I read the comments and I think they are all wrong.
Current capitalism is not capitalism at all, it’s oligarchy. Capitalism originally originated from an idea of everyone having the same equal opportunities. Right now it does not capitalism, it is a oligarheism or whatever - a circle jerk to syphon your wealth and make you poor - capitalism aas never designed for this.
Communism is about equality dictated by the government which also implies government for some reason is not equal to basic citizen. And communism doesn’t allow the ability to grow. However, communism on paper really guarantees your social safety in terms of you will not die, you will have food, you will have a house. However, on practice, it didn’t really work well. And current community countries are actually socialism.
Something good is always in the middle. We can have a capitalist-like growth opportunities and regulations from the government and social guarantees. For example, like in most countries in Europe, you have a wealth guarantee, you have a social and job protection. and also strict regulations on terms of companies so they will not abuse their customers and they will not abuse their employees
The current comment section is just a fight for nothing. The problem is not in the system capitalism, socialism or communism. The problem is in a legar case and circlejerk - where even the government is in. So it actually becomes harder and harder to actually have a good thing in common reason in socialism and in capitalism.
Saying today is oligarchy not capitalism is like saying you don’t have cancer you have stage four cancer
Communism is by definition a stateless society, not sure where you are getting those ideas about a communist government. Define “didn’t work well”. Nations such as Cuba have not achieved a communist utopia, but they did significantly improve the lives of their citizens in pretty much every way compared to pre revolutionary Cuba. Those states are obviously not communist and it is debatable to what extent they are socialist and not state capitalist.
Almost all European countries are currently in the process of removing as much of those social guarantees, which is a logically process that pretty inevitably happens as long capitalism exists.
Oligarchy is not caused by capitalism. These are different things. I’m not really sure if capitalism really caused it - it could just accelerated it. Bad people would so evil things in any system unless regulated
Communism requires state. Otherwise, it would be an anarchy - which never worked. About utopian communism:
2.1 USSR - failed on the way to the communism due to economic reasons. The system wasn’t able to handle it all, and USSR had huge deficits and poorness.
2.2 China - “a communistic” country. Which is not really anymore. It just masks itself as one to still have a single leader (in their case a single party)
2.3 about Cuba I have no idea, no experience
That is unfortunate. But this social guarantees are being removed by rich and power hungry people that are trying to aggregate more power. And power is money. Imagine money = capitalism = bad. But if we will remove money from the system - bad actors could still abuse their power in different ways (political weight, connections)
Im downoted to hell for a different opinion from lefties, righties and centrists. Cool. I love society. But it is not a reddit and no karma, so it doesnt matter :)
Your thinking of written history, almost all of which was written by slavers and lords to justify them doing nothing and getting all the stuff.
The vast majority of human existence, from when we first diverged from apes until the agricultural revolutions, was organized around anarchic tribes and clans where they shared there resources and the leader “ruled” at the discretion of the tribe.
These were not benign, cooperative social structures. They were tiny dictatorships. The leader controlled the “discretion of the tribe” by eliminating dissent. The controlling principle of was “might makes right”.
Other words for the broad concept you are describing are “harem” and “cult”.
You have no idea what communism means. It is not anarchy, but mainly due to the difference in the way and not the goal. Saying communism requires a state is like saying water atoms require more than one proton and electron. It is literally the definition of what communism isn’t is.
2.1 The USSR had economic problems, especially near the end, but it also had achieved great economic progress. If you consider the full existence of USSR it’s economy grew equally to that of the West. The USSR however had a way worse start as it inherited a feudal society that had just lost a war and was attacked immediately by capitalist nations such as the USA. Other countries that had similar starting conditions grew significantly less than the West or USSR in the same time period. The USSR saw a significant increase in life expectancy: . It’s economy later declined due to mismanaged and a expenditure for the military that wasn’t feasable, but all in all I don’t think it’s fair to call the USSR a economic failure.
I read the comments and I think they are all wrong.
Current capitalism is not capitalism at all, it’s oligarchy. Capitalism originally originated from an idea of everyone having the same equal opportunities. Right now it does not capitalism, it is a oligarheism or whatever - a circle jerk to syphon your wealth and make you poor - capitalism aas never designed for this.
Communism is about equality dictated by the government which also implies government for some reason is not equal to basic citizen. And communism doesn’t allow the ability to grow. However, communism on paper really guarantees your social safety in terms of you will not die, you will have food, you will have a house. However, on practice, it didn’t really work well. And current community countries are actually socialism.
Something good is always in the middle. We can have a capitalist-like growth opportunities and regulations from the government and social guarantees. For example, like in most countries in Europe, you have a wealth guarantee, you have a social and job protection. and also strict regulations on terms of companies so they will not abuse their customers and they will not abuse their employees
The current comment section is just a fight for nothing. The problem is not in the system capitalism, socialism or communism. The problem is in a legar case and circlejerk - where even the government is in. So it actually becomes harder and harder to actually have a good thing in common reason in socialism and in capitalism.
Oh my, I would have never though that this comment will actually cause this explosive reaction.
But of course it is the internet. Who would have though that having an opinion that differs from both sides will result in “not” pissing all sides.
Internet is awesome.
Ehrm… The current system has caused the sixth mass extinction on the planet. Capitalism will inevitable collapse because it incentivizes ecocide.
Most intelligent liberal.
Gee… nothing oligarchical about a system where the rich hold all the power, eh?
Nothing at all, brightspark?
Really, brightspark? Nothing at all about a stateless, classless and moneyless society, eh?
Have you ever tried not eating paint flakes?
Saying today is oligarchy not capitalism is like saying you don’t have cancer you have stage four cancer
Communism is by definition a stateless society, not sure where you are getting those ideas about a communist government. Define “didn’t work well”. Nations such as Cuba have not achieved a communist utopia, but they did significantly improve the lives of their citizens in pretty much every way compared to pre revolutionary Cuba. Those states are obviously not communist and it is debatable to what extent they are socialist and not state capitalist.
Almost all European countries are currently in the process of removing as much of those social guarantees, which is a logically process that pretty inevitably happens as long capitalism exists.
Oligarchy is not caused by capitalism. These are different things. I’m not really sure if capitalism really caused it - it could just accelerated it. Bad people would so evil things in any system unless regulated
Communism requires state. Otherwise, it would be an anarchy - which never worked. About utopian communism: 2.1 USSR - failed on the way to the communism due to economic reasons. The system wasn’t able to handle it all, and USSR had huge deficits and poorness. 2.2 China - “a communistic” country. Which is not really anymore. It just masks itself as one to still have a single leader (in their case a single party) 2.3 about Cuba I have no idea, no experience
That is unfortunate. But this social guarantees are being removed by rich and power hungry people that are trying to aggregate more power. And power is money. Imagine money = capitalism = bad. But if we will remove money from the system - bad actors could still abuse their power in different ways (political weight, connections)
Im downoted to hell for a different opinion from lefties, righties and centrists. Cool. I love society. But it is not a reddit and no karma, so it doesnt matter :)
So is anarcho-communism an oxymoron for you then?
Anarchy never worked except for the vast majority of human existence.
The vast majority of human existence: slavery and feudalism
That shit happened after agriculture.
Your thinking of written history, almost all of which was written by slavers and lords to justify them doing nothing and getting all the stuff.
The vast majority of human existence, from when we first diverged from apes until the agricultural revolutions, was organized around anarchic tribes and clans where they shared there resources and the leader “ruled” at the discretion of the tribe.
These were not benign, cooperative social structures. They were tiny dictatorships. The leader controlled the “discretion of the tribe” by eliminating dissent. The controlling principle of was “might makes right”.
Other words for the broad concept you are describing are “harem” and “cult”.
You young earth creationists get wilder all the time. Now the Earth is younger than bronze?
2.1 The USSR had economic problems, especially near the end, but it also had achieved great economic progress. If you consider the full existence of USSR it’s economy grew equally to that of the West. The USSR however had a way worse start as it inherited a feudal society that had just lost a war and was attacked immediately by capitalist nations such as the USA. Other countries that had similar starting conditions grew significantly less than the West or USSR in the same time period. The USSR saw a significant increase in life expectancy:
. It’s economy later declined due to mismanaged and a expenditure for the military that wasn’t feasable, but all in all I don’t think it’s fair to call the USSR a economic failure.
I don’t know how did you get all 3 points so wrong
.world accounts usually do. I’ve given up trying to argue with them. 🤷♀️
It’s not like Lenin didn’t write about this same thing 100 years ago…
Lenin after revolution, when people tried to do communism:
Ok…