460
submitted 8 months ago by Grayox@lemmy.ml to c/memes@lemmy.ml
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] Gigan@lemmy.world 5 points 8 months ago

So the tens of millions of people that died under communism were all landlords? Wow, what are the chances of that

[-] RmDebArc_5@sh.itjust.works -2 points 8 months ago

Communism is a bit different than what those “communist” countries had. If anything it was socialism, but that still doesn’t fit completely. These “communist” countries are just one-party states in which the government controls the economy. The idea of putting the working class in power is useless if you create a government that can make decisions against the opinions of the working class. Socialist one-party state ≠ Communist democracy

[-] Gigan@lemmy.world -3 points 8 months ago

Do you have a real-world example of a successful communist state? Because you may not like it, but those "communist" countries are humanities best attempts at enacting communism and they resulted in millions of people dying.

[-] peterg75@mastodon.social 1 points 8 months ago

@Gigan
There are none! There's a reason pure communism is called a utopia. Because it is! While it may work for a small community of like-minded individuals, is just not scalable. The more people there are the more difference of opinion there is.
@RmDebArc_5

[-] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 1 points 8 months ago

Pure Communism, ie the formation of society after the contradictions within Socialism have been resolved, is not called a Utopia except by anti-communists.

[-] peterg75@mastodon.social 1 points 8 months ago

@Cowbee
Resolved how? Did I somehow miss a memo?

There's a reason that all past attempts at the establishment of communist states have failed. Lenin, Mao, et al, had grand ideas steeped in Marxist teachings. All of them ended up in an authoritarian state. Cuba, North Korea, China, USSR. All failed because of the human factor.

[-] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 1 points 8 months ago

Contradiction refers to the remaining vestiges from Capitalism, ie a State, Class, and Money. I suggest reading up on Historical Materialism and Dialectics.

Secondly, failing because of "the human factor" is a purely idealistic outlook and not a materialist analysis, you're arguing off of vibes.

[-] peterg75@mastodon.social 1 points 8 months ago

@Cowbee that's funny, you calling me idealist, and you proposing classless, stateless society.

Hilarious.

[-] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 1 points 8 months ago

Yes, you are quite literally an idealist by citing "the Human Factor" as a necessary reason for issues faced by AES countries.

Idealism proposes the idea of unchanging Human characteristics, Materialism proposes the idea that environments shape ideas. The former is undoubdtedly unscientific, while the latter is scientific.

Fighting for a goal is not what I am referring to as Idealism.

load more comments (13 replies)
load more comments (24 replies)
load more comments (95 replies)
this post was submitted on 29 Apr 2024
460 points (78.7% liked)

Memes

45910 readers
2476 users here now

Rules:

  1. Be civil and nice.
  2. Try not to excessively repost, as a rule of thumb, wait at least 2 months to do it if you have to.

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS