What is communism?

[shunyadragon]

Interesting how you have failed to provide any legitimate examples of this.
The economic systems and political systems you have mentioned appear to have nothing in common.

Your stone walling, and playing the fool's game of 'Duck, Bob. Weave.' Please respond coherently with references.

 

[shunyadragon]

I don't see how anything provided supports any of your conclusions.
Other than the fact that the documentary referring to Mao as an "emperor".

What reference would be required for you to recognize that I am not "stone walling".

The other article quoted Mao. I have another article shortly that indicates the Mao admired emperors including the First Emperor.

From: Mao Zedong: Biographical and Political Profile | Asia for Educators | Columbia University

"From an early age, Mao was a voracious reader. He particularly liked popular historical novels concerning rebellions and unconventional military heroes. At age thirteen, after five years of education in the local primary school, he was forced by his father to leave school and return to the farm. Mao continued to study on his own and at age sixteen left home to complete his elementary school training in the Hunanese capital of Changsha.

It was here that Mao began to experience the powerful revolutionary waves engulfing Chinese society. He read the works of nationalist reformers such as Kang Yuwei (Kang You-wei). He developed an admiration for the strong emperors in earlier periods of Chinese history"

So far you have provided nothing.

 

[Milton Platt]

Communism - a political theory derived from Karl Marx, advocating class war and leading to a society in which all property is publicly owned and each person works and is paid according to their abilities and needs.

Socialism - a political and economic theory of social organization that advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole.

Mercantilism is a form of economic nationalism. Its goal is to enrich and empower the nation and state to the maximum degree, by acquiring and retaining as much economic activity as possible within the nation's borders. Manufacturing and industry, particularly of goods with military applications, were prioritized. Mercantilism sought to ensure the nation produced as much volume and variety of output as possible,

I included several related definitions of economic and political theory related to communism. The idea is to have a more comprehensive discussion on communism and the real world.

First, there is nothing in these definitions that indicates nor designates religion as a part of these economic and political theories.Yes Karl Marx attacked religion and was an atheist, but this is Karl Marx's religious view, and not necessarily a property of communism nor socialism, which have much older roots in economic and political philosophy.

The following questions will begin the discussion:

Were USSR, China, Korea and other East European Countries truly Communist?

What is the relationship between Christianity and communism/socialism in history?

What is the most recent successful model of communism/socialism? Hints: (1) It was very successful and ended recently for negotiated political reasons. (2) It was an entity under the United States government.

There has never been a truly communist country, I don't think, because the implementation is pretty much impossible.

 

[shunyadragon]

There has never been a truly communist country, I don't think, because the implementation is pretty much impossible.

I agree, but there is more to the story than this, It may hae been considered a Land of OZ, but yes, the Pan Canal Company Canal Zone comes the closest in what I called the Ozzie and Harriet version of communism.

 

[Milton Platt]

I agree, but there is more to the story than this, It may hae been considered a Land of OZ, but yes, the Pan Canal Company Canal Zone comes the closest in what I called the Ozzie and Harriet version of communism.

I think that Communism is the best idea in the world, except that it absolutely does not work. LOL I will look into the Pan Canal Company.

 

[shunyadragon]

So... Mao admired emperors... and...?
Your conclusions aren't proven by your evidence.

All I can do is quote references and one citing Mao himself. The biography of Mao is good, agrees with my view of Mao, and it describes Mao as the last emperor. The evidence is clear Mao patterned his rule after the methods of the First Emperor. My studies in China confirmed this.

A problem here, your misusing the concept of 'proof' here. What is you background in Chinese history that are grounds for your objections, and of course, you have failed to provide any references in response,

 

[shunyadragon]

Interesting how you have failed to provide any legitimate examples of this.
The economic systems and political systems you have mentioned appear to have nothing in common.

I provided the references and you are ignoring them. I will likely provide more. Again, you have provided nothing, but obfuscations.

 

[Confucian Mormon Buddhist]

People care way too much about formal definitions and what this or that dead philosopher said.

Communism has two fairly obvious definitions. One is that it's an economic system in which the collective controls the production and distribution of resources. Another is that it's a political ideology which supports the above.

Whether the collective achieves that state through anarchy or governance doesn't really matter, and it's childish to imagine that it could happen in anarchy anyways. You can't organize any group of people to do anything, past the point of a very small tribe, without some form of government.

Russia, China, North Korea, Cuba, etc. were both Communist in their political ideology and in their economic systems, give or take a few wrinkles (like limited privatization under Lenin's NEP or Gorbachev's perestroika.

Socialism, on the other hand, can refer to the use of government intervention to control the economy without directly owning the industries, or it can refer to both that and communism. That is, you can refer to socialism and communism as separate things or to communism as being a form of socialism and either interpretation is correct, depending upon the context.

 

[shunyadragon]

People care way too much about formal definitions and what this or that dead philosopher said.

I go not go with formal definitions, I go with the practical definitions, that avoid the selective definitions that promote selective political/religious agendas. Brutal historical dictatorships like Franco were selectively supported and tolerated by the Roman Church and others in the cause of fighting communism.

Communism has two fairly obvious definitions. One is that it's an economic system in which the collective controls the production and distribution of resources. Another is that it's a political ideology which supports the above.

I question the political ideology that is often associated with political/religious agendas that wage crusades against communist/socialist countries, and favor alliances with equally if not worse despotic evil regimes

Whether the collective achieves that state through anarchy or governance doesn't really matter, and it's childish to imagine that it could happen in anarchy anyways. You can't organize any group of people to do anything, past the point of a very small tribe, without some form of government.

Your correct that collectives only can function on a small scale, and any view of an anarchist governance is not realistic, but that is not the issue. Also considering the history of collectives is not encouraging, and most fail.

Russia, China, North Korea, Cuba, etc. were both Communist in their political ideology and in their economic systems, give or take a few wrinkles (like limited privatization under Lenin's NEP or Gorbachev's perestroika.

I do not consider the dictatorial rigid pyramid control of all aspects of society is in reality communism. It shares too much in common with other dictator governments that are not communist.

Socialism, on the other hand, can refer to the use of government intervention to control the economy without directly owning the industries, or it can refer to both that and communism. That is, you can refer to socialism and communism as separate things or to communism as being a form of socialism and either interpretation is correct, depending upon the context.

There are aspects of socialism throughout most countries, In fact education and health care is most successful under government agencies, and possibly cooperative with private industry. In Canada Blue Cross Blue Shield is the dominant health care insurance in basically a socialist system. On the other hand European health care systems do not involve private health insurance companies.

 

[VioletVortex]

Communism is a totalitarian governmental ideology combining socialism with extreme fascism. Socialism is democratic, meaning the means of production is owned by the people, carried out through the government. In Communism, however, the government is borderline or entirely facist, centralized the ownership of the means of production into itself.

 

[Confucian Mormon Buddhist]

Communism is a totalitarian governmental ideology combining socialism with extreme fascism. Socialism is democratic, meaning the means of production is owned by the people, carried out through the government. In Communism, however, the government is borderline or entirely facist, centralized the ownership of the means of production into itself.

That's a very, very strange definition of fascism you have.

 

[shunyadragon]

Communism is a totalitarian governmental ideology combining socialism with extreme fascism. Socialism is democratic, meaning the means of production is owned by the people, carried out through the government. In Communism, however, the government is borderline or entirely facist, centralized the ownership of the means of production into itself.

This illustrates the problem of differentiating authoritarian dictatorships that carry the labels of communist, socialist or fascist. The following article addresses this problem.

From: BBC NEWS | UK | Magazine | What is a fascist?

"It's a word much applied by opponents to the British National Party and other radical political movements, but what is a "fascist"?

Both of these men are often categorised as fascists
"Fascist" and "fascism" are terms that one might suppose to be simple badges, but dig beneath the surface and there are myriad complexities and a morass of academic debate.

It is more than six decades since the end of World War II and the fall of Nazi Germany, but those events are the prism through which the word "fascism" is still viewed.

The first "fascist" movement to gain power was Mussolini's Blackshirts in Italy in 1922. Their movement could certainly be said to be nationalist and authoritarian, as well as accepting of violence in the struggle for political power, but much of the rest of its characteristics have been subject to academic dispute.

"Frustratingly, I can't give a simple definition," says Kevin Passmore, reader in history at Cardiff University and author of Fascism: A Very Short Introduction. "It depends on definitions."

If your definition of "fascist" is someone who holds beliefs that can be categorised as "fascism", the terms fascism still needs to be defined.

THE ANSWER
There isn't an answer
Many say 'fascists' are authoritarian and nationalist
But some say racism is part of the definition
Others link the term to its Italian genesis
While still more use an amalgam of the Blackshirts and the Nazis "You can say 'is fascism a movement that resembles what fascism was in Italy?'" says Mr Passmore. But for many users of the terms, fascist and fascism must be a blend of the common denominators between Italian fascism and German Nazism."

If you change the belief of Aryan supremacy to the belief in Han ethnic supremacy in Chinese Communist rule. China under Mao may be described as an authoritarian nationalist Fascist. In the history of Mao's rule there was a superficial romantic inclusiveness of China's minorities, but the reality was that during Mao's rule they were persecuted and marginalized, and the government was dominantly ruled by the Han ethnic majority.

Modern governments like those of Saudi Arabia may also be called Fascist, being ruled by one tribal Arab Islamic group and other divisions of Islam, tribes and religions specifically persecuted, and censored.

The problem of categorizing these governments with convenient tags in Western countries for justifying alliances like Saudi Arabia, and aggressive opposition including attempts to over through the governments like Cuba,

 

[Kilgore Trout]

Communism is an adolescent pipe dream which appeals to certain kinds of personalities.