...and communism is an ideal?

So, in communist North Korea, the uncle of the leader gets executed by machine gun because " he stood unenthusiastically for the leader" and "clapped half-heartedly".

...what would have happened if he had of boo'd?

How can anyone with intelligence pretend communism works?

 

You're conflating communism and dictatorships.

 

I'm not getting involved in the communism debate at all, because I can't be arsed. But North Korea is not a communist state in reality is it? It's a dictatorship labeled as communism to justify his dictatorship is it not? (Genuine question)

 

Like China or the USSR Zizi, communist in name, but not in deed.

A brutal act between powerful people over their power struggles is absolutely not proof of whether an economic system "works" or not.

We now know that Britain had paramilitary death squads operating in Northern Ireland murdering on the streets those who, in their opinion, "needed shooting".

We know a little of the barbarous atrocities committed in Kenya by British forces.

We know that the USA authorities collude with the mafia to murder innocent people to whom they take a disllike.

I'm 100% certain you would not take these or 101 other such examples I could give you, all committed in or by free-market capitalist countries, would "prove" that economic system does not work.

Boris would be disappointed by the low IQ behind such an facetious argument.

 

That really has naff all to do with communism, it's totalitarianism and pretty inseparable from the tyranny that many non-communist countries have suffered.

Communism is harsh, born out of poverty and can ill afford dissenters or hangers-on but the ideals are quite honourable, have to be for it to work whatsoever. Ask almost any Cuban and they are proud of Castro's regime even though he himself was no angel in those early years.

 

Devil's advocate, but does that make female repression in Saudi Arabia evidence that all of capitalism is bad?

 

No, I am recognising that every communist state that has had any longevity has to have a dictator at it's head. What, by definition, proves that communism doesn't work.

 

Same as above!

 

I can't think of many examples where "clapping half heartedly" warrants execution in modern capitalist states.

I'll be delighted to hear about a "true" communist state that has stood the test of time, without a dictatorship to keep the "people" in check.

 

What is your definition of "work" ?

 

Maybe the communist ideal is honourable, but it will only ever be an ideal, as it just doesn't work. There are no examples sustained, pure communism working in over 100 years.

 

It wouldn't be a straightforward does work/doesn't work boundary, I am not so stupid as to believe that the true communist ideal would need to be in place absolutely perfectly before it could be construed as "working", but getting somewhere near it, would be a good start. Having a dictator regime at the top, is the complete opposite of the communist ideal and the absence of any communist states without a dictator is a clear indication the system only works in theory. Millions of different personalities amongst the people means that a significant proportion will never be satisfied with being suppressed willingly.

 

Saudi Arabia isn't a free market capitalist state as far as I know.

 

No, but I havn't used this example as proof that communism fails, it is merely an example of how communism relies on suppression in it's most extreme and violent form to keep "the people in check". Unfortunately, there are no current examples of pure communism working, as they have all failed.

 

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Is_Saudi_Arabia_capitalist#slide1

This well written powerpoint says otherwise.

 

How can it be a "free capitalist" society when the price of oil is set by an international cartel.

 

More interesting than this:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...cts-result-crabonated-coke-fake-Westerns.html

 

"State capitalist" is not "free market capitalist"

 

Try publicly being anti-American these days and you will soon be labelled a terrorist

 

Having lived in communist country for a year, I'm going to stick my neck out and say that communism is absolutely ****ing ******ed.

 

All those commenting on this thread should be careful. You may end up being the target of a north korean sleeper cell or something.

 

Every American can vote on their President every 4 years. That's a stupid analogy.

 

Zizi - I would say the early years of communism in both China and Russia were very successful indeed, turning both countries from under-developed agricultural backwaters into world superpowers.

Similarly, I would point out that Cuba has been one of the very few oasis of peace in Latin America over the past half century or so. No death squads, bloody dictatorships, coups etc. They have health and education statistics that are comparable with 1st world countries and they've been judged to be the only country in the world to be developing sustainably by the WWF.

You could of course point to the poor state of the Cuban economy, but I believe the US economic blockade to be largely responsible for that. I think it's a bit rich to try everything possible to cause economic chaos in a small country and then stand back, point and say their economic system isn't working!

Just about every country that has declared itself 'socialist', never mind communist, has faced one or more of economic isolation, assassination of its leaders, CIA organised coups or invasion. They've never stood a chance.

 

unless you are puerto rican. or living in puerto rico. or homeless.

 

more importantly, and this has nothing to do with communism, do you really 100% hand on heart think that he was executed for the reasons you listed? seriously?

 

Yes they can, it's called democracy .... however if you naively believe he or even his party controls the CIA then the stupidity is not mine.
Your own analogy basically labels every communist leader a despot which simply isn't true.

 

The key words are "early", because my question asked for "sustained" success. Both China and Russia were run by dictators such as Mao and Stalin, both murdered millions of their own population and both turned to capitalism in the end. Some success!

To blame the US embargo for Cuba's economic problems is ridiculous. Firstly, Cuba could still trade with the other 200 odd Countries in the world, as it was only the US trade that was banned. Secondly, to try and defend communism's failure on a capitalist countries unwillingness to trade with them is beyond common sense.

One of the major reasons for the embargo was the fact that American companies that were investing in Cuba by setting up businesses there, were nationalised! Also, around 200,000 Cuban refugees fled their country in the 70's and 80's on flimsy ramshackle boats. They obviously didn't think their economy was working.

Cuba had a reasonable economy prior to the revolution. It's GDP was higher than countries such as Japan, and higher than many US States. Then, post revolution, they relied on Russian subsidies and latterly have been bringing in capitalist principles. In fact Castro admitted in 2010 that the soviet type of centralist system was clearly unsustainable and therefore sought investment from businesses outside of Cuba. But you disagree with Fidel?

 

Well these were some of the reasons given by their government! Of course we will never know the full reasons as he has now been airbrushed from history, photo's, etc.

To turn this around, do you think that this happened due to criminal activity as we know it!

 

But the CIA don't execute someone just because they oppose the government. They would have to execute about half the population. Those sorts of mass genocide tend to happen in communist states, as we know.

Again, I used this as an example. It doesn't prove anything but it doesn't help to prove communism works, that is for sure. I don't know of every communist leader so can't make a judgement on all, but I am genuinely struggling to come up with a successful, sustainable pure communist state...and it seems that you and you fellow communist apologists are struggling in the same way.

 

I think using USA as a beacon for all that is right with capitalism is shaky ground. They have terrible human rights, they imprison massive portions of their population to effectively create a free workforce and they have a democracy without choice, which is no demorcracy at all.

America is as bad as Russia in my view.

 

Well I am not using the US as a beacon for anything.

 

Fair enough.

 

Just a few points ..
US trade agreements specifically exclude countries that trade openly with Cuba (outside of US embargo rules).
Both Russia and China are still communist countries despite the elements of capitalism they now seem to encourage.
Those migrating Cuban refugees were obviously not communists and were either dissidents or simply drawn to the glitz of America. They are not robots and people migrate throughout the western world also.
Japans economy was relatively tiny then as was that of many US states, do not cherry pick your examples and remember it was poverty that drove the Cuban revolution, not wealth.

BTW I am not a communist but a liberalist, however I despise the way that greed is rapidly destroying the planet for future generations. Responsible communism would at least arrest this somewhat though admittedly not without a check in population growth. Capitalism can only thrive on expansion, it is a wickedly destructive force.

 

Answers in bold above

 

Yes, they were perverted by power-crazed egomaniacs. I still think I would rather be a poor person living in the USSR rather than the capitalist Russia of today.

Oh come on! The US has been the major economic force around the world for the past 60 or 70 years at least. The US blockading Cuba is like the EU blockading Britain. I wonder how many countries around the world could have withstood the US economic aggression, the terrorist attacks, the sabotage, the arming of 'dissidents', the destabilising radio and TV broadcasts? Certainly I'm old enough to remember how Harold Wilson's Labour government in the '60s had to back down rapidly after it was elected on a manifesto of closing US bases in Britain. Wilson got called to the White House and told that the Pound would be worth tuppence ha'penny tomorrow if we dared to close their bases.

You do know that there are many millions allocated in the US budget each year aimed at (cough) pro-democracy activities within Cuba don't you? (http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/world/2013-03/15/content_16311397.htm) You do know that the US not only allows, but actively encourages terror groups in Miami who carry out attacks on the Cuban tourist industry and infrastructure (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VMtsbPQSGLw)?

You do know that as well as a ban on all trade, your "embargo" also includes a complete travel ban for US citizens, a "quarantine" on any ship that docks in Cuba so that it can't dock in the US for 6 months afterwards, provision for suing foreign companies who trade with Cuba and a ban on their executives travel to the US, fines on banks that deal with Cuba (HSBC just got a huge fine for handling Cuban money)

American companies were not 'setting up business' in Cuba. The entire economy was absolutely dominated by US monopolies and capital and huge profits were extracted.. The mafia ran most of Havana and companies such as United Fruit owned most of the countryside and treated the workers appallingly. Cuba had every right to nationalise those industries and they also included companies of other countries (including Britain). Since the US puppet tyrant Batista fled (to Miami with impunity) with almost the entire Cuban treasury, the country obviously couldn't pay full compensation immediately. Every other country in the world accepted payments over time in installments, which have long since been completed. Only one country refused absolutely that deal and has steadfastly refused any arrangement over compensation. I'll leave you to guess which one, but it start with U, ends in A and has S in the middle.

As for rafters, the US encourages these with the murderous wet foot-dry foot law (of which I'm sure you're aware) and citizens of many, many, many countries around the world try to travel illegally to the US without that encouragement. What economic system are the Mexicans "fleeing" when they cross the Rio Grande?

I doubt very much whether Cuba had a GDP higher than "many" US states before the Revolution, but I'm not surprised about Japan since it was not long after that country had been destroyed by WW2. They did indeed get large subsidies from the USSR, but managed to cope with losing all their trade overnight and all the spare parts for their machinery etc, not once with the US in 1959, but again with the USSR after 1991. Incredible how they managed to survive that.

Link?