Communism is not a flawed type of government. the people that have attempted communism have been flawed and have wound up hurting a lot of people. they also tend to be a little aggressive, like Korea and the USSR, so people in America tend to feel threatened.
2006-11-13 15:40:53
·
answer #1
·
answered by smartass 3
·
2⤊
2⤋
There are basically two things wrong with communism...for one thing people tend not to work hard when their efforts are rewarded at the same scale as a lazy person, secondly, all communist countries are ruled by dictatorships and dictatorships have always resulted in either poor counties or all the $$ being in the hands of a few. Pure capitalism stinks too as evidenced by the working conditions of early America. Our best period was after ww2 when unions became much stronger and controls were put on things like banking and mergers. Notice how when Reagan lifted the controls on banking that the s&l crisis resulted with losses in the hundreds of billions to U. S. taxpayers. What you need is a controlled capitalism with fair wages paid to workers...in this way the goods being produced can be consumed and everybody benefits.
2006-11-13 15:47:55
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
1⤋
Well first of all, it has never been tried, so saying that it will never work is debatable...
If you truly want to learn about communism, read the communist manifesto, it's public domain and can be read here: http://marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1848/communist-manifesto/index.htm
It's considered a dry read by some, but it's really the best way of learning about the subject.
Secondly, it's hated because A) The USSR, Red China, etc. the governments claiming to be communists, were very oppressive, many associate this with what they claimed to be, but then again, Hitler said he was a Christian, and people normally don't associate Christianity with Adolf Hitler. B) Communism is a danger to capitalists everywhere. If some of the underclass understands that the rich are unnecessary for their survival, the rich are in immediate danger because the wealth that they have more than enough of, could go to the hands of people who have less than enough.
The reason I say it has never been tried is, in marx's system, there is no such thing as class differences (I.E. No one is wealthier, or leads a more comfortable lifestyle than anyone else because of their possesions or wealth). Yet, in every "communist" government historical and current, their were class differences (millionaires and peasants in China, politburo members, KGB agents, and regulars in the USSR).
Thanks for the question...
John S
2006-11-13 15:40:56
·
answer #3
·
answered by John S 4
·
2⤊
2⤋
The people have less money than they do now.
60 million were killed under Stalin. For some reason, they never mention this.
You can not leave the country without the government's OK.
Another example is North Korea where the only people who are eating are the military.
Or Cuba. I once met a man vending at a cigar shop. He was so happy to be here. I don't know the details, but he was missing fingers. He had had them chopped off for some reason that Castro thought was a fit punishment for him.
But oh yes, it's never been tried, people are just afraid. (Smirks) Really there's nothing wrong with it at all.
And I'm not a capitalist or a commie.
2006-11-13 15:40:37
·
answer #4
·
answered by profile image 5
·
1⤊
2⤋
Because the folks who honestly paintings tough and possess organizations don't wish the federal government stealing inheritor prosperity and giving it to the lazy and vain amongst us. In different phrases, communism seeks to equalize the whole lot by means of taking from the competent or inclined then giving to the not able or unwilling. But what it relatively finally ends up doing is spreading distress similarly. In a communist society the folks who paintings tough and possess organizations cut down and just do ample to get by means of. They don't just like the notion of presidency stealing their wealth and giving it to others so that they pretty much emerge as lazy and vain and lodge to doing simply ample to get by means of. Communism seeks to separate up one pie similarly whilst capitalism seeks to make new pies. Get it? Wouldn't you as an alternative have the liberty to create extra pies than have the federal government quandary you a the piece of the pie that they consider you'll have? Take a seem at what occurred to Russia within the eighty's. Take a seem at North Korea at present. Take a seem on the course Venezuela goes. Do you relatively consider communism is viable in a nation of loose minds and revolutionary thinkers? I content material that it's viable in a nation of slaves and fans. Which one are you? Communism brings mediocracy and distress. It sounds nice to the lazy and vain amongst us seeing that they get loose stuff ... It sounds nice to tenured left wing professors who've in no way created a product any one might use or run a trade seeing that they get extra vigor and compliment. It additionally sounds nice to politicians who obtain best vigor and manipulate over wealth and topics in a communist society. Communism works nice on paper or till you run out of different peoples cash. Then every body is going hungry besides for the ruling political elegance. IS THIS WHAT YOU REALLY WANT?
2016-09-01 12:10:46
·
answer #5
·
answered by ? 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
well, i personally think communism could be a great thing, but it depends on who is ruling the nation. like fidel castro is a bad example of communism.
people hate communism for the socialist reasons.. they don't like that they can't vote, and lots of times they can't speka out against the government.
i personally wouldn't mind a communist government, as long as the people weren't oppressed, there was no death penalty, and people were free about to protest, there was freedom of speech, and so forth.
2006-11-13 15:40:20
·
answer #6
·
answered by Jacques 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
communism in it's true form http://www.anu.edu.au/polsci/marx/classics/manifesto.html
has never been truly practiced.
Like all forms of governance the true system while pure remains unentered as the impossible greed of human nature prevents it from ever being.
Stalin, Castro, MAO... none of them practiced communism, rather they practiced despotism behind the rhetoric of communistic endeavor.
Not unlike our current administration professes to being democratic when in fact they are as fascist as anything the pseudo communists ever manifested.
communism is not the enemy of democracy it is the enemy of capitalism and capitalism is the parlor to the ballroom of tyranny..
2006-11-13 16:05:27
·
answer #7
·
answered by sitizen_x 3
·
1⤊
0⤋
american capitalist propaganda is the reason people think it is so wrong. And the abuse that many communist countries do to the system that is too idealic to really work.
2006-11-13 15:44:11
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
2⤋