[NYYS]

Mixed economy (right-wing)

Private ownership is best for efficiency, but not best for making sure everyone gets a piece, therefore things that we want everyone to get a piece of need to be public - basic education, health care, police, fire, defense, etc.

Everything else, get your hands off so the nation can be wealthy.

Also, this topic just shows how screwy this forum is. Communism of course is cleaning up

[AmericanPatriot]

Also, this topic just shows how screwy this forum is. Communism of course is cleaning up

Hope that's sarcasm. Communism destroys nations. Lets think of some communist or previously communist regions. Hmm...Russia. What are three things you associate with Russia? Poverty, organized crime, and political instability. Oh wait, they're communists! Lets think here...China! Oh wait, pollution, poverty, disease, the list keeps going...Vietnam: poverty, etc.

Poverty seems to be a recurring theme. Communism doesn't work folks. It's great in theory, but modern societies can't handle it. Communism typically leads to totalitarian governments, economically dependent regions and subsequently impoverished areas, deportations (as seen under Stalin), and genocide (Stalin yet again.) I know I sound like a complete ass hole and wise ass, but I just don't see what attracts people to communism....

[NYYS]

Hope that's sarcasm. Communism destroys nations.

What? I think you misinterpreted what I said. There are few people on this forum who dislike communism more than I do.

My point was that this forum is overly slanted towards communism, as evidenced by the poll results. I was pointing out the overall detachment from reality.

[Eauz]

I was pointing out the overall detachment from reality.

What detachment from reality? Are you suggesting that in the Soviet Union, their economic policies were not real? What exactly is real in regard to the theory of the free market and the realities? What about economic voids? How can one be detached from reality, if reality is the environment one exists within?

Maybe economics professors are detached from reality since they teach the theory but never actually show the reality of the theory or the necessary reforms, subsidies and action taken by the state to be in some form beneficial?

Oddly enough, it was not until the threat of the USSR and other so-called communist nations did Western nations start to feel it was necessary to do something to capitalism to make it seem comfortable. Yet, it failed in the 1800's, the 1920's and 30's and the 70's and 80's. Now we are seeing the ill-effects of neo-liberal policies and the absurdity of them. Each time, some form of reform or state action was necessary to prevent revolts and strikes from turning ugly.

[Vera Politica]

Beautifully said.

That's cause Jefferson said it

[Brutus]

Or was it Goldwater fool?


That's what I thought. Holy shit, when did we get that emoticon?

[El Gilroy]

Accidentally voted communism, meant it to be socialism.
Coffee makes me shaky.

Yea, the economy ought to be state-controlled altogether. I'd say the technology to manage it might just be around the corner these days.

[Stawko]

There's no such things as a "best" system. A system most efficient for a given means of production emerges out of the demand for it by historical forces and class hegemony.

Just sitting there and day-dreaming about what system you want to wank over won't change shit.
The forces of HISTORY choose and install a most effective system, and a hegemonic class secures it's power in accordance to that most effective system for a given stage of development.

[War Angel]

I believe a good economical system, like all things, needs some balance. I'm leaning more towards a free market, though, so I'd say I'm mixed right-wing. I believe Capitalism to be the right way ONLY when there are safety nets and some social care.

Also, I cannot believe so many people here actually consider Communism to be a good economic system... that is so un-intelligent. Communism is seriously stupid, non-functioning and thoroughly fucked-up.

[Rbns]

That is quite possibly the dumbest thing I've ever heard. Unless that was sarcasm, then you've got real issues. Anyone who kills millions of people is not worthy of being a hero. I suppose you like Hitler too?

You mean you don't? What kind of far right-winger are you? And although I don't want to bring this up at every turn, you should know that your precious country was founded on the death of millions as well.

[Manuel]

Barish?

Did you really have to insult every right-winger by claiming they all like Hitler?

[W01f]

Poverty, organized crime, and political instability. Oh wait, they're communists!

Wow are you serious? All three of those things you listed were nearly non-existent in the industrialized Soviet Union. (Stalin may have been a terrible man, but terrible men can still do things right, as Stalin proved in many ways). Badly implemented capitalism was the sole cause of all those problems which rose simultaneously with the fall of communism.

Take a look at how well other former Soviet states are doing with capitalism. All the 'stan countries along with Georgia and Kazakhstan have poverty rates through the roof, many of which have never been farther from democracy or any sort of prosperity as individual nations. Oh, and Mongolia? No, they weren't part of the Soviet Union, but they did make the transition to capitalism at about the same time. Doesn't seem like such a good idea in hind sight eh?

Here, you can check it yourself.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_co ... in_poverty

Lets think here...China! Oh wait, pollution, poverty, disease, the list keeps going.

yes, lets see here. China! A country that's in the process of industrializing (who didn't even have running warm water outside of community bathrooms in the 70s), is doing so at a faster pace than any other country in the world, and is still some how managing to feed the mouths of 1.3 billion people. (That's the equivalent of America x 4). They will soon have the worlds largest economy. Where do you think China will be in terms of poverty, pollution and disease in 50-100 years when they're fully developed and leading the world on all fronts? Rome wasn't built in a day, as much as I hate the thought of China gaining anymore power on the world stage.

Poverty seems to be a recurring theme.

Poverty seems to be a recurring theme all over the world, regardless of economical system. All of the most poverty stricken nations in the world are so called capitalist states.

Why is it that every argument against communism is either a one line bumper sticker/Simpsons quote with absolutely no substance, or something that looks copy/pasted straight out of a 1960s propaganda article in the New York Times?

For the record, I voted mixed-left.

[Rbns]

Did you really have to insult every right-winger by claiming they all like Hitler?

In my opinion, the only reason a far right-winger wouldn't respect Hitler could be that he failed miserably in the end.

[sazerac]

In my opinion, the only reason a far right-winger wouldn't respect Hitler could be that he failed miserably in the end.

Well and because he was a socialist who wanted to chase Christianity from public life, overturn tradition, and wanted an all-powerful state.

[Manuel]

In my opinion, the only reason a far right-winger wouldn't respect Hitler could be that he failed miserably in the end.

Or, maybe, because he was an evil son of a bitch that kill 6 million people, and his perversion of fascism conttinues to give the ideology a bad name into the modern world?

[Rbns]

Well and because he was a socialist who wanted to chase Christianity from public life, overturn tradition, and wanted an all-powerful state.

That sounds like a conservative criticism, and I don't consider conservatives far right.

Or, maybe, because he was an evil son of a bitch that kill 6 million people, and his perversion of fascism conttinues to give the ideology a bad name into the modern world?

Great. What about his best buddy, Mussolini? Did the creator of fascism give it a bad name too?

[Nets]

Wo1l, no organized crime in the Soviet Union!

And I suppose the Russian Mob appeared out of thin air in 1991! Like any other poor and repressive country with a controlled economy, a black-market emerged -- which goes hand in hand with organized crime. To say there was no poverty in the SovUn is also off the mark. Waiting in lines for 3 hours for groceries and toilet paper is poverty, IMO. I have family friends who emerged from the Soviet Union, and unanimously denounce the place. (These people now live in both the USA and Israel).

And Wo1f you have to distinguish between true capitalism and the government-run oligarchy economic systems which are pervasive in Africa and other states. If these countries had actual, transparent capitalism within the bounds of law and regulation instead of the up-for-grabs corrupt free-for-all they have now, the situation would be different. You can't take countries where the ruling classes gutted the economies and sold off everything, sending the money to swiss bank accounts as examples of Capitalism.

Political tyranny/corruption and prosperous Capitalism repel one another.

Keep in mind I am not a free-market fundamentalist, I believe in balance between State and Private sector, but capitalism has done wonders for certain countries. North/South Korea and East/West Germany are prime examples.

[Grunch]

North/South Korea and East/West Germany are prime examples.

Yes, the wonders of... capitalist... North Korea

[W01f]

And I suppose the Russian Mob appeared out of thin air in 1991!

That's not too far off the mark actually. Of course there is no such thing as a nation with 300 million people in which there's a complete absence of a black market and organized crime, but it certainly wasn't of epidemic proportions, as it is now.

Anyways, the point I was trying to make wasn't how great the Soviet Union was, it was how incredibly ignorant and completely backwards it is to blame poverty, corruption and organized crime in current day Russia on communism, and that many (most?) of the former Soviet republics were far better off 25 years ago than they are now.

Like any other poor and repressive country with a controlled economy, a black-market emerged

Are you trying to tell me that there's no black market in Canada, or America, or Australia? Where there are laws against certain products and certain methods of trade, there will always be a black market.

Waiting in lines for 3 hours for groceries and toilet paper is poverty, IMO.

You've got one man who lives alone in a 1 bedroom apartment. He eats cheerios for breakfast, a peanut butter sandwich for lunch and some canned soup for dinner. Nothing out of the norm. He can't afford cable or the internet. In fact he can't even afford a computer, and his tv must be older than him.

Then there's the man who sleeps in the middle of the sidewalk in downtown Toronto. His meal of the day was a half-eaten big mac he found in the garbage. Sleep and food - This was a good day.

Poverty can mean many different things. In my opinion, poverty isn't measured by how long you must wait in line to buy a luxury such as toilet paper. Poverty is not being able to afford toilet paper.

[Kapanda]

What detachment from reality? Are you suggesting that in the Soviet Union, their economic policies were not real? What exactly is real in regard to the theory of the free market and the realities? What about economic voids? How can one be detached from reality, if reality is the environment one exists within?

It is obviously a figure of speech, meaning that the only sensible explanation for the support such ideologies gathered is that the leaders were ignoring or detached to what was actually happening in the regions that such policies were implemented.

Maybe economics professors are detached from reality since they teach the theory but never actually show the reality of the theory or the necessary reforms, subsidies and action taken by the state to be in some form beneficial?

Oh but they do! And they also present evidence to why certain policies work and/or don't work.

Oddly enough, it was not until the threat of the USSR and other so-called communist nations did Western nations start to feel it was necessary to do something to capitalism to make it seem comfortable.

BS. Left-wingers give their ideologies too much credit for the adaptation that the Western countries often go through. the US has never been communist, but FDR steered his country to an unusally leftist nation.

Yet, it failed in the 1800's, the 1920's and 30's and the 70's and 80's. Now we are seeing the ill-effects of neo-liberal policies and the absurdity of them. Each time, some form of reform or state action was necessary to prevent revolts and strikes from turning ugly.

Giving you the benefit of the doubt, I'll assume that you don't really believe that since the 1800's communism or any less extreme version of it has worked better than "free-er" markets have...? What we are now seeing are not only the ill-effects of modern policies (because no system is perfect), but also the great rewards of sustainable economic growth.