• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Who wants to be a communist?

VF500

Member
Joined
Nov 8, 2010
Messages
190
Reaction score
39
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
With the American Communist Party coming out of the closet and the number of self described communists that surround Obama, it's no wonder a lot of people are calling themselves communists. Here's a link that gives a somewhat glossy version of life under Mao in China from 1949, through the different revolutions, various purges, ping pong diplomacy and up to the economic reforms of Deng Xiaping that have turned China into a world player. One item that stuck in my mind was that it wasn't until 1979, after Mao was dead, that "a rudimentary legal system was instituted". The whole thing is 11 pages so stop when you've had enough.

Mao's China
 
With the American Communist Party coming out of the closet and the number of self described communists that surround Obama, it's no wonder a lot of people are calling themselves communists.

This is the part where I need to request a link or some other form of documentation to back up your claims.

As far as I know, the communist party of the US has only a few hundred members.
 
Why would a communist America look anything like China or the Soviet Union? It would be based on our American values. Freedom of speech, the press, religion, etc wouldn't suddenly go away. Embracing socialism as a financial system by no means implies adopting a repressive, totalitarian rule.
 
There is no American Communist Party anymore.

OP needs to do his reading.
 
With the American Communist Party coming out of the closet and the number of self described communists that surround Obama, it's no wonder a lot of people are calling themselves communists. Here's a link that gives a somewhat glossy version of life under Mao in China from 1949, through the different revolutions, various purges, ping pong diplomacy and up to the economic reforms of Deng Xiaping that have turned China into a world player. One item that stuck in my mind was that it wasn't until 1979, after Mao was dead, that "a rudimentary legal system was instituted". The whole thing is 11 pages so stop when you've had enough.

Mao's China

Are you the official communist thread starter around here?
 
Weren't gays the new communists? I mean, if you gotta have a scape goat, stick to one at a time please.
 
The CPUSA is not the ACP. To my knowledge, there never was an American Communist Party. There was (and still is) a Communist Party of the United States of America.

This may seem like nit-picking, but with political parties you NEED to be that precise because even though names can sound similar the two parties may stand for different things.
 
Who wants to be a communist?

I can't really think of anybody except an empoverished farmer or one of the many factory laborers in a pre-industrial or early industrial society, where capitalism has not yet created mass consumption and mass wealth yet -- people who are living from one day to the next, without any chance of ever climbing the social ladder or overcoming the social status they were born into, in a society where a significant class of people plays no role as consumer, but merely as cheap laborer.

Quite a few such people existed in Europe's early industrialization phase during the 19th century (early in Britain, later in France and Germany, finally in Russia), but a genuine "working class" with an according class conscience soon ceased to exist, as class barriers decreased, social mobility increased and capitalism developed far enough to create wealth for the masses (along with a social liberal establishment of certain labor protection laws and social safety nets). The diagram of modern capitalist societies no longer is a pyramid (many poor on the bottom, very few rich on the top) as in those 19th century industrial societies, but has become more like an egg (few rich and few poor, and a large middle class).

Without such a proletariat, you don't find many supporters of communism. The large middle class that has taken its place has too much to lose to oppose capitalism.

But I imagine for pauperized exploited laborers in the 19th century, or farm hands in feudalist societies, who did not have any social safety whatsoever and nothing to lose except their chains, communism is indeed an attractive concept.
 
This is the part where I need to request a link or some other form of documentation to back up your claims.

As far as I know, the communist party of the US has only a few hundred members.

Well, Henny, why not try the one at the bottom of my post that says: MAO'S CHINA Of course that would mean you'd have had to actually read the whole post, which I now know you didn't.
 
Well, Henny, why not try the one at the bottom of my post that says: MAO'S CHINA Of course that would mean you'd have had to actually read the whole post, which I now know you didn't.

Which was a link to something that happened in China. Not the U.S.
 
Well, Henny, why not try the one at the bottom of my post that says: MAO'S CHINA Of course that would mean you'd have had to actually read the whole post, which I now know you didn't.

Your link details the history of communism in china. This in no way addresses any points being made about the current US administration. :shrug:

So I will ask again.
 
Who wants to be a communist?

I can't really think of anybody except an empoverished farmer or one of the many factory laborers in a pre-industrial or early industrial society, where capitalism has not yet created mass consumption and mass wealth yet -- people who are living from one day to the next, without any chance of ever climbing the social ladder or overcoming the social status they were born into, in a society where a significant class of people plays no role as consumer, but merely as cheap laborer.

Quite a few such people existed in Europe's early industrialization phase during the 19th century (early in Britain, later in France and Germany, finally in Russia), but a genuine "working class" with an according class conscience soon ceased to exist, as class barriers decreased, social mobility increased and capitalism developed far enough to create wealth for the masses (along with a social liberal establishment of certain labor protection laws and social safety nets). The diagram of modern capitalist societies no longer is a pyramid (many poor on the bottom, very few rich on the top) as in those 19th century industrial societies, but has become more like an egg (few rich and few poor, and a large middle class).

Without such a proletariat, you don't find many supporters of communism. The large middle class that has taken its place has too much to lose to oppose capitalism.

But I imagine for pauperized exploited laborers in the 19th century, or farm hands in feudalist societies, who did not have any social safety whatsoever and nothing to lose except their chains, communism is indeed an attractive concept.


Ich meine Sie sind ganz verrück. Wie alt sind Sie, junger als fünzehn? Ich bin sechsundsechszig und hab' für über fünfundzwanzig jahre für eine Deutsche firma gearbeitet. Ich kenne ein bisschen um Deutschland. Offensichtlich haben Sie nie unter communismus gelebt, but thanks for giiving me the chance to brush up on my German, Komerad.
 
Last edited:
There was a Socialist Workers' Party candidate for mayor here in DC this year.
 
Which was a link to something that happened in China. Not the U.S.

Well, duh!!

If you had an attention span greather than a May fly, you'd catch what's being written
 
There was a Socialist Workers' Party candidate for mayor here in DC this year.

Yea and we have a socialist in Congress (Bernie Sanders) who keeps getting re-elected.
Well, actually we have several in the Dem party, but Bernie admits it.
 
Who wants to be a communist?

I can't really think of anybody except an empoverished farmer or one of the many factory laborers in a pre-industrial or early industrial society, where capitalism has not yet created mass consumption and mass wealth yet -- people who are living from one day to the next, without any chance of ever climbing the social ladder or overcoming the social status they were born into, in a society where a significant class of people plays no role as consumer, but merely as cheap laborer.

Quite a few such people existed in Europe's early industrialization phase during the 19th century (early in Britain, later in France and Germany, finally in Russia), but a genuine "working class" with an according class conscience soon ceased to exist, as class barriers decreased, social mobility increased and capitalism developed far enough to create wealth for the masses (along with a social liberal establishment of certain labor protection laws and social safety nets). The diagram of modern capitalist societies no longer is a pyramid (many poor on the bottom, very few rich on the top) as in those 19th century industrial societies, but has become more like an egg (few rich and few poor, and a large middle class).

Without such a proletariat, you don't find many supporters of communism. The large middle class that has taken its place has too much to lose to oppose capitalism.

But I imagine for pauperized exploited laborers in the 19th century, or farm hands in feudalist societies, who did not have any social safety whatsoever and nothing to lose except their chains, communism is indeed an attractive concept.

Ja, noch was. About how many pauperized exploited laborers in the 19th century, or farm hands in feudalist societies do you think there are in the United States? This just a pure guess, so don't quote me, but I'm going to say none. So what's filling the ranks of the American Communist Party, except for a bunch of fools who don't know any better and just think it's hip and chic to say, "I'm a communist"?
 
Ich meine Sie sind ganz verrück. Wie alt sind Sie, junger als fünzehn? Ich bin sechsundsechszig und hab' für über fünfundzwanzig jahre für eine Deutsche firma gearbeitet. Ich kenne ein bisschen um Deutschland. Offensichtlich haben Sie nie unter communismus gelebt, but thanks for giiving me the chance to brush up on my German, Komerad.

Hey, Ihr Deutsch ist gar nicht schlecht! Aber am Inhalt müssen wir noch etwas arbeiten ... :D

I wasn't making a point in favor of communism, if that's what you believe I did. I just tried to imagine what kind of people could possibly be attracted by such a horrible ideology. What I said above, in other words, is that "except really desperate people in historical mass poverty, nobody could seriously support communism, except nuts". Capitalism has done much more to improve general wealth and to raise the former working class into the middle class, than communism ever has.
 
Ja, noch was. About how many pauperized exploited laborers in the 19th century, or farm hands in feudalist societies do you think there are in the United States? This just a pure guess, so don't quote me, but I'm going to say none. So what's filling the ranks of the American Communist Party, except for a bunch of fools who don't know any better and just think it's hip and chic to say, "I'm a communist"?

I agree, almost none. That's why the American Communist Party has only a few hundred members out of around 300 million. Except for a very small number of truly confused people, nobody in America supports communism.

If you had a large genuine class of starving workers or farmers, that might be different. In that case, that party might be larger.
 
Hey, Ihr Deutsch ist gar nicht schlecht! Aber am Inhalt müssen wir noch etwas arbeiten ... :D

I wasn't making a point in favor of communism, if that's what you believe I did. I just tried to imagine what kind of people could possibly be attracted by such a horrible ideology. What I said above, in other words, is that "except really desperate people in historical mass poverty, nobody could seriously support communism, except nuts". Capitalism has done much more to improve general wealth and to raise the former working class into the middle class, than communism ever has.

Yep. However, I think the fundamental misunderstanding that fuels threads like these is that there are certain people that cannot tell the difference between those who desire a mixed economy and those who desire communism. Ultimately, it is that misunderstanding or misrepresentation of intent that makes arguments about the hell of being in a communistic country irrelevent to any real policy discussion.
 
Yep. However, I think the fundamental misunderstanding that fuels threads like these is that there are certain people that cannot tell the difference between those who desire a mixed economy and those who desire communism. Ultimately, it is that misunderstanding or misrepresentation of intent that makes arguments about the hell of being in a communistic country irrelevent to any real policy discussion.

Yep, this ridiculous confusion of communism with liberal democracy probably is one reason. Another seems to be that some people have a problem disttinguishing between normative and descriptive claims.
 
I would imagine that many more people in America would support a communist platform if it were detailed. We live in a system dictated by the whims of financial interests. What's good for Coke, GM, Haliburton, and Citibank aren't necessarily what's good for the rest of us. The prime thing that pushes these companies to hinder us is to increase their profit. In a communist system, there is no need for profit in that sense. So then these business can be put into the proper place, serving the common good rather than just serving their owners and shareholders.

I know it's a simplistic argument, and a comprehensive embracing of socialist ideals would be much more complicated than that, but everyone who is not a millionaire stands to benefit from a system which does not treat people like disposable resources.

Consider our current recession. Greedy corporations created a housing market which was unstable, and was designed around getting a lot of money out of customers, and then handing them a volatile product. And now we cannot get jobs while the richest men became richer. This recession would never have happened in a system that is not driven by profit. Especially since our system is very much centered around short-term profit rather than long-term growth.
 
communism works wonderfully, so long as all parties wish to live under communism.

you know how I know it works? because my marriage works, and my marriage is textbook communism.

but once some people don't want to practice communism, it all falls apart.
 
Well, duh!!

If you had an attention span greather than a May fly, you'd catch what's being written

Cool personal attack dude. And I do see what was written. What I don't buy into is what you are trying to sell in that the U.S. is going down the same path as China.
 
Back
Top Bottom