No. Communism, as viewed by Marx, was a solution to a problem that in reality does not exist. Marx supposed that value is created by labor, but he did not realize that value is also created by trade. Which is inexplicable, as he referred in a footnote in Capital to a paper containing that idea. Employment is of course trade, and although it is true that an employer derives more value from the work than he pays the employee in wages, it is also true that the employee derives more value in wages than from the work he does to earn them. Hence, all of communism is based on an error. This error is by far the most expensive mistake that anyone has ever made in all of human history: the cost has run to trillions of dollars, and tens of millions of lives, and is continuing to increase every day.
2007-01-13 15:57:43
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
1⤋
Rhsaunders is wrong. Communism is not a "solution to a problem that does not exist". There is a very very real problem with capitalism; whether you think capitalism is the better of two evils is your business and if you want to make a comment about the communist manifesto being hokey, that is your business also, but don't imply that the problems communism is trying to tackle do not exist. The problem is very real and very obvious. Capitalism breeds dynasty and family wealth. It is like a race in which some people start up already having finished while others are forced to run while hooked up to a ball and chain...the solution is socialist politics and public programs. Most people don't know this but public schools, fire departments, police departments, public libraries, and medical care are all social programs which go hand in hand with the ideology of communism. Imagine life without any of this in which millions of people just are not allowed access to those services. Imagine a world in which there was no minimum wage and hard working people (just not born into the right families) can not make enough money to afford a home and are forced into homelessness? Without access to or the ability to afford medical supplies what happens if you get sick? You would just die because...tough titty for you. What if you can't afford a coffin or to be cremated? Would they just dump your body in the trash also? Is this how we would like to treat ourselves? That is not "civilization" that is "kill or be killed...jungle law". To answer the main question: I think communism is inevitable.
2007-01-16 17:35:09
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Pure Communism, as described by Karl Marx, didn't work. Power hungry despots took Russia away from the idealists by brutal force. The spin off of Communism was Socialism. Almost all large nations have adopted SOME socialist policies. Many of these policies, such as Social Security in the United States, where resisted by conservatives; but have proven to be of great value to the poorer classes. Most wealthy republicans are resistant to our next big step: "Universal Health Care"; but it is remarkable that the Repblican governor of California is pushing for universal health coverage in his state.
2007-01-13 15:56:13
·
answer #3
·
answered by William K 2
·
1⤊
0⤋
Yes, Communism promises equality for all, no upper, middle or lower classes. Promises like this appeal to those that do not have. Unfortunately Communism turns into dictatorships. Read Animal Farm by George Orwell.
2007-01-13 16:31:03
·
answer #4
·
answered by #1barnie 2
·
1⤊
0⤋
Very unlikely. But various degrees of socialism is a possibility.
2007-01-13 15:50:16
·
answer #5
·
answered by Ivan 5
·
1⤊
0⤋
Sure. As likely are Stalin raising up from the dead.
2007-01-13 15:54:20
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
corruption can be called anything but it is still here regardless.
2007-01-13 15:58:16
·
answer #7
·
answered by dogpatch USA 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
YES.If the ACLU has its way!!!!!!!
2007-01-13 15:49:42
·
answer #8
·
answered by Mr Bellows 5
·
2⤊
0⤋