Communism

We are just going to assume communism didn't fail and lead to an oppressive dictatorship (which it does).


I think I would do badly in a communist society, because I am so used to capitalism. However, I think communism would be better for the people. Not much space for corruption...

Anyways, discuss.

yeah communism is superior to democracy by far
but...
such as it was really well showen is russia, you can't change humans.
since the leaders had the power, they also gave themselves a bigger share.
and they didn't even give the same rights to russians and people from other religions or to small groups or whatever

basicly, they took a really good thing and they proved that the human apes are nothing but power hungry.

still.. it's a really good theory... on the paper... >>

and then again it also proved to be a reason for racists to hate jews ~_~
but meh... racists come up with so many dumb ideas it's amazing... >>

Communism is one of better goverments but it took place in bad country(russia) becouse you need a country rich in within there own lands(as in they can grow food easly and can find any luxuries they want) but I still prefur Marcism.

Communism is one of better goverments but it took place in bad country(russia) becouse you need a country rich in within there own lands(as in they can grow food easly and can find any luxuries they want) but I still prefur Marcism.

russia can grow it's own food as weird as it might seem to you they aren't a 3rd world country and they seem to be evolved from time to time.

it's not the country it's the humans in it.
once some jerk takes a bigger share or some decide not to work cause they get paid anyways it turns into chaos.

as for Marcism, Carl Marcs wrote the communism theory, Marcism is named after him and it's basicly Communism that tries to make people accept Communism at will
though Carl marcs could easily tell no rich person will give up their money so the place gotta be taken over
what he failed to see though is how those who took over will also not let go of their new power.
but he was right on the first one too so Maricsm was bound to fail.

No communism is lenin iterpritation of marcism.
Also if the "violent revoltion" occurs those ppl no longer have power and if some trys to take to much land you kill them or remove them from society.

No communism is lenin iterpritation of marcism.
Also if the "violent revoltion" occurs those ppl no longer have power and if some trys to take to much land you kill them or remove them from society.

despite the fact that lenin was the one who managed to make the theory reality this is still Carl marcs' theory.
and you are really wrong about the 2nd one
cause mr hotshot leader lenin gave himself more than he gave to others
he gave the supporters of communism more than to those who didn't
and he did alot of other "unequalizing"
that's why it failed that badly. (so yes in a way you are right, it's a twisted marcism but no one actually follows the book word by word even when it comes to democracy.. lenin just seem to have changed 1 line too many)

Communism isn't the best, but it could be worse.

For example, Bush could run the entire world  

Communism doesn't work. Eventually, people would rebel.

Why the hell would people rebel? Or rather... what exactly would they be rebeling against? Communism is essentially born through rebelion. Why would people rebel against something they rebeled to create?

Because they would want their own things and to have different freedoms.

The problem with that rebelion is that it needs leaders and those leaders get special rights and power so a new revolution would need to occur every 5 minuites but a new leader will come to power and one more rebelion needs to occur and as you can see this is getting you no where.

the thing is not everything needs a leader
and a good leader is someone who doesn't look for special things in a society that should be perfectly equal.
but it's unavoidable when we talk about humans, their greed is more powerful than their logic.

that's why it will never work for humans >>

There's a good quote out there. "Democracy is the worst government. But it's the only one that works."

Whoa did I hear you right? Did you just say only democracy works?
...Dam I have no clue of where to start on how wrong that was...
To start you do realize that the USA is not a pure democracy.
Also Democrac only represents a minority becouse to win election you need majority and becouse it not just a 2 party election so only about 40% of the people get what they want but lets say that the majority was represented do the people really know what they want? Look at leader's that fallowed what there people wanted(Napeolon the 3rd) and see what happens to his country
BTW in most democracy and emergeny state dictator is also a option where thing people dont something to get done to be done(war on iraq was decision made w/o congress appruval or the UN) also what kind of goverment put people like Hitler,Sadaam and Mussoline? They all manipulated democracys to create dicatorships(also might I add sadaam had USA's support). So dont you dare say democracys is the only one that works becouse democracy is just as easly currupted.

Whoa did I hear you right? Did you just say only democracy works?
...Dam I have no clue of where to start on how wrong that was...
To start you do realize that the USA is not a pure democracy.
Also Democrac only represents a minority becouse to win election you need majority and becouse it not just a 2 party election so only about 40% of the people get what they want but lets say that the majority was represented do the people really know what they want? Look at leader's that fallowed what there people wanted(Napeolon the 3rd) and see what happens to his country
BTW in most democracy and emergeny state dictator is also a option where thing people dont something to get done to be done(war on iraq was decision made w/o congress appruval or the UN) also what kind of goverment put people like Hitler,Sadaam and Mussoline? They all manipulated democracys to create dicatorships(also might I add sadaam had USA's support). So dont you dare say democracys is the only one that works becouse democracy is just as easly currupted.

It's a quote. The USA has the best government. We are a federal republic. And that part is a lie about us going to war with Iraq without Congress. We have to have approval. Or we wouldn't be there would we.  :wink:

Whoa did I hear you right? Did you just say only democracy works?
...Dam I have no clue of where to start on how wrong that was...
To start you do realize that the USA is not a pure democracy.
Also Democrac only represents a minority becouse to win election you need majority and becouse it not just a 2 party election so only about 40% of the people get what they want but lets say that the majority was represented do the people really know what they want? Look at leader's that fallowed what there people wanted(Napeolon the 3rd) and see what happens to his country
BTW in most democracy and emergeny state dictator is also a option where thing people dont something to get done to be done(war on iraq was decision made w/o congress appruval or the UN) also what kind of goverment put people like Hitler,Sadaam and Mussoline? They all manipulated democracys to create dicatorships(also might I add sadaam had USA's support). So dont you dare say democracys is the only one that works becouse democracy is just as easly currupted.

It's a quote. The USA has the best government. We are a federal republic. And that part is a lie about us going to war with Iraq without Congress. We have to have approval. Or we wouldn't be there would we.  :wink:

Sorry to break it to ya but congress aproved a month AFTER the invasion.

It's not a good or bad issue. It's a difference of opinions.

Sorry to break it to ya but congress aproved a month AFTER the invasion.

Well it was still approved, wasn't it.

The end doesn't always justify the means.