Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Look, i am not talking about what "government" did. Every country got idiots in the government that do stuff like that. It's just that the USSR ones didn't hide it that much.
In terms of morality i am talking about people. Moral standards of the society (as in individuals) were higher (safer streets, stronger marriages, etc). Plus there was a natural advantage of the socialism - every profession was highly respected and every person believed his job to be important and did it better for the sake of the society. Surely, it has million downsides, but there were some good things about it.
In Soviet Union people didn't know any better, and they actually believed that they are the happiest people in the world, richest and most powerful. And that propoganda worked. People were happy working nine to five, coming back home to their families, and that was enough. People didn't WANT anything else. It's the constant desire for more that is tearing contemporary capitalistic society apart. Such thing was minimal in USSR.
Don't get me wrong, there is almost nothing in this world that i hate more than the soviet regime. It is terrible and one of the reasons why i am such a happy person today - is because i can compare. Trust me, my own family got scary stories like the one you've mentioned.
I am just saying that socialism had good things about it too. People were happy. Science and military industry were developing very rapidly. The country had a lot of power after all. It wasn't socialism that was killing people. It was other people, who had power at that time. Take some time to actually read what socialism and planned economics is in theory - it sounds pretty good))
As a matter of fact every corporation adopts socialism in one way or another: people are brought together, to work together, towards the same goal (development of the corporation), so that their corporation grows ever stronger and their pockets grow ever bigger. That's pure socialism, with the hierarchy and everything. But what works for a company, can't work for a country.
If they were so happy why was the alcoholism rate so high?
Everyone submit your definitions on Communism etc. from what ever source you feel comfortable with....
As for child labor....good point.
....here is an excerpt from....
"The Unknown Gulag: The Lost World of Stalin's Special Settlements" by Lynne Violla.
"Rules regulating the labor of children, minors, women, the elderly, and the non-able-bodied were also routinely violated. According to directives from August 1931, minors under sixteen were not to be employed in industry; exceptions were allowed only with a doctor's certificate and then only if the minor was over fourteen. Fourteen- to sixteen-year-olds were to have a four-hour workday, and sixteen- to eighteen-year-olds a six-hour day. In agriculture, children under twelve were not supposed to work at all. In fact, as a report on special settlers in Kazakhstan noted, children's labor was used "almost everywhere...equally with adults and without time limitations". Iagoda complained that the same norms for healthy men were applied to minors, pregnant women, and the non-able-bodied. A report on the Urals also noted that norms were not differentiated by gender or age."
(my italics)
So, if communist states (read dictatorships) routinely violate all the rules that they supposedly claim as springing inherently from their (liberating in theory but oppressive in practice) political philosophies....are they truly moral states, moral governments?
Is the practice of communism INHERENTLY oppressive regardless of how well intentioned the proponents may be?
So, if communist states (read dictatorships) routinely violate all the rules that they supposedly claim as springing inherently from their (liberating in theory but oppressive in practice) political philosophies....are they truly moral states, moral governments?
Is the practice of communism INHERENTLY oppressive regardless of how well intentioned the proponents may be?
...discuss...
Exactly the opposite.
You gave us an anecdotal example of one country where the Marxist ideal was violated by immoral men. What does that say about the morals of Communism? That it is only immoral if men make it so.
You proved that it is the despots, not the -ism, that is morally deficient. The men imposed child labor, not the communist principle.
Is the men who practice communism INHERENTLY oppressive regardless of how well intentioned the principle may be?
I have a frerind who did some work for a few months i russia. He said it really surprised him. he said bascially everyone wanted a bribe to get anyhtig down. It tooks weeks to get anyhting without it . He alos sadi the workers he meet didn't actaully work much .He also said most were more interested in when the governamnt stores that sold alcochol were open ;which was a hot topic when he was there because they were being closed more. He said that the McDonalds he went to had a hardtime getting workers becuse they were not use to actaully doing steady woker. Quite the opposite from what he was expecting. Basically he concluded why the system didn't work;because no on really cared.The shortages in some stores also made people pretty grouchy and only wanting theirs. He found that most things could be gotten easier on the black market which the police overlooked as long as they got theirs. Western brand cigarettes were one of the hot tiems and even Levis jeans you had wore were prized possessions. He said russia was one screwedup country.
So, does the theory of communism play right into the hands of men (and women) who mean evil....even if somehow the "theory" itself is benign? Can such a easily used theory really BE neutral, or benign then if dictators find it such a convenient tool for controlling and murdering people?
If so, can people who claim to be "moral", claim to lead moral lives accept as valid a theory (or government based on such a theory) so easily twisted by evil people bent on destruction of others?
(Let me give you all a little hint....where are the "checks and balances" in communism?.....That's correct...there aren't any....it's all what the "Boss" the "party" says...)
As for "isolated incidents", the information that has existed and continues to be brought to light daily on the patently evil and inhuman nature of the various communist governments in history is so overwhelming that one would truly have to be living in a box to have missed it. The mass killing of tens of millions of Russians, Ukrainians, Chinese, Khmer, Cambodians and many others is HARDLY an "isolated incident". The enslavement of children as well as untold millions of adults under the GULAG system is prima facie evidence of the murderous intent and actions of the Soviet Government. Whether or not the soviet "leaders" actually personally believed in the "Marxist-Leninist theory" they spouted or merely used it as a tool, an opiate to control the masses seems irrelevant in light of the horrid results of their respective regimes. In either case it would be a stretch of galactic proportions to call such people "moral". No amount of hollow intellectual lip-service spewed out for the benefit of various sycophants in the West bears any resemblance to the reality suffered by the Russian people under communism, the Chinese under communism, the Cambodians under communism etc.
Communist governments past and present have committed mass murders, ethnic cleansing, environmental destruction on such a scale that is defies description. Calling the state organized mass killing machine embodied in the GULAG system and all the horrid results of that system as well as mass collectivization show trials etc as "anecdotal" would have to be the greatest understatement ever!
Thanks everyone for the posts! Good discussion! Keep up the good work!
Last edited by Happy Cells; 03-27-2010 at 02:49 AM..
The earliest forms of human organization were communist. It was soon discovered that communism would not work, because there was no morality among them. So they evolved into oligarchies, usually under a despot, but the non-productive shirkers were still tolerated. They were called priests.
incisive point. communism 'couldnt' work when people's motivations are not aligned to an ideal. communism in itself is actually a good idea but the problem is not the idea, it's people.
as for capitalism, it's very idea has within it the seeds of what motivates or is aligned with people so that is why it works better. it actuality, it is less humane from an ethical point and has it's own problems too.
it is that humans cannot live up to the best ideals as of yet.
it's a very poignant and disturbing truth that most of the world's suffering is due to human faults more than anything. there is enough food in the world, enough medicine, enough of pretty much anything but people's characters determine how that will be utilized for best or not. we are limited by our own natures.
it's like saying wouldn't it be great if everyone was fair, good etc then there wouldn't be most of the problems in the world or it would be a lot less but that's the thing, you have to deal with what is.
(Let me give you all a little hint....where are the "checks and balances" in communism?.....That's correct...there aren't any....it's all what the "Boss" the "party" says...)
Explain to me the checks and balances that are inherent in capitalism. Like when Marcos was president of the Philippines, or Mobutu in Zaire, or the Shah in Iran, or the Saudi kings. Tell me about the checks and balances.
By the way, there are checks and balances in communism. In Chile, Allende was elected in a free election, and the CIA checked and balanced him.
No rational person will ever say that the Fascist Regime in Nazi Germany or the Fascist Regime in Imperialist Japan were "moral" or even legitimate governments.
Given the even more murderous history of Communism and all the associated philosophies and tennants (Marxism, Maoism etc) can any person or persons rationally claim to live by moral guidelines if they support such philosophies and governments that rule by such "philosophies"?
"The Maoist government in China modernized the country, but also murdered 40 to 70 million of it's own citizens" Is a country truly advanced if it has to commit mass murder in order to "improve" and "modernize"?
If mass murder is the cost of modernization, is such modernization moral? Is such modernization even productive?
incisive point. communism 'couldnt' work when people's motivations are not aligned to an ideal. communism in itself is actually a good idea but the problem is not the idea, it's people.
as for capitalism, it's very idea has within it the seeds of what motivates or is aligned with people so that is why it works better. it actuality, it is less humane from an ethical point and has it's own problems too.
it is that humans cannot live up to the best ideals as of yet.
it's a very poignant and disturbing truth that most of the world's suffering is due to human faults more than anything. there is enough food in the world, enough medicine, enough of pretty much anything but people's characters determine how that will be utilized for best or not. we are limited by our own natures.
Good point! Human beings have weaknesses. Perhaps, the most prevalent is being selfish. A social system, that would provide less room for those weaknesses should be preferable. I happened to believe, that socialism is the one.
No rational person will ever say that the Fascist Regime in Nazi Germany or the Fascist Regime in Imperialist Japan were "moral" or even legitimate governments.
Given the even more murderous history of Communism and all the associated philosophies and tennants (Marxism, Maoism etc) can any person or persons rationally claim to live by moral guidelines if they support such philosophies and governments that rule by such "philosophies"?
"The Maoist government in China modernized the country, but also murdered 40 to 70 million of it's own citizens" Is a country truly advanced if it has to commit mass murder in order to "improve" and "modernize"?
If mass murder is the cost of modernization, is such modernization moral? Is such modernization even productive?
Why wasn't the Nazi party a legitimate government? Why wasn't the Japanese Imperial government legitimate?
They were both duly elected by the people of those countries. Most Germans didn't know about the holocaust, or simply remained silent about it to protect themselves, but the Nazi government was in long before the extermination of the Jews began.
The Japanese had their style of government for centuries before the end of WWII, I see no reason why that was legitimate.
Now, about communism. Seems to me, it is the perfect "ideal" system. If everyone worked, and received everything they needed for that work, and no one was better than their brother, thats the perfect system. Much as Star Trek, if you've seen the episodes, and I'm sure you have. There was no money, if you wanted something, you simply got it.
However, humans are far from perfect. Unless we had a limitless amount of power, and food, communism simply isn't a viable system. People just want to much.
My grandfather told me, any work worth doing is worth doing well. In our model of economics, not all work is worth doing well. Its only worth doing well, if you get paid well to do it. In a communist model, the work is its own reward, and you don't need anything else, if your needs are meet.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
