9 replies to this topic

[He who posts]

So I feel like typing as I have one of those fancy devices where you can push buttons and letters appear on the screen.

 

Many people get in heated shout parties when other people say their country that they want to drag through the dirt was really socialist or communist. Generally, it's just looking at the economics and how they failed and that they had some dictator in power. But never do you hear them talk that they failed because the civilians weren't enforcing their rights. Someone else can say you now own the means of production is pretty and all but if you never enforce to keep those you will end up with the many failed states people bring up.

So yeah communist and socialist states have failed because the people weren't enforcing their will that was promised to them. If they did it might have worked, or not but who cares.

 

Edited by xoindotnler, 02 August 2016 - 09:07 AM.

[Manoka]

But it never worked? Name one successful communist country? Who made it, even close to the dream?

[He who posts]

But it never worked? Name one successful communist country? Who made it, even close to the dream?

Sort of. N/A. None.

 

Edited by xoindotnler, 02 August 2016 - 12:59 PM.

[Redezra]

Yeah Communism has a tendency to not work when some guys go "Hey wait a minute, I can rort the system and live like a king!". That is just a little at odds with the main message and vibe of Communism. But hey, what can you do, slave only dreams to be king, amirite?

[ᗅᗺᗷᗅ]

Communism, as practiced by various nation-states in the 20th century, was socialism run by gangsters. In other words, socialism in name only. Real, effective socialism is democratic and participatory. See Nordic Model.

 

Any system in which an elite few hold power over the rest, decide what's best for them, and impose rules and edicts by fiat is not truly socialist, no matter what it calls itself. Rather, these are the trappings of authoritarianism. Strange that in America the people who most strongly profess disapproval of socialists are conversely willing to throw their wholehearted support to a man who demonstrates all the trappings of authoritarianism listed above. Paradox much?

[Shokkou]

Communism, as practiced by various nation-states in the 20th century, was socialism run by gangsters. In other words, socialism in name only. Real, effective socialism is democratic and participatory. See Nordic Model.

 

Any system in which an elite few hold power over the rest, decide what's best for them, and impose rules and edicts by fiat is not truly socialist, no matter what it calls itself. Rather, these are the trappings of authoritarianism. Strange that in America the people who most strongly profess disapproval of socialists are conversely willing to throw their wholehearted support to a man who demonstrates all the trappings of authoritarianism listed above. Paradox much?

The problem with this is that by that definition all presidents who don't put their decisions to a referendum are authoritarians. Are you willing to go down that road? Because I am, but I don't think you are.

[Redezra]

Referendum based government is ridiculously ineffective. Just find a politically savvy family and give them the presidency, that'll work.

[He who posts]

Referendum based government is ridiculously ineffective. Just find a politically savvy family and give them the presidency, that'll work.

[Redezra]

And their country has been a success ever since.

[He who posts]