• 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!

Why has Marxism never worked?

:roll: If you're laboring under the impression he was free to say whatever he wanted, you've got quite a bit to learn. But, today has not been your day.

I wasn't aware that the chinese were commonly driven by fear in every step and conversation they made. I'm sure he was constantly monitored :lamo
 
This is ridiculous. What some Chinese tourguide said has hardly any relevance for defining China's polical system, except that it may be an example for what people in China believe what kind of government they are living in.

When a Chinese says "China is socialist", that just means this particular Chinese believes this is what it is. It does not mean he is factually right, that he even understands what socialism is, or that he has even the slightest idea of political philosophy in general to distinguish socialism/what he knows from any other concept.

Ask two random Americans. One will say "republic", the other "democracy". Usually, both mean the same, both don't really know the difference, yet they get into bitter fights about who is right. Why should this Chinese say anything else but "socialism", when that's what he keeps being told every day again -- regardless of the fact that most of China's economy has long been privatized in the past decades, and thus has hardly anything to do anymore with socialism?
 
I wasn't aware that the chinese were commonly driven by fear in every step and conversation they made. I'm sure he was constantly monitored :lamo

An official charged with being the face for visiting foreigners? Yes, yes he was. The only way he wasn't is if he's demonstrated unswerving loyalty to the government's party line.

Your naivete and ignorance of the matter notwithstanding.
 
images
 
An official charged with being the face for visiting foreigners? Yes, yes he was. The only way he wasn't is if he's demonstrated unswerving loyalty to the government's party line.

Your naivete and ignorance of the matter notwithstanding.

Glad you run counterintel for us, bro. Thanks.
 
By "worked" I mean provided a standard of living on par with capitalist countries. Maybe it's because if several people use the same vehicle, no one takes care of it. Maybe it's being locked behind walls on penalty of death if you try to escape. Maybe it's not having a legal system to handle grievances. China didn't get a legal system started until 1979, three years after Mao finally died. Russia dreaded the coming of the Olympics for fear of who was going to defect at the first chance. I thought it was supposed to be a "workers paradise". Ask any East German about it. I worked for a German owned company for twenty-five years and spoke to several. No one had anything good to say. So come on you commie sypathizers. Give me some reasons why anyone would want to live under communism.

You can't compare the current socialist republics with the United States as they're on whole other categories, there is only one true semi-socialist country left and that is Cuba. Compare Cuba to the rest of the countries in the Caribbean such as the Bahamas, Haiti, Jamaica, Dominican Republic, etc. and see how much more advance and modernized Cuba is than the rest in it's category.
 
I wouldn't really call china to be Communistic.

Communism, like Libertarianism, is one of those things that we have yet to see a real world example of. In either case, whenever it is tried, it ends up taking on elements of other ideologies as practicality overrides ideology at some level, whether that practicality is benign or corrupt.

I guess the real question is why certain philosophies cannot be successfully applied in the real world.

Libertarianism has been put into practice with the whole idea of no government, just business.....it's called organized crime. The closest thing to true communism put into practice is pretty much P2P file sharing.
 
By "worked" I mean provided a standard of living on par with capitalist countries. Maybe it's because if several people use the same vehicle, no one takes care of it. Maybe it's being locked behind walls on penalty of death if you try to escape. Maybe it's not having a legal system to handle grievances. China didn't get a legal system started until 1979, three years after Mao finally died. Russia dreaded the coming of the Olympics for fear of who was going to defect at the first chance. I thought it was supposed to be a "workers paradise". Ask any East German about it. I worked for a German owned company for twenty-five years and spoke to several. No one had anything good to say. So come on you commie sypathizers. Give me some reasons why anyone would want to live under communism.
Part of the reason ideas like Socialism and Communism haven't worked out well is environment. We have a global environment that is overall fairly hostile to such ideas and tends to everything it can to **** with them or cause instability. We fought at least one war over the issue and nearly blew up the world over it.

Another consideration is it hasn't been tried very often. How many Capitalist (or even mostly Capitalist) countries are there in the world? Compare that with even countries that CLAIM to be Socialist or Communist. There are less than 10 countries that even claim to be Communist or Socialist and less than 20 in the history of the world.

The biggest problem I see is impatience. A good example is Ernesto Guevara. He tried to bring Communism to countries that simply were not ready to accept the idea and he tried to crowbar it into place; as a result, his revolutions there failed because the countries in question were not ready. Thats a BIG problem because most countries operate at least with a Capitalistic mindset and if people are not mentally ready to accept a Socialistic or Communistic system, they'll get upset if you try to implement one. Those in charge often compensate by clamping down (as happens in any governmental system where the populace starts resisting).

If you really want Socialism and Communism to succeed, you need to encourage the process slowly and gradually from the ground up. People will eventually vote in a Socialistic system if they have the freedom to do so. Armed revolution should be to establish a democratic country ONLY. The job of Socialists and Communists is to keep the ideas alive and keep them present in people's minds as well as to encourage them wherever and whenever possible.
 
Marx didn't see the ability of the radical republics. Which passed child labor laws, compensatory acts, minimum wage only after Marx kicked the bucket.

I've noted this before, thanks for doing so. Marx saw no hope for the worker to live decently without government power, which meant totalitarianism. His world left no room for compromise, and he was woefully lacking vision in that regard.

I would add that Marx gets a fail for ignoring environmental costs and externalities.


ps. We do vote for the president. Firstly, in primaries. The electorals do not vote in primaries. Secondly, I don't remember the last time that a state's electoral did not coincide with the popular vote in the general election. Technically, the electorals can vote for whomever they want, but if they went against popular there would quickly be a bill/amendment to prevent such again. Let's not dwell on technicalities at the expense of recognizing reality.


Libertarianism has been put into practice with the whole idea of no government, just business.....it's called organized crime. The closest thing to true communism put into practice is pretty much P2P file sharing.

If he's joking, haha, gj. If he's not, someone mock the above.

Compare Cuba to the rest of the countries in the Caribbean

Puerto Rico
GDP - per capita (PPP): $17,100 (2009 est.)
$17,800 (2008 est.)
$18,400 (2007 est.)
note: data are in 2009 US dollars

Bahamas
GDP - per capita (PPP): $29,700 (2009 est.)
$31,200 (2008 est.)
$32,000 (2007 est.)
note: data are in 2009 US dollars

Barbados
GDP - per capita (PPP): $17,700 (2009 est.)
$18,900 (2008 est.)
$18,800 (2007 est.)
note: data are in 2009 US dollars

Jamaica
GDP - per capita (PPP): $8,400 (2009 est.)
$8,700 (2008 est.)
$8,900 (2007 est.)
note: data are in 2009 US dollars

Dominican Republic
GDP - per capita (PPP): $8,300 (2009 est.)
$8,200 (2008 est.)
$7,900 (2007 est.)
note: data are in 2009 US dollars

Cuba
GDP - per capita (PPP): $9,700 (2009 est.)
$9,600 (2008 est.)
$9,200 (2007 est.)
note: data are in 2009 US dollars
http://www.indexmundi.com/cuba/gdp_per_capita_(ppp).html

Cayman Islands
GDP - per capita (PPP): $43,800 (2004 est.)


Why countries?
 
Last edited:
I've noted this before, thanks for doing so. Marx saw no hope for the worker to live decently without government power, which meant totalitarianism. His world left no room for compromise, and he was woefully lacking vision in that regard.

I would add that Marx gets a fail for ignoring environmental costs and externalities.

ps. We do vote for the president. Firstly, in primaries. The electorals do not vote in primaries. Secondly, I don't remember the last time that a state's electoral did not coincide with the popular vote in the general election. Technically, the electorals can vote for whomever they want, but if they went against popular there would quickly be a bill/amendment to prevent such again. Let's not dwell on technicalities at the expense of recognizing reality.
If he's joking, haha, gj. If he's not, someone mock the above.
Your clear lack of knowledge about Marxism is extremely obvious due to that first statement. Marx did not call for complete totalitarianism. He thought it was just necessary to achieve the end goal, that being something similar to Anarcho-Communism, also know as true Communism. Anyone who knows even the basics of his principles should know this. Plus the voting is a joke. All the politicians are rich and backed by corporations to begin with. Since the corporations own the media, the politicians who push for any kind of reform change are ignorned for the politicians who promote mainstream pro-corporation ideals. Hardly democratic at all.

Why is that a joke? Communism was never achieved and business with no regulation would just be complete and utter oppression. Privatized army and police? No thanks..

Plus the statistics mean nothing. In Cuba for example you must realize how much of the items are already free. Not as much money is needed to survive. That way everyone gets enough to live and the ability to get luxury. Though Cuba isn't Communist and it is far from perfect. At least the state realizes that people have a right to live not a privelege you must earn.
 
Marx did not call for complete totalitarianism. He thought it was just necessary...

I'm not reading the rest. Have a nice day.
 
Marxism hasn't worked 'cause there never been a stateless Marxist state.:lol:
 
By "worked" I mean provided a standard of living on par with capitalist countries. Maybe it's because if several people use the same vehicle, no one takes care of it. Maybe it's being locked behind walls on penalty of death if you try to escape. Maybe it's not having a legal system to handle grievances. China didn't get a legal system started until 1979, three years after Mao finally died. Russia dreaded the coming of the Olympics for fear of who was going to defect at the first chance. I thought it was supposed to be a "workers paradise". Ask any East German about it. I worked for a German owned company for twenty-five years and spoke to several. No one had anything good to say. So come on you commie sypathizers. Give me some reasons why anyone would want to live under communism.

It has and never will work because it is against Man's Nature.

It doesn't work because it lacks the flexibility and ingenuity individuals bring to the table.

It doesn't work because it doesn't foster competition to do and be better because there is no reward, unless of course you are part of the ruling elite. There there is competition among the elite and to break into the elite to protect their own hides and to reap the life of leisure, control and luxury afforded those "more equal than others".

I have lived in post-Commie countries and just watched Obama's presser from one. I just came out from the field with a former Commi buddy/client of mine, grabbed a beer and started watching. He was laughing his ass off as I watched Obama answer questions.; face palming all the way through... so amused he grabbed my camera and took some photos.

zimmer-albums-conservitoons-picture67113041-dsc-0809-902x600.jpg

In Commi times such hotel rooms (my suite had 3-rooms) were unthinkable for the normal folks. And they were most likely bugged for those that stayed in something like this.

zimmer-albums-conservitoons-picture67113042-dsc-0817-902x600.jpg

The beer has much improved I'm told... no surprise... there's competition today. If the beer tastes like crap, the people can switch. In the old days... it was drink the petrol we supply and shut your face... slave... or else.

.
 
Last edited:
It has and never will work because it is against Man's Nature.

It doesn't work because it lacks the flexibility and ingenuity individuals bring to the table.

It doesn't work because it doesn't foster competition to do and be better because there is no reward, unless of course you are part of the ruling elite. There there is competition among the elite and to break into the elite to protect their own hides and to reap the life of leisure, control and luxury afforded those "more equal than others".
Human nature, lol. I kinda facepalmed that you resorted to that argument, though I'm not surprised as it is used often. People are greedy, deceitful, and manipulative because that is what this Capitalistic society calls for. It puts greed and self interest ahead of everyone else. In the Iroquois society they had no offical chain of hierarchy or no chance to have self betterment and competition was not needed. Their society survived until they were massacred by the colonial settlers. You may say that was then, now is different! You are right! Now we are able to provide more then enough for everyone if we don't throw away billions of dollars worth of goods like the Capitalists do instead of sharing them. Also if you take into account all the idleness that passes for work, example, businessmen, CEO's, secretaries etc. Though they may work it does not contribute to the making of a product.
Competition is unhealthy because it makes a rift in society. People are pitted against each other. It is not natural. So the beer has improved. That was because the USSR was flawed. I do not think America should follow the USSR, I myself am NOT a Marxist. However, the beer can be of the upmost qualitity, just as an example, because the people work to help society and they know that once they finish their job they are promised everything they need to live, and often luxuries are secured as well. Also you using Russia today as better in Capitalism is laughable. The society is in absolute poverty. Less people have jobs because the West companies do not want competition. The lunches in schools that were once free are now too expensive so often times most kids don't eat lunch. So I'm glad you think a beer tastes better, but think of the people living there not your petty wants.
 
Nice take it out of context for the win..

It is the beginning of your post (except for your declaration of my clear ignorance). How could I possibly take the beginning of your post out of context?

You declare that I am clearly and deeply ignorant and then the first two things you write are in direct contradiction to each other. I'm not interested in a win, I'm interested in a well-composed argument. Yours began as a train wreck and probably didn't get any better.
 
It is the beginning of your post (except for your declaration of my clear ignorance). How could I possibly take the beginning of your post out of context?

You declare that I am clearly and deeply ignorant and then the first two things you write are in direct contradiction to each other. I'm not interested in a win, I'm interested in a well-composed argument. Yours began as a train wreck and probably didn't get any better.

It is taken out of context as you didn't let the sentence finish. Obviously it isn't about a win, it is a sarcastic statement that apparently you aren't familiar with. On top of that I did somewhat phrase it wrong, as I am much better in speaking then at writing. The point is Marxism calls at first for a well planned economy then wishes the transitition to Communism. All I am saying is that it is not purely a planned economy and you should understand that.
 
(Ringing School Bell Icon)
Human nature, lol. I kinda facepalmed that you resorted to that argument, though I'm not surprised as it is used often.
It is used because it is true.

People are greedy,
Some are. Some aren't. That's the individual's character that decides whether he is or not.

deceitful, and manipulative
If it is criminal, then we have laws for that. Because man is not perfect.
In dealings with others, if someone is deceitful and manipulative... they're likely not to get far... unless of course they're in a closed society... a Communist Society breeds it like roaches.

I've never seen theft, deceit and liars as I have in former Commi countries. As Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn wrote in the Gulag Archipelago... Communism robbed the Russian people of their soul, because it breeds what I stated above.

because that is what this Capitalistic society calls for.
There are greedy people in Capitalist societies, but it is your choice to deal withthem or not, and because the market offers a lot of alternatives, you are... Free to Choose... who you do business with. It helps shape behavior in a positive manner. That's why Americans have been amongst the happiest and most friendly people on this planet.
It puts greed and self interest ahead of everyone else.
Dealt with this above. Pure, unadulterated Bull-****.

In the Iroquois society they had no offical chain of hierarchy or no chance to have self betterment and competition was not needed. Their society survived until they were massacred by the colonial settlers.
What did they achieve to make society better? What was their great contribution to the advancement of man? Pissing in their drinking water?
Now we are able to provide more then enough for everyone if we don't throw away billions of dollars worth of goods like the Capitalists do instead of sharing them.
Commies tried this. It failed epically and miserably. Capitalism has inefficiencies, but far fewer than any other system.

Also if you take into account all the idleness that passes for work, example, businessmen, CEO's, secretaries etc. Though they may work it does not contribute to the making of a product.
It contributes to the company producing the product. If not, a bloated company won't last long. A competitor will eat their lunch. That's why government is as it is... a big, fat, slow, inefficient ooze. It doesn't compete, it just robs more wealth to pay for more inefficiencies.
Did you learn this crap in school? For the school you went to is detrimental to society. It's a poison factory.
Competition is unhealthy because it makes a rift in society.
Say what? ROTFLOL... rift in society? If you want to see a rift... go to any former commi country, the scars are still visible, and the dmage to the people's brains is sad.
People are pitted against each other. It is not natural.
????:shock:??????:shock:?????:shock:??? It's our nature to compete and seek better lives. It's why the black market in the former commi countries provided vital foodstuffs on a tiny percent of the land used for agriculture.

So the beer has improved. That was because the USSR was flawed. I do not think America should follow the USSR, I myself am NOT a Marxist. However, the beer can be of the upmost qualitity, just as an example, because the people work to help society and they know that once they finish their job they are promised everything they need to live, and often luxuries are secured as well.
Gibberish.

Also you using Russia today as better in Capitalism is laughable. The society is in absolute poverty.
No, it's not... and there is less poverty in these countries than before.

Less people have jobs because the West companies do not want competition.
Again. ???????????????
Western companies are moving into these countries because there is skilled labor and they are cheaper. It's why their standard of living has increased by leaps and bounds in 20-years.

The lunches in schools that were once free are now too expensive so often times most kids don't eat lunch.
Where do you get this crapola?

So I'm glad you think a beer tastes better, but think of the people living there not your petty wants.
The locals say the beer is better, the vodka is better, food is plentiful and fresh, cars are better and pollute less, homes are nicer, clothes are better, they have better medical care... SOAP, DEO AND TOOTHPASTE IS NOT LUXURY ITEMS ANYMORE!

This is why the US has the problems it has. People wholly ignorant about what makes society better, providing the greatest good to the greatest number.

Our school system is in dire need of reform, and the Journolists should be (insert your punishment) for committing crimes against humanity... for both are responsible for poisoning the minds of its citizens.

We'rereborn, yours is perhaps the saddest post I've read on DP. It's truly sickening.

PS. The computer you are on was the product of competition... if there wasn't competition, you'd be fetching water from some river in pails, and sitting in the outhouse doing that do-whack-a-doo you do so well.

.
 
Last edited:
It has and never will work because it is against Man's Nature.
.

You do realize that this idea of "human nature" you're talking about has been refuted and proven non-existent, no sociologist has ever seen traces of the fact that humans are naturally greedy and assholes. Most humans will adapt to the social conditions and the ones we live in are a capitalist one therefore most people will conform to the conditions and be greedy. as for the incentive argument which I know will be brought up by you or someone else, I'm pretty sure a farmer and a laborer will feel a lot more satisfied and like they get incentive when they actually get wages that they can live on.
 
(Ringing School Bell Icon)
It is used because it is true.


Some are. Some aren't. That's the individual's character that decides whether he is or not.


If it is criminal, then we have laws for that. Because man is not perfect.
In dealings with others, if someone is deceitful and manipulative... they're likely not to get far... unless of course they're in a closed society... a Communist Society breeds it like roaches.

I've never seen theft, deceit and liars as I have in former Commi countries. As Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn wrote in the Gulag Archipelago... Communism robbed the Russian people of their soul, because it breeds what I stated above.


There are greedy people in Capitalist societies, but it is your choice to deal withthem or not, and because the market offers a lot of alternatives, you are... Free to Choose... who you do business with. It helps shape behavior in a positive manner. That's why Americans have been amongst the happiest and most friendly people on this planet.

Dealt with this above. Pure, unadulterated Bull-****.


What did they achieve to make society better? What was their great contribution to the advancement of man? Pissing in their drinking water?

Commies tried this. It failed epically and miserably. Capitalism has inefficiencies, but far fewer than any other system.


It contributes to the company producing the product. If not, a bloated company won't last long. A competitor will eat their lunch. That's why government is as it is... a big, fat, slow, inefficient ooze. It doesn't compete, it just robs more wealth to pay for more inefficiencies.
Did you learn this crap in school? For the school you went to is detrimental to society. It's a poison factory.

Say what? ROTFLOL... rift in society? If you want to see a rift... go to any former commi country, the scars are still visible, and the dmage to the people's brains is sad.
????:shock:??????:shock:?????:shock:??? It's our nature to compete and seek better lives. It's why the black market in the former commi countries provided vital foodstuffs on a tiny percent of the land used for agriculture.


Gibberish.


No, it's not... and there is less poverty in these countries than before.


Again. ???????????????
Western companies are moving into these countries because there is skilled labor and they are cheaper. It's why their standard of living has increased by leaps and bounds in 20-years.


Where do you get this crapola?


The locals say the beer is better, the vodka is better, food is plentiful and fresh, cars are better and pollute less, homes are nicer, clothes are better, they have better medical care... SOAP, DEO AND TOOTHPASTE IS NOT LUXURY ITEMS ANYMORE!

This is why the US has the problems it has. People wholly ignorant about what makes society better, providing the greatest good to the greatest number.

Our school system is in dire need of reform, and the Journolists should be (insert your punishment) for committing crimes against humanity... for both are responsible for poisoning the minds of its citizens.

We'rereborn, yours is perhaps the saddest post I've read on DP. It's truly sickening.

PS. The computer you are on was the product of competition... if there wasn't competition, you'd be fetching water from some river in pails, and sitting in the outhouse doing that do-whack-a-doo you do so well.

.

The countries in Eastern Europe have been completely scared because a capitalist economy has been implemented and to say Russia is doing better than it was before the fall of the Soviet Union is just not correct. You honestly cannot say that a country that has become the center of human trafficking, gambling, mobs, and corruption is improving, all of Eastern Europe has pretty much become the third worst part of the world to live in since the end of the Cold War.
 
The countries in Eastern Europe have been completely scared because a capitalist economy has been implemented and to say Russia is doing better than it was before the fall of the Soviet Union is just not correct. You honestly cannot say that a country that has become the center of human trafficking, gambling, mobs, and corruption is improving, all of Eastern Europe has pretty much become the third worst part of the world to live in since the end of the Cold War.

Life expectancy down, an upside down economy that needs to be gutted and cannot work in a capitalist system. There were lots of plain negatives for the people of the soviet union when the wall fell.
 
The countries in Eastern Europe have been completely scared because a capitalist economy has been implemented and to say Russia is doing better than it was before the fall of the Soviet Union is just not correct. You honestly cannot say that a country that has become the center of human trafficking, gambling, mobs, and corruption is improving, all of Eastern Europe has pretty much become the third worst part of the world to live in since the end of the Cold War.

I saw a statistic somewhere that said around 70-something percent of Russians today view the collapse of the Soviet Union as a tragedy. I'm not a fan of Stalin by any means, but a recent popular television show in Russia ranked him as the 3rd greatest Russian in history. So it's pretty evident that the Russian people are not exactly being sold on capitalism.
 
I saw a statistic somewhere that said around 70-something percent of Russians today view the collapse of the Soviet Union as a tragedy. I'm not a fan of Stalin by any means, but a recent popular television show in Russia ranked him as the 3rd greatest Russian in history. So it's pretty evident that the Russian people are not exactly being sold on capitalism.
Capitalism brought with it to Russia the rise to power of Russian organized crime.
 
I saw a statistic somewhere that said around 70-something percent of Russians today view the collapse of the Soviet Union as a tragedy. I'm not a fan of Stalin by any means, but a recent popular television show in Russia ranked him as the 3rd greatest Russian in history. So it's pretty evident that the Russian people are not exactly being sold on capitalism.

Well they dont mind capitalism at all, its that the fall of the soviet union was a human tragedy on an enormous scale. Livelihoods of hundreds of millions went straight down the toilet. The fall was a tragedy, it wouldve been better had it stuck around and reformed at a slower pace into something else. Gorbachevs time was one of the most democratic in Russia's history.
 
Back
Top Bottom