If it really worked and, didn't backfire? Yes, I would.
2006-07-28 07:50:33
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
1⤋
Communism only currently works on the small scale.
Communism depends on people being willing to put aside their personal greed, and on the society granting status and prestige for something other than wealth and material possessions.
Communism works great in most family households, because the family is willing to do those things and to function as a unit.
However, on a national scale, human psychology is such that most people want to feel special, and many people want to feel better than someone else. And currently, that means owning more property and having more power (control over resources).
That, in turn, is a side effect based on the technological limits and the fact that we operate on a limited-resources model. The entire economic system changes if technology reached a point where material resources (energy, food, buildings, clothing, etc) were available in effectively unlimited quantities.
As long as power and wealth the measures by which society grants status and prestige, and as long as technology can't produce unlimited resources, communism won't work on the large scale.
That being said, if we can reach a place of social consciousness where status is measured only on your personal accomplishments (not wealth) and where technology provides unlimited resources, it could be a very nice place to live.
For an example of this type of society, read James P Hogans' "Voyage from Yesteryear".
2006-07-28 07:50:46
·
answer #2
·
answered by coragryph 7
·
1⤊
0⤋
I believe that this is a moot question. I have studied a little about communism and the "Kollective", and to me, it does not inspire success. If I work harder under communism, I do not benefit from it at all. I only work harder.
Unfortunately, I can't envision communism working, anywhere. Karl Marx and Joseph Stalin had a dream, that, yes, while in theory, it would have worked, but unfortunately ignored the human element, and it became something perverted and sad.
2006-07-28 07:53:57
·
answer #3
·
answered by The_moondog 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
My chum, capitalism isn't proper, yet communism is terrible. Socialism would not artwork the two. Communism, in case you have the liberty to decide directly to no longer persist with alongside with it may be an excellent ingredient, yet that's impossible, undesirable adult men continually take over. Communism is a feeding floor for communism. you would be able to declare that your existence in a capitalist united states is undesirable, yet look at Somalia, look at something of the international, you're a blind bigot. you're blessed to have what you have, and not subject a pair of warlord stealing your meals. COMMUNISM can't and could never artwork! that's human beings such as you who're destroying this united states. in case you do not have faith me, look on the previous. look at each and everything usa has carried out, Ipods, computers, televisions, automobiles, even less complicated the thank you to get meals. In Communism, none of which would be superior because of the fact there is no rigidity, that's the reason it would not artwork. If I even have an rather complicated activity, and that i visit gets a commission the comparable as a rubbish guy, what's my rigidity? I have no reason to artwork complicated, because of the fact i can't lose my activity and that i will gets a commission the comparable because of the fact the guy doing much less artwork. Lazy human beings such as you would be able to stay badly, because of the fact they do no longer circulate out and locate a activity. You get funds, little via little, no count how complicated that's. You save, and however the wealthy could stay extra proper then you definately, there is no extra effective excitement in existence then making your guy or woman funds, and possessing your guy or woman stuff. you're actually not entitled to my funds, no count what you would be able to think of. My dad began off interior the biggest drug community in out state, he lived in a a hundred and fifty year previous homestead, with 3 rooms and one bathroom. Slowly he used his ingenuity and concepts to make funds. Now, he isn't any doubt one in all the a million%, commencing off approximately as badly as you may. those are my ideals, and you will have faith what you elect, yet never in history has communism succeeded, and it never will. i don't be attentive to why i'm arguing with you, because of the fact judging via your writing you're very uneducated.
2016-11-03 05:13:57
·
answer #4
·
answered by shuey 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
The Catholic Church is the most successful form of Communism the world has ever know - the cohessive factor of course being the priests' commitment to serving God.
how many people do you think you can get onboard if they have to take 'vows of poverty' and can't actually own anything?
2006-07-28 09:21:13
·
answer #5
·
answered by dlil 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
No, mostly because I believe that if you work hard you should be better off than other people, however i believe no one should be homeless or go hungry. The problem with communism is that the ruler usually becomes a dictator eventually. case in point: Cuba.
2006-07-28 07:55:18
·
answer #6
·
answered by RATM 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Never - the question itself is quite ridiculous. You can't pretend something works when it continues to prove it does harm to the masses. See China and North Korea. Absolute power corrupts Absolutely.
2006-07-28 07:51:33
·
answer #7
·
answered by Genie 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
communism:
fundamentally, a system of social organization in which property (especially real property and the means of production) is held in common.
Oh you mean like one gas company. One toothpaste. One giant store where we can get everything? Goverment seizing private property?
Sounds familiar.
2006-07-28 07:55:35
·
answer #8
·
answered by m 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
Why?
Even if you could make it work. Why would I want the government telling me where I could live what I could do and what I could buy.
It sounds more like a you would be a slave or a surf. I like my freedom my rights. I can own my own land my own home. I would not give it up.
2006-07-28 07:55:03
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
no i wouldnt because i dont want to be like everyone else, i am not a robot and if i am better than someone and worker harder and smarter than i should be rewarded more than someone who isnt. Fact is ALL HUMANS are different so you cant treat us all the same
2006-07-28 07:50:15
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋
nope. i would never ask someone to live and work for me and i would hate to do the same for someone else.
in order for that to work you would have to suspend certain freedoms.
it goes against my beliefs of self determination and freedom of choice and personal liberty.
2006-07-28 07:58:34
·
answer #11
·
answered by sbcalif 4
·
0⤊
0⤋