The Pros And Cons Of Communism
Throughout modern history, there have been two major economic systems, whether defined by name or not: communism and capitalism. Their ideologies are inherently contrasting, and often hostile to one another. Throughout the hostilities, slander and governmental propaganda has become widespread creating fear and hate towards communism, although in some communist countries the same can be claimed. In this document, I will juxtapose these ideological differences and hopefully disperse any misconceptions you may have of the two systems.
To understand communism, one must fully comprehend the meaning and inner-workings of capitalism. Capitalism is a system based on free trade, that is, one or a collective of private citizens doing business with another individual or collective of private citizens. The means of production are owned by individuals instead of the state.
Money is effectively used as work credits. In theory, the more work you do, the more you are able to trade. Id est, one who works for one day won't have the ability to trade as much as one who works for six days. This, in theory, assures that those who contribute to the community are able to have more luxuries than those who do not.
In this system, people are free to create businesses and …show more content…
sell their products with little to no interference from a higher-up. They are free to pay individuals to do work, terminate their employment, determine the amount a product costs, and [legally] do anything necessary to "one up" the competitor. In fact, some people have made a profit by doing nothing but manipulating money, such as buying raw material, sending it to a company to be assembled and packaged, and then selling the finished product to merchants for a profit.
Property is often defined as the cornerstone of capitalism. The bedrock principle of it is that you may do what you want how you want to with anything that you paid for. This can be applied to many situations. If I buy a sewing machine, I can either use it myself, pay someone to make me clothes with it, charge money for allowing someone else to use it, or, if desired, smash it into a thousand pieces and use it in a food recipe. Capitalists claim that without property, one cannot have freedom.
In pure capitalism, monopolies are prevalent and companies could theoretically be as powerful as the government if a purely laissez-faire ideology is adopted. However, in practice the government generally breaks up monopolies, as demonstrated in the breaking up of the Bell Corporation and hefty fines for Microsoft in many European and Asian markets. Capitalist economists denounce this act as anti-free trade and socialistic. Economic moderates and fiscal authoritarians condone this practice, claiming that it protects the consumer from exploitation and gives more freedom of choice.
Capitalism as described in Adam Smith's "Wealth of Nations," which was the first explanation of what capitalism is, has not existed since the Industrial Revolution in America.
After unregulated capitalism had demonstrated to be oppressive, environmentally harmful, and plutocratic, perpetuating a cycle of poverty and the uneven distribution of wealth, Western nations adopted socialist programs such as public schools, welfare programs, subsidized healthcare, and Social Security to counter this. The market, though more heavily regulated, is still relatively free. One might characterize it as a mixed economy (Case/Fair Chapter 22) which many governments use to promote both the advance of industry and social
welfare.
Communism, on the other hand, is very different. It was defined by Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels in their 1848 pamphlet "The Communist Manifesto." Capitalism, they said, will inevitably lead to class warfare: the workers (proletariat) v. the ruling class (bourgeoisie). The proletariat will eventually vastly outnumber the bourgeoisie, and
The means of production, such as equipment in steel foundries and textile mills, are not owned by any particular individual(s), rather collectively by the community. The workers manage the factory and produce commodities as they see fit.
Money is not existent. The workers, of whom produce commodities for the good of the community rather than for profit, run the factory in what they see as the most productive and beneficial manner. They directly distribute the products to whomever desires it.
Work is entirely voluntary. In capitalism, work is compulsory simply because one cannot eat without money. In communism, you are only required to contribute to the community. This can be achieved by doing something you love to do. I know some people who enjoy manual labor. They love working with their hands and finishing the day seeing a job well done. In communism, one can live well and do this. Because in doing this they contribute to the community, other workers are happy to supply them with what they produce.
What happens if one member of a community is lazy and does nothing but eat, sleep, and watch television? The members of the area get together and talk to the person. They will either urge him to carry his own weight or tell him to leave and not come back. However, this situation is unlikely, because rest is useless unless one has been doing something productive.
Culture is an issue of debate among communist thinkers. Some theorize that to totally eliminate oppression of any sort, ideas and traditions we currently see as fundamental must be abolished. The traditional family, for instance, can be seen as inherently patriarchal and authoritarian and a reaction of capitalism and the acquisition of private property. On the other hand, communist Alexandra Kollontai stated that the need for family will be determined by the nature of the people and that when deemed unnecessary by the community, it will be naturally phased out (Kollontai Komunistka).
Communists and capitalists are very critical of each other. This, of course, is due to the obvious differences in ideologies. I cannot even begin to count the times I've heard a capitalist call a communist a "stupid commie" or a communist calling a capitalist a "$@#% reactionary." The survival of communism is based on the obliteration of the bourgeoisie and to capitalists, the perseverance of "freedom" is blocked by the establishment of a communist state.
Capitalists state that communism disregards inherent human nature. Humans, like other mammals, naturally show a tendency to be possessive over what is "theirs." We have our territories and nobody but us can use it. Communists respond to this allegation by pointing out that humans are not naturally like that, and that every human is born with a tabula rasa, or a blank slate, and that we can change how humans act by changing social conditions to foster cooperation in lieu of competition.
Another criticism capitalists have is that if a global dictatorship of the proletariat is established, those who hold power will refuse to relinquish it, and we will all be subject to the rule of a tyrant. Communists counter this claim by stating that once a global dictatorship of the proletariat is established, there will be no need for a dictator and he will naturally wither away and utopia will be maintained.
Communists, I've seen, are more critical of capitalists. They state that the value of labor is not determined by the actual value of labor, rather the market demand for the trade. For example, an artist contributes to the culture of the land, but is paid a pittance because the amount of art connoisseurs is relatively small. Everyone in society, however, is indirectly benefited by art. A professional athlete, however, is paid millions of dollars to do a recreational sport because there are plenty of people who relax by watching professional sports.
Another criticism of capitalism and its failures are that socioeconomic factors oppress workers and prevent them from advancing in the system. For example, if a person grows up in a poor family and only knows of poverty and crime to make ends meet, he will most likely choose to remain in the culture of crime he knows. It perpetuates a cycle of pessimism.
Capitalism is inherently hierarchical and authoritarian, according to the leftists, because it requires a boss and employee. A minority is dictating what the majority does for his own profit, which is the epitome of oppression. This form of authority is evil.
Money creates a society of greed because it puts the ability to get commodities in the hand of a single tool. It enforces the idea that the most important thing in life is the acquisition of wealth, because without it you have nothing. This creates "money grubbers" and encourages people to have careers that pay well not because they enjoy the work, but because it's the most efficient method of getting money.
In conclusion, communism and capitalism are both viable economic and social systems if placed in the right hands. However I do not believe that either global communism is feasible or that capitalism will ever create a benevolent society. Thus, we must seek a system that gives absolute power to the people while maintaining order and fostering benevolence.
To understand communism, one must fully comprehend the meaning and inner-workings of capitalism. Capitalism is a system based on free trade, that is, one or a collective of private citizens doing business with another individual or collective of private citizens. The means of production are owned by individuals instead of the state.
Money is effectively used as work credits. In theory, the more work you do, the more you are able to trade. Id est, one who works for one day won't have the ability to trade as much as one who works for six days. This, in theory, assures that those who contribute to the community are able to have more luxuries than those who do not.
In this system, people are free to create businesses and …show more content…
sell their products with little to no interference from a higher-up. They are free to pay individuals to do work, terminate their employment, determine the amount a product costs, and [legally] do anything necessary to "one up" the competitor. In fact, some people have made a profit by doing nothing but manipulating money, such as buying raw material, sending it to a company to be assembled and packaged, and then selling the finished product to merchants for a profit.
Property is often defined as the cornerstone of capitalism. The bedrock principle of it is that you may do what you want how you want to with anything that you paid for. This can be applied to many situations. If I buy a sewing machine, I can either use it myself, pay someone to make me clothes with it, charge money for allowing someone else to use it, or, if desired, smash it into a thousand pieces and use it in a food recipe. Capitalists claim that without property, one cannot have freedom.
In pure capitalism, monopolies are prevalent and companies could theoretically be as powerful as the government if a purely laissez-faire ideology is adopted. However, in practice the government generally breaks up monopolies, as demonstrated in the breaking up of the Bell Corporation and hefty fines for Microsoft in many European and Asian markets. Capitalist economists denounce this act as anti-free trade and socialistic. Economic moderates and fiscal authoritarians condone this practice, claiming that it protects the consumer from exploitation and gives more freedom of choice.
Capitalism as described in Adam Smith's "Wealth of Nations," which was the first explanation of what capitalism is, has not existed since the Industrial Revolution in America.
After unregulated capitalism had demonstrated to be oppressive, environmentally harmful, and plutocratic, perpetuating a cycle of poverty and the uneven distribution of wealth, Western nations adopted socialist programs such as public schools, welfare programs, subsidized healthcare, and Social Security to counter this. The market, though more heavily regulated, is still relatively free. One might characterize it as a mixed economy (Case/Fair Chapter 22) which many governments use to promote both the advance of industry and social
welfare.
Communism, on the other hand, is very different. It was defined by Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels in their 1848 pamphlet "The Communist Manifesto." Capitalism, they said, will inevitably lead to class warfare: the workers (proletariat) v. the ruling class (bourgeoisie). The proletariat will eventually vastly outnumber the bourgeoisie, and
The means of production, such as equipment in steel foundries and textile mills, are not owned by any particular individual(s), rather collectively by the community. The workers manage the factory and produce commodities as they see fit.
Money is not existent. The workers, of whom produce commodities for the good of the community rather than for profit, run the factory in what they see as the most productive and beneficial manner. They directly distribute the products to whomever desires it.
Work is entirely voluntary. In capitalism, work is compulsory simply because one cannot eat without money. In communism, you are only required to contribute to the community. This can be achieved by doing something you love to do. I know some people who enjoy manual labor. They love working with their hands and finishing the day seeing a job well done. In communism, one can live well and do this. Because in doing this they contribute to the community, other workers are happy to supply them with what they produce.
What happens if one member of a community is lazy and does nothing but eat, sleep, and watch television? The members of the area get together and talk to the person. They will either urge him to carry his own weight or tell him to leave and not come back. However, this situation is unlikely, because rest is useless unless one has been doing something productive.
Culture is an issue of debate among communist thinkers. Some theorize that to totally eliminate oppression of any sort, ideas and traditions we currently see as fundamental must be abolished. The traditional family, for instance, can be seen as inherently patriarchal and authoritarian and a reaction of capitalism and the acquisition of private property. On the other hand, communist Alexandra Kollontai stated that the need for family will be determined by the nature of the people and that when deemed unnecessary by the community, it will be naturally phased out (Kollontai Komunistka).
Communists and capitalists are very critical of each other. This, of course, is due to the obvious differences in ideologies. I cannot even begin to count the times I've heard a capitalist call a communist a "stupid commie" or a communist calling a capitalist a "$@#% reactionary." The survival of communism is based on the obliteration of the bourgeoisie and to capitalists, the perseverance of "freedom" is blocked by the establishment of a communist state.
Capitalists state that communism disregards inherent human nature. Humans, like other mammals, naturally show a tendency to be possessive over what is "theirs." We have our territories and nobody but us can use it. Communists respond to this allegation by pointing out that humans are not naturally like that, and that every human is born with a tabula rasa, or a blank slate, and that we can change how humans act by changing social conditions to foster cooperation in lieu of competition.
Another criticism capitalists have is that if a global dictatorship of the proletariat is established, those who hold power will refuse to relinquish it, and we will all be subject to the rule of a tyrant. Communists counter this claim by stating that once a global dictatorship of the proletariat is established, there will be no need for a dictator and he will naturally wither away and utopia will be maintained.
Communists, I've seen, are more critical of capitalists. They state that the value of labor is not determined by the actual value of labor, rather the market demand for the trade. For example, an artist contributes to the culture of the land, but is paid a pittance because the amount of art connoisseurs is relatively small. Everyone in society, however, is indirectly benefited by art. A professional athlete, however, is paid millions of dollars to do a recreational sport because there are plenty of people who relax by watching professional sports.
Another criticism of capitalism and its failures are that socioeconomic factors oppress workers and prevent them from advancing in the system. For example, if a person grows up in a poor family and only knows of poverty and crime to make ends meet, he will most likely choose to remain in the culture of crime he knows. It perpetuates a cycle of pessimism.
Capitalism is inherently hierarchical and authoritarian, according to the leftists, because it requires a boss and employee. A minority is dictating what the majority does for his own profit, which is the epitome of oppression. This form of authority is evil.
Money creates a society of greed because it puts the ability to get commodities in the hand of a single tool. It enforces the idea that the most important thing in life is the acquisition of wealth, because without it you have nothing. This creates "money grubbers" and encourages people to have careers that pay well not because they enjoy the work, but because it's the most efficient method of getting money.
In conclusion, communism and capitalism are both viable economic and social systems if placed in the right hands. However I do not believe that either global communism is feasible or that capitalism will ever create a benevolent society. Thus, we must seek a system that gives absolute power to the people while maintaining order and fostering benevolence.