If you have read the magazines recently and before pertaining to the situation of China being a communist society, you would have seen that China as a nation, has become very human, too human that people are being controlled to the point of emotional manipulation.
There is the lack of women due to severe infanticide brought about by population control acts. It is also well known that the Chinese society, as a whole, lacks the motivation to pursue or strive for something greater that normal living.
On the other hand, if we take our eyes to the democratic situation of the United States and other democratic countries, we would see the great gap that seperates the two nation, with regard to the society’s physical and emotional health, also the modernism of each country.
However, I believe, that with this facts at hand, after seeing the relativeness of each system of government seperated in the opposite ends of the spectrum, I can say, that without communist ideologies and practice, democratic ideologies would merely be a philosophical dream due to lack of comparison between beliefs, wherein positivity and negativity is seen, and contrasting of sequential events that would only happen through practical application. Therefore, I can say that without communism, democracy would not exist.
What do you think? Does the world owe China a great deal due to the communist beliefs it is holding that makes it possible for democracy to thrive? What can you say?
China has a communist society, sparked by the Red Book, based on the idealogies of Karl Marx, during the Cultural Revolution. Communism is still prevailing, however, some acts/laws have been passsed to modify the system.
Yes I’d be inclined to agree, but the presumption of Marxist socialism in the first place was that all political (r)evolution in history was due to the dichotemy between thesis and antithesis from two polarised perspectives.
Does communism, as a theory, fall down if it can be proven that this assumption of political dichotemy/dualism is unwarranted?
Well, it’s called historical dialectical materialism, not political dialectical materialism. All that means is that new forms of society arise from the contradictions in old systems.
Still, I wonder if you mean did ‘communist’ countries influence America in terms of race and gender?
Well, thats just fancy way of looking at the old cause and effect system right? his political science is a result of mine, mine was a result of his. Communism being the result of capitolism/democracy, capitolism/democracy as the result of monarchy/dictatorship.
But i cant see as Communism as a opposite to Democracy. I always thought the exact opposite of democracy was anarchy. Communism seems to be a take of from democracy. its like they got the first 3 lines for the people of the people by the people and thats it.
As for will communism fall when its proven wrong? yes, will socialism (PURE) no. because we even in democracy are moving more toward socialism. Every time you hear a speaker say “even/fair/level playing ground” They are trying to bring about a socialistic change.
Communism may oppose capitalism and democracy, but it does not exist for that reason.
With the rise of industry in England early in the 19th Century, it became fasionable for intellectuals to explain processes in quantitative terms. “Art follows empire,” as Napoleon said. Darwin “explained” evolution in terms of natural selection; Freud “explained” psychology in terms of opposing quantities of energy; and Marx “explained” history in terms of economics.
The “death of God” was all the rage. As Alan Watts pointed out, “You can’t rip off the universe with God looking over your shoulder.”
If religion is a sense of direction in a directionless world (Spengler), then communism is the deification of the human mind as a provider of direction. Communism fills the vacuum of a diminishing Christianity.
In a communist world, there is no God, and Karl Marx is His prophet.
Communism is a religion, and its antithesis is Christianity (or Buddhism or Taoism or Shintoism), not capitalism and/or democracy.
modemgum* - firstly china is positively not a communist regime. it is a military dictatorship.
as for communism comming from capitalism/democracy it came from capitalism/semi-deomocracy in that the working classes of the then industrialised/ing states did not have the vote or only in small or unfair numbers. they were largely unpoliticised aswell. as for communism opposing democracy - it pretty much requires it as how can a person work for the greater good if he cannot choose how the greater good is determined over a shoter time span.
China is a peoples republic run by a Communist Party. Taiwan on the other hand is democracy. Chang Kai Shek lost the battle, and established that existing democracy in Taiwan. Chang Kai Shek lost to Mao Tze Dong which in turn led to the formation of a stablized government in China. China is a Communist coutry. However, with the World Trade Organization, I can say that its opening its gates to new ideas in a very slow pace specially with regards to liberal ones.
the Third Reich is a Totalitarian State wherein Hitler extended government control on schools and religion. The Third Reich was believed to be the successor to the Holy Roman Empire. So liberal states as a cover for the projection of the good of the many, and charismatic purposes would be forbidden.
the workers have nothing to lose but their chains as proposed by the communist manifesto, capitalism needs to die out sometime or another as the rise of the communist party takes it effect. The proletariat or the working class transcends and unites to break free with regards to the alienation from work back to a “natural state of being” such as the feudalist ideals during the 18th century in Germany. However, communism is different from socialism in a sense that socialists are more concerned with the well being of the proletariat rather than sparking a revolution for the freedom of the proletariat. Socialism concentrates more on the general welfares of the worker and the social effects of capitalist entrepreneurs to the state. On the other hand, democracy, at par with capitalist form of business structure, stimulates a sense of hierarchy among the people of the nation. It stands for the rights of liberty and freedom according to the constitution. Democracy and capitalism forms a society wherein everyone works for money to survive and economic gaps seperate the people. Capitalism reflects the best of a democratic country. It provides entertainment, leisure and fun. Democracy stands for the rights of peace amongst the democratic nations.
According to Plato, the great greek philosopher, every individual in this realm of life strives to attain something greater than themselves, specifically absolute morality or the highest good. And through the process of human interaction and comparison, political societies are formed. The perception varies with each individual, as well as bias and discretion to each political system, however one thing stands in common is that every government has its own contribution to the atttainment of the absolute through comparison, competitiion and ambition.
That’s a pretty massive misreading of the Communist Manifesto. Communism is defined by the description (not prescription): from each according to his ability, to each according to his need. Socialism, following Lenin, is the following description: from each according to his ability, to each according to his work.
Socialism, according to Marx, is the next stage after capitalism and that that stage will gradually turn into communism, the final stage.
The kind of work Marx is talking about is work under the capitalist system, not work in general. He found it completely incredulous that people would actually think work in general should be abolished as he thought that that is what men and women are defined by.
Brad you are wrong in saying that communism is a mere utopian dream, wherein everything can never be under the rule of the communal society and government, such as the systems of Stalin and Communist China. We are living in a modern world were everything has transcended or ascended the rationalism of the BC periods of intellect and reason, therefore we thrive in philosophies supported by concepts and ideologies. The once known era of inferring and dialects have long been gone and to be willing to adjust to the rapid changes of the world is a must. We cannot simply argue and propose that communism is totalitarian or communism is not socialism, rather must state principles to maintain order and minimize sensible perceptions or personal points of view. To say that communism is similar to a utopian state of society would be defeasible and wrongfully stated, it would be better to say that communism is an abstract form of political principle similar to democracy, monarchy, aristocracy and the like.
I never said communism was a utopian dream, I just said what Marx said. You’re the one who brought up Marx.
All you had to say was you weren’t following Marx. That’s fine but why bring up one of those BC intellects if you don’t think he has anything to offer.
The rest of your post seems a trumped up defeatist version of, “Now we know better.” I don’t think we know any better and I’m at odds to figure out who it is that you’re referring to. Care to be a little more specific?
