Communism & Capitalism

Xijivuli

Libertarian
So, I wrote this awhile ago and recently decided to redo it. I'd like for input on my points... even if you agree with what I'm saying, please point out logical fallacies. One I saw was in point 2... there are too many variables, such as productivity of each person, it seems. Thanks for reading!

Capitalism and communism stand at opposite poles. Their essential difference is this: The communist, seeing the rich man and his fine home, says: 'No man should have so much.' The capitalist, seeing the same thing, says: 'All men should have as much.'
-- Phelps Adams

The great virtue of a free market system is that it does not care what color people are; it does not care what their religion is; it only cares whether they can produce something you want to buy. It is the most effective system we have discovered to enable people who hate one another to deal with one another and help one another. -- Milton Friedman

In a few words, the chief reason communism cannot work is free will and human nature (although there are more reasons). The definitions relevant to this paper are listed below. All are taken from the Merriam-Webster Dictionary .

FREE WILL:
1 : voluntary choice or decision “I do this of my own free will.”
2 : freedom of humans to make choices that are not determined by prior causes or by divine intervention.

HUMAN NATURE:
the nature of humans; especially : the fundamental dispositions and traits of humans “It is human nature to sin.”

I believe human nature consists of three main principles: The desire to achieve, individuality, and greed/envy. The importance of these two phrases will be made clear in the next section.

REASON IT CAN’T WORK No. 1: Free Will & Human Nature

The communist ideology fails to take into account free will and human nature. In a communist ideal, all will work together as a well-oiled and productive machine. Of course, we see things such as this every day. Termites maintain their nests day in and day out. They work with great efficiency day in and day out, quite literally for the good of the mound.

This is not how humans function. You may disagree with my idea of human nature, but you cannot deny that every human being has at least a hint of self-respect and free will. Termites do not. It is because of this, we can’t -- won’t -- act like perfect, harmonious, machines.

Communism expects each and every one of the people to work together and to be willing to sacrifice for the good of the people. Communism requires that each and every worker lose their free will and affinity -- for with these, comes the desire to achieve above the rest, which is quite contradictory to standard communist ideals. It quite literally contradicts the ideas of nature and free will. It brazenly ignores these, and pretends that all are willing to sacrifice themselves, for the collective.

Since humans have free will, there cannot be a total communist state (in a popular majority as required by Marx), and therefore, it is an invalid way of doing things. There will always be rebels, those who refuse to work for the good of the community, and the larger that community is the larger the chance of those rebels. Thus, not every nation can be “truly” communist, and therefore, the “utopia” that communism seeks to attain is, alas, unattainable with more than about 1,000 people on the planet.

REASON IT CAN’T WORK No. 2: The Economic Issues

Say I have communist community that out of ‘Z’ people total, there are 100 adult, able-bodied people. Twenty of us each work at a clothing factory, a food processor/farm, a housing builder, and medical care center/pharmaceuticals institute, and a police/fire station. We all manage to do our jobs and distribute our goods/services for the good of the community. With these five services/products, the people in Village X can live with a merely “OK” standard of living at best. They’ve got food, clothing, healthcare, housing, and protection. This all costs ‘Y’ amount of manpower/labor/money per year.

Now, let us say I want to raise the standard of living significantly. Let us also say that I can create all of these products in one factory with twenty people (even though this isn’t the case -- some would require less, like the chair, and some would require many more, like the car). I would like to add to each household:
• A car
• A TV
• Heating/Cooling systems
•*Indoor plumbing
•*Electricity
Now, in order to attain these, I would have to create more factories, laborers, etc. This would take a lot of time and effort, just for these five improvements, and you’d have to add each of the five improvements to, say, the fifty houses in my village.

So, in order to have the population live in a great standard of living, I’d need more of ‘Y’, but with more of ‘Y’ comes more ‘Z’, which in turn requires more ‘Y’ than it gives. It becomes endless loop that can only provide its people with the most basic of needs at best. With each new family comes a new house, which I’d have to give them the ten products/services, and the family becomes a giant collective debt machine -- they require more than they give for their labor input.

Thus, purely communist societies cannot enjoy a very good standard of living because of the severe limitations it involves, especially the larger ones.

REASON IT CAN’T WORK No. 3: “Fairness” and Natural Selection

I myself believe in evolution. If you don’t, then this section probably doesn’t have a lot of weight. I could explain why I believe in evolution, but that’s another topic for another paper.

One of the main principles of Charles Darwin’s Theory of Evolution is called natural selection. Natural selection is basically the that the strongest of the species live on and the weakest die out. Economically, communism works against this in that it seeks to balance out the community in the most extreme sense, eliminate failure, and make society “fair.”

Which brings me to fairness. The freedom to fail is perhaps one of the most important in a democratic society. While communism seeks to cushion failure (which is ultimately counter-productive, because failure breeds success and new inventions, ideas, and thoughts) capitalism embraces it as a natural part of any person's, economy’s, or government’s being.

You cannot be a communist, who believes in the good of the community, and a believer of evolution as a natural law -- for it concerns the surviving of the individual (NOT the survival of species in general).


REASON IT CAN’T WORK No. 4: Universal Requirements

Karl Marx clearly stated in his Manifesto that in order for communism to work, the whole globe would have to be one big collective. I’ve already touched upon how this is possible in RICW No. 2, but this is specifically to address those who say the Warsaw Pact would eventually become global and achieve the Marxist dream.

The seven non-Russian states were chiefly satellite states; the Soviets supported smaller states like Hungary, Poland, or Albania in a way a puppet-master props up his dolls.

For instance, the Soviet-backed Komunistická Strana Československa (Czechoslovakia Communist Party) overthrew the government in Czechoslovakia via coup d’état. The story is the same for most nations, such as Latvia, Belarus, or Lithuania. Insinuating that a utopia would be achieved with the Warsaw Pact is absurd; most of the nations joined forcibly. Therefore, the Warsaw Pact was not a harmonious alliance that was near creating a communist paradise on earth.

In conclusion, Communism cannot work for four main reasons:

ONE: It works against human nature, whereas capitalism utilizes it to better the individual who works. In almost every instance of a wealthy person, we have someone who somewhere along the line, worked hard to get their fortunes. (Except for lotteries. But who wins those?)

TWO: The standard of living in communism would be quite low, especially considering the population of the world. If all 6 billion+ of us were communist, our standard of living would be quite low, especially in comparison to the average capitalists’.

THREE: It violates the theories of Natural Selection/Evolution. If you believe in these two things, you cannot be communist.

FOUR: There has never been a global communist society, nor has there ever even been an alliance that has come close.
 
So, I wrote this awhile ago and recently decided to redo it. I'd like for input on my points... even if you agree with what I'm saying, please point out logical fallacies. One I saw was in point 2... there are too many variables, such as productivity of each person, it seems. Thanks for reading!

Capitalism and communism stand at opposite poles. Their essential difference is this: The communist, seeing the rich man and his fine home, says: 'No man should have so much.' The capitalist, seeing the same thing, says: 'All men should have as much.'
-- Phelps Adams

The great virtue of a free market system is that it does not care what color people are; it does not care what their religion is; it only cares whether they can produce something you want to buy. It is the most effective system we have discovered to enable people who hate one another to deal with one another and help one another. -- Milton Friedman

In a few words, the chief reason communism cannot work is free will and human nature (although there are more reasons). The definitions relevant to this paper are listed below. All are taken from the Merriam-Webster Dictionary .

FREE WILL:
1 : voluntary choice or decision “I do this of my own free will.”
2 : freedom of humans to make choices that are not determined by prior causes or by divine intervention.

HUMAN NATURE:
the nature of humans; especially : the fundamental dispositions and traits of humans “It is human nature to sin.”

I believe human nature consists of three main principles: The desire to achieve, individuality, and greed/envy. The importance of these two phrases will be made clear in the next section.

REASON IT CAN’T WORK No. 1: Free Will & Human Nature

The communist ideology fails to take into account free will and human nature. In a communist ideal, all will work together as a well-oiled and productive machine. Of course, we see things such as this every day. Termites maintain their nests day in and day out. They work with great efficiency day in and day out, quite literally for the good of the mound.

This is not how humans function. You may disagree with my idea of human nature, but you cannot deny that every human being has at least a hint of self-respect and free will. Termites do not. It is because of this, we can’t -- won’t -- act like perfect, harmonious, machines.

Communism expects each and every one of the people to work together and to be willing to sacrifice for the good of the people. Communism requires that each and every worker lose their free will and affinity -- for with these, comes the desire to achieve above the rest, which is quite contradictory to standard communist ideals. It quite literally contradicts the ideas of nature and free will. It brazenly ignores these, and pretends that all are willing to sacrifice themselves, for the collective.

Since humans have free will, there cannot be a total communist state (in a popular majority as required by Marx), and therefore, it is an invalid way of doing things. There will always be rebels, those who refuse to work for the good of the community, and the larger that community is the larger the chance of those rebels. Thus, not every nation can be “truly” communist, and therefore, the “utopia” that communism seeks to attain is, alas, unattainable with more than about 1,000 people on the planet.

REASON IT CAN’T WORK No. 2: The Economic Issues

Say I have communist community that out of ‘Z’ people total, there are 100 adult, able-bodied people. Twenty of us each work at a clothing factory, a food processor/farm, a housing builder, and medical care center/pharmaceuticals institute, and a police/fire station. We all manage to do our jobs and distribute our goods/services for the good of the community. With these five services/products, the people in Village X can live with a merely “OK” standard of living at best. They’ve got food, clothing, healthcare, housing, and protection. This all costs ‘Y’ amount of manpower/labor/money per year.

Now, let us say I want to raise the standard of living significantly. Let us also say that I can create all of these products in one factory with twenty people (even though this isn’t the case -- some would require less, like the chair, and some would require many more, like the car). I would like to add to each household:
• A car
• A TV
• Heating/Cooling systems
•*Indoor plumbing
•*Electricity
Now, in order to attain these, I would have to create more factories, laborers, etc. This would take a lot of time and effort, just for these five improvements, and you’d have to add each of the five improvements to, say, the fifty houses in my village.

So, in order to have the population live in a great standard of living, I’d need more of ‘Y’, but with more of ‘Y’ comes more ‘Z’, which in turn requires more ‘Y’ than it gives. It becomes endless loop that can only provide its people with the most basic of needs at best. With each new family comes a new house, which I’d have to give them the ten products/services, and the family becomes a giant collective debt machine -- they require more than they give for their labor input.

Thus, purely communist societies cannot enjoy a very good standard of living because of the severe limitations it involves, especially the larger ones.

REASON IT CAN’T WORK No. 3: “Fairness” and Natural Selection

I myself believe in evolution. If you don’t, then this section probably doesn’t have a lot of weight. I could explain why I believe in evolution, but that’s another topic for another paper.

One of the main principles of Charles Darwin’s Theory of Evolution is called natural selection. Natural selection is basically the that the strongest of the species live on and the weakest die out. Economically, communism works against this in that it seeks to balance out the community in the most extreme sense, eliminate failure, and make society “fair.”

Which brings me to fairness. The freedom to fail is perhaps one of the most important in a democratic society. While communism seeks to cushion failure (which is ultimately counter-productive, because failure breeds success and new inventions, ideas, and thoughts) capitalism embraces it as a natural part of any person's, economy’s, or government’s being.

You cannot be a communist, who believes in the good of the community, and a believer of evolution as a natural law -- for it concerns the surviving of the individual (NOT the survival of species in general).


REASON IT CAN’T WORK No. 4: Universal Requirements

Karl Marx clearly stated in his Manifesto that in order for communism to work, the whole globe would have to be one big collective. I’ve already touched upon how this is possible in RICW No. 2, but this is specifically to address those who say the Warsaw Pact would eventually become global and achieve the Marxist dream.

The seven non-Russian states were chiefly satellite states; the Soviets supported smaller states like Hungary, Poland, or Albania in a way a puppet-master props up his dolls.

For instance, the Soviet-backed Komunistická Strana Československa (Czechoslovakia Communist Party) overthrew the government in Czechoslovakia via coup d’état. The story is the same for most nations, such as Latvia, Belarus, or Lithuania. Insinuating that a utopia would be achieved with the Warsaw Pact is absurd; most of the nations joined forcibly. Therefore, the Warsaw Pact was not a harmonious alliance that was near creating a communist paradise on earth.

In conclusion, Communism cannot work for four main reasons:

ONE: It works against human nature, whereas capitalism utilizes it to better the individual who works. In almost every instance of a wealthy person, we have someone who somewhere along the line, worked hard to get their fortunes. (Except for lotteries. But who wins those?)

TWO: The standard of living in communism would be quite low, especially considering the population of the world. If all 6 billion+ of us were communist, our standard of living would be quite low, especially in comparison to the average capitalists’.

THREE: It violates the theories of Natural Selection/Evolution. If you believe in these two things, you cannot be communist.

FOUR: There has never been a global communist society, nor has there ever even been an alliance that has come close.
Sounds like you been reading John Birch propaganda instead of doing some hard thinking.

Now I'm in no way shape or form an advocate of communism but all four of your conclusions are logical fallacies.

#1. Social collectivism is with out a doubt one of the most fundamental of human social behaviors. The observed emprical facts contradict your conclusion, so that one is wrong.

#2. You're making a false assumption. There are more nations on this planet with communist and socialist governments/economies then there are capitalist, free market economies. So that empirical fact also contradicts your conclsion. There must be a reason why communism/socialism is the most popular form of government on the planet.

#3. Now this one is just plain silly. Biological evolution has absolutely nothing to do with economics or politics. This conclusion borders on the pathologically insane conclusion as those who support social Darwinism.

#4. And what does this little irrellevency have to do with anything? It fails to explain why communism/socialism is the most popular form of government in the world. It is much more popular then Jeffersonian Democracy, for example.

So congratulations, you've managed to draw a correct conclusion that communism ultimately cannot work as well as capitalism with out getting single fact or conclusion correct. You should expect Rep points for that from Dixie any second now. :)
 
#1. Social collectivism is with out a doubt one of the most fundamental of human social behaviors. The observed emprical facts contradict your conclusion, so that one is wrong.

This is incorrect. Social collectivism is not a natural trait of humans. In fact, it is rarely found in large groups of humans, and is most often the result of centuries of culture, as in the case of the Japanese people. Humans don't function like a colony of termites, that was his point, and he is correct. It is not in our nature to function like a colony of termites, and generally speaking, unless this behavior is ingrained in our culture, we simply do not behave this way naturally. Sorry!

#2. You're making a false assumption. There are more nations on this planet with communist and socialist governments/economies then there are capitalist, free market economies. So that empirical fact also contradicts your conclsion. There must be a reason why communism/socialism is the most popular form of government on the planet.

You are making a false assumption that everyone has the freedom and liberty to vote for what type of government they will have, and most people chose communism. That is either intellectually dishonest, or ignorant of the world around you, I don't know which.

#3. Now this one is just plain silly. Biological evolution has absolutely nothing to do with economics or politics. This conclusion borders on the pathologically insane conclusion as those who support social Darwinism.

Biological evolution has everything to do with everything! The point he is making, is that communism contradicts the very principles of evolution theory. In other words, it is 'counter-intuitive' to nature and natural selection. While I think it's a somewhat insignificant point to make, it is indeed valid.

#4. And what does this little irrellevency have to do with anything? It fails to explain why communism/socialism is the most popular form of government in the world. It is much more popular then Jeffersonian Democracy, for example.

Okay Mr. Cheerleader for Communism... but it's a fact that most communist systems were INSTALLED against the will of the people, in defiance of the will of the people in most cases, and is almost never preferred over freedom and capitalism. It's "popular" alright... among authoritarian dictators who impose their will on people with an iron fist!


So congratulations, you've managed to draw a correct conclusion that communism ultimately cannot work as well as capitalism with out getting single fact or conclusion correct. You should expect Rep points for that from Dixie any second now. :)

Rep points given, and I am considering deducting some from you, for your general stupidity!
 
China: Capitalism Doesn't Require Democracy
by Robert B. Reich

"China is the manufacturing hub of the globe. It's is also moving quickly into the highest of high technologies. It already graduates more computer engineers every year than the United States.

Its cities are booming. There are more building cranes in use today in China than in all of the United States. China's super-highways are filled with modern cars. Its deep-water ports and airports are world class. Its research and development centers are state of the art. At the rate its growing, in three decades China will be the largest economy in the world.

Communist, as in communal? Are you kidding? The gap between China's rich and poor is turning into a chasm. China's innovators, investors, and captains of industry are richly rewarded. They live in luxury housing developments whose streets are lined with McMansions. The feed in fancy restaurants, and relax in five-star hotels and resorts. China's poor live in a different world. Mao Tse Tung would turn in his grave.

So where are the Chinese communists? They're in government. The communist party is the only party there is. China doesn't have freedom of speech or freedom of the press. It doesn't tolerate dissent. Authorities can arrest and imprison people who threaten stability, as the party defines it. Any group that dares to protest is treated brutally. There are no civil liberties, no labor unions, no centers of political power outside the communist party.

China shows that when it comes to economics, the dividing line among the world's nations is no longer between communism and capitalism. Capitalism has won hands down. The real dividing line is no longer economic. It's political. And that divide is between democracy and authoritarianism. China is a capitalist economy with an authoritarian government.

For years, we've assumed that capitalism and democracy fit hand in glove. We took it as an article of faith that you can't have one without the other. That's why a key element of American policy toward China has been to encourage free trade, direct investment, and open markets. As China becomes more prosperous and integrated into the global market -- so American policy makers have thought -- China will also become more democratic.

Well, maybe we've been a bit naive. It's true that democracy needs capitalism. Try to come up with the name of a single democracy in the world that doesn't have a capitalist economy. For democracy to function there must be centers of power outside of government. Capitalism decentralizes economic power, and thereby provides the private ground in which democracy can take root.

But China shows that the reverse may not be true -- capitalism doesn't need democracy. Capitalism's wide diffusion of economic power offers enough incentive for investors to take risks with their money. But, as China shows, capitalism doesn't necessarily provide enough protection for individuals to take risks with their opinions."
http://www.commondreams.org/views06/0110-42.htm


Capitalism works better under Communist authoritarians than under a democracy because the government can suppress labor more effectively than they can under a democracy. Capitalism can exist with any political system but works best when it is hand in hand with authoritarian governments.

Today's China has proven your whole premise incorrect.
 
Last edited:
Really surprised, no defenders of slave labor, no defenders of outsourcing, no Beck backers calling me names or wanting to fuck someone in my family.
I guess it's the fact that their ideology has failed and is indefensible.
 
Capitalism is not the same as trade. Trade is good. Capitalism is central banker authoritarianism and the same amount of social engineering that communists aspire too.
 
This is incorrect. Social collectivism is not a natural trait of humans. In fact, it is rarely found in large groups of humans, and is most often the result of centuries of culture, as in the case of the Japanese people. Humans don't function like a colony of termites, that was his point, and he is correct. It is not in our nature to function like a colony of termites, and generally speaking, unless this behavior is ingrained in our culture, we simply do not behave this way naturally. Sorry!



You are making a false assumption that everyone has the freedom and liberty to vote for what type of government they will have, and most people chose communism. That is either intellectually dishonest, or ignorant of the world around you, I don't know which.



Biological evolution has everything to do with everything! The point he is making, is that communism contradicts the very principles of evolution theory. In other words, it is 'counter-intuitive' to nature and natural selection. While I think it's a somewhat insignificant point to make, it is indeed valid.



Okay Mr. Cheerleader for Communism... but it's a fact that most communist systems were INSTALLED against the will of the people, in defiance of the will of the people in most cases, and is almost never preferred over freedom and capitalism. It's "popular" alright... among authoritarian dictators who impose their will on people with an iron fist!




Rep points given, and I am considering deducting some from you, for your general stupidity!

BUt dixie, human culture and learned behavior is our ace in the hole over the rest of creation. BUT this ability to learn so much is a double edged sword, we can be programmed against our own interests, and taught to hate those we should love, through various mind control techniques, just like how elitists left and right can be taught in one generation that national loyalty is naziism, so they hate and denigrate their fellows, and seek to put them out of work for their own profit.

What are valid loyalties? and who tells us what are valid loyalties?
 
Comparative advantage theories render all countries dysfunctional and overspecialized, unlivable without the multinational coroporations to be in the middle of all the transactions.

As a guy with no skills whatsoever, I'm not surprised to see you attack specialization, aka, the bulwark of modern civilization.
 
As a guy with no skills whatsoever, I'm not surprised to see you attack specialization, aka, the bulwark of modern civilization.

Overspecializtion is the way fascists separate people from other realities and control them, defining them so narrowly that feel fear and dependancy on the fascists to utilize them for that one narrow purpose. This fear is then used to corrupt them against other members of the population.
 
Overspecializtion is the way fascists separate people from other realities and control them, defining them so narrowly that feel fear and dependancy on the fascists to utilize them for that one narrow purpose. This fear is then used to corrupt them against other members of the population.

Specialization doesn't mean you are unaware of what is transpiring in the other areas of the economy. It just means you aren't highly qualified, or qualified, to specifically work in those other areas. Engineers can know what's going on in retail, retailers can know what's going on in chemical plants, and chemists can know what's going on in the entertainment industry.
 
Specialization doesn't mean you are unaware of what is transpiring in the other areas of the economy. It just means you aren't highly qualified, or qualified, to specifically work in those other areas. Engineers can know what's going on in retail, retailers can know what's going on in chemical plants, and chemists can know what's going on in the entertainment industry.

They may know at a superficial level. Specialization is a form of control and identity manipulation.

But comparative advantage is different and more retarded than individual specialization. Comparative advantage is the odd assertion that a country can only do one thing. And it's especially corrupt because it's DICTATED what a nation's comparative advantage will be. And when they start pretending that consumption is the only thing your nation can do, then you're in for real trouble. The next step is being cut out of the supply chain all together.
 
They may know at a superficial level. Specialization is a form of control and identity manipulation.

But comparative advantage is different and more retarded than individual specialization. Comparative advantage is the odd assertion that a country can only do one thing. And it's especially corrupt because it's DICTATED what a nation's comparative advantage will be. And when they start pretending that consumption is the only thing your nation can do, then you're in for real trouble. The next step is being cut out of the supply chain all together.

Yes, a nation's comparative advantage is dictated... by geography!! Or do you think a desert nation should specialize in lumber exports, and an arctic nation should specialize in fruit exports?
 
Yes, a nation's comparative advantage is dictated... by geography!! Or do you think a desert nation should specialize in lumber exports, and an arctic nation should specialize in fruit exports?

to some degree this is true. But mostly the decision is political.
 
Back
Top