View Full Version : The Distinction?
Nov 28th, 2004, 12:58 PM
Consider the question asked on the poll, as for myself, I don't really see no clear distinction, One might be more evil than the other but eventually the most wicked consumes the other.
Nov 28th, 2004, 2:57 PM
In modern usage
Theory and Theories
Early forms or First Responses to Capitalism
One-party Communist Rule
For the people by people too people ( in theory)
2/10 party rule
Are you looking for the economic difference
Capitalism/ Economic freedom
Nov 28th, 2004, 6:13 PM
Are you looking for the economic difference
Any and all. I've been watching the troubles of The Ukrain and do wonder why America is so interested/worried in the elections over there, however, I am a bit confused because I thought Russia proclaimed a democratic governing, so what is America so worried about?
Nov 28th, 2004, 6:58 PM
We are on the same page, Iím watching and Market. Itís interesting.
They have been a front for other countries (So to speak)
that donít want their fingers in the pie.
In the end, itís all about economics. If not, name one I like to know!!!!!
Nov 28th, 2004, 7:37 PM
It is my understanding that democracy allows for individual success in an economic sense. I may be off base here, but I have be led to believe the communists system (in its pure form) dose not allow an individual to succeed, all patents that are successfully are free to all members of a given state or country. Thereby limiting individual success.
Nov 28th, 2004, 9:38 PM
I've been watching the troubles of The Ukrain and do wonder why America is so interested/worried in the elections over thereMy opinion is that it may reflect or cause additional dispute and demands for change in our own voting system. Provided enough people put the remote down and actually get involved.
Nov 28th, 2004, 9:54 PM
actually, Russia has been going quite authoritarian lately. sure, they vote, and there is more freedom than under Communism, but that freedom has been slipping in the past few years. That, in effect, is why we are concerned with Ukraine, since its "winner" is authoritarian and pro-Russian.
As for the difference between democracy and communism, one only need look at the definitions:
Democracy: Government by the people, exercised either directly or through elected representatives.
Communism: A theoretical economic system characterized by the collective ownership of property and by the organization of labor for the common advantage of all members.
In effect, democracy is a style of government and communism is a style of economy. It would be techically possible to have a Democratic Communism. However, due to the complete state control of the economy in Communism, it is unlikely that it could be called a "Democracy" because Democracy implies choice, which is inconsistent with state control.
Hope I've been a help, and hope you can see the difference now.
Nov 28th, 2004, 10:09 PM
Consider the question asked on the poll, as for myself, I don't really see no clear distinction, One might be more evil than the other but eventually the most wicked consumes the other.I suppose that would depend on your opinion of what wicked would be.
If one governmental body such as in communism controls the economy and doles out its "profits" to everyone, everyone can benefit or lose. All medical care and basic means are provided to everyone contributing. Farmers are provided the land in which to farm and are allowed a small (miniscule) chunk in which to provide for their families provided they dont keep "too much", again its controlled but the farmer doesnt have to pay for the state land they farm.
The system is ripe for rape since the governing body also controls who can receive the best of the spoils. In this system everyone must contribute and everyone gets something. However, with prices controlled by the same governing body, it doesnt leave much room for economical growth and the ability to generate more profits. It also doesnt leave much if any chance for the people in general to be capable of aquiring material things much beyond what is neccessary since their wages are also controlled. There is no "minimum" wage and unless youre one of the lucky ones with freinds in high places, virtually no chance or ability to become financially secure or independantly wealthy. If I remember correctly, there was no "tax" per se or some kind of stipend came right out of the wages
Also, since this type of government controls everything, they also control the media, all law enforcment and can dictate damn near everything that goes on in daily life including government officials who are "elected" as long as they are acceptable to the ruling body, or are appointed. There is no majority rule, its their way or the highway to Siberia. The "good" of this type of government is that its no secret who is the boss and who controls what.
In a democracy the people rule through elected representatives. People are free to make their way through life, make as much money as they want, do what they want for the most part etc. However, their aint no free ride either. You pay in one way or another for everything you have. Think you own your house? Dont pay your property taxes for awhile and see who really owns it.
This system is also fraught with opportunity for abuse. Theres enough in the news about it. Ours isnt perfect but I prefer it.
Its too bad you didnt put in other types. Dutchie could throw in some good insight from his neck o' the woods.
Nov 28th, 2004, 10:12 PM
there was no "tax" per se
You could also say its a 100% "tax"... which is how I view it.
And I would say you also left out possibly the worst part about such a system... because of the facts you mentioned:
it doesnt leave much room for economical growth and the ability to generate more profits. It also doesnt leave much if any chance for the people in general to be capable of aquiring material things much beyond what is neccessary since their wages are also controlled.
there is little to no individual initiative or desire to succeed. any and all such desire is born of only 1) personal satisfaction or 2) desire to see the state succeed.... of course both are laudible goals, but as far as I can tell, economic incentive provides a better incentive... most people want to succeed, and probably most even partially at least, want to succeed for its own sake (personal satisfaction). But with no way to tell who succeeds or if I succeed or whatnot (ie, thru having more toys at the end of the day), we can take part of personal satisfaction out.
The thought that I could make a good life for me and my family and possibly retire early drives me to take risks and give it my all. There is a lot of personal satisfaction that comes in that as well, however, a lot of the personal satisfaction comes WITH that... so that if my goals are to provide nicely for my family, the lack of an economic chance to do that means I dont have much to gain in the way of personal satisfaction.
Nov 28th, 2004, 10:15 PM
You could also say its a 100% "tax"... which is how I view it.Quite true. I was thinking of our definition of "tax" which most here are familiar with, in posting that.
Nov 29th, 2004, 12:40 AM
Comparing communism to democracy is like comparing an anvil to a wedding dress. This whole poll is useless, and I won't vote.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.1.6 Copyright © 2013 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.