• Welcome to DOSBODS

    Please consider creating a free account to be able to access all the features of the DOSBODS community. It only takes 20 seconds!

Stunley Andwin

The return of communism

Recommended Posts

Communism always ends up in a horrifying disaster whenever it is tried: whether it is Chairman Mao deliberately starving 25 million people to death in one year so that he could export enough grain to buy nuclear weapons and submarines, Pol Pot murdering around 30 percent of his own people or the horrifying Stalinist gulags, a nation that turns to the far left should consider itself lucky if it merely ends up in abject and utter poverty like Cuba or Venezuela.

None of those were real communism however, it was merely the people running it that were bad. Let us observe the return of the far left to formerly rich and successful countries.

Here is Jean-Claude Juncker celebrating Karl Marx’s 200th birthday. Doing this so openly suggests that they are so confident of victory that they do not feel the need to hide it any more.

https://www.express.co.uk/news/world/955635/Juncker-speech-EU-chief-Marx-200th-Birthday-Trier

Portugal is another neo-Marxist stronghold.

https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-07-26/portugal-becoming-bastion-neo-marxism

Ash Sarkar is literally a communist!

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Communism has "had a rest", so it must be OK now. The danger has passed. Like nuclear power stations :)

Whether or not communism could ever work in theory - it's actually irrelevant, because we're human beings and therefore flawed creatures.

"Empathy rarely extends beyond the family".

In order to argue for communism you have to carefully ignore human psychology and all of history. You also have to see humans from a solely group-based perspective and ignore the concept of individual liberty.

Watch what happens when you take a group of humans and dump them in a situation in which they have to care for themselves. A commune, if you will. That last series of 10,000 BC tells you all you need to know about what happens and the force that it is essential for a leader to exert in order to prevent that from happening.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How obvious does it have to be that, outside of weekend whiteboard seminars, communism and socialism have the seeds of their failure sewn in because they don't reward people for their productivity and efforts so workers reduce them and everybody becomes poorer until people start to starve?

There have been several discussions on here where, even in a notionally capitalist country, the way the tax and benefits systems have been set up that it becomes barely worth working and very capable people (on here and in RL) are reducing their hours, refusing promotions, and planning to retire early.

In the real world it fails every time and the only appeal for politicians is that once they get into power they can set themselves up as lifetime rulers living lives of luxury and controlling every aspect of their population's lives.  Stalin and Castro ruled like absolute monarchs.  Juncker would love to do the same and appears to be well on his way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I take the point of the lefties that capitalism has also killed millions - take the First World War, for example - what was that if not a capitalist war?

My problem is more that communism is always held up as a benevolent and enlightened alternative to capitalism, when the reality is that every time it has been tried it results in, to quote our poet Thomas Hood, 'poverty, hunger and dirt'. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, DTMark said:

Communism has "had a rest", so it must be OK now. The danger has passed. Like nuclear power stations :)

Whether or not communism could ever work in theory - it's actually irrelevant, because we're human beings and therefore flawed creatures.

"Empathy rarely extends beyond the family".

In order to argue for communism you have to carefully ignore human psychology and all of history. You also have to see humans from a solely group-based perspective and ignore the concept of individual liberty.

Watch what happens when you take a group of humans and dump them in a situation in which they have to care for themselves. A commune, if you will. That last series of 10,000 BC tells you all you need to know about what happens and the force that it is essential for a leader to exert in order to prevent that from happening.

 

Other forms of politics and ways of organising cultures are equally subject to the flaws of human nature.

We need to set things up on the basis that people will behave like cunts if given a chance to do so, either immediately or following others cuntish behaviour if they see an advantage.  Leaders MUST be constrained by and subject to the will of the people they lead.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

watched a short video this morning where a journalist asked communists about venezuela.

supporting the human reaction to a situation, one communist proclaimed the breakdown was due to people hoarding water and food.  That means the place wasnt a communist community in the first place.

stupid is as stupid says.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Austin Allegro said:

I take the point of the lefties that capitalism has also killed millions - take the First World War, for example - what was that if not a capitalist war?

My problem is more that communism is always held up as a benevolent and enlightened alternative to capitalism, when the reality is that every time it has been tried it results in, to quote our poet Thomas Hood, 'poverty, hunger and dirt'. 

I dont now about Capitalist war, but Commies kill their own. always.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Frank Hovis said:

How obvious does it have to be that, outside of weekend whiteboard seminars, communism and socialism have the seeds of their failure sewn in because they don't reward people for their productivity and efforts so workers reduce them and everybody becomes poorer until people start to starve?

There have been several discussions on here where, even in a notionally capitalist country, the way the tax and benefits systems have been set up that it becomes barely worth working and very capable people (on here and in RL) are reducing their hours, refusing promotions, and planning to retire early.

In the real world it fails every time and the only appeal for politicians is that once they get into power they can set themselves up as lifetime rulers living lives of luxury and controlling every aspect of their population's lives.  Stalin and Castro ruled like absolute monarchs.  Juncker would love to do the same and appears to be well on his way.

 

So, we've had communism for quite a while in the UK as, to all intents and purposes, we are at the end game regarding withdrawal of work and food banks

of course TPTB masquerade it as a full employment success,

hidden by a rise in the self-employed (people who like to be independent but many on their own version of zero hours contracts), an excessive student population, and employees on real zero hours contracts.

A communist economy that is a charade facilitated on tick

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, BLOOLOO said:

I dont now about Capitalist war, but Commies kill their own. always.

One would have thought than anyone with a passing knowledge of history* could see that REVOLOOOSHUN, as the kids say it, in nearly every case results in a worse tyranny than that which went before. The only exception I can think of is our Glorious Revolution of 1688 which wasn't really a proper revolution anyway. 

* I suspect what passes for historical knowledge nowadays is the Nazis, Mary Seacole and Martin Luther King. 

Edited by Austin Allegro

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not having to be productive to get paid is a common factor amongst today's communism enthusiasts. Whether globalist civil 'servants' like Olly Robbins or silly kids from well off backgrounds like Ash with an income from media and made up academia to top up whatever mummy gives her. People who have to actually deal with customers and produce results don't tend to have the same enthusiasm for the idea. It's such a shame that such bollocks is actually gaining traction amongst hopefully small groups of people in a country like the UK, where until the Brown benefits giveaway started, we actually had a fairly good balance between competition and a welfare safety net in this country.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As I've said before, just follow the money on any socialist/commie you meet - it's usually someone else's money they're living off...be it government money or rich relatives bankrolling them.

They're used to feeding on other people's money rather than toiling for it and they want more free money.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not a communist but I am going to play a bit of devil's advocate here;

For some reason capitalism seems to get a free ride - free market capitalism has failed several times, usually resulting in revolutions and/or global wars.

People often cite the many millions that communism has killed, which is true, but successful capitalist countries have just offshored the nasty effects of capitalism to poorer countries (or inshored it these days). Once upon a time we had slavery. Then we had colonialism and deplorable working conditions. Once unionisation took hold, production followed a path around the world exploiting the least socially developed countries, sheltering the west from these effects so that we could marvel at how great capitalism is.

But then protectionism was discarded. 

Now we inshore cheap labour for the jobs that can;t be offshored and when the credit taps get turned off, the plebs will see that the emperor has no clothes and they too will be exposed to the how brutal capitalism can be.

It's probably little wonder that communism takes off in countries at the shittier end of the capitalist dream. It's certainly not the long term answer, but we certainly need to start thinking of a new system that doesn;t rely on the idiocy of perpetual growth, pointless consuming and a population growth ponzi scheme.

Juncker's still a twat though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm never sure about this sort of thing.  I'd say that neither pure capitalism or communism work well.  The interesting part is when you have a pragmatic-ism...

  • I suppose I believe that 'Capitalism Minus' sort of works -- that is, you have capitalism, but introduce elements to stop too much hoarding of wealth in one place, etc.  Things like taxes, protection against monopolies, a bit of welfare state, etc.
  • The problem with communism is that 'Communism plus' seems to not work -- that is communism, but with a bit of free-market thrown in to stop too much dependency on the state, etc.  That seems to always produce a communist state with mainly poor people plus a few oligarchs.

I'd add that if we've currently got 'Capitalism minus' it's gone a bit too 'minus' in some areas, such as tax credits removing the incentive to work, state propping-up of the entire FIRE economy (which was already too well-off).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, maynardgravy said:

I'm not a communist but I am going to play a bit of devil's advocate here;

For some reason capitalism seems to get a free ride - free market capitalism has failed several times, usually resulting in revolutions and/or global wars.

People often cite the many millions that communism has killed, which is true, but successful capitalist countries have just offshored the nasty effects of capitalism to poorer countries (or inshored it these days). Once upon a time we had slavery. Then we had colonialism and deplorable working conditions. Once unionisation took hold, production followed a path around the world exploiting the least socially developed countries, sheltering the west from these effects so that we could marvel at how great capitalism is.

But then protectionism was discarded. 

Now we inshore cheap labour for the jobs that can;t be offshored and when the credit taps get turned off, the plebs will see that the emperor has no clothes and they too will be exposed to the how brutal capitalism can be.

It's probably little wonder that communism takes off in countries at the shittier end of the capitalist dream. It's certainly not the long term answer, but we certainly need to start thinking of a new system that doesn;t rely on the idiocy of perpetual growth, pointless consuming and a population growth ponzi scheme.

Juncker's still a twat though.

Aren't you rooting that within a historic time when labour = humans?

Modern container docks run with a handful of operatives rather than hundreds.

These days industry does not in general require masses of human labour to turn its wheels.   It requires a small number of very skilled people.

The old ideas of human capital that feed communism are rooted within a time when every industry required vast numbers of people doing physical labour.  That is no longer the case.

People are being imported to do unnecessary jobs and this is why their wages are supplemented by tax credits: their work is of insufficient value to feed, house and clothe themselves.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, maynardgravy said:

I'm not a communist but I am going to play a bit of devil's advocate here;

For some reason capitalism seems to get a free ride - free market capitalism has failed several times, usually resulting in revolutions and/or global wars.

People often cite the many millions that communism has killed, which is true, but successful capitalist countries have just offshored the nasty effects of capitalism to poorer countries (or inshored it these days). Once upon a time we had slavery. Then we had colonialism and deplorable working conditions. Once unionisation took hold, production followed a path around the world exploiting the least socially developed countries, sheltering the west from these effects so that we could marvel at how great capitalism is.

But then protectionism was discarded. 

Now we inshore cheap labour for the jobs that can;t be offshored and when the credit taps get turned off, the plebs will see that the emperor has no clothes and they too will be exposed to the how brutal capitalism can be.

It's probably little wonder that communism takes off in countries at the shittier end of the capitalist dream. It's certainly not the long term answer, but we certainly need to start thinking of a new system that doesn;t rely on the idiocy of perpetual growth, pointless consuming and a population growth ponzi scheme.

Juncker's still a twat though.

middle of the roaders see the dangers of both sorts.  thats why we are middle of the roaders.  we see capitalism putting people out of work when the usefulness is done. Thats why we see a safety net for those as essential.

we see commies not working and getting their whole lives paid for. thats why we see a benefit system that is too generous as unproductive.

We dont want government in our lives except when we really need help.  Protection against financial bullies, and protection against tyranny from the left.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Frank Hovis said:

Aren't you rooting that within a historic time when labour = humans?

Modern container docks run with a handful of operatives rather than hundreds.

These days industry does not in general require masses of human labour to turn its wheels.   It requires a small number of very skilled people.

The old ideas of human capital that feed communism are rooted within a time when every industry required vast numbers of people doing physical labour.  That is no longer the case.

People are being imported to do unnecessary jobs and this is why their wages are supplemented by tax credits: their work is of insufficient value to feed, house and clothe themselves.

I agree. Then you have to ask why people are being imported to wash cars etc. Is it because the system requires pointless consumers?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, BLOOLOO said:

middle of the roaders see the dangers of both sorts.  thats why we are middle of the roaders.  we see capitalism putting people out of work when the usefulness is done. Thats why we see a safety net for those as essential.

we see commies not working and getting their whole lives paid for. thats why we see a benefit system that is too generous as unproductive.

We dont want government in our lives except when we really need help.  Protection against financial bullies, and protection against tyranny from the left.

Pretty much - but then I can't help but hear Blair's '3rd way' in the back of my mind and vomit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If capitalism was allowed from 2007/8 onwards when they started printing money to give to themselves we'd be in a far better position than we currently are.

Instead those claiming to be capitalists destroyed capitalism by giving themselves other peoples money.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, maynardgravy said:

I'm not a communist but I am going to play a bit of devil's advocate here;

For some reason capitalism seems to get a free ride - free market capitalism has failed several times, usually resulting in revolutions and/or global wars.

People often cite the many millions that communism has killed, which is true, but successful capitalist countries have just offshored the nasty effects of capitalism to poorer countries (or inshored it these days). Once upon a time we had slavery. Then we had colonialism and deplorable working conditions. Once unionisation took hold, production followed a path around the world exploiting the least socially developed countries, sheltering the west from these effects so that we could marvel at how great capitalism is.

But then protectionism was discarded. 

Now we inshore cheap labour for the jobs that can;t be offshored and when the credit taps get turned off, the plebs will see that the emperor has no clothes and they too will be exposed to the how brutal capitalism can be.

It's probably little wonder that communism takes off in countries at the shittier end of the capitalist dream. It's certainly not the long term answer, but we certainly need to start thinking of a new system that doesn;t rely on the idiocy of perpetual growth, pointless consuming and a population growth ponzi scheme.

Juncker's still a twat though.

I think Capitalism fails because we always intervene to prevent catastrophe, whereas catastrophe is a good cleansing process - we are just scared of catastrophe

I take the view that economies, theories etc will follow the same rules of natural selection that lead to survival of the fittest in nature - we just don't have a long enough time frame to see that.

Of course, intervention is all part and parcel of the evolutionary process.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, JoeDavola said:

As I've said before, just follow the money on any socialist/commie you meet - it's usually someone else's money they're living off...be it government money or rich relatives bankrolling them.

They're used to feeding on other people's money rather than toiling for it and they want more free money.

It goes beyond money or resources or assets. It is about the distribution of power.

"None of those were real communism" can and should be immediately countered with "there has never been real capitalism, only cronyism". 

The balance of power has been histories biggest problem. Sometimes it is taken by force, sometimes amassed by cunning or democratically distributed - Julius Caesar was elected by a party that advocated for the plebs!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Banned said:

If capitalism was allowed from 2007/8 onwards when they started printing money to give to themselves we'd be in a far better position than we currently are.

Instead those claiming to be capitalists destroyed capitalism by giving themselves other peoples money.

you mean taking other peoples money through inflation and low interest rates to those with capital.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.