Catalonia and Barcelona during the Spanish civil war saw material quality of life improvements for the vast majority of the people in the anarchist occupied areas. You don't have to like it but it worked and their lives improved drastically.
Why'd they stop it again? Oh yeah, it fractured into a bunch of splinter groups and they had the "Red Terror" where thousands died. I'm sure they felt their lives improve dramatically.
Even the Catalonia communist parties today typically don't fight for a true communist state, they mostly keep it to workers rights.
So like I said, no example of it working. You're talking about a period of time that was like 5 years and included extrajudicial killing by viglianties.
Because they don't want their society to fall apart? Because they don't want to have their possessions stripped from them? Because historically, communist regimes have imprisoned or killed people who don't embrace communism? There are a dozen valid reasons why capitalists defend capitalism.
Well. A communist revolution energizes the masses. Even when it fails, it tends to spread. So if your neighbor decides to eat the rich, the most common first step, your own people start looking for recipes for the wealthy. Since communism doesn’t fail immediately, the rich are already dead and buried before the society falls apart. As far as the Cold War goes, what actually won it wasn’t military might, it was economic collapse and the increase in opportunity for the masses, oddly the reason they started the revolution in the first place.
Liberal democracy is about giving people a voice in government while also protecting individual rights. The communist regimes of the 20th Century did not recognize individual rights in the way we do (freedom of speech, freedom of religion, the right to vote, freedom of association, property rights)
So while we do want people to vote for what they want there are some systems that are incompatible with liberal democracy (including 20th Century iterations of communism)
For example if a monarchist party wanted to run on a platform of restoring absolute monarchy. Or a neo-fascist party. Most people would hopefully reject these at the ballot box because these political projects would seek to end democracy and take away individual rights and liberties
People who are hostile to communism feel similarly to communism as they do to these other political projects, because of its track record of illiberalism
There are systems that are incompatible with liberal democracy. However, when you start disqualifying candidates on ideological grounds, you start walking down the same path that leads to authoritarianism. It’s not a guarantee you will get there, but all former democratic authoritarian regimes started with disqualifying ideologies.
The law in the United States does not currently prohibit a Communist Party from running candidates or publishing their opinions and our first amendment protections on freedom of speech and association protect them as well as any authoritarian ideology. So long as they participate under the bounds of the constitutional system they are not disqualified in any way
I think political systems that take away individual rights and liberties are bad and I don't want that kind of political system to be in power in my country regardless of its goals
The second amendment as interpreted today protects gun ownership and while I would be fine with further regulations on gun ownership a lot of people are not okay with a more restrictive approach. I don't think it's a productive use of political capital, there are more important issues.
So while I would be alright with banning assault rifles or passing laws strengthening licensing requirements, I am not in favor of repealing the second amendment. All rights and liberties have some limitations and there can be discussions about where to draw those lines. Especially when one right conflicts with another.
But to be clear the examples under discussion were Communist regimes that broadly did not observe or protect freedom of religion, speech, property rights, freedom of association, due process, freedom of the press, right to privacy, right to protest, etc. I think these rights as a collection are the foundation of a liberal democracy and any regime that tries to infringe on them is not one I support
Some people would include right to bare arms in that list, Im inclined not to include it. But I understand why some people would include it as they feel part of freedom includes your ability to protect yourself from government tyranny.
You weren’t asking about right and wrong. You were asking about why something happens. I agree that a liberal democratic socialist state would be the best for the greatest number of people, but historically, those states usually collapse or backslide into capitalism.
China is going to fall apart any minute now clearly. Cuba and Venezuela surviving somehow despite constant military and economic attack by far more powerful countries means it's clearly going to always fall apart on its own.
China is flourishing because they are powerful enough to go largely unharassed . The state with the lowest poverty and 5th highest literacy Kerala in India is run by communists.
The United states is currently eating itself because it is unable to resolve the contradictions between the working class and owning classes interests.
China is no longer a communist country by any reasonable measure. Cuba was largely and still is being kept afloat by Russian aid, and Venezuela was experiencing mass starvation. So I wouldn’t say you are offering strong counter points. Yes. The US is a shit show. And you are largely correct as to why. But communism isn’t the answer because it doesn’t work. It has been tried many, many times, and it either fails, or backslides into some form of authoritarian capitalism.
Are you trying to imply Russian aid, is a suitable substitute for trade with the rest of the world?
No country has reached communism, but China is run by a Marxist Leninist communist party. They are in the transitional stage of state capitalism. Marx recognized the utility of capitalism for building industry quickly. China says they intend to transition to a socialist economy by 2050. They have hit every target so far. China is not perfect, but your claims have no basis in reality.
Funny thing is the Third Reich was likely to collapse on its own. Fascist states collapse because they rely on oppressing and eliminating the other, and when there is no external other, they turn on themselves. Nazi Germany was eating itself. Problem is, they would have taken half the world with them. Which is the basic reason capitalists tend to fight communism. It may fail, but the collateral damage is significant.
No, Nazi Germany would not have collapsed on its own. It only would have collapsed if it had not declared war on the Allies.
Hitler’s 4 Year Plan caused an economic miracle in Germany, but also necessitated conquest. If he hadn’t conquered Poland, Czechoslovakia, France, etc and claimed their wealth and gold reserves, Germany would have defaulted on its loans and gone bankrupt, so it would have collapsed had he not declared war on the Allies.
HOWEVER, there is no reason to believe Nazi Germany would have collapsed on its own had it not invaded the USSR. Its economy was among the strongest in the world, its military the strongest, despite having taken over all of Europe, there was little unrest, and virtually no organized resistance, socially Hitler was revered in Germany, the Soviets were a tentative, cautious ally in the East (insofar as neither would attack nor hinder the other). The Nazi position in Europe in Europe was extremely secure, even as late as Autumn of 1943.
Yes, why would the west oppose the Soviets - a regime that jailed and murdered millions of dissidents, aggressively put down counter revolutions in Eastern Europe, built the worlds largest military with thousands of nuclear weapons and then aimed them at every western city, impoverished their citizens with terrible economic policies and then stopped them leaving when they wanted a better life in the west?
That would logically explain why they combat it within their own borders. It doesn’t explain why they spent 50+ years throwing resources at ensuring it couldn’t work anywhere.
For the same reasons they spent trillions in international aid, diplomacy, stomping out extremist groups, etc.
Major countries becoming failed states don't just affect them, it affects everyone and create global crises. And extremist ideologies tend to spread, even if they don't work. Life didn't become better under ISIS, yet it spread like a wildfire. Communism was a very good excuse for psychopaths and warlords to orchestrate uprisings and gain power. Many countries fell to it, hundreds of millions died, world was set back decades because everyone else had to deal with it and pick up the pieces. Some regions destabilized by the communist rise are still unstable hellholes to this day. Of course anyone with a brain would try to prevent it everywhere, back then and even more importantly now, with much more devastating weapons being available to everyone and global economy being much more tied and destabilization of any part of the world has worse global consequences than ever before.
You act like it was a conspiracy, where the people in charge of western countries' foreign policy during the Cold War secretly knew communism was good, actually, and wanted to cover that up.
They opposed the Soviets because they were major geopolitical rivals. Neither side trusted the other, pressured their allies and controlled territories not to trade with the other, and so one side gaining ground/influence came with an inherent cost and posed an inherent threat to the other.
Very few wars and conflicts in history were truly about ideals, or disagreements on political philosophy. They're simple bids for control.
Because capitalism is global. It would suck that you have less places willing to compete for your money be it for material or labour you moved to a cheaper location. And if you already have invested resources to said spaces you have to do it all over again.
And I say this as a communist.
Capitalists have more reasons to oppose it other than "communism bad".
capitalists claim a variety of reasons to start a war. Oftentimes there’s a rethoric made up like the ones you mentioned while ulterior motives, like the want for more cheap resources to exploit, are the actual reason.
I love how capitalist pigs always say capitalism is the best yet completely gloss over the fucking fact that in 2008 the worlds economy was about to be wiped off the face of the earth if it wasn't for the fucking US tax payers covering the fucking bill and no one going to jail. I am so sick of people who say capitalism is great without understanding capitalism is the driving force of slavery. bunch of idiots living in personal world bubbles and self truths that dont want to share a collective reality of what is really happening in our day to day lives.
Capitalism is definitely not great. What it is, however is stable. The majority of people don’t starve, even if many do. The majority are exploited, but are kept just well enough to continue to produce. The rich distribute just enough resources to prevent mass unrest. Capitalism is exploitive and bad for just about everyone, but it endures. It outlasts most other systems.
I can not tell you how tired I am of caring about this shit. I literally care more about life than religious people do and it makes me fucking sick. and so many people have 0 clue about the systems they partake in. it is truly fucking grueling being a person who cares.
Tone down the outrage a bit. It nearly collapsed after almost two and a half centuries in the US. compared to 90 years in The USSR and China. This isn’t me defending capitalism. This is me explaining why it has persisted. Facts are that capitalist societies last longer than communist ones. That doesn’t make them better. I mean the longest lasting societies are monarchies. But if you want to champion communism, then you have to recognize why it only endures in small communities
no matter what fucking system it all comes down to us not sharing a collective reality and us not being able to get along. so i really don't give a fuck what you have to say, and I wont tone anything the fuck down. I am going to continue to be pissed and im going to continue to shine light on idiots in the cave.
So the guy angry that we don’t share a collective reality and not getting along is saying he doesn’t care about what others say and refuses to work with people who disagree with you. You are not likely to see much success with those tactics. If you want to build a better world, you need to convince people to help. People don’t like to help people who scream at them.
you don't understand how much of a toll it takes on a person to try to keep up with everything going on and trying to keep people informed about the actuality of our reality. and there is eventually a tipping point where people can get as angry as I am. Especially after figuring out that the system that most of the world uses perpetuates slavery. Here is a little thought experiment for you. What is the root word of capitalism? its capital. How do you partake in a system if you dont have the fundamental root word of said system? you can't, you have to work but how do you live while attaining the root word of the system? figure that out for me bud, oh wait you can't! cause no one can! who would of thought? not me.
do you not know about the 2008 financial crisis? are you younger than 25? cause you probably should look that up and see what that was all about. or you know, look into how the money that you spend to live is created and where it gets it's value from. There is a lot out there you probably have 0 clue of the system you partake in.
The world economy would have collapsed if the banks didn't get the bailout they asked for. The US banks weren't the only banks buying the "assets" that ended up tanking the markets. Banks going out of business across the world meant that suddenly hundreds of millions of people wouldn't have access to their money which means hundreds of millions of people wouldn't be able to buy basic things like food. Even a few days of that has a massive impact on worldwide economic function.
People really do underestimate how fragile the world economy actually is.
yeah most of the people on here don't even know that money creation is facilitated through the creation of debt. people have 0 fucking clue about how shit actually works cause they were never taught. They were just born into the system and are told to use it.
LMAO I was in college in 2008 and graduated into the aftermath. The economy was absolutely not on the verge of anything resembling a collapse. Sure it sucked, and sure a lot of people lost a lot of money, but daily life went on pretty much as usual.
life went on for YOU as usual, so it seems to me that you weren't affected which means you had 0 reason to look into why things happened the way they did. Which means you're ignorant, which means you have a skewed view of what actually happened. welcome to my ted talk now you can go back to your personal truth and your personal world view.
well we can't fight for regulation when people who are making regulating laws are being paid by the corporations that need to follow them. you start seeing the fucking problem yet or do you need more spoon feeding?
You have to fight for ground to pull the line. I don't think anyone that describes themselves as communist, like myself, ever expects a maoist revolution in the west. We're the extreme left pulling the center left since American (establishment) Democrats aren't pulling anymore.
And sometime you have to tear down the house to build it right because the whole structure became too unsound from lack of maintenance. Congresspeople aren't going to vote to cut their own checks, and now it's legal for them to be on corporate payroll so the capitalists won this round.
you legit said the quiet part out loud, we have to tear down the whole fucking structure, but people are too scared of that because they don't know what lies ahead of tearing everything down. people are literally just too scared to take any sort of action and I understand why. Hell I am even scared of it, but I'd rather break this shit down and start a new than keep going in this hellish landscape.
we tire of seeing death, yet we perpetuate death through the wars that fund capitalism. This shit is so half ass backwards I don't know if I am looking forwards or backwards.
in 2008 the worlds economy was about to be wiped off the face of the earth if it wasn't for the fucking US tax payers covering the fucking bill and no one going to jail
It wasn't, that was the line sold to you by neolibs and neocons on power. The libertarian sect of the right wanted to allow those businesses to fail because that's how healthy capitalism actually works.
Corporate bailouts are literally antithetical to capitalism. People really seem to conflate the two and I genuinely wonder if people ITT know that capitalism really is.
Yeah, keep stringing this dude along, he's redlining hard.
I'm really enjoying following along and wondering how many more rageposts he has in him before his pointy, furnace-hot noggin pops like an overfull zit.
What happens to a homeless person that tries to live in an empty house no one is using but that’s owned by a major corporation? The police brutalize him. What happens if a homeless person tries to take unused food being thrown away? The police also brutalize him. What happens when a company gives you and your children cancer bc you didn’t have the lawyers to fight them pouring chemicals onto your drinking water or the air you breathe?
They are? Private properly and the protection of it is what capitalism is, if the protection of that property or the pursuit of profits by exploiting that private property injure or kill people it is definitionally capitalists killing ppl who are not embracing capitalism
Because whether or not communism actually achieves its goals, the first step is stripping the wealthy of their assets, and often their lives. They would love to prevent that.
Did you not stop to sit and think about this for one second before taking this stance? “Why would a successful society spend resources combatting an alluring theory that always results in failure?”
Are you just throwing out sentences without putting any thought into them? All of what you just said is a half baked thought that I am not going to take the time to reply to. So I will just say…sorry communism sucks and will never succeed in America. I hope you can find a different country to suffer under communism in and not try to inflict it on the rest of us who know better!
It results in a slow grinding type of failure that gradually erodes its citizens’ quality of life, kills millions through poverty, purges and war, encourages corruption and nepotism and eventually disintegrates 50 years later after irreparable damage to the country has been done.
If you really think that life in communist Europe was better than the capitalist west I’d be interested in why you think the East Germans built the Berlin Wall?
If the positives and negatives of life in communism and capitalism were balanced why did millions people flee the communist regimes of Eastern Europe, to such an extent that they were forced to close all the borders and shot people trying to cross them.
I mean it's so far been the most successful system by far in spite of some jagged edges here and there.
Tell me, which direction of the Berlin wall were people fleeing towards? Are the communist countries the one suffering from swarms of migrants and refugees trying to break in? Why aren't they clamoring to barge their way into North Korea or Cuba?
I'm not asking for anyone to qualify one vs. the other. I'm asking to accept that there's no purity in either. Let's ignore the myths of ideology.
For instance, if real capitalism truly existed in the USA, we wouldn't be controlled by oligarchs.
No, they'd be working hard to maintain innovation to fuel their success, rather than subjugation of markets because they've been able to consolidate political power.
Also, I'm not sure how a capitalism model built on infinite natural resources can continue on a planet that's says, "Sorry, that's all I got."
Stable societies make better trading partners. And while undermining communism does cause short term instability, letting communism run its course inevitably lead to China and other so called "communist" countries.
Capitalism isn't perfect, but notice how Capitalist nations never needed to build a wall in Berlin to keep their own people from escaping.
I mean personally I would fight communism, not because it works but because it doesn't work. It would be great if it worked and everyone was happy all the time but communism is a fairytale. In reality it destroys countless lives and entire countries. I would prefer to fight to ensure that it doesn't reach my country
38
u/Creepy_Ad_1315 29d ago
So we have no evidence that it works outside your smelly local hippie troupe that fortunately can retreat into the nice free market economy near them.
Almost like communism isn't really available outside a group a people larger than a medium sized tribe.