It has been said that democracy is the worst form of government except all the others that have been tried. -Winston Churchill Socialism doesn't work, as does Communism. It's a pipe dream that is under the illusion of freedom when all it is, is people making your decisions for you. Democracy may suck, but it's the best we have so far.
Both work on paper, as Winter-Snow said, but they're just like Utopia, impractical in a realistic setting. Survival, food, and shelter seem like issues people would most likely form groups over with whoever has the most brute force or most loyal followers being the leader. You didn't say anything about an Oligarchy system.
Fine Oligarchy: What do you think a bunch of rich people will do other than try and get more rich at the cost of everyone else?
But that's a Plutocracy, which is rule by the wealthy and is a sub form of Oligarchy. Speaking of "rule by the wealthy", don't most government candidates fall under this?
No, I guess I don't? What does that have to do with anything? That doesn't have a whole lot to do with what actual Communism is. You seem to be referring to the ways in which Socialist Totalitarian and Communist Totalitarian governments develop, but there are other ways in which Socialism and Communism can work. Most people here seem to be under the illusion that Communism and Socialism are strictly systems of government. They aren't. They're economic systems whose effect on a system of government is poorly understood by nearly everyone who uses those words. The reason why Communism has a bad connotation is because most governments which have tried it had Totalitarian systems, which are bad. There has never been a modern Socialist Democracy or Communist Democracy, not because it is a pipe dream or because it is an illusion, but because of the way in which Marxist progression to Socialism and Communism functions. The Soviet Union, North Korea, Cuba, and China are/were not Communist Democracies. They are/were Totalitarian institutions that took for themselves the name of "Communist" despite not have followed Marx's written formula for true Communism. There is an entire world of difference. People make claims, such as those in this thread, that Communism is just an ideal, and that it will never actually happen, when all the while countries like England and the United States of America take the steps, one by one over the centuries, towards natural Communism. It is a path which well-governed nations follow, not through some set of skewed, revolution-inspired ideals, but through a natural progression which allows a nation to better itself. To understand what it means to become a true Communist Democracy is to understand the way in which an economy develops over the centuries alongside its government. You can disagree with me based on your opinion of Socialism or Communism, because you may prefer some other economic system (and that's fine; I do not seek to offend anyone or dismiss their opinions), but that does not change this fact: Socialism and Communism can be used.
The definition of communism you're thinking of is Marxism. Communism is generally Marxism-Leninism-Stalinism.
The system that is right depends on the heart of the country, that is, the goal of It's people. Democracy seems to work for very patriotic countries, while communism has worked to pull countries from economic disaster. The only bad forms of government are Martial Law, Dictatorships, Totalitarianism, and other forms of brutally opressive government. I have no opinion on Monarchy.
I guess if we are talking about political systems, I guess political parties are included. I lean more on the Libertarian belief (both a third party & a political belief). I believe that we should be conservative on both the economy & gun rights, yet liberal on social and moral issues like LGBT, women, & minority rights. And I support pro-choice, when it comes to abortion. I am 50/50 on the issue of pot. I believe we should go green (environment wise) & have a limited government. I also believe in social progression so I am more of a "progressive libertarian" and more left-leaning than the average libertarian. I believe the libertarian method is the best political system as of now. Not a fan in anyway to socialism or communism. But I also can see the evils in capitalism. Also I believe in total separation of church & state, and that religion has no place in law making or any political decisions. Sent from my Apple iPod touch named 'Apple Jack' cause I am the Realest BRonY in the mug, by Tapatalk.
I'm a market anarchist, which is basically the logical conclusion libertarian ideas. So I don't want a government in the first place.
I'm a hardline Socialist and I'm fully in favour of physical force Irish republicanism. I believe that the ultimate goal for my own country should be a democratic Socialist republic of Ireland. In order to do this however, Ireland would need to be united (Northern Ireland would need to leave Britain, in other words, I am also a separatist) and then the Irish government would need to be reformed. This would likely require a continuation of the Troubles which plagued Northern Ireland from 1969 to 1998 and would ultimately result in further paramilitary action. If greater care was taken and if more weapons were acquired beforehand, I believe that a military campaign against the British Government and the Ulster Loyalist paramilitaries could be successful. Tensions are already high over here and it seems a violent uprising is inevitable from both the Ulster Loyalists and the Irish Republicans. In light of the recent Union Flag Protests, I believe that there is a good chance that the Loyalist paramilitaries (Ulster Volunteer Force, Ulster Defence Association, Loyalist Volunteer Force, Orange Volunteers, Red Hand Commando's and Real Ulster Freedom Fighters) have not in fact decommissioned their arms and are perfectly capable of continuing violence against the catholic and republican civilians of Northern Ireland as they have done in the past. As a result, new arms trading links should be opened (most likely with other guerilla organisations such as the PLO) and a large stockpile of weapons should be hoarded for the defence of such communities. If the British government once again fail to stop these attacks from the militant loyalist population, then Republican paramilitaries (Real Irish Republican Army, Continuity Irish Republican Army, Óglaigh na hÉireann, Irish National Liberation Army and the Provisional Irish Republican Army) must take the fight to the loyalist paramilitaries by executing top members of their organisation and by stealing their arms. Obviously, great care must be taken to prevent any civilian casualties, but ultimately the risk is worthwhile seeing as the loyalist paramilitaries have no such qualms about killing innocent civilians. The fight may then be taken to the British Army and the PSNI/RUC (Police Service of Northern Ireland/Royal Ulster Constabulary) however they do not appear to be a target worth fighting as of now, though if opportunities are spotted, they may be taken advantage of. Obviously, the unionist/loyalist people of NI must have a say, but they cannot be considered the highest governing body as they have been since the partition of Ireland. Their conservative and borderline fascist policies must be struck down to ensure equality of the people. This is not something that I believe can be acquired through the right wing policies of the British government. The struggle is first with the British government, then with the loyalist paramilitaries and finally with the right wing, capitalist system as a whole. Once the fight has finished, solidarity and support must be expressed to all those suffering under imperialist oppression, such as North Korea, Palestine and all countries currently suffering at the hands of the British and American war machine. I personally recommend that solidarity be expressed by the working class of all countries against the oppressive policies of their rulers. I have pledged my loyalty both to the Irish Republican Socialist Party and the 32 County Sovereignty Movement. I recommend that you pledge your support to similar organisations such as the International Workers of the World and the Irish Republican Socialist Committees of North America. Do not misinterpret my words as a "with me or against me" argument. People have the right to believe what they believe. If you are on the right wing, I can still accept and tolerate you. I can maybe even come to like you. But when these beliefs are put into practise and the oppression of such countries is reinforced by you, such as by you joining the armed forces, you have no one but yourself to blame when violent action is taken against you. Politics is not personal. If you are a legitimate threat and once you have taken up arms, you have made your choice and you will be treated as such. A soldier pledges his allegiance to combat those who oppose his beliefs and his country. Once that allegiance has been pledged, violence will ensue against those who have taken the opposite side. War is hell, but sometimes that hell is necessary to create a better world for all. In the words of Karl Marx: "Workers of the world, unite!"
True. I was hoping to educate those that weren't aware of what Communism was in terms of a much broader, global scale, but I guess the best way for them to learn that would be to take a Sociology class. That goes for any economic system. The connotation of the word "Communism" is a pretty bad one, but we've only had experiences with Communist countries that also had Dictators and Authoritarian states. Marxist Communism is called "True Communism" because it outlines the steps taken to reach the ideal form of Communism. Revolutions that skip steps just won't cut it, you know?
So I don't want to get too much into american politics, but as an american It's what I'm most familiar with. I happen to be very happy with what the United States tries to be. I am personally a socialist, but I am an american socialist. I believe that free markets have their role to play and then freedom should be an essential part of people's lives. When I use the word Socialism, I mean it in it's purest meaning - as being opposite to individualism. Individualism had a good run, it opened new doors of social and economic freedom for people but at the end of the day, there are some things that just work better when everyone chips in and works collectively. Someone made the comment that america is a representative democracy - i think that is technically the definition of a republic, but the same concept stands true that the point of the way america works is that there are elected leaders whose full-time job is to do 1 of 4 things. They are either elected to debate and make laws, to execute those laws, to organize resources to support those laws, or to judge people's adherence to the laws or if the laws are even fair. Direct democracy is good for small groups but for a country of hundreds of millions of people, you just need full-time politicians and bureaucratic and officers to lead the whole thing. These people act on their own, but they are accountable to the public through the voting booth. If someone does a bad job it is the public's responsibility to elect someone better. This requires that the public be educated which can be it's own challenge, however I think it is the most fair system around and I wouldn't want to live under anything else. Getting back to my socialism; I think america has been at it's best, and many similar nations have been at their best, when the government is regulating corporations and protecting the environment and providing for the public welfare. At the end of the day, yes, Apple may be the best organization for the job of making an mp3 player, but I think there are some things that are better done by the government - like environmental protection, healthcare, or education. Ultimately I guess I am advocatign for a hybrid system - where the free market is free to invent and build new and exciting things, and the government works with those private companies to provide basic resources and to keep them in line if one of them decides to start hurting people in the name of profits.
