That's why Lenin came up with the soviets, though that was pretty naïve, too.
Joel Send a noteboard - 10/10/2011 05:54:37 AM
The principles that Locke spoke of need one more element to make them work effectively. Self-Responsibilty. In Locke's vision, people should be and are responsible for themselves in most things, and only come together for things that cannot be done alone, namely defense from other nation's and the few laws needed to make society run efficiently (murder, thieving, etc).
In Communism, it's principles are based an idealistic view of humanity. In communism, Marx's true vision (which there is not much said about in his writings), humanity has no greed, no reason to be jealous of anyone else, no reason to be selfish. It completely ignores the truth about humanity in that humanity as a whole are greedy and selfish and will not normally do something unless it directly benefits themselves, and that as whole, they are lazy. You have probably worked with the people who will do the bare minimum at any given thing. But there is no oversight for the people at the top.
In Communism, it's principles are based an idealistic view of humanity. In communism, Marx's true vision (which there is not much said about in his writings), humanity has no greed, no reason to be jealous of anyone else, no reason to be selfish. It completely ignores the truth about humanity in that humanity as a whole are greedy and selfish and will not normally do something unless it directly benefits themselves, and that as whole, they are lazy. You have probably worked with the people who will do the bare minimum at any given thing. But there is no oversight for the people at the top.
People tend to forget that Marx was neither economist nor political scientist; he was an historian, so he left the details of his grand socio-economic creation to folks like Lenin. The soviets were supposed to provide oversight at the top from the bottom, as you probably know; unfortunately, that did not work too well. Like I said, Lenin was a bit naïve himself, IMHO, which I personally suspect has a lot to do with why a year after the Russian Civil War he was dead and the very pragmatic Stalin was in charge. Thing is, though, any system needs oversight, and social contract governments require that oversight come from the bottom; any system will work well when that is present and fail in its absence (kinda like what is going on in DC these days.)
Honorbound and honored to be Bonded to Mahtaliel Sedai
Last First in wotmania Chat
Slightly better than chocolate.
Love still can't be coerced.
Please Don't Eat the Newbies!
LoL. Be well, RAFOlk.
Last First in wotmania Chat
Slightly better than chocolate.
Love still can't be coerced.
Please Don't Eat the Newbies!
LoL. Be well, RAFOlk.
Is communism the true economy of democracies?
10/10/2011 01:35:24 AM
- 775 Views
Sorry, not following this.....
10/10/2011 03:33:11 AM
- 596 Views
Um, a LOT of places have mixed "free" market and state rule.
10/10/2011 05:43:49 AM
- 617 Views
WTF? Canada, Western Europe, and Japan are democracies, not state-rule like China - *NM*
10/10/2011 05:53:17 PM
- 227 Views
They are not similar.
10/10/2011 04:01:59 AM
- 468 Views
That's why Lenin came up with the soviets, though that was pretty naïve, too.
10/10/2011 05:54:37 AM
- 416 Views
Lenin died in 1924. The Civil War was over in 1920. He died after several strokes. *NM*
10/10/2011 05:30:58 PM
- 197 Views
Sorry, did not realize he survived it that long.
11/10/2011 04:21:05 AM
- 522 Views
There is no evidence that Lenin was poisoned.
11/10/2011 04:50:28 AM
- 449 Views
That is hardly the only way to kill; in Lenins condition, neglect would have sufficed.
11/10/2011 06:28:31 AM
- 481 Views
Let's see...you're asking if property theft by the state is compatible with freedom? No.
10/10/2011 04:58:14 AM
- 461 Views
I'm curious how you distinguish "full socialism" from "full communism."
10/10/2011 05:32:53 AM
- 432 Views
You obviously don't understand the definitions of socialism and communism.
10/10/2011 02:41:39 PM
- 515 Views
In theory, but economics is not politics, making social contracts a bit more dubious.
10/10/2011 05:18:39 AM
- 598 Views
No. A thousand times no.
10/10/2011 07:46:22 AM
- 604 Views
Guess I count myself among those fools, though I pretty much agree with Danny.
10/10/2011 10:52:11 AM
- 509 Views
I don't usually answer your scattershot rants, Joel, but you have overextended yourself.
10/10/2011 05:28:07 PM
- 547 Views
That still looks like Stalin and Mao rationalizing away the impossibility of their stated goals.
11/10/2011 05:59:06 AM
- 561 Views
No time to today, but you're very wrong.
11/10/2011 02:32:38 PM
- 443 Views
OK.
11/10/2011 03:08:17 PM
- 431 Views
Nope, because free-market democracy totally permits communism already
12/10/2011 12:50:36 AM
- 505 Views