---
From what I understand Capitalism in theory seems to be this.
I have three refrigerators.
You have two refrigerators.
He has one refrigerator.
And Socialism in theory seems to be this.
I have two refrigerators.
You have two refrigerators
He has two refrigerators.
Correct me if I'm wrong.
---
So now, just a few questions I wanted to ask.
1. What theory is better?
2. Which theory do you think is better/easier to practice? *If a mixture, which one is more dominant?*
3. If practiced in entirety *without any concept of the opposite system* which one leads to Totalitarianism in a shorter amount of time?
Capitalism is based on voluntary interactions of market participants. Socialism is based on compulsory actions forced upon all participants under threat of force. You tell me which is better.
2. Which theory do you think is better/easier to practice? *If a mixture, which one is more dominant?*
Capitalism is the form taken by a naturally occurring economy. As for your second part, in places such as China that are still labeled "communist," the ruling parties have been slowly allowing more free market principles to be practiced. As a result, their economies are expanding at an incredible pace, and the standard of living is being raised.
3. If practiced in entirety *without any concept of the opposite system* which one leads to Totalitarianism in a shorter amount of time?
A little light reading of relatively recent world history should be sufficient to answer that question for you. I'll give you a hint: it's only happened under one of the two systems.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
These are indeed troubling times when the slaves not only wear their shackles with pride, but also mock the free.
The refrigerator I have, I share with 10 other people and the state actually owns it, which I pay an insane tax rate for the privilege to use. We have been waiting 3 months for the government to fix it.
True free market capitalism, not the state sponsored cronie-corporatism many confuse for free market capitalism:
The refrigerator I have I own outright, and paid a really good price for. It has all the bells & whistles. And I can afford to actually fill it with food. And if it breaks I have my choice of competing repairmen to come out that day to fix it.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Deep in the human unconscious is a pervasive need for a logical universe that makes sense. But the real universe is always one step beyond logic."
-Muad'Dib
True free market capitalism, not the state sponsored cronie-corporatism many confuse for free market capitalism:
The refrigerator I have I own outright, and paid a really good price for. It has all the bells & whistles. And I can afford to actually fill it with food. And if it breaks I have my choice of competing repairmen to come out that day to fix it.
What about the free market makes any guarantees about competition existing?
Socialist things: All public facilities including but not limited to, roads, highways, schools, libraries, and the postal service.
And now I shall make a straw man of capitalism. If the road network was capitalist, every road would be a toll road and there would be so many competing road systems that there'd be no room left for buildings.
Nazi = National Socialist German Workers Party (Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei)
You Godwin'd, you lose.
There, this topic can now continue its descent into profound stupidity.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.
Capitalism has proven to be the most democratic (of modern times) Other ideologies failed (communism in USSR, national-socialism in Europe)
I believe capitalism in the United States has some major flaws, like if you are a disease and can't work or losing your job. All these things are a bit better in Europe.
I think people shouldn't be ''owned'' by the state like communism.
It was deformed workers states where people were owned and relied on the state. [b]There has never been a communist state, as the word itself is an oxymoron as a communism abolishes the state, I won't repeat myself again
AH! Finally someone really knows what communism means! :smile.gif:
The USSR was not a communist state.
Mao's china was not a communist state.
In name only maybe. Communism is the abolishment of the state but the state was all that was in these countries.
The USA is not the best example of a capitalist country, it has many more problems then most European nations.
If you think Nazi Germany was socialist... well you're just being silly.
Wait, so communism is a verb/action? Also, isn't a stateless society the definition of Anarchy? Or are we equivocating the word "state"? What do you mean by state? I'm honestly asking... It has been a while since I read Communist Manifesto and I read it before college so I think I missed a few things.
The USSR was not a communist state.
Mao's china was not a communist state.
In name only maybe. Communism is the abolishment of the state but the state was all that was in these countries.
The USA is not the best example of a capitalist country, it has many more problems then most European nations.
If you think Nazi Germany was socialist... well you're just being silly.
Wait, so communism is a verb/action? Also, isn't a stateless society the definition of Anarchy? Or are we equivocating the word "state"? What do you mean by state? I'm honestly asking... It has been a while since I read Communist Manifesto and I read it before college so I think I missed a few things.
Communism is a society, not a form of state or governmental regime. A stateless society is Anarchy, but there are some fundamental differences in how it can be acheived, and I can't answer them in depth.
From what I understand about communism is that it tries to achieve equality within the society, is this correct?
Yes the ultimate equality within humankind, no gods or rulers.
But what is equality in man? For, true equality would mean that everyone is exactly the same in every aspect (Ideas, politics, social status, etc) would makes us unhuman philosophically. Likewise, one can only be equal in some senses and unequal in others while keeping their humanity. So, what kind of equality is it suppose to create? Again, I'm truly asking and I am also planning on rereading Communist Manifesto which should help answer my questions further as I have a better understanding of philosophy now.
Yes the ultimate equality within humankind, no gods or rulers.
But what is equality in man? For, true equality would mean that everyone is exactly the same in every aspect (Ideas, politics, social status, etc) would makes us unhuman philosophically. Likewise, one can only be equal in some senses and unequal in others while keeping their humanity. So, what kind of equality is it suppose to create? Again, I'm truly asking and I am also planning on rereading Communist Manifesto which should help answer my questions further as I have a better understanding of philosophy now.
The Communist Manifesto is not the optimum start in understanding Marxism. It's a historical document that was of political importance AT THE TIME.
May I suggest the "Principles of Communism" by Friedrich Engels (Marx's companion)? It's has an FAQ layout and is more easy to read and doesn't have historical references buried in the text.
I've read Engel's work. However, Dialectics? that's been the common method of showing points in logic and arguments since Socrates' Times (Maybe even longer, not an expert in that subject)... What's wrong with it? Thank you for answering me.
---
From what I understand Capitalism in theory seems to be this.
I have three refrigerators.
You have two refrigerators.
He has one refrigerator.
And Socialism in theory seems to be this.
I have two refrigerators.
You have two refrigerators
He has two refrigerators.
Correct me if I'm wrong.
---
So now, just a few questions I wanted to ask.
1. What theory is better?
2. Which theory do you think is better/easier to practice? *If a mixture, which one is more dominant?*
3. If practiced in entirety *without any concept of the opposite system* which one leads to Totalitarianism in a shorter amount of time?
Capitalism is based on voluntary interactions of market participants. Socialism is based on compulsory actions forced upon all participants under threat of force. You tell me which is better.
Capitalism is the form taken by a naturally occurring economy. As for your second part, in places such as China that are still labeled "communist," the ruling parties have been slowly allowing more free market principles to be practiced. As a result, their economies are expanding at an incredible pace, and the standard of living is being raised.
A little light reading of relatively recent world history should be sufficient to answer that question for you. I'll give you a hint: it's only happened under one of the two systems.
The refrigerator I have, I share with 10 other people and the state actually owns it, which I pay an insane tax rate for the privilege to use. We have been waiting 3 months for the government to fix it.
True free market capitalism, not the state sponsored cronie-corporatism many confuse for free market capitalism:
The refrigerator I have I own outright, and paid a really good price for. It has all the bells & whistles. And I can afford to actually fill it with food. And if it breaks I have my choice of competing repairmen to come out that day to fix it.
-Muad'Dib
Socialism: Nazi Germany
Capitalism: United States of America
Which one do you think was better?
MineScience - viewtopic.php?f=25&t=166560
Dragonator - viewtopic.php?f=25&t=141803
Sand Skiffs - viewtopic.php?f=25&t=233346
Nazi = National Socialist German Workers Party (Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei)
MineScience - viewtopic.php?f=25&t=166560
Dragonator - viewtopic.php?f=25&t=141803
Sand Skiffs - viewtopic.php?f=25&t=233346
What about the free market makes any guarantees about competition existing?
Socialist things: All public facilities including but not limited to, roads, highways, schools, libraries, and the postal service.
And now I shall make a straw man of capitalism. If the road network was capitalist, every road would be a toll road and there would be so many competing road systems that there'd be no room left for buildings.
You Godwin'd, you lose.
There, this topic can now continue its descent into profound stupidity.
It is Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei
MineScience - viewtopic.php?f=25&t=166560
Dragonator - viewtopic.php?f=25&t=141803
Sand Skiffs - viewtopic.php?f=25&t=233346
I believe capitalism in the United States has some major flaws, like if you are a disease and can't work or losing your job. All these things are a bit better in Europe.
I think people shouldn't be ''owned'' by the state like communism.
Mommy? Why psychotic dictatorship no blue?
AH! Finally someone really knows what communism means! :smile.gif:
Wait, so communism is a verb/action? Also, isn't a stateless society the definition of Anarchy? Or are we equivocating the word "state"? What do you mean by state? I'm honestly asking... It has been a while since I read Communist Manifesto and I read it before college so I think I missed a few things.
From what I understand about communism is that it tries to achieve equality within the society, is this correct?
But what is equality in man? For, true equality would mean that everyone is exactly the same in every aspect (Ideas, politics, social status, etc) would makes us unhuman philosophically. Likewise, one can only be equal in some senses and unequal in others while keeping their humanity. So, what kind of equality is it suppose to create? Again, I'm truly asking and I am also planning on rereading Communist Manifesto which should help answer my questions further as I have a better understanding of philosophy now.
I've read Engel's work. However, Dialectics? that's been the common method of showing points in logic and arguments since Socrates' Times (Maybe even longer, not an expert in that subject)... What's wrong with it? Thank you for answering me.