Communism and Socialism, in theory, are ideal forms of government.

Asked by: ChrisF
  • In a perfect world

    It is entirely possible that communism would the be the ultimate form of government and economy if selfishness and greed were not factors. Unfortunately, they are, so it's impossible to have complete equality. Socialist ideals, however, aren't the same as communist ideals, and many are practical and can work well in practice in several nations i.E. Western Europe.

  • Yeah I could see in theory.

    In theory Communism sounds like a great thing. Everyone's united, there's no government, there's no racism, no sexism, no classes no money, there's equality. It sounds like a great thing when you just think about it, unfortunately it falls flat on its face when it's actually attempted. Which unfortunate but due to man's greedy nature, that's just how it happens.

  • Theoretically, it is ideal.

    Communist and socialist ideals would be very good ideals to go by. If it wasn't for the inherent greed for power and wealth that the vast majority of people express. If there were a group of infallible people able to run the government, and a system of making sure that somehow only other such people were able to get into office, it would be a borderline utopia. In a realistic sense, however, very few such people exist, and there will always be others who wish to take power for themselves.

  • In theory, yes. In reality, no.

    Theoretically, a Communist or Socialist nation is one where all people are equal. Nobody is discriminated against because of race, gender, or sexuality. There would be no poverty or discrimination, at the cost of giving up economic freedom. Of course, the question is if Communism and Socialism are ideal forms of government theoretically. Realistically, they cannot work, because the ideal of complete equality cannot be truly achieved. The desire to compete with others, and to have more than others is a part of human nature. Therefore, no society can be entirely equal. In fact, at some points during the Cold War, there were more billionaires (or maybe it was millionaires) in Moscow than any other city on Earth.

  • We need a Socialist Democracy

    We need a system that leaves no one behind, but doesn't create free loaders. Capitalism has been taken to the extreme in this country, for we are now and always have been a plutocracy. We need a system that thrives on a vibrant middle class. The amount of people and distribution of wealth should be similar to a Bell Curve you see in economics class. There should be less rich and poor people and a healthy, sizable middle class. This capitalist society we have today is creating rampant income inequality that will destroy America as we know it.

  • Even in theory, it is evil.

    Firstly, there are two types of socialism: state- or anarcho-. With state-communism the evil is clear. An all powerful government is micromanaging the lives of all of its citizens. This all powerful government leaves room for bad men to take over and really screw up a country (Stalin, Mao, etc.). Economically speaking, it is impossible for for a government to run a command system as evident by the works of Hayek, and the history of places like the USSR or even present day North Korea. For those that believe anarcho-communism is good in theory, I would still disagree. The idea behind anarcho-communism is that there would be no government, and everyone would own means of production through voluntary trade unions or communities. While I very much appreciate the voluntarism in this scenario, I do not see how you could avoid the tragedy of the commons or not eventually transform into an anarcho-capitalist society. Trade and specialization would still be necessary for a decent standard of living beyond subsistence level. Money would be necessary to avoid the miseries of barter. How you could live in a world solely through sharing and public ownership of everything while STILL maintaining and consistently improving the standard of living is beyond me. The best thing that could come out of this would be a hybrid anarcho-capitalist/communist society.

  • Snap back to reality. This is earth. There are humans with human thoughts.

    Look at Communism. Study it. Read about the terrors Mao and Stalin committed, the MILLIONS of deaths. It doesn't work! They, like all governments, become corrupted in a heartbeat, the people are abused, millions die, revolution occurs and we do the dance again. Communism has proven to be considerably worse than Capitalism when it inevitably spirals out of control. The United States is bloated, corrupted, and disgusting, but, if you study American history you won't find a single President who ordered thousands of competing political opponents to their deaths. You won't find mass starvation for fifty years, or altered history books.

    Capitalism sucks. It is vile and horribly flawed in its deepest core, but so is Socialism. It sounds fantastic on paper but I dare anybody here to work like dogs for your pay only to have half of it "given to the state". Pull your heads out of the clouds and step back on planet earth. This is a planet with humans. Always remember that. Greed is flowing through the streets, Money talks, and land ain't cheap and work ain't free. We can't share everything fairly, just like we can't EVER have world peace. It just isn't going to happen.

  • The use of force is bad even in theory.

    We must remember that Communism, even in theory, is a form of government based in force. Government is a monopoly on force. No business or individual can legally steal 30% of people's money...But the government can. In a communist country, the government would own 100% of the means of production. Profit and private property would not exist even if it were voluntary, because the government would not allow it. The use of force to stop voluntary exchange is immoral, in theory or in practice.

  • Socialism and Communism are quite different.

    Government is always in transition, so it's difficult to imagine a better society simply coming about. The reality is that change is a gradual process. Socialism manages to combine the motivation of capitalism with safety and satisfaction. Capitalism has aided our society in so many ways: technologically, socially, culturally, et cetera. These things are important and useful, but as we develop, there is no reason to not adapt those things to make life better and easier for people. If we can tax the very wealthy, or use technology to produce cheaply/free services and goods for the everyday person, we ought to do that. If we can provide free electricity and water, we should do it. If we can provide internet in more places, we should do that. That is socialism: working with capital/resources to provide people with what they individually need and want. Still, it provides motivation and an outlet for greed. Many modern cities are becoming more socialist-like, using capital to make people's lives better.

    Communism, more focused on the collective, is not something that I think is ideal. It doesn't seem to account for the individual needs and differences between people. Communism, or so I think now, cannot work well with the truth of the diversity and complexity of humans.

Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
George_Tuttles says2013-07-25T19:33:44.710
Absolutely not because in order for them to work, human nature would have to change. Humans get lazy and lack drive under these forms of government. And in most cases the government needs to force a lot of people to work, i.E slavery.
ChrisF says2013-07-25T19:49:34.270
You are clearly failing to understand the point, which is that they are ideal in THEORY.