Communism. Good or bad. What do you really know about Communism?

[haroldeye]

My uncle said that if he ruled the world he would collect all the wealth into one big heap and share it out equally.
Then when he had spent his share he would collect it all in again ad infinitum.

Course he never said he was a communist.

[scoundrel]

Originally Posted by haroldeye

My uncle said that if he ruled the world he would collect all the wealth into one big heap and share it out equally.
Then when he had spent his share he would collect it all in again ad infinitum.

Course he never said he was a communist.

Quite right; this is a capitalist model. The sharing out phase is called "the revolution".

[Wendigo]

Originally Posted by crinolynne

Ah but you *do* need to read about his economic theory. Marx pointed out that labour was an un-evaluated and under-valued parameter in economics. Just as Dickens pointed out the over-value of capital and the over-value given to individual pursuit of self worth. As the 19th century proved, unchecked capitalism is evil - Marx, Dickens and many others brought the pendulum into balance and the world has benefited hugely.

I did read up on his theory as part of my Economics course it's all pie in the sky wishful thinking and will never happen the way he believes it could.
Unchecked Communism is also evil, Stalin, Mao, Ceausescu, the whole inbred mad Kimmy clan in North Kimrea, Pol Pot.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_k...munist_regimes

Everything you can accuse Capitalism of Communism can not be declared innocent of. Marx may have been clever but he forgot to factor in element X, the way people behave when they get in power as those idealist Marxist revolutionaries soon turn into cruel tyrants.

[deepsepia]

Originally Posted by xyzde69

French state TV.
I published on this topic the full details of this documentary and you didn't reply about it during several day.

I resume here a horrible documentary made by the state TV channel France 2 about "The secrets that you wouldn't know about our smartphones".

And I've already explained to you some "secrets" that you don't understand:

there's a minuscule amount of cobalt in a cellphone, about 5-10 grams, worth about 20 cents

in a developed market economy, like Australia, miners make over $100,000 per year and work in safety and (comparative) comfort.

Why?

Because they're running machines that cost millions of dollars. That's your "capitalism" for you -- the investment of the "capital" that it takes to fit out a modern mine. A worker who operates a truck that costs $5 million makes a lot of money; a worker who picks out rock by hand doesn't.

A mine in a backward and phenomenally corrupt "country" -- and I use that word loosely, because the DRC is more a civil war than a country-- will be unpleasant. Why? Because EVERYTHING in the DRC is unpleasant and no one will invest money in building a modern mining facility. No big western mining company operates there-- no Rio Tinto, no Broken Hill. All you've got are Chinese firms buying from locals . . . which is why conditions are bad.

You know what would make life in the DRC more pleasant, more like Australia? Getting their shit together, getting a stable government, and getting some of that investment capital you hate so much in. Get a real company like BHP operating, and you'd have some standards.

[crinolynne]

Originally Posted by Wendigo

I did read up on his theory as part of my Economics course it's all pie in the sky wishful thinking and will never happen the way he believes it could.

Of course, he was writing with a backdrop of very young children working 16 hours a day 6 days a week for practically nothing. Pretty hard to predict the emergence of a Pol pot, though I would suggest he had nothing to do with communism.

[deepsepia]

Originally Posted by crinolynne

Pretty hard to predict the emergence of a Pol pot, though I would suggest he had nothing to do with communism.

Easy to predict the emergence of Pol Pot, if you know the history of Communists in power.

Pol Pot was educated in Marxism, and his chief economist studied at the Sorbonne, and heavily influenced by Mao. His emptying of the cities and abuse of the educated, the bourgeois -- that's a carbon copy of tje Cultural Revolution.

And Mao, of course, was reading both Marx and Stalin.

And they all were reading Marx and Communism as its written: crushing all private property and all markets, moving all economic activity to the State, which is in turn controlled by the Party. That's what Marx says the aim is--- but of course, he never actually ran anything, so you look at words on paper and you say "well that sounds nice" you have to close your eyes to all that reality.

Here's what Pol Pot and Khieu Samphan did with their academic Marxism when they got the chance to put it into practice

The economy underwent massive restructuring; all money was virtually banned and banks were closed. Markets were all but destroyed. All who had lived in the cities were now to work in the countryside…. The leaders of the Khmer Rouge movement, Saloth Sar (better known to the world by his nom de guerre Pol Pot) and Sorbonne-educated economist Khieu Samphan, to name but two, sought to recast Cambodia anew…. The Khmer Rouge’s goal was simple: the rustication of an economy.

source:
CAMBODIA'S ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND HISTORY
https://web.archive.org/web/20060107...hal/whole.html

And if you read your Communist Manifesto, you find that Marx and Engels program included

Originally Posted by Communist Manifesto

Confiscation of the possessions of all emigrants and rebels against the
majority of the people.

Formation of industrial armies, especially for agriculture.

Centralization of money and credit in the hands of the state through a national
bank with state capital, and the suppression of all private banks and bankers

So, in fact, what Pol Pot was doing proceeds from a reading of the Communist Manifesto. He confiscated the property of anyone he deemed "enemies of the Revolution" (basically anyone with property), formed "industrial armies for agriculture" and "suppressed all private banks and bankers". The bit that Marx doesn't mention-- for the simple reason that he never actually did anything-- is that you'll find people don't want this, and you end up having to compel them, by force.

Its always a puzzle to me when people say that it has "nothing to do with communism" -- when in fact communists in power do the same thing over and over again.

[Licht]

Originally Posted by Estreeter

Yeah I do, it's simple .....
The absurdity is that in this thread you state you want more to be paid and in another you say we don't need money to have a decent life

I understand that perfectly

You haven't explained how you go from one extreme to another, until you can explain your thought process there with 100% clarity none of your points hold any water ..... Go on, avoid the issue here





I'd rather be a stupid anti communist who lives a comfortable life than a Pro Communist who looks for excuses to live a life that's seems like drudgery

Did I meantion we won, in case I forgot ..... we won.


Disclosure,
This post was bought to you by my Apple iMac whilst having a bacon and eggs breakfast

My thought process is understandable for a person with a university education and not with the formation of an auto mechanic. What exactly you (dear friend) is not clear. That your country has moved production to southeast Asia, because exploiting Asians prose than paying its own twice as much? That a stupid American college friend on average has an IQ below any Russian with a secondary vocational education (I recently watched a video on youtube, as the Americans were trying to understand where North Korea is). You have to be a nation of stupid dibils not to find North Korea on the map. We have this student in the Troika can do in the seventh grade of primary school. The thought process is not about the Anglo-Saxons.

What exactly do you want to hear from me? Candidate of Historical Sciences (Russia). Half of your researchers are stupid degenerates whom I do not want to discuss because of their stupidity. In addition to stupid jokes, I have not yet heard any attempts at thinking. I consistently (dotted) presented you with the concept of the ideas of the world-system analysis of Wallerstein. First, read it, then enter into discussions. While your level for me is not interesting. Carry nonsense about some money. It's about capital, about the way of production, about productive forces ... Can you give definitions to these concepts? No? Yes? I'm convinced that the average American is more stupid than the Russian in three. You can joke as much as you like. Learn to debate, and then croak. And first, read something outside your primitive school program.

[deepsepia]

Originally Posted by Licht

That your country has moved production to southeast Asia, because exploiting Asians prose than paying its own twice as much?

"Exploiting Asians"?

Let's recall that in the decades since China abandoned Marxism, China has moved hundreds of millions of people out of desperate poverty-- that's a _success.



And has Australia suffered because of this?

Hardly.

Australian wages are some of the highest in the world.

So if an Australian mines iron ore which is sent to China, and then spends some of the $100,000+ that he makes on a ute built in China with steel produced from that iron ore-- how exactly is that a bad thing for either country or its workers?

Chinese vastly prefer working in factories to rural poverty. Australians have been doing very well for decades.

So what exactly is your problem with that?

[cginok]

Originally Posted by Licht

My thought process is understandable for a person with a university education and not with the formation of an auto mechanic. What exactly you (dear friend) is not clear. That your country has moved production to southeast Asia, because exploiting Asians prose than paying its own twice as much? That a stupid American college friend on average has an IQ below any Russian with a secondary vocational education (I recently watched a video on youtube, as the Americans were trying to understand where North Korea is). You have to be a nation of stupid dibils not to find North Korea on the map. We have this student in the Troika can do in the seventh grade of primary school. The thought process is not about the Anglo-Saxons.

What exactly do you want to hear from me? Candidate of Historical Sciences (Russia). Half of your researchers are stupid degenerates whom I do not want to discuss because of their stupidity. In addition to stupid jokes, I have not yet heard any attempts at thinking. I consistently (dotted) presented you with the concept of the ideas of the world-system analysis of Wallerstein. First, read it, then enter into discussions. While your level for me is not interesting. Carry nonsense about some money. It's about capital, about the way of production, about productive forces ... Can you give definitions to these concepts? No? Yes? I'm convinced that the average American is more stupid than the Russian in three. You can joke as much as you like. Learn to debate, and then croak. And first, read something outside your primitive school program.

IQ does not equate to knowledge, or vice versa. IQ is a measure of your ability to learn, not how much knowledge you have accumulated. One would expect a highly educated person, such as yourself, to know such things.

One would ask though, if communism was/is so great, why did tens...hundreds...of millions of your fellow Russians/Eastern Europeans reject it? When the Iron Curtain fell, the inhabitants of all those "workers paradises" couldn't run to capitalism fast enough...and in the succeeding 2+ decades haven't looked back.

[Roubignol]

Originally Posted by deepsepia

"Exploiting Asians"?

Let's recall that in the decades since China abandoned Marxism, China has moved hundreds of millions of people out of desperate poverty-- that's a _success.



And has Australia suffered because of this?

Hardly.

Australian wages are some of the highest in the world.

So if an Australian mines iron ore which is sent to China, and then spends some of the $100,000+ that he makes on a ute built in China with steel produced from that iron ore-- how exactly is that a bad thing for either country or its workers?

Chinese vastly prefer working in factories to rural poverty. Australians have been doing very well for decades.

So what exactly is your problem with that?

I only watch one dramatical fact.
You spent all your life believing in the value of markets and money. And in 2008, we finally get the demonstration that was total bullshit. Total.

Suddenly states printed billions all over from ..... nowhere.
The same states that are not able to pay our rent, suddenly get thousand of billions to reinject to the banks.

No commodities get their real prices, no wages are fairly defined... That's all bullshit. Value, money are collars used by fair or unfair dictators (politicians and bankers) to run stooges. 80 IQ level clowns.

I recently read a book written by Jacques Attali (a major of his promotion at l'ENA and Polytechnic and professor of economy).
"Demain, tous ruinés?" (Tomorrow, all ruined?).

He detailed all the process of debts during centuries.
Debt owners (often Jews) never paid by kings, crisis that evaporated huge amount of money.... etc...
That's all crap.

Today people do not pay the real price of highly valuable raw materials. They waste them with their fake money. They spend 45 hours a week to get 1 hour holiday. They are... dominated.

The 2008 American crooks understood that very well. They sent 64 millions people into poverty and paid themselves several millions of dollars of wages even knowing that the system was collapsing.
They faced the US commissions, tried to look very sorry in front of their friends (normal, auditions were filmed) and get out freee....

They NEVER went to jail and today they write books, give meetings and still are rich.
That's an instutional mafia.

Wake up deep... You defend slavery and dishonesty.