Give me your best arguments against communism

[Pennsylvania]

Communists object to any capitalist or near-capitalist system because they believe it will inherently lead to the exploitation of workers. This was the starting point for Marx: trying to eliminate worker exploitation. Of course, this begs the question: What is exploitation? If the communist actually knows his own philosophy, he will explain that workers are entitled to the products of their own labor, and when he sells his product to the capitalist class (the bourgeoisie), they in turn sell the product for a profit, and, having contributed nothing to the production of the product, is thereby exploiting his position "over" the poor proletarian. There are two problems with this:

1) Inherent in the idea of this relationship is that the value of the product is fixed, i.e. its worth must equate to the labor invested in its production, and the capitalist class is essentially leeching a "part" of that fixed "whole" value. As we know, value is demonstrably subjective. That is, whenever exchange takes place, it does so because one party values item X greater than item Y, and the other party values item Y over item X. This subjectivity of value means the worker may in fact sell his product for "less" than the capitalist class may sell it for, but these exchange values are determined voluntarily at all times during this process of sale and resale. As the relationships are voluntary, they are non-exploitative.

2) The second problem with the Marxist analysis is that it argues for the common ownership of the "means of production", which in Marxist philosophy refers to factories, land and other large-scale tools for the creation of goods. Since whatever the worker is using to produce his good most likely falls into this category, the Marxist desires its deprivatization. Yet this is quite an inconsistent position to take. Virtually anything can be employed as a means by which to produce, including your own body, hands, mind (as Rand argued) but also other external small-scale tools. Let's say I produce a hammer out of wood and metal. By the Marxist analysis, this hammer is mine since I produced it, yet the instant I turn that hammer into a means of production, it must now be communized. The very notion is laughably stupid and ridiculously inapplicable to any society.



Of course, the largest problem with any society which wishes to abolish the price mechanism will always be the Calculation Argument. This argument has never been sufficiently refuted, so you might as well throw it in there

[fisharmor]

That was hardly full on communism. More like militaristic dictatorship under the guise of a communist government.

This reminds me of an episode of Black Adder Goes Forth... where the General declares that they are going to rush out of the trenches and charge the Germans, because the fact that they've done it and failed a dozen times means it's the last thing they're going to expect.

Communism is the second half of the South Park episode on Guitar Hero, where he stops concentrating on playing the guitar game and spends all his time on another game chasing a dragon he can't catch... and eventually can't play the guitar game anymore.

Over 25 million dead, and the only new thing they didn't lift from German POWs or the US was the AK-47. That's the track record to beat... and it'll stand for the rest of time.

[Warrior_of_Freedom]

communism is fine, as long as it isn't in America.

[1000-points-of-fright]

the only new thing they didn't lift from German POWs or the US was the AK-47. That's the track record to beat... and it'll stand for the rest of time.

And even the AK47 was based on the German Sturmgewehr 44.

[Chester Copperpot]

I'm having an argument with a nitwit on another board. I need something beyond the obvious "freedom and liberty is better" argument. This person is practically a socialist...how can I get through?

We tried communism in this country back in Jamestown in 1607.. and the result was almost everybody died of starvation and sickness...

John Smith came in and got rid of the communal system and Jamestown became a success...

Communism is guaranteed mediocrity... but sometimes you need a surplus to get you through lean times. That surplus only comes when people bust their ass, and they're not willing to do that, when they dont reap the rewards from busting their ass.

[cajuncocoa]

//

[cajuncocoa]

//

[purplechoe]

central bank - one of the planks of the communist manifesto..

[Ninja Homer]

Just look at the 20th century and it's filled with examples of communism (and socialism) not working.

The reason they probably think communism would be better is because they probably think our failing system is capitalism... it's not, it's corporatism.

[speciallyblend]

they would grow crappy marijuana!!

[slothman]

There are many examples of socialism working.
Though communism hasn't worked well.

Also, most of the pyramids were built with non-slavery.
The workers wanted to help because the Pharoh was a god to them.

[CUnknown]

Communism is a totalitarian planned economy. It never works.

Socialism can exist side-by-side with at least a form of capitalism. It works just fine. It just depends on what your goals are.

In Communism, you've got one brand of car, one brand of toothpaste, one brand of everything--it's made by the government. In Socialism, industry might be regulated to all hell, but at least it's still semi-privately run. People can own businesses under socialism.

If you want complete economic freedom, you won't be happy under socialism, but under Communism, you'd be in jail, lol.

Socialism probably hurts GDP and hinders industry and maybe even progress of technology, but it does at least attempt to take care of people, so I think it has some positive points.

Communism really is attempting to turn everyone into slaves of the state, so no, I don't think there are any positive aspects about it. It has never worked throughout history. The Soviet system collapsed, and China has adopted a much more capitalist system now than they ever had before. Because they probably don't want to collapse, too.

[MN Patriot]

Umm... Chile is the number one example, where the economy was modelled on the Monetarist economic philosophy. Nobody remember Pinochet? Berlusconi in italy seems to be coming pretty close to that today, too.

It is possible to seize military control of a country and implement market reforms. It just is not very compatible to liberty.

Agreed.

Pinochet is about the worst dictator that was even remotely capitalist. 1500 people "disappeared" during his rule. Then he retired, something few leftists dictators do. Considering the lack of respect for human rights that communists and central and south American countries have, Chile was lucky to have him. The communist dictator that would have been in his place probably would have killed many more, and Democrats would have supported him, like they support Chavez, Castro, etc.

[szczebrzeszyn]

From the viewpoint of an ordinary small-town kid:

Long queues to buy coffee - I remember when we stood for hours as kids. Of course, it wasn't real coffee...But the only "brand" people knew anyway. Coffee-like product (same was with chockolate, which was actually subnamed "a chockolate-like product").

No meat in meat shops (unless you knew the owner - they always had a little something below the desk - for friends or apparatchiks only)

Growing scarcity - many goods started to be rationed - people were given a special "coupons" - you were allowed to buy as much as you had on these coupons (of course you paid by cash). I don't remember all the rationed products, but definitely meat, sugar, rice, soap, cigarettes, alcohol..many others as time went by.

Everyone had a job - but there was not much to buy (low quality goods, scarcity)

Toilet paper stories are true - I remember big trucks coming to our neighbourhood loaded with toilet paper - you could exchange normal paper (stacks of newspapers etc) for toilet paper. It was quite an event, heh..

Of course, let's not forget about issues like citizen-spies (you never knew who was a paid agent - and frankly ANYBODY could be one), commie forces killing people etc. But that's a whole different store.

[dean.engelhardt]

I'm having an argument with a nitwit on another board. I need something beyond the obvious "freedom and liberty is better" argument. This person is practically a socialist...how can I get through?

Arguing the theory of socialism against capitalism is a fools game. If communism or socialism has produced great societies there should be something in a history book to give a good example.

[purplechoe]

From the viewpoint of an ordinary small-town kid:

Long queues to buy coffee - I remember when we stood for hours as kids. Of course, it wasn't real coffee...But the only "brand" people knew anyway. Coffee-like product (same was with chockolate, which was actually subnamed "a chockolate-like product").

No meat in meat shops (unless you knew the owner - they always had a little something below the desk - for friends or apparatchiks only)

Growing scarcity - many goods started to be rationed - people were given a special "coupons" - you were allowed to buy as much as you had on these coupons (of course you paid by cash). I don't remember all the rationed products, but definitely meat, sugar, rice, soap, cigarettes, alcohol..many others as time went by.

Everyone had a job - but there was not much to buy (low quality goods, scarcity)

Toilet paper stories are true - I remember big trucks coming to our neighbourhood loaded with toilet paper - you could exchange normal paper (stacks of newspapers etc) for toilet paper. It was quite an event, heh..

Of course, let's not forget about issues like citizen-spies (you never knew who was a paid agent - and frankly ANYBODY could be one), commie forces killing people etc. But that's a whole different store.

I can very much relate to the above because I lived through it. One thing you forgot was gasoline coupons... you only get so much gas per month, meat, etc... I don't remember cigarettes being rationed... if you had American $$$ Dollars there were stores called Pewex (not sure if I got the name right) in which you could buy all the western stuff like coffee, chocolate, alcohol, cigarettes, etc...

I remember the toilet paper, my mother would come home with a huge bag filled with it because the store received a delivery and you never knew when the next delivery would be and if you would be able to get any... (that would apply pretty much to any other commodity products) people would stand in lines with no idea what they were waiting for because stores were receiving deliveries and you just never knew what was coming, could be crap... could be something you can stock up on...

as a kid I had to have a pictured license to ride a bicycle...

and lets not even talk about healthcare... it might give you nightmares...

[dean.engelhardt]

Communism works fine if your goal is eliminating poverty. Where it doesn't work so well is in innovation, effort, growth, or really anything beyond just getting by with the bare minimum.

I might have missed it, but which communist government eliminated poverty?

[FreeTraveler]

If I gave you the best argument against communism, I'd be in trouble.

Just be thankful for the Second Amendment.

[szczebrzeszyn]

I can very much relate to the above because I lived through it.

What city you lived in? (I assume you lived in Poland)

[purplechoe]

What city you lived in? (I assume you lived in Poland)

[slothman]

If communism or socialism has produced great societies there should be something in a history book to give a good example.

China seems "great" to me.
Or at least it is powerful, both economically and militarily.
I don't know your definition of 'great' so I can't respond.
It seems like you would use the "no true Scotsman" falacy to define 'great' so communistic gov'ts never work.

[purplechoe]

China seems "great" to me.
Or at least it is powerful, both economically and militarily.
I don't know your definition of 'great' so I can't respond.
It seems like you would use the "no true Scotsman" falacy to define 'great' so communistic gov'ts never work.

As someone who lived in such a system I would say that you don't know what the hell you're talking about and that you're very, very naive... socialism/ communism is a scam... those who beileved in it were called in Russia or other socialist countries "the useful idiots" by those in power...

[RCA]

Send him this link:

YouTube - New Hampshire Liberty Forum - Keynote Speaker: Stefan Molyneux from Freedomain Radio (Part 1)

[mczerone]

In a non-communistic society, there is nothing stopping any group from buying a commune and making their own rules of communism amongst themselves.

In a communist society, the best and brightest, the innovative, and the productive are all forced to live for the median members of society - except for the 'planners' - who are the de facto ruling class, who maintain power through self-selection ("Good 'ol boys"), not meritocratic methods. Beyond these negative factors, there is the calculation problem, that no alogorithm can be fed into a computer to return the "best" configuration of a society's resources - only trial and error (=capitalism and bankruptcy) can determine what arrangements can meet the needs of society in an effective and efficient way.

[szczebrzeszyn]

Nice. Back then I lived not far away - near Olsztyn (seen on the map as well).

[jsu718]

I might have missed it, but which communist government eliminated poverty?

Completely eliminated? None. China is pretty close though, although I would hesitate to call it a perfect ideological communist government either... nor do we really have accurate numbers to go on considering how secretive China is about how they do things. The 2005 numbers show about 2/3rds (0.64 times) as many people in poverty as the US but with 4.4 times the population. 2.5% vs 13%. It's also $1 a day to live in China vs $13-30 a day in the US to stay above the poverty line... with some variance due to family sizes, location, etc.

[fisharmor]

Completely eliminated? None. China is pretty close though....

And in the end, we will never know for sure where the "donors" for the Bodies exhibits came from.

Although I have a hunch.

[purplechoe]

///

[purplechoe]

Completely eliminated? None. China is pretty close though, although I would hesitate to call it a perfect ideological communist government either... nor do we really have accurate numbers to go on considering how secretive China is about how they do things. The 2005 numbers show about 2/3rds (0.64 times) as many people in poverty as the US but with 4.4 times the population. 2.5% vs 13%. It's also $1 a day to live in China vs $13-30 a day in the US to stay above the poverty line... with some variance due to family sizes, location, etc.

you hit the nail on the head - communism is nothing but pure propaganda...

Soviet Subversion of the Free World Press - 1984

Yuri Bezmenov, a Russian born, KGB trained subverter tells about the influence of the Soviet Union on Western media and describes the stages of communist takeovers. This interview was conducted by G. Edward Griffin in 1984.

[noxagol]

Communism simply flies in the face of what people want and against human nature. Instead of making a brand new system that requires forcibly reprogramming human nature, why not have a system that works hand in hand with human nature, a la free-markets. Also, their hatred isn't against free markets but what they believe to be free-markets which is really a lower degree of what they want. It is kind of funny when you really think about it.