Communism vs Socialism.

[Shadowstar1922]

This has begun to consume my attention and my time, and for the past day or so, I've been studying how exactly communism works. So, I will post the main article that sums communism up, and the difference between Communism, and Socialism. Which, almost all communist states in the past, like Soviet Russia and China and N. Korea have expressed socialism, and marxism which is almost the complete opposite of the original ideology of communism.

Share ya thoughts

One of the most amazing phenomena of current political thought is the fact that only a very small percentage of people on the political left have a clue as to what socialism and communism are.
If one were to ask 100 college students -- students who identify themselves as sympathetic to communism and hostile to capitalism -- ask them if they would favor a system in which "government withers on the vine," a system in which there is no government, no taxes -- probably very few of them would say they favor such a system. Yet, that is Marxist communism, the communism that they say is superior to capitalism.
Communism works. I know this first hand. When I was head of a household, I ran my family under the communist system. From each of us came goods and services according to our abilities. To each of us, those goods and services were provided according to need. Thus, I went to work and provided most of the money. The kids did no outside work and ate well every day. The wife held an outside job, and both she and I shared the domestic chores (me mostly outside, she mostly inside).
I never complained when I had to do the heavy lifting. She never asked me to sew on my own buttons. It never even occurred to us to complain.
There was no equality in this. We didn't care about equality. We cared about taking care of each other, and the system worked.
So why don't we apply these rules to society at large?
Alas, large societies do not have the same personal dynamics as do families. Perhaps they should, but reality does not obey "should."
Recognizing this, the early communists in Russia instituted what they called a "transitional" system. Socialism was established as a temporary bridge, to get the society from its prior feudal system to a future communist ideal.
But socialism actually has the opposite effect. Instead of reducing government, it establishes an all-powerful (and ever increasingly powerful) central government, a totalitarian system in which anyone suspected of dissent is imprisoned in a labor camp, usually never to be heard from again.
Such a government will never -- never -- hand over "power to the people." Once you've tasted raw, total power, you can't let go. It consumes you.
In Western Europe, a more docile brand of socialism was adopted, for the express purpose of avoiding the brutalities of Stalinist and Hitlerian socialism.
For almost 70 years now, this benign form of socialism has entrenched itself in Europe, so much so that for most Europeans, the thought of self-reliance has become something to ridicule and fear.
In Greece, for example, which has spent every drachma it has ever collected in taxes -- and spent every drachma it has ever borrowed but can never repay -- the people demand even more government-paid benefits. The question of "where will we get the money" has no meaning to them. Let the government borrow more, let it print more, let it do something, but never cut my benefits -- indeed, riot to force it to increase my benefits.
Other European countries are gradually following suit. Its citizens continually demand more from government, but continually demand that less be required of themselves in terms of personal responsibility.
Is there a problem in my family? Call in the government. Do I need surgery? Call in the government (which is why more people die of survivable medical conditions in Europe than do in the USA).
Socialism is not a bridge to communism. It will never get us there. On the contrary, it is a dead end, or worse, a road that leads off the edge of a cliff.
If the people of the USA do not wake up before election day, there will be no one to bail Europe out of the mess it has created -- because the USA will meet the same fate.

[meiguorach]

This all sounds familiar... I live in China where... Socialism is present. But I'm not only thinking about China.

[Shadowstar1922]

This all sounds familiar... I live in China where... Socialism is present. But I'm not only thinking about China.

Yeah. If the countries that have "communism" right now actually turned to communism, and away from socialism, they'd be much better countries.

[Shadowstar1922]

There's no win win situation in this circumstance. I believe partly in Marxism, just not the Utopian concept of Communism. In Communism, there's no way to really move up, so there's no motivation. Then again, it does promote equality but let's be honest, there will never truly be equality in this world, there will always be people who aren't peaceful and don't want to take care of others. Socialism has the strong concept of motivation, which would seemingly say that people who work harder lead a better lifestyle. But people take advantage of this and gain power, then abuse it. So, that rules out equality and sets a division between people. They're both good and bad in their own ways.

Yes, that's the main problem. In a lot of communist or socialist states, the leaders abused the power, for example, Josef Stalin, General Mao, etc. In any form of government, especially Democracies, leaders can get by the fundamentals of how the leaders should behave and abuse their given power.

Though, I understand socialism is somewhat good if executed properly, I feel that it gives too much power to the government when the government shouldn't have so much power. This is why I side with communism on this point.

[Lamb]

None can win..

[prophet]

Death is a preferable alternative to communism.

[Shadowstar1922]

Death is a preferable alternative to communism.

So, you'd prefer Death over people providing for you? Funny. .-.

May I remind you, that all "Communist" countries that ever exsisted, NEVER reached Communism. They were all and including current ones, socialist. Look at their official names.

USSR: United Soviet Socialist Republics.
Vietnam. Socialist Republic of Vietnam

The founding fathers of modern communism and the USSR new that jumping straight to communism would cause so much havoc and the People would obviously not be prepared to do so. So, they built a bridge way to lead to communism, called Socialism. The problem was, like in the article I posted, socialism promoted a strong central, oppressive government that just got more and more powerful. Which is the exact opposite of communism, and would never lead to communism.

It was a false bridgeway that the Russians set up. the beginners failed, the leaders ahead of time saw it and abused it, and every single "communist" country constructed the socialist bridge way to convince the people that they'd end up with communism when in fact, they wouldn't.

There has never been a communist state. There never will be. The Power the small government has is too much for people and they abuse it.

[prophet]

Better dead than red.

[Shadowstar1922]

Better dead than red.

When you're dead, don't you become red? O.o

Blood?

[Shadow00]

Death>Communism

If you search it up, communism is a dictatorship.
You DON'T allow people to differ, all people are equal no matter if one works and one doesn't.
In a perfect communist country, all people would wear the same clothes and have the same thoughts.

Why I prefer socialism?
Well I don't like socialism either, but in a socialist country someone worthy WILL get in front of others, a thing that is the exact opposite of communism.

Communism is not all about peace and love.
Don't forget that this world's greatest murderers were both communists.
And there's a reason for that.