posted
I've seen recently the Georges Clooney's movie Good bye, and good luck, about the MacCartism. And as an ignorant and disinformated European i am, I'd like to know how is viewed the communism in USA. How does a common American react if somebody said he likes the idea of communism ? I'm currious.
Posts: 1189 | Registered: Dec 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Depends on the "common American", what the speaker means by "Communism", etc., etc.
Personally, I think communism at its most basic is a good idea. However, I think that in the world we live in, it just won't work. I look forward to the day when it will (which, to me, is tied to the Second Coming.)
Posts: 21182 | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
In another age, you will be in jail for such words, no ? I agree with your opinion. I think mankind is not so "good" and "disciplinated" to live in such a society.
Posts: 1189 | Registered: Dec 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
In another age, I would probably be smart enough to keep my words to myself.
My dad grew up in the early 60's, and went to Catholic school. They were taught to hide under their desks in case of a nuclear attack ( ) and that Communists were servants of Satan. He tells a story of what happened when he was picking at his lunch one day. One of the nuns came up to him and said, "You'd better eat that. There are starving children in China who would be glad of that food, you know!" My dad looked at her and said, (knowing him, very innocently but with an ironic gleam in his eyes and a twitch around the mouth) "The Chinese are Red Commies and deserve to die anyway, right?"
He got smacked with a ruler for that one. Three raps across both knuckles. *giggles*
Posts: 21182 | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Communism is now seen as something quaint and passe. China is embracing capitalism, the USSR broke apart and Russia has gone capitalistic, too. There is no more "Communist Threat", and the United States won the cold war.
So if someone says they like the idea of communism, they are patted on the head, like a naive child, and pretty much ignored.
Posts: 10397 | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Tante Shvester in France, Communism (and assimilated to) represent between 10 and 15 % of people... Do you really think they are all naïve ? I'm not sure... Adding to that, I believe it's real chance to have them for political discution sometime.
Posts: 1189 | Registered: Dec 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
In America, the Communist party is small and not well organized. It's just not a "player" on the national scene.
I know some people who are Communists. One worked in the defense industry building top secret planes. Seriously, nobody cares. It's not like the guy was going to sell secrets. He just liked a different system of government. (He was a big fan of Fidel, basically.)
Ultimately, the worst thing possible has happened to communists in this country -- they are basically irrelevant.
I suppose that could change if we start seeing our own brand of leftist insurgents, but for now, it's just not an issue most people think of as important inside America.
There are, of course, lots of people who grew up during the cold war and get very upset about various communist dictatorships of the past & present.
I think you'd get a bigger reaction asking about "socialism" which carries with it the spectre of government takeover of private property/investment, etc.
Some use "socialism" and "communism" interchangeably, I realize, but I think there's a distinction in most people's minds here in the US. I could be wrong, though. I often am when it comes to understanding what my fellow citizens think.
Posts: 22497 | Registered: Sep 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
I certainly think French Communists are naive, yes. Bob's analysis is largely correct. Most Americans don't really have an opinion on Communism, except that the Russians used it, and we beat them, and Communism is silly and irrelevant.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I like your wise way of thinking Bob. I understand what you explain. I agree with you about Socialism and Communism. I just want to notice that in France, the Socialists is a less lefted political party than the Communists. François Mitterand was a socialist and the president of France between 1981 and 1995. So your point of view is very interesting.
Rakeesh, You said that you (The USA) Beat them. I'd like you add details to your sentences by some facts. What is for you the most important attack from USA to Communism ?
Posts: 1189 | Registered: Dec 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I worked with a personell manager who claimed to be a Communist. His job was to make sure people were not paid to much. He fired the workers to improve the profits of the owners.
I asked him how that worked with his philosophy. His response helped me to create the following mantra.
"Communism is the best of all political systems... As long as its Stalinist Communism... And as long as you are Stalin."
Posts: 11895 | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
It's paradoxal ! He really claim to be a communist ? I think communism got down because of such person. Maybe he say that to have a rebel image...
Posts: 1189 | Registered: Dec 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Well to be specific Choobak, I said that is what most Americans think, not me specifically. I would've been more detailed.
I'd say opposing the USSR for fifty years and forcing them into an arms and technology race they could not possibly win, thus leading to their collapse, was probably the two biggest factors.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Oh ! Sorry, Rakeesh. My ugly english let me misunderstood your post. You say that this is the arms and technology race the reason of USSR disparition. You are right, but USSR won the race (more nuclear missile, more submarines, more weapons... The fact is they get too far... They want more and more arms. This is their economy who destroy them. They spend more money for this race and forget USSR population. That why people wanted go to the West side.
In a sens, USA well played by letting USSR to win the race. They protect their economy and offer a better material life to their population. USSR population became envious...
Posts: 1189 | Registered: Dec 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
What you're forgetting is that in order for the Soviets to "stay ahead" in the arms race they had to divert massive funds from domestic spending.
The reason the Soviets were so worried about SDI is because they knew they would have to try and match or beat the amount we were spending on it, and they knew they couldn't afford to do so.
quote:Personally, I think communism at its most basic is a good idea. However, I think that in the world we live in, it just won't work. I look forward to the day when it will (which, to me, is tied to the Second Coming.)
I'm probably not the "average" American, but my stance is exactly 180 degrees from this. At its most basic, communism is the involuntary theft of mine. It places everybody but Stalin and Mao in slavery.
So it's fair to say that I find the very idea of communism (by force) morally repugnant.
If you want to start commune and pool all your resources and such voluntarily, that's fine because it will be by choice. But I think if you look at history, the voluntary communes usually collapsed even faster than the forced communes.
edit to add:
Look at how fast the USSR fell apart once the subjugated states realized that the Soviet Union would no longer use force to keep them within the fold.
Posts: 413 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Choobak: In another age, you will be in jail for such words, no ?
Is this really true? It seems unlikely to me, but no one called it out. From what I know, high profile Communists (a la Rosenbergs, Debs, etc.) were not jailed because of their political beliefs, but because of illegal activities motivated by their beliefs. Run of the mill communists could expect to lose jobs and opportunities, but not freedoms. Is that an accurate assessment, according to any early 20th century Hatrack historians?
Posts: 2926 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
We're pretty sure the Soviets lost the race; propaganda saying you have more is not equivalent to actually having more, and in particular not to having more effective, long-range capabilities.
Posts: 15770 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Yeah, and tied to the Second Coming. Compeletely different from any form of Communism as we know it.
Posts: 880 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Yes, well I don't think that you can come up with an example in your history book that parallels what kq was referring to.
Posts: 1412 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by fugu13: We're pretty sure the Soviets lost the race; propaganda saying you have more is not equivalent to actually having more, and in particular not to having more effective, long-range capabilities.
I seem to remember that after the USSR collapsed and we got to see what they actually *had*, it turned out they were much further behind than we'd feared during the Cold War.
Posts: 326 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Oh yes. Even a lot of what they "had" was in decrepit state and unlikely to actually work.
Now, one area they were ahead was biological warfare. Of course, they also used human subjects, which accelerated their development.
Posts: 15770 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Bob_Scopatz: I know some people who are Communists. . . . He just liked a different system of government. (He was a big fan of Fidel, basically.)
Oh! An idiot!
-o-
I was going to say what SenojRetep already said. Macarthyism was a very bad thing, and people were hassled or lost opportunities, yadda yadda, but people weren't generally thrown in jail for this.
-o-
Socialism is very different from Communism. Socialist governments don't generally commit atrocities like communist ones always do.
Posts: 13680 | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
The common American has very negative reactions to the word, more as a result of years of government propaganda than anything else. Even left-wing American intellectuals (yes, they do exist!) prefer to use almost any term other than communism. Keep in mind that no socialist has ever held high office in the U.S. and that both major political parties in the U.S. are conservative by global standards.
Posts: 1332 | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
My negative reactions are not the result of government propaganda.
Actually, I'm trying to figure out what you even mean by government propaganda. The atrocities and human rights violations committed by communist countries are documented and virtually indisputed.
Posts: 13680 | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Well ! All of that post is begining to give me a point of view about USA and the communism currently.
About the race, i'd like to say that just before the collapse, USSR weapon works. And Unfortunnately, too many of them are used in conflicts in Africa or Asia. And don't think russians were bad to build or design technology. Actually, their methods are the best in innovation (search about the TRIZ method). And In my enginering school, we learn some. No, USSR really won the race and that was its lost.
And About Jail, It was a joke. Posts: 1189 | Registered: Dec 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
ketchupqueen, do you seriously contend that atrocities committed by the US even begin to rival those of, say, the USSR? Do you want to compare Britain's human rights record to Cuba's? Canada's to China's? Sweden's to North Korea's?
I know there are human rights violations committed by lots of other countries, and my post did not imply otherwise. My post was specifically a response to the statement that the main reason Americans have a dim view of communism is because American government propaganda. On the contrary, we have a dim view because a) they don't work, and b) they brutalize and steal from their people. Sure, Fascism and Islamic theocracy both have a terrible record in modern times as well. But to say that communism has a terrible record does not imply that fascism and Islamic theocracy do not.
I've always been quick to acknowledge and denounce US moral failings when it comes to international affairs. (Just ask Storm Saxon. ) But I think that if you seriously intend to say that American atrocities compare to Soviet ones, than this discussion has just descended into silliness.
Posts: 13680 | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Sure, they had more -- but we let them get ahead (take a look at this graph: http://www.nrdc.org/nuclear/nudb/dafig11.asp ). Both sides had overkill, and for the more important number, strategic nuclear weapons, we were ahead.
We had more of one of the most important strategic weapons, carriers.
There is significant doubt as to how many Russian nuclear submarines were actually in service. They built a few over 240, but estimates for how many they actually were running by the end range as low as 150.
Yes, lots of Russian weapons work well. But their arms buildup didn't compare to ours technologically (take a look at the tank we had at the end, the M1A1 Abrams, which was generally superior to the nearest russian model).
Posts: 15770 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:ketchupqueen, do you seriously contend that atrocities committed by the US even begin to rival those of, say, the USSR? Do you want to compare Britain's human rights record to Cuba's? Canada's to China's? Sweden's to North Korea's?
No.
But there are other countries whose records compare to those of those countries, which are not communist. And our hands are not clean. That was my only point.
I don't blame communism for those atrocities-- I blame the leaders who committed the atrocities. I don't blame the concept of communism for the poverty and starvation of people in communist countries, I blame the imperfect conception of communism and how it was implicated that was used to victimize those people. I've already said I don't think it can work in the world we live in. I'm just saying that because the people lived in a communist country, we don't all blame the concept of communism itself for their deaths, some of us blame the leaders who perpetrated said atrocities, no matter what form of government they purported to serve.
Posts: 21182 | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
(Not that I'm discounting the many atrocities the U.S. government has perpetrated over the course of its history-- I'm thinking of the Trail of Tears, for one...)
Posts: 21182 | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
My personal view on communism is that it is bad, even if man could live it in its ideal form. I believe in a meritocracy where people get what they earn, no more, no less. Though, this is also somewhat idealistic, I much preffer this meritocracy to communism, if i had to choose between ideal worlds.
Posts: 17 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Imagine no possessions . . . I don't think you could . . .
Communism, if you really let the ideal fill your mind, is almost impossible to concieve. Can you imagine a world where anything you have isn't really yours, and you gladly give it up to anyone else who needed it without a moments thought? Gee.
On the other hand, it tends to be awful in practice.
Posts: 1735 | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by AYC: My personal view on communism is that it is bad, even if man could live it in its ideal form. I believe in a meritocracy where people get what they earn, no more, no less. Though, this is also somewhat idealistic, I much preffer this meritocracy to communism, if i had to choose between ideal worlds.
I agree. I have never understood the view that it its perfect form communism is great, but it just hasn't worked out.
I personally think communism is wrong even in its perfect form. You are enslaving the people who are productive to those who are not as productive.
But, I guess I just don't have a collectivist mentality.
Posts: 1901 | Registered: May 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Icarus, Hitler was an anti-Communist. Pinochet was a U.S.-suported anti-communist, who, with the help of the U.S., overthrew a democratic government and then proceeded to massacre opponents.
But the overwhelming effect of U.S. government propaganda was to equate the word "communism" with the atrocities of Stalinists. And I say this as one who does not believe Communism to be a viable economic system.
Posts: 1332 | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm not sure where your comment is coming from, Pelegius; Icarus didn't bring up Hitler or Pinochet.
Posts: 15770 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I just don't see people being productive without some incentive for themselves. I really don't.
And I don't think I've ever heard ANY "government propaganda" against communism, unless it was a history lesson about "This is what happened in the era of McCartney. McCartneyism is bad." And so forth.
quote:Originally posted by ketchupqueen: In its perfect form, everyone would be productive to the best of their abilities.
What about those who have little material ambition and only wish to work enough to support themselves with their "basic" needs. Wouldn't they be shirking their responsibilities within a communist system?
Posts: 413 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I like competition. I think that there is a nobility in competiton among free and equal people, and that capitalism is a fine economic system even in the best of all possible worlds. There is a dignity in winning, and there is a dignity in losing. The Olympics is a physical testament to the virtue of competition. The problem, of course, is that people are rarely free and equal in the economic market, so the government regulates with subsidies and credits and bankruptcies. The second problem is that the muscular forces of competition burst out of their proper realm and start effecting the basic standards of living, and start meddling in an untoward manner with a person's self-respect.
For example, I haven't seen any surveys to bolster my claim, but I imagine that the median US Olympic households, that is the parents of these athletes, is markedly higher than the national average, and further, that state by state, the parents will make more than the state average. The basic needs of these athletes were met, so they had the ability to begin to engage in this virtuous competiton.
Competition is not bad, it just ought to be carefully watched, especially when the basic needs of an individual are at play.
quote:I don't blame communism for those atrocities-- I blame the leaders who committed the atrocities.
While I agree that some blame has to be attributed to the leaders of these governments, shouldn't some blame fall on the system of government that allows these leaders the power to commit said atrocities?
Posts: 4313 | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:What about those who have little material ambition and only wish to work enough to support themselves with their "basic" needs. Wouldn't they be shirking their responsibilities within a communist system?
As I have said before and others have pointed out, my conception of Communism is quite different from the one you're thinking of.
quote:While I agree that some blame has to be attributed to the leaders of these governments, shouldn't some blame fall on the system of government that allows these leaders the power to commit said atrocities?
But many of these leaders seize power not specifically allowed by the system of government. And as I said before, there are many kinds of governments that these atrocities have been committed in the name of, including "democracies". Obviously, when a system of government allows a leader or citizens this kind of power to destroy others, something is wrong. It could be in the way the ideal of the government is implemented. It could be corruption within a purportedly humane system of government. It could be any number of things. It's probably usually many more than one of those. To blame the ideal of communism for acts commited by a corrupt leader doesn't make sense to me.
Posts: 21182 | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by ketchupqueen: In its perfect form, everyone would be productive to the best of their abilities.
but, if you have better abilities, your abilties require more work to keep up, or your ablities are more valuable to society, shouldn't you be rewarded more?
Posts: 1901 | Registered: May 2004
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[ROFL]](graemlins/rofl.gif)
) and that Communists were servants of Satan. He tells a story of what happened when he was picking at his lunch one day. One of the nuns came up to him and said, "You'd better eat that. There are starving children in China who would be glad of that food, you know!" My dad looked at her and said, (knowing him, very innocently but with an ironic gleam in his eyes and a twitch around the mouth) "The Chinese are Red Commies and deserve to die anyway, right?"![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
Amen, Tante
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
