Why is it considered "moral" to be communist?

[Hollywood Jack]

Communism is immoral imo. Taking from the hard working to give to the parasite is bullshit. Who would want to work hard if you'll be punished for it through heavy taxation when you can be a parasite instead and have all your needs met? Everyone would become a parasite, and with no one to leech off of, society crumbles.

Actually, in communist societies people are put to work. Communism is not the same as a welfare state. They have steady, albeit low paying jobs. Production goes down however due to a lack of motivation because their work is not rewarded, hence the famous Soviet proverb "we pretend to work and they pretend to pay us."

 

[Jack V Savage]

No, I'm not misinformed at all. I've taken several classes on the subject and read a good many histories of communism and communist regimes from various perspectives. Communism, because it is based on state control of economic production, is an inherently political system. Communist economic policies assume the presence of a state with nearly total authority.

Trying to say communism isn't a political system is a semantic word game used by those trying to obscure the totalitarian nature of the system.

It's not state control, it's public(worker) control.

Inga's argument seems to boil down to a form of the No True Scotsman fallacy. I'm sure at least one of the several classes she has taken has mentioned the First International split. Both sides were communists, but what were the factions? Seems quite dishonest--and typically Inga-ish--to first say that Xes who don't do Y aren't actually Xes, and then to assert that all Xes do Y.

 

[RubberGuard5]

That's incorrect. All property is publicly owned. It could look like anarchosyndaclism. I don't see why the US couldn't be communist. Community owned businesses with full profit sharing, etc.

Check out self-management in socialist Yugoslavia.

 

[Deleted member 53472]

where's the mandolin-playing arab from Cali that converted from Islam to liberalism? I want to know his opinion on this subject and why do communists wear clothes and shoes made through exploitation of the workers and thereby support capitalism

 

[ReAnimator Reagan]

No such thing as a moral white christian capitalist either(slave trade was responsible for even more deaths).

Then no such thing as a moral black person then because black africans sold other black africans as slaves.

But lets not be stupid, lets get to the facts that these are both belief systems and I would say both religions. Now, I would say that to a communist the state is god. But, religion we can agree tells you what ought to be.

Now, Christianity lead to the abolisionists who ended slavery in the western world. Slavery was a world wide phenomenon before written history. And capitalism lead to world poverty being cut by like 70%.
Now, christianity and capitalism lead to the USA which has been the best and freest country in the world and inspired the rest of the western world and made it better.
We are probably also the most charitable country in the world.

Now, what has Communism led to every fucking time? Pol Pot wiped out about 2/3rds of cambodians. Stalin killed about 20 million. Mao killed over twice that. Here I am going to post the top 10 mass murderers of all time.
You can also see how the USSR/communism ruined eastern germany and cuba and etc.

Now, what good has communism done? And be careful bringing up shit like healthcare in cuba when you have buildings where the cuban gov tortures people for not agreeing with the government---not plotting to blow up shit.....but just dissidents.

1 MAO ZEDONG
China (1949-76) Regime Communist Victims 60 million

2 JOSEPH STALIN
Soviet Union (1929-53) Regime Communist Victims 40 million

Lenin’s paranoid successor was the runner-up to Mao in the mass-murder stakes. Stalin imposed a deliberate famine on Ukraine, killed millions of the wealthier peasants – or ‘kulaks’ – as he forced them off their land, and purged his own party, shooting thousands and sending millions more to work as slaves and perish in the Gulag.

7
POL POT

Cambodia (1975-79)
Regime Communist (Khmer Rouge)
Victims At least 1.7 million (political opponents)

8
KIM ILSUNG

North Korea (1948-94)
Regime Communist
Victims At least 1.6 million (political opponents/civilians through famine)


9
MENGISTU HAILE MARIAM
Ethiopia (1974-78)
Regime Communist military dictatorship
Victims 1.5 million (Eritreans/political opponents)


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/home/mos...he-murderous-regimes-world.html#ixzz4gPJvzEdh
^ here is the link. Be assured they are all dictators.

Name ONE christian capitalist dictatorship----and if you can which I doubt well you list the death toll of them as well.



How many slaves were killed specifically by christian capitalists???? Please post your number.
What good has communism produced?


See, your position is FANTASY and DANGEROUS and must be fought with the TRUTH---it is actually very easy to show how the USA is more moral than the USSR and their aftershits.

 

[asharak]

Name ONE christian capitalist dictatorship----and if you can which I doubt well you list the death toll of them as well.

Isn't that what monarchies were?

What's their death toll(not just in their countries, but in Africa also)?

Now, what has Communism led to every fucking time?

So your point is that Communist revolutions have started with that type of government? Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't pretty much every civilization start out with brutal monarchies?

At any rate, the current chinese government might be the best in the world.

 

[goldennirvana]

Because the idea is you're sticking up for the powerless in society... then you end up slaughtering millions of them. But it's okay, because you didn't kill them for their race, so being a communist is still acceptable today.

 

[Fawlty]

Inga's argument seems to boil down to a form of the No True Scotsman fallacy. I'm sure at least one of the several classes she has taken has mentioned the First International split. Both sides were communists, but what were the factions? Seems quite dishonest--and typically Inga-ish--to first say that Xes who don't do Y aren't actually Xes, and then to assert that all Xes do Y.

Oh great, the gender pronoun nazis got you too.

Poppycock. That's just rhetoric to befuddle the rubes. It never actually works out that way, and it isn't intended to.

Communism as a political-economic doctrine centralizes massive power in the hands of very few, who we are always assured have the very best intentions. It is inherently totalitarian, which is why communist states so often end up as totalitarian dictatorships. How stupid does person have to be to continue to believe that they just didn't implement Marx's ideas correctly when communists turn whatever country they've seized control of into another hellhole?

Shouldn't you also recognize a spectrum of human intentions? You're making a snide pass at assurances, yet there's no way you'd honestly disagree that Martov was a better-intentioned and more honest man than Lenin, much less Stalin.

 

[STEVEN SEAGOLD]

What's there to explain? Caring for others is the highest of moral duties. Empathy. Self-sacrifice. To look past yourself and serve the needs of others.

 

[ultramanhyata]

Communists claim to want a stateless society, but they never ever strive in that direction. They build a society that is entirely controlled and shaped by the state.

Though you don't realize it, the problem you have isn't with communists who claim to want a stateless society. It's with people who claim to be communists while supporting the state.

 

[Metusalemi]

Oh great, the gender pronoun nazis got you too.

<DrakeLaugh>

 

[Metusalemi]

What's there to explain? Caring for others is the highest of moral duties. Empathy. Self-sacrifice. To look past yourself and serve the needs of others.

Empathy is not the ultimate virtue. Any virtue taken too far turns into a vice.

The balance of all virtues is the ultimate virtue.

Also, who gets to decide the "needs"?

 

[ReAnimator Reagan]

Isn't that what monarchies were?

Some them were. But what happened when capitalism fused with democracy and Christianity? The best societies the world has ever known/

What happened when communism fused with religion? Oh, wait, marxism is vehemently opposed to religion.
What happened when communism fused with democracy? Well, Marxism requires a strong central government. And while you may have an election in the ONE CASE of VEnezuala, what happened to that after shit hit the fan? A dictatorship.

What's their death toll(not just in their countries, but in Africa also)?

You tell me. You are the one who said commies did not kill as many as <INSERT_ANYONE_ELSE_EVER> here. It is up to you to prove it, not me. I provided my evidence. You provide yours.

At any rate, the current chinese government might be the best in the world.

They have huge human rights violation and very very limited freedom and life is very cheap there and the government is very oppressive. There is a reason that Chinese move out of China to the west.
But I am assuming you never lived in China and don't know what you are talking about.

 

[Jorge Luis Borges]

Though you don't realize it, the problem you have isn't with communists who claim to want a stateless society. It's with people who claim to be communists while supporting the state.

Yeah, the predictable no true scotsman fallacy. The first people to call themselves communists, and everyone else who has followed them who call themselves communists all talked about stateless societies and all built extremely top heavy, authoritarian states.

If Lenin wasn't a communist, if Stalin and Mao weren't communists, if Trotsky wasn't a Communist, then who is? And all built states that dminated society to a profound extent.

 

[Jorge Luis Borges]

What's there to explain? Caring for others is the highest of moral duties. Empathy. Self-sacrifice. To look past yourself and serve the needs of others.

What needs explained is why communism is still defended as being about empathy or caring for others when it has such a long track record of being the exact opposite.

 

[Jorge Luis Borges]

Every economic system need a political one to go with it, and the best one to be paired with it has been the Chinese government so far.

The Chinese government killed 70 million of its own citizens either through direct persecution or because of economic incompetence. It has always been an inhumane system.

 

[Jack V Savage]

Yeah, the predictable no true scotsman fallacy. The first people to call themselves communists, and everyone else who has followed them who call themselves communists all talked about stateless societies and all built extremely top heavy, authoritarian states.

That's some chutzpah for you to accuse someone else of the No True Scotsman fallacy. Why isn't Bakunin counted as a communist by you despite the fact that he clearly was (and an early and politically active and influential one)? No reason other than that it doesn't fit with your dishonest approach here, no? And the first person to call himself a communist is generally considered to be Victor d'Hupay. Didn't build any state of any kind. Neither did Marx, BTW. And I already mentioned Bakunin. And there's Joseph Déjacque. You're speaking as if you know the subject, but you're either very unfamiliar or you're lying again.

 

[Unknown Pleasures]

The Chinese government killed 70 million of its own citizens either through direct persecution or because of economic incompetence. It has always been an inhumane system.

Perhaps a flip side would be agricultural societies had to quickly industrialize to prevent themselves from succumbing to conquering forces at the time, like Japan who was trying to expand, and European powers already with a history of carving up under-developed nations, at times with genocidal impacts.

The great nations that had a huge technology edge as a result of the industrial revolution largely violently invaded other nations since they had the power to do so, and were competing with other nations. I believe Lenin's work hinted at something about imperialism being the highest form of capitalism. If you think about what things were like at the time (and at the time is an important point), militarily taking over other countries, subject people to slave labor, and returning the spoils to royalty or elites across the world, it's a tough argument to call that a humane system.

Anyhow, China and Russia had to industrialize in a crazy short period of time to ensure their survival from foreign invaders. That was impossible to do without domestic fallout and atrocities and famines undoubtedly took place, but the broader context is minimized given we traditionally compete against Russia and China since WW2, of course our genocide of native people of north america isn't deemed a failure or result of brutality of capitalism. Much like Haiti''s economic failures aren't blamed on capitalism, but Cuba's economic failures are. So, despite the tragedies under Mao and Stalin, there is another side of the story that isn't very popular to bring up in pop culture.

 

[ultramanhyata]

Yeah, the predictable no true scotsman fallacy.

The predictable attempt to redefine the communist society.

If Tim Kennedy went around calling himself a pacifist and critics who understood the definition of pacifism called him out on the contradictions inherent in that claim would you accuse those critics of employing the NTS fallacy?

 

[Prutfis]

Ignorance. Color me Surprised. Dumbass.