Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 30 of 57

Thread: Why doesn't Communism/Marxism/Socialism work ?

  1. #1

    Question Why doesn't Communism/Marxism/Socialism work ?

    Why doesn't Communism/Marxism/Socialism work ? The idea that everyone is equal and gets paid the same income or wages did this not work in the Soviet Union was there still a Rich/Wealthy Elite ? Marxists believe in collective ownership of the means of production but was there still Business management and owners in the Soviet Union ? Did the Soviet Union really have Income Equality thank you ?

    Karl Marx and Frederick Engels

    Manifesto
    of the Communist Party
    1848

    II -- PROLETARIANS AND COMMUNISTS

    1. Abolition of property in land and application of all rents of land to public purposes.

    2. A heavy progressive or graduated income tax.

    3. Abolition of all rights of inheritance.

    4. Confiscation of the property of all emigrants and rebels.

    5. Centralization of credit in the banks of the state, by means of a national bank with state capital and an exclusive monopoly.

    6. Centralization of the means of communication and transport in the hands of the state.

    7. Extension of factories and instruments of production owned by the state; the bringing into cultivation of waste lands, and the improvement of the soil generally in accordance with a common plan.

    8. Equal obligation of all to work. Establishment of industrial armies, especially for agriculture.

    9. Combination of agriculture with manufacturing industries; gradual abolition of all the distinction between town and country by a more equable distribution of the populace over the country.

    10. Free education for all children in public schools. Abolition of children's factory labor in its present form. Combination of education with industrial production, etc.

    http://www.anu.edu.au/polsci/marx/cl...manifesto.html



  2. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  3. #2
    Google "Economic Calculation Problem".

  4. #3
    Quote Originally Posted by Cutlerzzz View Post
    Google "Economic Calculation Problem".
    +1 you can't make sound economic calculations without a free market pricing structure.

  5. #4
    There are lots of problems.
    Control or planned economy vs. market economy.
    No incentive to excel or to do more work than the bare minimum required.
    If labor is forced, slaves do not work as hard as a free man, and will try to undermine their overlords (hmmm wonder why U.S. productivity is dropping?)
    Planned economies do not want highly educated population as people who know how to think start to wonder why their leaders are leaders...intelligence tends to inspire independent thought, and independent thought is not conducive to central planning.
    "The journalist is one who separates the wheat from the chaff, and then prints the chaff." - Adlai Stevenson

    “I tell you that virtue does not come from money: but from virtue comes money and all other good things to man, both to the individual and to the state.” - Socrates

  6. #5
    Lots of questions on "communism", "the rich elite", and such...is this for a research paper?

    This should kinda be obvious if you're on RPF. These systems deny the basic human desire for freedom.

  7. #6
    Are you sure it didn't? I'd be curious to learn more about the economic systems of the various native american populations pre European exploration. Some of those could have possibly been classified as working communism or socialism.

    A short while back I was chatting w/ my history buff uncle. The subject turned to manifest destiny. It got me to thinking if 'private property' wasn't the 'manifest destiny' that would do in their way of life.

    If anybody has some good sources on the economics of the native tribes, please share.

  8. #7
    They are just another form of slavery.

    See Philosophy of Liberty.

  9. #8
    Quote Originally Posted by Krugerrand View Post
    Are you sure it didn't?
    I'm pretty sure it did. That is to say, I'm pretty sure the point of communism/ socialism is collectivism, suppression of the individual, and misery.

    If anybody has some good sources on the economics of the native tribes, please share.
    If the tribes themselves are to be believed, a tribal tradition which they're using to gain exceptions to standing law in a lot of states is gambling.
    How exactly does one gamble if one does not own property?
    Also, why was there so much fighting and animosity in areas like the southwest and plains, where resources aren't as plentiful, and much more peace and goodwill in areas like the northwest, where there was plenty to eat?
    Sure, one can explain a Potlach as an essentially communist affair - but given that the entire event revolves around people voluntarily giving things to other people, how can that be in line with the idea of public goods?

    But to answer the topic:
    Quote Originally Posted by mikejohnson2006 View Post
    1. Abolition of property in land and application of all rents of land to public purposes.
    First, there are precious few places in the US that don't rent property to tenants in the form of property tax, so the question is, is it working here?
    Second, you need to check the record and realize that in cases where people own property, they tend to take care of it, and in cases where they don't own it, they trash it.
    There is simply no incentive for people to care for and improve land - ie, progress - if they don't own it. The only option is to point a gun to the head of the tenants - turn them into slaves.

    2. A heavy progressive or graduated income tax.
    In other words, you do not own either your labor (see above) or the profit from it. In short, your'e a slave.

    3. Abolition of all rights of inheritance.
    You're already a slave, so it only makes sense that you can't give what you don't have to other people.

    4. Confiscation of the property of all emigrants and rebels.
    Since you were already a slave who can't own anything, what does this matter?

    5. Centralization of credit in the banks of the state, by means of a national bank with state capital and an exclusive monopoly.
    Not sure why this is important, since you're already a slave who can't own property and can't keep money anyway.

    6. Centralization of the means of communication and transport in the hands of the state.
    Gotta keep the slaves content in their slavery.

    7. Extension of factories and instruments of production owned by the state; the bringing into cultivation of waste lands, and the improvement of the soil generally in accordance with a common plan.
    By, of course, threatening to execute the slaves who will actually be doing the work.

    8. Equal obligation of all to work. Establishment of industrial armies, especially for agriculture.
    Make the slaves efficient. That always works.

    9. Combination of agriculture with manufacturing industries; gradual abolition of all the distinction between town and country by a more equable distribution of the populace over the country.
    This part flies in the face of environmentalism. Well, we did that here, by using state power to chase people out of cities and subsidize pressboard estates. Makes me wonder why envirofreaks are so pro-communism.

    10. Free education for all children in public schools. Abolition of children's factory labor in its present form. Combination of education with industrial production, etc.
    More slave reeducation.

    Does it work? Does slavery work?
    There is no functional difference between a Roman patrician and a member of the inner party.
    There are no crimes against people.
    There are only crimes against the state.
    And the state will never, ever choose to hold accountable its agents, because a thing can not commit a crime against itself.



  10. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  11. #9
    If you want an in depth analysis on why Socialism does not work, I'd recommend the book Socialism: An Economic and Sociological Analysis - Ludwig Von Mises:

    http://mises.org/resources/2736

    Or the condensed version, Economic Calculation In The Socialist Commonwealth:
    http://mises.org/resources/2736

  12. #10
    Quote Originally Posted by matt0611 View Post
    If you want an in depth analysis on why Socialism does not work, I'd recommend the book Socialism: An Economic and Sociological Analysis - Ludwig Von Mises:

    http://mises.org/resources/2736

    Or the condensed version, Economic Calculation In The Socialist Commonwealth:
    http://mises.org/resources/2736
    Road to Serfdom by F.A. Hayek is another good one

  13. #11
    The economic calculation problem is probably the most important, but the incentive problem is also ever present.

  14. #12
    Quote Originally Posted by Krugerrand View Post
    Are you sure it didn't? I'd be curious to learn more about the economic systems of the various native american populations pre European exploration. Some of those could have possibly been classified as working communism or socialism.
    And it may very well have worked for Native Americans... I would doubt the empires (Aztec, Inca) were run that way, but the small tribal groups, sure. New research seems to indicate humans are hard-wired to make "tribes" of 50 up to several hundred people, where everyone in the community knows each other, cooperates, and takes care of each other. I would think that could absolutely work, because when everyone knows everyone else, everyone wants to take care of each other, and everyone's role and duty is defined and known to the whole group, the incentives to work hard (rather than face public shame) are there. I'd have no problem with modern people setting themselves up in little communist communes and doing whatever they pleased, *within* that commune.

    But civilizations and nations =/= tribes. When you expand the idea beyond the tribal level, everyone is a stranger. Why work hard to benefit strangers, who won't recognize your work?

  15. #13
    Quote Originally Posted by mikejohnson2006 View Post
    Why doesn't Communism/Marxism/Socialism work
    well lessee...


    1. Abolition of property in land and application of all rents of land to public purposes.
    This fails because, oddly, people are not fond of being robbed.

    2. A heavy progressive or graduated income tax.
    See point 1, above.

    3. Abolition of all rights of inheritance.
    See point 1, above.

    4. Confiscation of the property of all emigrants and rebels.
    See point 1, above.

    5. Centralization of credit in the banks of the state, by means of a national bank with state capital and an exclusive monopoly.
    See point 1, above.

    Also, people do not like being treated like imbecile children, even in the cases where they are.

    6. Centralization of the means of communication and transport in the hands of the state.
    See point 5, above.

    7. Extension of factories and instruments of production owned by the state; the bringing into cultivation of waste lands, and the improvement of the soil generally in accordance with a common plan.
    See point 5, above.

    Also, people are not clones. Therefore, "common plan[s]" fail.

    8. Equal obligation of all to work. Establishment of industrial armies, especially for agriculture.
    See point 7, above.

    The use of "armies" - the militarization of the population, with all it implies in terms of authority and blind obedience.

    9. Combination of agriculture with manufacturing industries; gradual abolition of all the distinction between town and country by a more equable distribution of the populace over the country.
    I cannot even figure out why this is significant.

    10. Free education for all children in public schools. Abolition of children's factory labor in its present form. Combination of education with industrial production, etc.
    See point 7, above.

    http://www.anu.edu.au/polsci/marx/cl...manifesto.html[/QUOTE]
    freedomisobvious.blogspot.com

    There is only one correct way: freedom. All other solutions are non-solutions.

    It appears that artificial intelligence is at least slightly superior to natural stupidity.

    Our words make us the ghosts that we are.

    Convincing the world he didn't exist was the Devil's second greatest trick; the first was convincing us that God didn't exist.

  16. #14
    Point 9 is significant because it promotes "factory farms" such as ConAgra and Monsanto and seeks to run family farms out of business. It is a lot easier to control a couple of corporate farms that own most of the land than it is to manage a bunch of independents.
    "The journalist is one who separates the wheat from the chaff, and then prints the chaff." - Adlai Stevenson

    “I tell you that virtue does not come from money: but from virtue comes money and all other good things to man, both to the individual and to the state.” - Socrates

  17. #15
    Quote Originally Posted by Krugerrand View Post
    Some of those could have possibly been classified as working communism or socialism.
    That is like saying that your "family economy" is successful socialism. Most families (Mom, Dad, kids etc.) are socialist, and most can manage their household economy. But the more complex an economy, the more central planning fails.

    For the OP:




  18. #16
    Communism rests on a violation of the commandments Thou shalt not steal and Thou shalt not covet.

    It rests on a rejection of God's eternal law of private property, and therefore is evil and will fail.



  19. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  20. #17
    The moment that a "pot" of shared resources is created, the taking of those resources will become corrupted.

    First, unscrupulous people will attempt to take more than their "fair" share. Next, the people who are delegated the responsibility of distributing the resources will become corrupted, and will favor themselves and their cronies. In the end, shared resources will be nothing more than a method of redistributing wealth from those who donate, to those who have the power of distribution, and those who fraudulently take what they should not.

    The gross inefficiencies of central economic planning is a separate, but equal flaw in communism.
    Last edited by Brian4Liberty; 09-13-2011 at 10:31 AM.
    "Foreign aid is taking money from the poor people of a rich country, and giving it to the rich people of a poor country." - Ron Paul
    "Beware the Military-Industrial-Financial-Pharma-Corporate-Internet-Media-Government Complex." - B4L update of General Dwight D. Eisenhower
    "Debt is the drug, Wall St. Banksters are the dealers, and politicians are the addicts." - B4L
    "Totally free immigration? I've never taken that position. I believe in national sovereignty." - Ron Paul

    Proponent of real science.
    The views and opinions expressed here are solely my own, and do not represent this forum or any other entities or persons.

  21. #18
    Socialism can actually work provided you don't have Rothschild central bank. This would also require non materialistic people and most of the world has been brainwashed to be materialistic. There are some people who are not however.

    It would be a more non materialistic society where the basic needs are taken care of while excess luxuries are hard to come by. This would be a society with a more simple life and a lot more free time. It would not be a hit on the economic charts, but for simple living people who want to avoid long work weeks and derive less happiness from material items it is a good fit.

    Ideally it would have to be a direct democracy mixed with socialism, in order to prevent a corporatist government.
    Last edited by nbhadja; 09-13-2011 at 10:50 AM.
    "Countries are benefited when they changed these [national sovereignty] policies, and evidence suggests that North Americans are ready for a new relationship that renders this old definition of sovereignty obsolete."

    CFR task force co-chairman Robert Pastor

  22. #19
    Quote Originally Posted by leonster View Post
    And it may very well have worked for Native Americans... I would doubt the empires (Aztec, Inca) were run that way, but the small tribal groups, sure. New research seems to indicate humans are hard-wired to make "tribes" of 50 up to several hundred people, where everyone in the community knows each other, cooperates, and takes care of each other. I would think that could absolutely work, because when everyone knows everyone else, everyone wants to take care of each other, and everyone's role and duty is defined and known to the whole group, the incentives to work hard (rather than face public shame) are there. I'd have no problem with modern people setting themselves up in little communist communes and doing whatever they pleased, *within* that commune.

    But civilizations and nations =/= tribes. When you expand the idea beyond the tribal level, everyone is a stranger. Why work hard to benefit strangers, who won't recognize your work?
    I also doubt the Aztec and Inca were run that way ... but I'd be curious to learn more about it. I don't think it would be fair to characterize the Seminole as a family like tribe instead of a nation. What was their 'economy' like? Certainly there had to have been trade between 'tribes.'

  23. #20
    Quote Originally Posted by Wesker1982 View Post
    That is like saying that your "family economy" is successful socialism. Most families (Mom, Dad, kids etc.) are socialist, and most can manage their household economy. But the more complex an economy, the more central planning fails.

    For the OP:
    ...
    I wouldn't call my family socialistic. I don't want to derail the thread, but I'm curious how socialistic the Indian nations may have been.

  24. #21
    The Indian tribes were flat out socialist. That is how families are typically run.

    I like to call Indians the pure people. Material items, the concept of "private ownership" etc did not plague them.

    They had a whole different philosophy...a philosophy of nature.

    Bolivia is an example of a socialist family economy country that has improved by leaps and bounds since they kicked out the imperialist corporatist US puppet leaders.
    Last edited by nbhadja; 09-13-2011 at 12:25 PM.
    "Countries are benefited when they changed these [national sovereignty] policies, and evidence suggests that North Americans are ready for a new relationship that renders this old definition of sovereignty obsolete."

    CFR task force co-chairman Robert Pastor

  25. #22
    Communism is incompatible with human nature. It works great for ants, but we are not ants.

    Read Atlas Shrugged.

  26. #23
    Quote Originally Posted by nbhadja View Post
    I like to call Indians the pure people. Material items, the concept of "private ownership" etc did not plague them.

    They had a whole different philosophy...a philosophy of nature.
    Collectivist much?
    I'm interested in what facet of purity invented the idea of removing the scalp of a live human being.
    There are no crimes against people.
    There are only crimes against the state.
    And the state will never, ever choose to hold accountable its agents, because a thing can not commit a crime against itself.

  27. #24
    Quote Originally Posted by Xenophage View Post
    Communism is incompatible with human nature. It works great for ants, but we are not ants.

    Read Atlas Shrugged.
    It has nothing to do with communism or government at all.

    The Natives were anarchists and lived within the laws of nature. They had no government. Naturally their tribes were socialist just like families are socialist.

    When they made a hunt, they made sure every member was fed and taken care of. They made sure every member had access to their shaman or medicinal healer. That is a system with elements of socialism in it. In fact, their distributed their resources in a purely socialist manner.
    Last edited by nbhadja; 09-13-2011 at 01:15 PM.
    "Countries are benefited when they changed these [national sovereignty] policies, and evidence suggests that North Americans are ready for a new relationship that renders this old definition of sovereignty obsolete."

    CFR task force co-chairman Robert Pastor



  28. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  29. #25
    Quote Originally Posted by fisharmor View Post
    Collectivist much?
    I'm interested in what facet of purity invented the idea of removing the scalp of a live human being.
    Take a look at Europe, which has a big history of that (beheading anyone?). The Natives were a lot more peaceful than the arriving Europeans.

    But anyways that is off topic and another argument.

    Families are naturally collectivists. Native people all over the world (not just Native Americans) were naturally collectivists among their tribes.
    Last edited by nbhadja; 09-13-2011 at 01:15 PM.
    "Countries are benefited when they changed these [national sovereignty] policies, and evidence suggests that North Americans are ready for a new relationship that renders this old definition of sovereignty obsolete."

    CFR task force co-chairman Robert Pastor

  30. #26
    Quote Originally Posted by nbhadja View Post
    But anyways that is off topic and another argument.
    Well, then, let's stick to the topic.
    How do you explain gambling in native societies, if they were collectivists and shared property?
    How do you explain the Potlach? What part of ceremonial gift-giving makes sense if there is only shared property?
    There are no crimes against people.
    There are only crimes against the state.
    And the state will never, ever choose to hold accountable its agents, because a thing can not commit a crime against itself.

  31. #27
    Quote Originally Posted by fisharmor View Post
    Well, then, let's stick to the topic.
    How do you explain gambling in native societies, if they were collectivists and shared property?
    How do you explain the Potlach? What part of ceremonial gift-giving makes sense if there is only shared property?



    Families and tribes are collectivist by nature. They make sure every member gets food, gets medical healing etc. They made sure all of the basic needs were taken care for each tribe member.

    When they made a hunt, they made sure each member got food. There is no way around that. The basic needs were taken care of for everyone. Thus they are socialist in that manner of resource distribution . Byeond that, then yes they could do whatever including gamble etc. Though they did not really have many material items since they were not so materialistic.
    Last edited by nbhadja; 09-13-2011 at 01:52 PM.
    "Countries are benefited when they changed these [national sovereignty] policies, and evidence suggests that North Americans are ready for a new relationship that renders this old definition of sovereignty obsolete."

    CFR task force co-chairman Robert Pastor

  32. #28
    Why doesn't Communism/Marxism/Socialism work?
    Some others have already said it.

    Because man is man.




    Bunkloco
    Fear of man will prove to be a snare, but whoever trusts in the LORD is kept safe. Proverbs 29:25
    "I think the propaganda machine is the biggest problem that we face today in trying to get the truth out to people."
    Ron Paul

    Please watch, subscribe, like, & share, Ron Paul Liberty Report
    BITCHUTE IS A LIBERTY MINDED ALTERNATIVE TO GOOGLE SUBSIDIARY YOUTUBE

  33. #29
    Quote Originally Posted by mikejohnson2006 View Post
    Why doesn't Communism/Marxism/Socialism work ? The idea that everyone is equal and gets paid the same income or wages did this not work in the Soviet Union was there still a Rich/Wealthy Elite ? Marxists believe in collective ownership of the means of production but was there still Business management and owners in the Soviet Union ? Did the Soviet Union really have Income Equality thank you ?

    Karl Marx and Frederick Engels

    Manifesto
    of the Communist Party
    1848

    II -- PROLETARIANS AND COMMUNISTS

    1. Abolition of property in land and application of all rents of land to public purposes.

    2. A heavy progressive or graduated income tax.

    3. Abolition of all rights of inheritance.

    4. Confiscation of the property of all emigrants and rebels.

    5. Centralization of credit in the banks of the state, by means of a national bank with state capital and an exclusive monopoly.

    6. Centralization of the means of communication and transport in the hands of the state.

    7. Extension of factories and instruments of production owned by the state; the bringing into cultivation of waste lands, and the improvement of the soil generally in accordance with a common plan.

    8. Equal obligation of all to work. Establishment of industrial armies, especially for agriculture.

    9. Combination of agriculture with manufacturing industries; gradual abolition of all the distinction between town and country by a more equable distribution of the populace over the country.

    10. Free education for all children in public schools. Abolition of children's factory labor in its present form. Combination of education with industrial production, etc.

    http://www.anu.edu.au/polsci/marx/cl...manifesto.html
    The implementation of Watkinsian Communism is the ideal way to solve this nation's problems both economically and socially. The banking system has persecuted the American people just as much if not more than socialism. So, implement socialism solely in the banking system and no where else. No matter if a person is the head CEO in a banking company or he or she is the very least employee, they get paid the same. No benefits, bonuses, or perks, but just straight pay.
    Hallelujah!
    Watkinsian Communism is certain to straighten out both the banking system and the social problems created by social communism in this nation.

  34. #30
    Quote Originally Posted by Krugerrand View Post
    Are you sure it didn't? I'd be curious to learn more about the economic systems of the various native american populations pre European exploration. Some of those could have possibly been classified as working communism or socialism.

    A short while back I was chatting w/ my history buff uncle. The subject turned to manifest destiny. It got me to thinking if 'private property' wasn't the 'manifest destiny' that would do in their way of life.

    If anybody has some good sources on the economics of the native tribes, please share.
    Those could be classified as working?

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast


Similar Threads

  1. Why socialism doesn't work - a classic example:
    By qednick in forum U.S. Political News
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 09-21-2017, 05:39 PM
  2. Replies: 8
    Last Post: 08-28-2011, 09:06 PM
  3. Socialism/Communism/Marxism
    By aid632007 in forum U.S. Political News
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 05-13-2011, 02:28 AM
  4. Socialism/Communism/Marxism
    By aid632007 in forum U.S. Political News
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 05-13-2011, 01:29 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •