As a disclaimer, I understand the logic in most cases, it shouldn’t imply that I agree with it.
In an ideal communism, everyone would have their basic needs taken care of, regardless of who they are, what they do, how “valuable” they are, or what they know is, etc.
In reality, almost all attempts at communism are authoritarian at their core, and whomever is in a position of authority, due to them being human and inherently selfish, they value their own comfort and contribution more than they value the contribution of others. This will almost always devolve into a mass exploitation of the populous to serve those who are in control.
The ideals of communism, in and of themselves are not bad or evil. The practical result of the authority that arises from a communist country or society will very often result in human suffering on a massive scale.
So to put it simply, people generally romanticize the ideals of communism; at a high level, speaking very ideally, they’re not wrong. Communism has some ideas that should be taken into very serious consideration. When applied on a large scale in communist countries like China (as an easy example) it’s very easy for the majority to be living well below what most would consider “the poverty line” with little to no consideration from the governing authority regarding that situation.
Thus, while the communist ideal of a solution to this problem is preferable to the homeless and destitute results of capitalism, there isn’t any country in the world that lives up to providing a good living situation to those who are in need. Sure, in a communist country, you may get a roof over your head, given to you by the government, but you may or may not get adequate amounts of food on the table to not starve, or required medical care, or any of a plethora of other things that are beneficial to your continued existence. You just get to die in a bed, in an apartment, via starvation or treatable medical ailments, rather than dying from exposure with enough food in your stomach, and in otherwise okay physical health, because you had no place warm to sleep.
All options are equal levels of terrible.
IMO, the point of these kinds of posts isn’t to say that we would be better off with communism, but rather, that the typical capitalist “solutions” to problems are less desirable, and we, as a society, should consider other options and solutions in order to help our countrymen, rather than punish them for being poor.
And I agree that social investment in capitalist societies builds better quality of life. Where I disagree with you is on the intention of these posts. Its clearly communist propaganda painting communism as a perfect solution for everything, as if we could not remember history or see with our own eyes that nobody wants to immigrate to North Korea for a reason.
That’s fair. I don’t want to immigrate to North Korea either. I’m more socialist leaning, but there has to be some significant checks and balances to make sure the system doesn’t get biased towards those in power.
The rich/powerful already have the majority of the money and an easy life as far as I’m concerned. The communism I’m in favor of is stuff like universal healthcare and UBI and such. Giving people the tools and resources to live a respectable life, regardless of their station. I don’t believe that McDonald’s workers should be given the same as doctors or anything, but both should be able to afford rent/food, and have all their basic needs met. They should be able to get the medical care that they may require, whenever they need it would being in debt for the rest of their lives.
I believe that a system that allows for this, can exist, and should exist. The thing I’m most against is any system of authoritarianism. If one person or a small, like-minded group can decide the actions and restrictions of the population, that’s not good. It can be argued that even in a capitalist and democratic country like the USA, this situation is already in place, as nobody but the people who are already rich seem to be able or willing to run for any government position, and they make laws that benefit them and what they want. It’s near absolute control by a small group of similar people (at the very least), which also isn’t good.
I don’t know what the right answer is, and I won’t pretend to. I just know that this isn’t it.
As a disclaimer, I understand the logic in most cases, it shouldn’t imply that I agree with it.
In an ideal communism, everyone would have their basic needs taken care of, regardless of who they are, what they do, how “valuable” they are, or what they know is, etc.
In reality, almost all attempts at communism are authoritarian at their core, and whomever is in a position of authority, due to them being human and inherently selfish, they value their own comfort and contribution more than they value the contribution of others. This will almost always devolve into a mass exploitation of the populous to serve those who are in control.
The ideals of communism, in and of themselves are not bad or evil. The practical result of the authority that arises from a communist country or society will very often result in human suffering on a massive scale.
So to put it simply, people generally romanticize the ideals of communism; at a high level, speaking very ideally, they’re not wrong. Communism has some ideas that should be taken into very serious consideration. When applied on a large scale in communist countries like China (as an easy example) it’s very easy for the majority to be living well below what most would consider “the poverty line” with little to no consideration from the governing authority regarding that situation.
Thus, while the communist ideal of a solution to this problem is preferable to the homeless and destitute results of capitalism, there isn’t any country in the world that lives up to providing a good living situation to those who are in need. Sure, in a communist country, you may get a roof over your head, given to you by the government, but you may or may not get adequate amounts of food on the table to not starve, or required medical care, or any of a plethora of other things that are beneficial to your continued existence. You just get to die in a bed, in an apartment, via starvation or treatable medical ailments, rather than dying from exposure with enough food in your stomach, and in otherwise okay physical health, because you had no place warm to sleep.
All options are equal levels of terrible.
IMO, the point of these kinds of posts isn’t to say that we would be better off with communism, but rather, that the typical capitalist “solutions” to problems are less desirable, and we, as a society, should consider other options and solutions in order to help our countrymen, rather than punish them for being poor.
And I agree that social investment in capitalist societies builds better quality of life. Where I disagree with you is on the intention of these posts. Its clearly communist propaganda painting communism as a perfect solution for everything, as if we could not remember history or see with our own eyes that nobody wants to immigrate to North Korea for a reason.
That’s fair. I don’t want to immigrate to North Korea either. I’m more socialist leaning, but there has to be some significant checks and balances to make sure the system doesn’t get biased towards those in power.
The rich/powerful already have the majority of the money and an easy life as far as I’m concerned. The communism I’m in favor of is stuff like universal healthcare and UBI and such. Giving people the tools and resources to live a respectable life, regardless of their station. I don’t believe that McDonald’s workers should be given the same as doctors or anything, but both should be able to afford rent/food, and have all their basic needs met. They should be able to get the medical care that they may require, whenever they need it would being in debt for the rest of their lives.
I believe that a system that allows for this, can exist, and should exist. The thing I’m most against is any system of authoritarianism. If one person or a small, like-minded group can decide the actions and restrictions of the population, that’s not good. It can be argued that even in a capitalist and democratic country like the USA, this situation is already in place, as nobody but the people who are already rich seem to be able or willing to run for any government position, and they make laws that benefit them and what they want. It’s near absolute control by a small group of similar people (at the very least), which also isn’t good.
I don’t know what the right answer is, and I won’t pretend to. I just know that this isn’t it.