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.
Why don't you explain what a Republic is without looking at Wikipedia?
A representative republic is a democracy where people do not directly vote themselves on the issues, but they vote for a representative to vote in their interest. Can you imagine the logistics required if we replaced Congress and the Electoral College with just the popular vote?
Quote:
Originally Posted by NCN
I have always thought of communism as the government becoming more powerful than and taking the place of God. When each individual is responsible for himself then he can look to God instead of the government for his fate.
I don't believe in God. Call me a godless communist like Stalin all you want.
Socialism is a government controlled economy with programs and benefits in place to reduce the income differences between classes.
Communism is a form of socialism, in which private property in abolished and class identifications are virtually non-existent. According to Karl Marx's theory on societal progression, all nations proceed to communism, in an order that is essentially feudalism-slave state-capitalism-socialism-communism. There are most aspect to communism, which can all be found in the Communism Manifesto, which I suggest everyone read. No, it won't make you a communist. It didn't on me.
Authoritarianism is a government system in which one or very few individuals have total control over a country.
Some important things to note:
A true communism has never existed. The Soviet Union was not a communism, at least, not by Marx's definition. Marx clearly state that an industrial state must exist for communism to truly exist. Russia was non-industrialized at the time of Lenin's take over. Lenin believed he could force Russian into communism, and industrialize it with the government's power afterward (this is called Leninism).
Authoritarian government's don't have to exist in a communist/socialist state. By that, I mean a form of Democracy can exist within these states. Karl Mark was pro-representative government and constitutionalism. This is precisely why the Soviet Union was not communist. There were classes within society. There was the overwhelming majority, and the leaders.
Communism, as seen in the modern eye, it Utopian. Ideal in nature, but likely impossible to achieve. Or impossible to achieve for long.
Yep, Lenin basically skipped the capitalist and much of the socialist phase. The communal farms didn't work very well, either. The result is kinda like what happens when you skip the instructions building a Lego set, thinking, I got this.
I think we're seeing the progression already, in Europe. Western European countries have moved from feudalism, to the slave state, to a capitalist industrialized state, and now they're moving towards socialism.
Yep, Lenin basically skipped the capitalist and much of the socialist phase. The communal farms didn't work very well, either. The result is kinda like what happens when you skip the instructions building a Lego set, thinking, I got this.
I think we're seeing the progression already, in Europe. Western European countries have moved from feudalism, to the slave state, to a capitalist industrialized state, and now they're moving towards socialism.
Which is the last stage before total collapse, to be taken over by a corrupt oligarchy.
We're talking about reality, not the insane ramblings of madmen.
It just so happens that this "rambling madman" created a pretty influential political philosophy. And what he described in his manifestos is likely what he envisioned would happen if his instructions were followed. As the other poster said, Lenin failed to properly communize Russia. No one's ever made it to the Sixth Stage so we have no basis in reality anyways. Try reading Marx's work.
It just so happens that this "rambling madman" created a pretty influential political philosophy. And what he described in his manifestos is likely what he envisioned would happen if his instructions were followed. As the other poster said, Lenin failed to properly communize Russia. No one's ever made it to the Sixth Stage so we have no basis in reality anyways. Try reading Marx's work.
LOL!
You provide the argument that explains why they were madmen, but don't see it.
You can only create true communism if you kill everyone.
Actually, socialism and communism are not the same thing.
Karl Marx made it clear that there is a progression towards communism.
The Soviet Union came rather close to communism - and it was the objective of its leaders, though many Politburo members at the end had ceased being true believers (Mikhail Suslov may be a notable exception).
Anyways, what you hear criticized is socialism, which can lead to communism.
If you don't know why socialism is bad - Harrier can give you three good reasons: Josef Stalin, Chairman Mao, and Pol Pot.
and I can give you three reasons why it (socialism) is good like David Ben Gurion, Aneurin Bevin and Helmut Scmidt (Chancellor of the BDR) .Three good communists include Steven J. Gould, Paul Robeson and John Reed with an honorable mention to Pete Seeger.
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.
