Why Socialism (and Communism) Fails and why our society is being destroyed

To be very honest, after living in the United State I have come to have a very Hobbesian' view of human nature insofar as witnessing people playing politics with policy in order to be put in office. I respect that you have so much passion for what you believe Sythe, I'm not trying to be disrespectful, but in all curiosity what country comes closest to what you describe today? If any exist in a nearly pure form how is it doing? This is not a snide remark, I really do not have any clue if such a place exists.

For me, it seems that the entire world would have to make this shift. For example, such a libertarian country could not possibly safely control nuclear weapons with the rest of the world accepting de facto private ownership. This is the kind of instance where it is not permissible to have a variety of companies creating a marketplace for a good. If one sells them to a rogue country for a quick profit you cannot simply 'use market forces' and dispel the harm. A tight grip with some kind of security needs to have its force in certain areas of the nation even just for the sake of the safety and welfare of other nations.

With things like Guerrilla warfare that you describe (although I agree this is definitely the most formidable opponent to any developed nation... i.e. the Vietnam War and the war in both Iraq and Afghanistan) there is no check to stop something like nuclear war. There has to be command to call the shots at a healthy level. I know other governments have had problems with this type of technology and security, but these countries at least had a figure to go to in the government in order to dispute the actions and bring sanctions upon. Another country focusing their displeasure on one company does little to secure such technology. Sorry for extending this example so far, but I think several of these examples exist to make the same point. (Of course correct me if I am mis-interpreting anything you have said about libertarianism and its function, I am by no means an expert of political philosophy.)

Indeed, I think political philosophy is an immensely complicated subject, and human nature poses problems that can't be foreseen in pure philosophy. You point out contradictions in either socialism and/or communism, and I agree that neither of those are practical, but do you concede nothing in terms of a margin for error or even corruption within libertarianism? Consider this:

To me the type of system you describe seems like a tool that compliments some semblance of government. I don't have the faith in mankind caring enough about maintaining balance like you. Not that I have faith in government 100% either. I definitely see where you are coming from. I think a fusion of the two is necessary, however. For instance, you talk about one bad court ruling leading to a new court which has more discretion because the convicted can become a judge on his own accord in a free market environment. I think it is a bit of a logical leap to say that that person will even get out of jail while he or she lives, then go to law school, be accepted in the first place, and become a practicing judge. Let alone a better judge. I also see it as dangerous to allow convicted criminals (whether or not the right decision was made) the choice to be a judge unconditionally. Regardless of actual guilt. This would create a revolving door that no one wants... allowing real criminals the chance for the same opportunities.

At any rate, my real question is in regards to the type of elite there would be. You acknowledge that a ruling class must exist within a society in your original entry, but is there any chance of oversight in any area of production/services? I have a difficult time grasping the notion that oversight is self-generating with no exceptions within a free market. I think it over-estimates the will in people to a great degree to act. I think the will stops at a mental level. For example, I would venture to say that many many people do not give to the cause of finding a cure to a disease such as cancer etc. even though it poses a direct threat to themselves. Although, I'm sure if you asked them they would tell you that they wish a cure existed. How do you mobilize the necessary national pride in order to maintain a solid system of checks and balances? And, where the checks to exist, ensure that the people act on this knowledge.

The United States is not an abject failure in my opinion. I think Democracy has an interesting mechanism for change, and the founding fathers in the US intentionally made it difficult for change to happen quickly because extensive discourse is necessary. Although I think the US should have smaller government presence in MANY areas, a fusion of philosophies and systems seems like the balance that works best. I do not believe that a pure system of either libertarianism or socialism is the answer or would be perfect. But, if I were to be forced to choose only one for a country to have, it would be libertarianism. I think it is the lesser of two evils, but also that it would ultimately fail in the long-run.

Thanks for the awesome read This has quickly become my favorite section of the forums (Something for All), seeing as though I just entered the University of Pittsburgh to obtain my phD in philosophy in order to teach. I'm excited to be part of the community in this neck of the woods!

I did my best to be as professional as possible, I'd appreciate the same treatment. You have an awesome website here.

 

Sythe, my friends tell me that libertarianism and full state of freedom would not work as there would be chaos and everyone would be killing each other. That is why government is needed.

How do you respond to that?

 

Our society is one of capitalism, and is self-destructive, stemming from greed. Did anyone happen to see Michael Moore's film, Capitalism: A Love Story, it is rather thought provoking and raises some key issues about why our society is in a downward spiral.

 

There are variations on Socialism that I find are most plausible for a functioning society (no, I am not evoking the golden mean fallacy, or whatever it's called).

 

Why would a system where cooperation is required to be successful in society result in people slaughtering each other?

Which, specifically?

 

That's why China is only "technically" a communist country, but in reality the closest country that has came closest to actual communism, would be the USA.

 

How close was the Soviet Union to a actual Communist system? Not very, Marx was a idealist and believed that people could get along and create a perfect utopia. Of course, people aren't easy to figure out and Communism fails utterly because people don't mesh with it's theory. China isn't a Communism Country because it doesn't follow the theory, It's a soicalist country with a mixed market. Communism hasn't been done correctly yet and never will.

Democracy is a flawed system as well, If the majority of people are ignorant, stupid and willing to fall for any kind of lie based on what they are told to believe. When a society cannot think for themselves are constantly subjected to Government Propaganda and, like I said before, believe what they are told to believe instead of thinking for themselves. A democracy takes a commited population and with election turn-up numbers as they are now. That's obivously in decline.

I hope that America can return to it's Libertarianism roots and other countries follow suit. Because if China and other Authoritarian governments are left as the leaders of the world..

 

You have the right idea but understand that Communism cannot work in a practical environment. It's just logically impossible to do this, even if the acting leaders contribute their own wealth to the 'communist pool'. Then you have to consider the moral ramifications of such a system (basically, complete slavery in a 'perfect communist state'.)

 

To tell the truth, From the sources I learned about Communism from failed to mention that people own each other as well only saying " Everything from the cloths on your back belongs to everyone in theorized Communism." I was actually shocked hear that you belonged to everyone else and vise versa in a Communist system.

But learning this now, I obivously agree with your statement, owning another human being is just morally wrong no matter what system it is. Communism Theory is a wonderful idea I think, one where people are equal and earn the same and are willing to give more for less to better society, that being said, the Communism experiment in the Soviet Union was a utter failure and wasn't even close to actually being actual communism, just "Wanna-bee Communism."

 

Well how far are you willing to go for 'perfect communism?'

As I understand it, a perfect Communist society is one where everyone, including the de facto leader(s) of that Communist society, contributes their best possible effort and everyone gets a sizeable check every month. Now you're faced with a new problem: People are going to spend that money differently; some will gamble it away, others will save it, etc. So now these people are no longer equal because some gambled it away or spent it all on drugs. If you wish to have a perfect Communist society, you must now strictly enforce what people can and cannot buy: Drugs, liquor, gambling, entertainment, transportation, etc...

...However, some will still inevitably find a way to lose some money. If you see where this is going, the only way for a 'perfect' communist society to exist is for absolute slavery to be unleashed and I'd rather be poor and ill than be a slave.

 

I thought this was interesting, in regards to the healthcare issue.

 

very nicely explained. I agree with you.

 

The best form of government for a large nation such as the United States is an idealistic representative democracy. I don't need to dull you with the reasons as you probably know them better than I. You are extremely smart but I'm shocked to see that you actually believe, given human nature, that Libertarianism could actually work. The reasons for failure are obvious and the chance of failure 100%. The idea isn't humane as the weak would almost immediately die off and order would not be maintained. You know many philosophers have said that humans are inherently evil and I completely believe it.

 

First of all, really, thanks for this, it was an explanation I was looking for since 5th grade when my teacher explained this briefly. I didn't want to google it on the internet because I'd be introduced to books and books stating debating on whether this or that etc..

I read every bit, took awhile to understand things because i'm 14, but after reading it a few times I have a good idea of what you're saying.

2nd- I really agree to your thoughts on Libertarianism, and think truely it is the best solution. A question though, if you guys don't allow war, won't other country's be provoked into taking control over you, and what would happen if such a thing happened? UN? They haven't solved any of the country i'm living in's problems :/

I know I know nothing about politics i'm only 14, but if that happened would there be a solution?

What do you mean by that? I didn't really understand it clearly, do you mean, they taxed the free market too much and thats why the US is in crisis? Or is it because they borrowed money from them?


Thanks a lot, loved it.
Pigbow

 

Sythe, I am sorry that I could only read a few posts above so if I say something and it is already pointed out, forgive me. But I still want to join this interesting conversation so here I go.

I have to completely agree about all the reasoning of your first post, that communism and socialism fail. However, I wondered about the existence of communism and socialism in the first place. Like why people yearned for it, why people loved the idea and blindly trusted Marx, Lenin, and all other communistic leaders that these leaders could free them from all the miseries. Then people find out bitterly that they even fall into much bigger miseries. Most communistic and socialistic countries are associated with totalitarianism. People are forced to do this, or to do that, and punishment or even death is used to put people in order. These countries become brutal. After these people find out about the sad truth, why don't they just refix it? Have you ever wondered?

I myself always wondered and I studied history, culture, social structure, past government, and traveled to and lived in a few of these communistic countries. Guest what I found out? The answer is so simple. All of them are stupid. By saying stupid, I do not mean to offend them. They just do not have a clue about anything.

Let me give you examples. If you walk around on streets or in supermarkets or grocery stores, people just bump into you or would cut you off or would not get in line for check out. They would not even realize that you are still standing there, yielding for them, in a big confusion why they do that, and angrily eyeballing them. If you speak out, people would just say what the hell are you talking about? huh? you are the stupid one for not working hard for your fair share. Isn't this the same as China always violating international trade norms? Huh? First world countries don't do this, are you first world countries stupid for not getting your fair share? ----> They have ignorance.

Kids in school are usually taught with discipline. Teachers and staff hold almost absolute authority and can do almost anything to the kids and the kids cannot complain. Complaining just makes matters worse, they will be living in hell. On the other hand, I saw a few schools for wealthy kids. The kids were treated extremely well and teachers and staff were extremely nice. Very well-behaved. Problems solved? No! Because the kids were free to do what they wanted, they did not study well, instead most of them behaved very badly. They mostly abuse their privilege, much like people are allowed to have guns for self-defense but they would abuse that right by roaming around killing people. And if the kids behave like this in school, guess what? they do the same when they become adults. They complain that they do not have freedom when are suppressed. Yet, when they are given freedom, they abuse it. ----> Abusing.

For wives and husbands, they mostly treat each other with discipline too, not by love. When I talked to many couples that I knew pretty well, I asked one of the wives when her husband was not there "why don't you join our party tomorrow?" She hesitated and answered "Sorry, my husband would not allow me, I have been going out a lot so he would be mad if I go out tomorrow" Indeed, her husband had authority over her life. Stories of husbands beating up their wives because of disobeying are extremely common. Why don't the wives stand up to that then? They cannot. They are dependent on their husbands because society dictates so. Their mind even dictates so. They really want to do things they want but they cannot. If they go to court to sue their husbands for domestic violence, the court would not take it seriously and would want to just dismiss the case. Isn't this the same as people ask for freedom then they are suppressed by force of police or military? ----> Dictatorship built-in.

When I went out to buy things, salespeople would do their best to advertise, talk me into buying with very little care for truth. The products would be far off from their words. Yes I ended up buying some of them despite my keenness built-up over a period of time living in these countries. I found out it's wrong product, or wrong quality, or wrong price, or even accidentally gave them a bigger money bill. I walked home, walked back to them to dispute and they said they did not remember who I was, or this was not their product, or I did not overpay. I tried to talk to their managers, but the managers had the same attitude. Once I even tried to make a big scene in front of a store hoping other people on the street would help me out. Guess what? People stopped and looked and ... enjoyed the show. No one would say anything. Isn't this how their government officials stand back and watch their countries suffer with full of problems? ----> Inability to comprehend and Ignorance.

You really have to live in the environment to get the full picture because it is extremely different from First world's perspective. But I hope you get the picture, if you don't, please look into it some more until you see what I want to point out. It is important but many people cannot have the opportunity to experience.

Once you get the picture, you should find out that everything in these countries are plainly wrong in First world's perspective. However, that is how they have been surviving until now. It has always been like that and brutality in communism is not something new. It is only a new term but the same meaning. It is normal for people there to treat each other with violence, disdain and heartlessness. Why? Without all the supressing on each other, their society would fall apart because of the tendency to abuse.

Have you met or seen kids from these communist countries who come to live in first world countries either for studying or business or just permanent moving? Most of them are extremely wealthy, much wealthier than the average people of the first world countries. And most of them spend their money like there is no tomorrow for their status and own enjoyment instead of helping out their people or contributing to their countries' economies overall. I saw many of these kids imported Lamborghini, Ferrari to drive in their ROCK-BOTTOM GDP countries with CASH and outrageous IMPORT TAX. We may ask are they stupid? Yes they are, they do not know any better. They abuse their wealth taken from their very own people. But why is this happening? It is because these countries are loosening themselves, slowly turning into Libertarianism, freedom is given more to people, less supressing compared to when they completely closed their countries. Because of this new incomplete freedom, they already abuse it. It is worth to note that this is nothing new though, rich people also abused like this before all the communist revolutions to clean up all that. Now it is just coming back.



Or take a look at this story

http://blogs.asiantown.net/-/2431/cuong-dola-vietnam---the-richest-viet-boy-and-his-car-collections.aspx

and this story about China's cars

http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/2010/11/cars-to-china%E2%80%99s-countryside-bugatti-maybach-bentley-lamborghini-maserati-rolls-royce/

To cap it all off, we think they are wrong and they think we are wrong. We just have very different perspectives. For them, communism and socialism or even totalitarianism is all fine. Nothing wrong with that because life still goes on, they still face hardship just like how they always have and that is how life is supposed to be for them. We are only forcing our ideology onto them.

Conclusion is we should follow our libertarianism by allowing them to follow communism, socialism and even totalitarianism as long as it does not hurt us. Isn't this what we have been doing?

 

China used to be strictly communist. Not anymore for the present although they still call themselves communist. True. However, China is still communist in a political sense even though they fail to follow communism economically.

Am I missing something here because I do not quite see what communism and socialism have to do with slavery. Please point out if I missed in previous posts. I do not support slavery. You do not support slavery. What should we do about it?