Where would you rather live?

Posted by: triangle.128k

Would you rather live in a purely capitalist society with no taxes, public spending or anything? Or would you rather live in a near purely communist society?

  • A pure capitalist society

  • A pure communist society

63% 36 votes
37% 21 votes
  • Obviously.

  • Would you rather? John Rockefeller (yes Rockefeller as in Ludlow massacre) or Joseph Stalin (yes Joseph Stalin the mass murderer who sent millions to Soviet torture camps for no reason) Hard to tell which is better, I've lived in neither, but you can guess both are pretty bad.

  • Because we all know that the Soviet Union really was a swell place back in the day.

  • Perhaps in theory communism is more equal, but in practice it requires extreme amount of suppression and restraining of human rights. Capitalism can lead to corruption, but it implies greater freedom.

  • I think that both are terrible but I see a pure capitalist society as the lesser of two evils.

  • I'd rather have some meritocracy and earn my own money than living with others doing the same thing the state wants and getting the same benefits. I don't want to be a slave to the state. HISTORY tells us that COMMUNISM has always been an excuse used to control people and gain power. Just look at critiques of Stalin and Mao or Kim Jong Il. China is a "communist state" -- in theory but capitalist in economic development. They beheaded and robbed rich businessmen off their assets and sent educated individuals to the rural farms in the 1970s cultural revolution. They starved 2m farmers to death just because Chairman Mao boasted about having agricultural produce 5x what has really been. WOULD YOU WANT TO LEAD SUCH A LIFE? Not only does communism produce lazy and apathetic people, it is a hindrance to development and any innovations that might have happened. Such a shame that in the 1970s they taught my mom that by 2000 there will be ABSOLUTE communism where you can take what you want from supermarkets for free. It's amazing how people actually believed in them!

  • Laissez-faire would be a more accurate term but capitalism will do. Communism on the other hand, is impossible to implement to its fullest extent. Communism is supposed to be a societal organization method. This means that it should be possible to have a communist society. A society is the aggregate of interpersonal interaction among individuals. Communism, however, applied strictly negates the individual as it is based on the concept that each should give according to his abilities and receive according to his needs. If everyone did this perfectly, they would lose all meaning and value as individuals and would rather become accessories to the greater whole. In other words the society would transcend its existence as a society and would simply become a kind of super-organism where each unit that used to be an individual is analogous to a cell in the human body and the collection of these units working together to achieve one goal is analogous to the human being. The individual cells do not have meaning or value as individual cells, they are only significant in the context of the collective of cells that is called the organism.

  • It's a great idea (in theory that is) Pure capitalism would lead to corruption, corporatism, and etc.

  • If communism worked correctly in this hypothetical country.

  • If anyone studied for themselves instead of accepting what they learn in school, they would choose this.

  • Both systems are realistically impossible to achieve, but if they could then Pure Communism would have a better standard of living.

  • Communism is an advanced stage of socialism; but just like with socialism, society would have control over the means to production. For everyone that thought the Soviet Union was communist, ask yourself, who owned the means to production. If you answer the government you would be correct; but then you'd also have to ask your self who owned the government. Certainly not the people. So if the government owned the means to production but the people didn't have any say in gov., did the people really have control over the means to production. The answer is NO.

  • Capitalism lead to the abuse and forced subjugation of the working class. The bourgeoisie owning the means of production (factories, land, etc.) force the people to sell their labor in order to survive. This is not a voluntary transaction, it is forced nearly to the extent of slavery. Those who attempt to work for themselves will either eventually be unable to compete and put out of business, then required to work for the bourgeoisie, or they will achieve success by forcing other companies into failure, thus becoming the bourgeoisie that forces others to sell their labor to them. In a fully developed communist society there is no state, no money, and no social classes. Society will function under the concept of "From each according to his ability, to each according to his need". This is the final stage of development for society. The only way the people can truly live in peace and be free from oppression.

Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
TimeisPower says2015-09-12T04:09:18.5943093Z
I feel like communism has a better intent, but it's still a hard decision considering that no country has even actually attained communism.
PericIes says2015-09-12T04:42:17.6639042Z
Yeah, I agree. This is a hypothetical though, so I think that actual communism can be considered here, which is why I went with it. If we're talking realistically, though, I'd have to go capitalism.
tajshar2k says2015-09-12T14:08:58.9891606Z
Pro capitalists, Who's going to build the roads for you to drive on? You?
Vox_Veritas says2015-09-13T20:06:48.7245812Z
You misinterpret the definition of Capitalism.
Vox_Veritas says2015-09-13T20:10:54.6024856Z
A society with no taxes is anarchy, seeing as how government would not be able to function. Laissez-faire capitalists want a small government, one which is just big enough to provide for defense, uphold the rule of law and private ownership of goods and property, build and maintain roads, and perhaps a few other regulations such as making sure that the food we eat is safe and completely edible.
wompt says2015-09-14T01:37:55.8269702Z
Ummm, where is the neither option? This is a false dichotomy.
chandlerrouse says2015-09-15T03:58:04.7795816Z
In Germany
1994XF04 says2015-10-12T13:13:53.4394128Z
I'd rather just comment because both end badly.
Skyscraper says2015-12-02T17:35:00.8466135Z
True communism can work but there is still the one who always feels they are more deserving then the other and this is where corruption starts then the idea fails, plus you go to school to be a doctor they assign you a job as a dishwater because that is were they need the most. I believe France is true socialist country but you pay high taxes but seems to work just employment is low right now,and Germany is not so much. But they had great social plans but got exploited in the late 80s with a huge Migration problem. Great Welfare program or unemployment program this was designed to take care of Germans as it was not too common for people wanting to be slackers, there was always some but not of abundance . The Germans had tremendous pride and nobody was sitting around always working at improving things and working. But they had to make changes as people where going there just to exploit the system. ( We have Germans in our family we heard it all over the years but some will disagree that is ok)

Freebase Icon   Portions of this page are reproduced from or are modifications based on work created and shared by Google and used according to terms described in the Creative Commons 3.0 Attribution License.

By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use.