English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

Are the two mutually exclusive of one another?

2007-11-20 09:56:41 · 10 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government Politics

10 answers

Because your teacher can read.

If you look at history you will see that there has never been a Communist country that was a real Democracy. Oh they all claimed to be the People's Republic of this and the Democratic Republic of that...they even have elections where stunningly high percentages of people show up to vote and they all vote the same way...(gee almost as if it was planned that way....) but in reality they were murderous oligarchical tyrannies that killed millions of their own people.

Seriously, think about it. Don't look at what stupid pseudo-intellectual professors who never had a real job say is theoretically possible. Look at History. Communism has been tried. It has killed MILLIONS... Hilter was small time compared to the numbers of people the Communists killed.
(Not kidding... Hitler may have gotten as many as 10,000,000 in the Holocaust... Mao killed twice that, easily, between forced collectivization and the Great Leap Forward... not counting his "Culutral Revolution".... and that's just Mao, not incluiding The Paris Commune, The USSR. East Germany, Poland, Vietnam, Cambodia (oh, excuse me "Democratic Kampuchea"), Laos, North Korea, Post-Mao China, Czechoslovakia, Yugoslavia, Romania, Bulgaria, Cuba, Ethiopia, Nicaragua, Angola, and all the assorted rebel and terrorist groups...(like the Japanese Red Brigades).

Communisim is never popular because it NEVER works. You get famine, poverty, slavery, and mass murder... who's going to vote for that?

Communism is based on false assumptions about humanity. It assumes that you can make a perfect society... well you can't because societies are made up of people and people aren't perfect.

2007-11-20 10:17:53 · answer #1 · answered by Larry R 6 · 0 1

JJ, now you finally are asking the real questions about the things you have been supporting over the last couple of monthes. They are very mutually exclusive, In communism the government dictates everything you do, in democracy the people vote and majority rules apply. In a democratic republic like our own, we vote for people we believe, or have been convinced to believe, are willing and cabable to do the research and make informed decisions in our governemnt. If we were a true democracy we would of starved to death before the war of 1812 as there were just to many people spread accross to much territory to vote on every single action. Nothing would be achieved.

Not even small commune type societies were comunistic, they did everything in pure capitolistic form. The farmer did not share his grain with the blacksmith, he would barter with the blacksmith for the smiths services based on how much he felt the grain and the labors he put into it were worth to him. The blacksmith did the same. Each trying to fool the other into giving more than the effort they actually used.

Humans are far from ready for the ideals that are needed to make communism work. we are selfish, greedy, violent, apathetic creatures.

2007-11-20 10:54:39 · answer #2 · answered by cutiessailor 3 · 0 0

Urm, sorry, however your instructor is flawed. As anyone with a measure in historical past, I'm telling you that so much of Western Europe used to be simply as democratic because the USA earlier than WW2. And Europe wasn't deficient. France, the UK, Germany, good, they have been one of the crucial richest international locations on the earth, and nonetheless are. There's a intent the UK's parliament is known as the mummy of all parliaments, finally. Democracy is essentially, a mystery vote, one vote in keeping with character, each person can vote, common elections. The UK for a begin had all of those matters many years earlier than WW2 (and earlier than the USA in a few instances). Medieval legislation? Like what? We're no longer those who did not permit black individuals vote, who did not permit black individuals use the identical bus as white individuals...And as for no longer being in a position of doing something with out American greenbacks, I consider you can uncover that there have been no american greenbacks worried within the invention of the steam engine (the unmarried invention that revolutionised the sector, and is accountable for the best way we are living now) or the change engine, or the jet engine, or the submarine, the steam turbine, incandescent mild bulbs, hovercraft...and the invent of Democracy occured a couple of thousand years earlier than America even existed - IN EUROPE. So how might you've got potentially have prompted it? And sorry, however having a monarchy does no longer imply you're no longer democratic. The UK's monarchy, for illustration, is one certain via constitutional regulations and legislation which means that they've no vigour. They are a figurehead handiest, and so haven't any referring to whether or not the nation has democracy or no longer. Basically, your instructor is mis-teaching you. You will have to sue. In reality, it appears like such a lot of your schooling has been as an alternative, good, missing in actual knowledge judging via the leisure of your query.

2016-09-05 10:26:08 · answer #3 · answered by ? 4 · 0 0

With communism, you have a one party state. Everyone works towards the same goal, that is making the world a better place. You are meant to have a vote, but in countries that have CLAIMED to be communist, you only get a vote if you are a party member.

You vote on local issues, and elect a representative to represent you in the next tier of government.

So it is a form of democracy, but not as we know it. For example, you would not have a direct vote in who the leader of a country is, the people who represent you in the 'supreme soviet' would vote on your behalf (these people being voted in by the soviet/tier below them and so on till your vote counted).

So no, it is not democracy as we know it.

2007-11-24 08:33:03 · answer #4 · answered by The Patriot 7 · 0 0

The only effective means of establishing communism within a nation is by dictatorship. Thus, in an ironic twist, said means demeans all of which communism stands for.

2007-11-20 10:03:09 · answer #5 · answered by chris 4 · 1 1

No, I pertains to freedoms, the other to social justice and equitable distribution of wealth. Your teacher is an anti communist and maybe he was brainwashed like most people in the USA are.

2007-11-22 10:42:35 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Sounds like your teacher isn't a history teacher. Communism hasn't worked in the past and it will never work. Socialism can't even work until you take money out of the equation. Your teacher is a liberal as many (if not most) are. Most of them can't see past their own desires.

2007-11-20 10:08:12 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0 2

Sounds like de education in the public schools again

2007-11-20 10:10:02 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

Communism would destroy Democracy. It is impossible to be both.

2007-11-20 14:22:01 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0 1

to have your income strictly controlled and by the state cannot be democratic.

2007-11-20 10:09:54 · answer #10 · answered by Z 1 · 1 1

fedest.com, questions and answers