tells them to hate, and they do so mindlessly for generations.

It's funny how so many of the arguments here are that 'communism doesn't work', and that it's a sure-fire recipe for war, when the main reason it's not worked is due to greedy bastards shutting it down, and in more than one case, US/Nato/allied etc. involvement in the shutting down (often violently) of reasonably successful Communism/Nationalism.

In most cases, the only difference between communist dictatorships and capitalist ones is the illusion of freedom and power given in 'Democratic' nations. The only real power in a democracy is revolution, and such has not happened in the majority of first world democratic nations in a long time, making the process of a token voting system the only real remnant of 'democratic' power, and the illusion of land and property ownership the only illusion of capitalism being viable for the masses.

Let me give a quick example of a democratic capitalist nation to relate to. Willy Wonka, with his ownership and authority over all of his company and chocolate factory, gives you one Everlasting Gobstopper. The Gobstopper is yours so long as you agree to the conditions that you will keep it only for yourself, you will not show or give it to Slugworth or any other competing company, and that you acknowledge that it is indeed therefore property of Willy Wonka and Wonka Industries.

Now relate this to the above. I purchase with American Dollars property on US soil. I may live there, farm there, or build and rent out the property as long as I acknowledge that it belongs not to me but the US nation, and continue to pay taxes on said land. I may not under any circumstances lawfully build a foreign embassy on said land, or gift or sell that land to a foreign nation. I can however sell my right to use the property for certain allowed activities and ventures to foreign interests in a commercial sense, as long as this is an approved body willing to pay due taxes, acknowledge American national ownership of the land itself, and adhere to the law and statutes attached to those conditions.

TL ; DR: Democracy is as much of a farce as Communism, only democratic nations give the illusion of power, ownership, and rights to the individual, where communism just outright tells you you have limited rights and freedoms.



posted on Jan, 4 2013 @ 10:45 PM
link   
The form of communism they have in China is not true communism. It is basically Chinese Imperialism without a royal family. It was replaced with a government and it is the government that puts the leader in place in much the same way as imperialistic families did.

All the stratus of Chinese Class is still in place. The way they distribute the land is still done the same as when they were under the historic imperialistic class they let the poor work the land and they keep a certain amount for themselves and then the rest goes to the government.

Chinese Communism is basically a modified Imperialistic program and it works for that particular culture. It would never work for western society.

Lenin/Marxist styled Communism never works because it is based on the principle that Man is basically good and will do for others as he would for himself. But that is a fantasy. If it doesn't get him ahead he will become lazy and not work as hard.

Free market capitalism works because it understands man basic greedy nature and using that it motivates men to work hard when it benefits themselves.
edit on 4-1-2013 by ChesterJohn because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 4 2013 @ 11:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by ChesterJohn
The form of communism they have in China is not true communism. It is basically Chinese Imperialism without a royal family. It was replaced with a government and it is the government that puts the leader in place in much the same way as imperialistic families did.

All the stratus of Chinese Class is still in place. The way they distribute the land is still done the same as when they were under the historic imperialistic class they let the poor work the land and they keep a certain amount for themselves and then the rest goes to the government.

Chinese Communism is basically a modified Imperialistic program and it works for that particular culture. It would never work for western society.

Lenin/Marxist styled Communism never works because it is based on the principle that Man is basically good and will do for others as he would for himself. But that is a fantasy. If it doesn't get him ahead he will become lazy and not work as hard.

Free market capitalism works because it understands man basic greedy nature and using that it motivates men to work hard when it benefits themselves.
edit on 4-1-2013 by ChesterJohn because: (no reason given)


And in all of these systems, parasitic people still figure out how to bleed the honest worker.

These are usually the same twisted idiots that see hard working people as somehow being selfish.



posted on Jan, 4 2013 @ 11:25 PM
link   
reply to post by badgerprints
 


you got that right because man is greedy and if being a parasite benefits him he will indulge in that. Make it hard for him to be a parasite and he will become a thief (a form of societal parasite) or a hard working honest man.
edit on 4-1-2013 by ChesterJohn because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 5 2013 @ 12:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by crankySamurai
reply to post by NysgjerrigDame
 


Communism is the eradication of all private property. This is not something to be welcomed but instead dreaded. Individual sovereignty is non existent without private property. Individual freedom is crucial to society that would like to exist without coercive force. Private property is essential for this.




You've been fooled....

Even if you don't believe the story you can gleam the intent of the story....

Why was the Tower of Babel destroyed, mankind scattered and given different tongues?



posted on Jan, 5 2013 @ 12:32 AM
link   
reply to post by NysgjerrigDame
 





Most of ATS believes the lies of the West,


Lies of the west?... Sigh! How about the "RESULTS" of every country in history that has tried it... (shakes head unbelief)


You wannabes can't even mount a credible argument much less a coherent one...
www.abovetopsecret.com...
www.abovetopsecret.com...
www.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on Jan, 5 2013 @ 01:05 AM
link   
Reply to post by NysgjerrigDame
 


For several very simple reasons.

They grew up being taught that America is the greatest nation ever, can never do any wrong and that communism is pure evil. Couple that with listening to Fox News and Glenn Beck or Limbaugh, where the word communism is constantly used, albeit incorrectly, every 10 minutes, they lose all critical thinking ability and they are programmed to automatically equate communism with evil. More importantly, they automatically equate Obama with communism and evil. It's disturbing to see how many ill informed, downright ignorant people are in the country and wandering about under the illusion that they understand what they say.


 
Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com
 



posted on Jan, 5 2013 @ 01:17 AM
link   

Lies of the west?... Sigh! How about the "RESULTS" of every country in history that has tried it... (shakes head unbelief)


There have been anarchist countries that had absolute equality, both in terms of social liberties and access to economic resources?? OMG, where??
edit on 5-1-2013 by TheJourney because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 5 2013 @ 02:20 AM
link   
Hey I am from China... technically we are still living in a Communism country(Communism political system combine with half Capitalism economy), I can tell Communism is not a good thing, it still affecting these days no matter how much works karl marx or other wisemen had done on paper, Communism had killed people, millions and millions, Destroyed traditions culture and integrity.



posted on Jan, 5 2013 @ 02:22 AM
link   
reply to post by clapper
 


It is the greed of those who decided to take power in those systems that caused the death and decay of morality, not the system itself.



posted on Jan, 5 2013 @ 02:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by TrueBrit
reply to post by clapper
 


It is the greed of those who decided to take power in those systems that caused the death and decay of morality, not the system itself.


Oh yeah, First they want to take power and then they invented Communism to achieved the goal.



posted on Jan, 5 2013 @ 02:34 AM
link   
reply to post by clapper
 


Specifically, the fellows who "invented" communism as you put it, were not in and of themselves seeking power. They were reacting to an unacceptable situation in the politics of thier region, and formulating a new method to re focus the powerbase of that region, on to the majority, the worker, the poor. They were trying to insist that a nation only march as fast as its slowest citizen, so that no one would be left behind through destitution, and provide for everyone, rather than allowing the prevailing system at the time, to leave the least well off to die through poverty.



posted on Jan, 5 2013 @ 02:44 AM
link   
reply to post by TrueBrit
 


I can understand your words it's the same in our school books, but in reality Communism society never work out like that.





new topics

top topics



 
15
<< 12  13  14    16  17 >>

log in

join