Communism Killed 100 Million People in 20th Century. Underestimate no doubt

a reply to: 727Sky


"Many forms of Gov­ern­ment have been tried, and will be tried in this world of sin and woe. No one pre­tends that democ­ra­cy is per­fect or all-wise. Indeed it has been said that democ­ra­cy is the worst form of Gov­ern­ment except for all those oth­er forms that have been tried from time to time.…"
-Winston Churchill

a reply to: DBCowboy

D.C the form of Govt is not in question per say, it's the form of economic system. a pure form of a democracy can lead to horrors, a Republic is a lil better since the right of the minority may not be infringed on, at least in a perfect world.

a reply to: Spider879

The economic system that a nation adopts is predicated on the form of government that a nation has.

a reply to: DBCowboy

Not at all times D.C both England and Saudi Arabia are monarchist and especially Saudi Arabia is leading towards a monarchist theocracy, but it's economic system is capitalist.. China is Communist in name only today, it is so for removed from communism, Mao have stopped rolling over in his grave he is so exhausted.

a reply to: XAnarchistX

We should also establish the fact that your brand of communism is a unicorn.

Who's in charge?

Who is manipulating a political ideology to fit their twisted version of it?

America's current oligarchy, based on the premise of Capitalism - - - benefits the top 1%.

None of them, Communism, Socialism, Republic, etc, are corrupt in their true base conceptions.

I'm open to something better then what we've become.

originally posted by: Spider879
a reply to: DBCowboy

Not at all times D.C both England and Saudi Arabia are monarchist and especially Saudi Arabia is leading towards a monarchist theocracy, but it's economic system is capitalist.. China is Communist in name only today, it is so for removed from communism, Mao have stopped rolling over in his grave he is so exhausted.

You can't call it a free market system. If anything, the systems in China and Saudi are bastard children of socialism.

Which can function as long as they never have elections and the ruling power stays in place.

Which is what many want in the US.

Socialism might work within the US as long as you eliminate elections and have one ruling ideology. That way long-term programs that would have to be run by the government could stay in place.

originally posted by: nOraKat

originally posted by: Ohanka
Ideas cannot kill people.

Communism has never killed a single person. Neither has Capitalism, or Fascism.

Communism can work if the leadership has good benevolent intentions. However if the leaderships intentions are for a greedy special interest dictatorship then socialism/communism will enable that.

There is a greedy special interest and there is minority interest.

Communism always considers the good of the state to be paramount. So if you happen to be getting in the way of the perceived good of the state as an entity, you will be sacrificed.

This is where communism always fails. It is always just blindly assumed that the good of the state will obviously benefit the most people ... until you're on the chopping block for one reason or another.

originally posted by: DBCowboy

originally posted by: Spider879
a reply to: DBCowboy

Not at all times D.C both England and Saudi Arabia are monarchist and especially Saudi Arabia is leading towards a monarchist theocracy, but it's economic system is capitalist.. China is Communist in name only today, it is so for removed from communism, Mao have stopped rolling over in his grave he is so exhausted.

You can't call it a free market system. If anything, the systems in China and Saudi are bastard children of socialism.

Which can function as long as they never have elections and the ruling power stays in place.

Which is what many want in the US.

Socialism might work within the US as long as you eliminate elections and have one ruling ideology. That way long-term programs that would have to be run by the government could stay in place.

How so ???.socialism works well in Denmark and other northern nations and they have a vibrant multi party system.. at least that's what I have read so far.

a reply to: Spider879

Now wait ... that's colonialism which is not capitalism.

The thing I am seeing here is that people are confusing the ideas of economic systems and political systems, but that's understandable.

Communism and socialism are both mixed up with the state/political system and dependent on it in order to control the economy. Fascism is the same way.

Capitalism is simply an economic system that occurs ... even in state-run, command economies where it has been outlawed. It is merely the state of the free exchange of goods and services. People want to call the US a capitalist society, but given the amount and level of government intrusion and control in the markets, that's debatable. However, to the extent we do have capitalism, that is not dependent on our government. We do not have a "capitalist" government like many European governments call themselves Democratic socialist governments.

originally posted by: Spider879

originally posted by: DBCowboy

originally posted by: Spider879
a reply to: DBCowboy

Not at all times D.C both England and Saudi Arabia are monarchist and especially Saudi Arabia is leading towards a monarchist theocracy, but it's economic system is capitalist.. China is Communist in name only today, it is so for removed from communism, Mao have stopped rolling over in his grave he is so exhausted.

You can't call it a free market system. If anything, the systems in China and Saudi are bastard children of socialism.

Which can function as long as they never have elections and the ruling power stays in place.

Which is what many want in the US.

Socialism might work within the US as long as you eliminate elections and have one ruling ideology. That way long-term programs that would have to be run by the government could stay in place.

How so ???.socialism works well in Denmark and other northern nations and they have a vibrant multi party system.. at least that's what I have read so far.

The multi-party systems all have the same core beliefs.

a reply to: Kkintekk

They already are. Everything since the last election has been all about the nasty Russians and how they stole the election. If something goes wrong for you, you better make sure there isn't a Russian hiding under your bed.

a reply to: DBCowboy

I think we need to let California fully play itself out before we decide whether or not your vision of working socialism is valid. California is more or less what you describe.

a reply to: ketsuko

I did considered the issue of colonialism and it's relationship to capitalism as practiced by Wall St and other areas of high finance , yes a monarchy may get it's cut, but it's the individual private companies that reaps most of the benefits, often times to rival a dynasty or an official government of what ever form...remember the speak softly and carry a big stick , era of the Banana Republics??

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: DBCowboy

I think we need to let California fully play itself out before we decide whether or not your vision of working socialism is valid. California is more or less what you describe.

Notice how I said you'd have to eliminate elections for socialism to succeed.

The US has a schizophrenic government style.

Every 4 to 8 years it changes it's personality and approach.

In order for Socialism to "work" it would have to have just one type of ideology running things, thus ending the US and the Constitution.

As for socialism actually working? It probably would, until it ran out of other people's money.

a reply to: Spider879

I do remember that, but I'm confused as to what Teddy Roosevelt (who said it) and the beginning of the Progressive Era has to do with this since it seems to be one you ought to be very fond of.

a reply to: DBCowboy

California is basically a small microcosm of one party rule inside the US. You more or less don't have meaningful elections out there anymore.

originally posted by: DBCowboy

originally posted by: Spider879

originally posted by: DBCowboy

originally posted by: Spider879
a reply to: DBCowboy

Not at all times D.C both England and Saudi Arabia are monarchist and especially Saudi Arabia is leading towards a monarchist theocracy, but it's economic system is capitalist.. China is Communist in name only today, it is so for removed from communism, Mao have stopped rolling over in his grave he is so exhausted.

You can't call it a free market system. If anything, the systems in China and Saudi are bastard children of socialism.

Which can function as long as they never have elections and the ruling power stays in place.

Which is what many want in the US.

Socialism might work within the US as long as you eliminate elections and have one ruling ideology. That way long-term programs that would have to be run by the government could stay in place.

How so ???.socialism works well in Denmark and other northern nations and they have a vibrant multi party system.. at least that's what I have read so far.

The multi-party systems all have the same core beliefs.

And that's a problem because?

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: DBCowboy

California is basically a small microcosm of one party rule inside the US. You more or less don't have meaningful elections out there anymore.

That's not true at all.

CA has had both Republican and Democratic governors.

CA is very mixed politically.

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: DBCowboy

originally posted by: Spider879

originally posted by: DBCowboy

originally posted by: Spider879
a reply to: DBCowboy

Not at all times D.C both England and Saudi Arabia are monarchist and especially Saudi Arabia is leading towards a monarchist theocracy, but it's economic system is capitalist.. China is Communist in name only today, it is so for removed from communism, Mao have stopped rolling over in his grave he is so exhausted.

You can't call it a free market system. If anything, the systems in China and Saudi are bastard children of socialism.

Which can function as long as they never have elections and the ruling power stays in place.

Which is what many want in the US.

Socialism might work within the US as long as you eliminate elections and have one ruling ideology. That way long-term programs that would have to be run by the government could stay in place.

How so ???.socialism works well in Denmark and other northern nations and they have a vibrant multi party system.. at least that's what I have read so far.

The multi-party systems all have the same core beliefs.

And that's a problem because?

Never said it was a problem, just saying that how socialist countries can have "multi-party" systems.

If all the "parties" use socialism as it's core, then socialism can function.