How to Convince my Friends that Communism isn't evil?

[Journeyman H. [UK]]

Unless democracy is considered capitalism then no capitalism isn't being forced upon me, even if it was in democracy at least there is some extent to actually vote for a party you think will bring good

What "Democracy"?
Did you vote for any wars in Iraq, Afghanistan, or Libya? Because I sure didn't want us to go to war.
Did you get a chance to vote about any new bills? I.e. SOPA.
Did you get to have your say in what should be done to improve your country? I didn't.

I see no more democracy in our system than socialist countries.
What you're forgetting about the idea of capitalism, is that, money is the only form of democracy.
So pretty much, privatising everything, allowing big corporations to (unfairly) compete with small businesses.

Example:

1. You own a family business, and a big supermarket came along and built their store next to you, they cut their prices way below the amount you can sell.
Would you consider that fair?

2. You are poor, you cannot afford medical care. You catch a disease. The hospital demands that you pay them to be healthier.
Would you consider that fair?


Under the rule of Vladimer Lenin;
Everyone's lifespan increased a lot. 
There were a lot less people with diseases.
Unemployment was very low, especially compared to America.
It was a crime for corporations to take advantage of poor people (i.e. purposely making them paid minimum wage)
Everyone's standard of living was increased.

This was even after WWI, where a lot of countries went into debt as well.

I think that communism has done a lot more than what capitalism has ever done. The key to capitalism is taking advantage of something and then making a profit from it.


With the current system that we are in, is that, you vote for the leader of the country. That's it. I have never got a chance to vote for anything else, just the candidate.
This then gives you the illusion of democracy. You think that you voted for a leader therefore it makes the country democratic.

[SoapANator]

Unless democracy is considered capitalism then no capitalism isn't being forced upon me, even if it was in democracy at least there is some extent to actually vote for a party you think will bring good

What "Democracy"?
Did you vote for any wars in Iraq, Afghanistan, or Libya? Because I sure didn't want us to go to war.
Did you get a chance to vote about any new bills? I.e. SOPA.
Did you get to have your say in what should be done to improve your country? I didn't.

I see no more democracy in our system than socialist countries.
What you're forgetting about the idea of capitalism, is that, money is the only form of democracy.
So pretty much, privatising everything, allowing big corporations to (unfairly) compete with small businesses.

Example:

1. You own a family business, and a big supermarket came along and built their store next to you, they cut their prices way below the amount you can sell.
Would you consider that fair?

2. You are poor, you cannot afford medical care. You catch a disease. The hospital demands that you pay them to be healthier.
Would you consider that fair?


Under the rule of Vladimer Lenin;
Everyone's lifespan increased a lot. 
There were a lot less people with diseases.
Unemployment was very low, especially compared to America.
It was a crime for corporations to take advantage of poor people (i.e. purposely making them paid minimum wage)
Everyone's standard of living was increased.

This was even after WWI, where a lot of countries went into debt as well.

I think that communism has done a lot more than what capitalism has ever done. The key to capitalism is taking advantage of something and then making a profit from it.


With the current system that we are in, is that, you vote for the leader of the country. That's it. I have never got a chance to vote for anything else, just the candidate.
This then gives you the illusion of democracy. You think that you voted for a leader therefore it makes the country democratic.

Communism cares about the people. While, in a Capitalist society the rich get richer the poor gets poorer.  Communism  is better in every aspect.
kdone

[Pielolz]

LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOL


Communist countries have the poorest population IN THE WORLD. The government suppresses their rights, especially to freedom of speech. And the people have no say whatsoever about what the government does. You are incredibly stupid.

[Journeyman H. [UK]]

LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOL


Communist countries have the poorest population IN THE WORLD. The government suppresses their rights, especially to freedom of speech. And the people have no say whatsoever about what the government does. You are incredibly stupid.

Under Lenin's rule, Russia had a far better economy than America did. It had mass production and allowed a lot of jobs for the Russian people. Lenin was the only closest thing to communism, however it was still socialist.
Also please note that country being poor is irrelevant compared to purchasing power.

Stalin and Mao took the lands from people, they too were socialists, and they abused their power, especially Stalin. Putin also suppresses the people too.
So in all honesty, they are not really socialists in the first place. The only thing that was socialist was that the people were meant to get free health care, more purchasing power from labour workers, and more jobs, but obviously people call anything communist these days.

[Pielolz]

wut? Russian's GNP rose drastically after communism was dismantled, not to mention how much better off the Russian people were. Look a China, their communist, would you like to live in China? Fat chance.

[Journeyman H. [UK]]

wut? Russian's GNP rose drastically after communism was dismantled, not to mention how much better off the Russian people were. Look a China, their communist, would you like to live in China? Fat chance.

1) It was not communism. It was socialism.
2) When Vladimir Lenin got into power, the Russians achieved a higher lifespan than America, this means that the standards of living was higher, and they have free access to medical care.
3) China's socialism used Maoism. Different from Stalinism and Leninism.

I can tell that you don't understand a lot about communism. Since you're blindly using that word on countries like China and Russia, your term should be Socialism.
The country may seem to be poor, but in fact, it's spending the money that would benefit people.
America may seem rich, but they're making money from the people and spending it on resources from the outside. However not allowing the people to benefit from it.


Socialism in Russia definitely worked before WWII. However the only flaw was that when you have people in power, who abuse it, they can easily take advantage of it.

Under Lenin's power, he was dismantling the Russian Empire. As you should know already, an empire uses the wealth of conquered lands to make the homeland richer. Obviously, Lenin was against any forms of exploitation of workers / countryman. Hence why Russia got poor, and it struggled even further because they made a Union with countries that are in poverty, so distributing the wealth amongst the union would prove itself to be difficult. However, even though Russia was seen as a poor country, it maintained higher standards of living than America would have potentially achieved.

[Yimmy The Cat]

Just finished reading "Animal Farm"

So, if you have read the book, you would see that Communism works very well
IF YOU HAVE GOOD LEADERS, unlike today.

Also, in Communism only people who are a good citizen are equal.

[tics]

Renegade, Jimmy, and Degytarev, I am disappointed......I have to reiterate. I don't like repeating myself.

I'll make it really obvious this time.

COMMUNISM IS STATELESS AND HAS NO GOVERNMENT. IN THE PAST THERE HAVE NOT BEEN ANY COMMUNIST NATIONS AS THE TERM 'COMMUNIST NATION' IS AN OXYMORON. NORTH KOREA, CHINA, AND THE SOVIET UNION WERE/ARE SOCIALIST!

Not to mention that in those nations there was hardly any focus on the economy at all. Social issues were more on the forefront, and avoiding nuclear war with the United States. Socialism only works with democracy. Otherwise, it is far too exploitable. That is why you had issues in the Soviet Union. However, the Soviet Union had a far better quality of living than the Russian Empire. Therefore, socialism did indeed improve Russia tenfold.

[cookiesofamerica]

LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOL


Communist countries have the poorest population IN THE WORLD. The government suppresses their rights, especially to freedom of speech. And the people have no say whatsoever about what the government does. You are incredibly stupid.

Under Lenin's rule, Russia had a far better economy than America did. It had mass production and allowed a lot of jobs for the Russian people. Lenin was the only closest thing to communism, however it was still socialist.
Also please note that country being poor is irrelevant compared to purchasing power.

Stalin and Mao took the lands from people, they too were socialists, and they abused their power, especially Stalin. Putin also suppresses the people too.
So in all honesty, they are not really socialists in the first place. The only thing that was socialist was that the people were meant to get free health care, more purchasing power from labour workers, and more jobs, but obviously people call anything communist these days.

In the first few years when lenin in power it was better in a way, but the people exploited the system and became lazy, lacking of products and the trade. With capitalism you have more economic freedom, you trade your labor for money, even though yes back in the day it was worse, but it was more of corporatism state than capitalist. However with capitalism with some regulations it's easier for money to flow. In soviet Russia which they were to promote communism (which was socialism of course) did not give economic freedom and society was bound to collapse. That's why china was so worried that if they had not give economic freedom the socialist government of China would collapse not so far as the soviet union did. Also journeymen most governments of the west are democratic-republic, where law protects the people while the congress and the federal government does certain things and blah blah... so democracy somewhat exists.

[Journeyman H. [UK]]

LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOL


Communist countries have the poorest population IN THE WORLD. The government suppresses their rights, especially to freedom of speech. And the people have no say whatsoever about what the government does. You are incredibly stupid.

Under Lenin's rule, Russia had a far better economy than America did. It had mass production and allowed a lot of jobs for the Russian people. Lenin was the only closest thing to communism, however it was still socialist.
Also please note that country being poor is irrelevant compared to purchasing power.

Stalin and Mao took the lands from people, they too were socialists, and they abused their power, especially Stalin. Putin also suppresses the people too.
So in all honesty, they are not really socialists in the first place. The only thing that was socialist was that the people were meant to get free health care, more purchasing power from labour workers, and more jobs, but obviously people call anything communist these days.

In the first few years when lenin in power it was better in a way, but the people exploited the system and became lazy, lacking of products and the trade. With capitalism you have more economic freedom, you trade your labor for money, even though yes back in the day it was worse, but it was more of corporatism state than capitalist. However with capitalism with some regulations it's easier for money to flow. In soviet Russia which they were to promote communism (which was socialism of course) did not give economic freedom and society was bound to collapse. That's why china was so worried that if they had not give economic freedom the socialist government of China would collapse not so far as the soviet union did. Also journeymen most governments of the west are democratic-republic, where law protects the people while the congress and the federal government does certain things and blah blah... so democracy somewhat exists.

Would you like to prove that?
The exploit of the system, yes. Only the future leaders exploited that (i.e. Stalin), no one else.

Neither China or Russia collapsed, they're still socialists today, they did not attempt to promote communism, for if that they did, the people would take the power away from the leaders.

I will also tell you, that you don't get any more economic freedom with capitalism, well, you do if you have a lot of money, which 75% of the population in America does not. Sure, you're given the illusion that you have freedom but in reality, you don't.

Also, in a capitalist society, you'll follow the free market system, which means you can make products outside the U.S that are in poverty (i.e. Africa, Taiwan) and pay workers that work at an equivalent of 10 - 50 cents, to make products that you purchase in your country.
Hence why your economy looks good. Therefore, capitalism only works through exploitation of workers who are in poverty and need money to live. The term is called "Wage slavery".
So I guess regulations should not count on the poor people who can only survive from 0 - $1 a day?
If you really think there are regulations in a free market system that actually benefits the people, then you're wrong. Oh wait, yeah, minimum wage, unfortunately that does not get regulated outside their own country as well.

Socialism / Communism was designed to allow people to have power, rather than rich people being allowed to have power. However, the only problem with this system is that it can easily be exploited through abusive leaders. However Vladimir Lenin has definitely proven that Socialism works far better than capitalism does.


You're wrong as well when it came to "Laziness", Russia.
Russia only mass produced when it is required, otherwise it was a wasteful to create massive amounts of goods that are not going to be used. So they controlled the amount of goods required to be made.

The U.S, in the great depression had plenty of resources, food, oil, goods, that can be given to everyone, they mass produced all day, everyday but since no one had jobs due to;
1) No free higher education system, even though military spending is ridiculously high.
2) Growing technological unemployment, meaning that technology is doing jobs that we can do, but at a much more efficient rate.
3) Due to the crash (oh, funny, money problem, it's funny how you can "Run out of money")

It meant they had no money to buy those goods, which stops money from circulating. Yeah, capitalism sure did work.


Soviet Russia also didn't trade a lot due to 2 things:
1) They were practising self-sufficiency, therefore they want to create alternative materials that were effective, it saves money rather than travelling the other side of the world just to get simple materials, which technically means that they are advancing in terms of science and technology.
2) They had plenty of resources to produce what they need.

Just because there was low foreign trade does not mean "lolpoorcountrythissystemfails"

I still don't get the laziness part of Russia.

Also, just because you can vote =/= democracy.
Just means that you voted for a leader that can do whatever he/she wants to do during his time being a president/prime minister/leader.

[Kaiser Wilhelm I ?DetroitRP]

I don't agree with socialism to be honest, but I will post a full audio long response because it is hard to type this stuff. Maybe tommorrow.

[raged]

Under Lenin's rule, Russia had a far better economy than America did. It had mass production and allowed a lot of jobs for the Russian people. Lenin was the only closest thing to communism, however it was still socialist.

bro, russia lost in the cold war because their economy couldn't keep up with the USA and keep on producing military equipment, as well as taking care of the economic needs of their country.

Neither China or Russia collapsed, they're still socialists today, they did not attempt to promote communism, for if that they did, the people would take the power away from the leaders.

Russia is democratic today actually. You call it socialism but there's still aspects of capitalism in every democratic society eg the fact pay-grades all vary while some people can make vast fortunes and others do not; so calling it socialism isn't correct.

Socialism / Communism was designed to allow people to have power, rather than rich people being allowed to have power. However, the only problem with this system is that it can easily be exploited through abusive leaders.

It proved that everyone can have the same standard of living except for the government who becomes corrupt. That doesn't necessarily mean that everyone had good quality things.

One of the debates in the Cold War between USA and Soviet Russia was the fact that the USA would brag about their lavish kitchens and highly advanced washers in comparison to Russia, who used the argument that at least every single person in their state at least owned a washer.

I'm not going to read through an extra four pages of this nonsense because hardly any of you seem to fully understand what you're talking about. Every government spectrum is flawed, you can argue it one way or another, that doesn't mean communism/socialism is evil nor does it mean it's the ideal structure for every government in today's society.

[emma]

Communism isn't evil per se; however, the ideas that spring from it bring pain beyond belief, such as famines and this thread.

[Journeyman H. [UK]]

Under Lenin's rule, Russia had a far better economy than America did. It had mass production and allowed a lot of jobs for the Russian people. Lenin was the only closest thing to communism, however it was still socialist.

bro, russia lost in the cold war because their economy couldn't keep up with the USA and keep on producing military equipment, as well as taking care of the economic needs of their country.

Neither China or Russia collapsed, they're still socialists today, they did not attempt to promote communism, for if that they did, the people would take the power away from the leaders.

Russia is democratic today actually. You call it socialism but there's still aspects of capitalism in every democratic society eg the fact pay-grades all vary while some people can make vast fortunes and others do not; so calling it socialism isn't correct.

Socialism / Communism was designed to allow people to have power, rather than rich people being allowed to have power. However, the only problem with this system is that it can easily be exploited through abusive leaders.

It proved that everyone can have the same standard of living except for the government who becomes corrupt. That doesn't necessarily mean that everyone had good quality things.

One of the debates in the Cold War between USA and Soviet Russia was the fact that the USA would brag about their lavish kitchens and highly advanced washers in comparison to Russia, who used the argument that at least every single person in their state at least owned a washer.

I'm not going to read through an extra four pages of this nonsense because hardly any of you seem to fully understand what you're talking about. Every government spectrum is flawed, you can argue it one way or another, that doesn't mean communism/socialism is evil nor does it mean it's the ideal structure for every government in today's society.

I believe you misread what I said.
I said under Lenin's rule. Therefore 1917-1924.
Also, you've failed to understand that Russia was aiming to focus on self-sustaining, by using alternative methods, that's why they looked like they had an economic downfall. However socialism did not want to profit from everything.
Russia did not really lose the cold war, in fact, America lost just as much resources and land from participating in the cold war.


You took the whole term of "Socialism" the completely wrong way, socialism + communism is designed to give power to the people.
Socialism =/= no democracy.
The only problem with countries that claimed they were socialists were not, hence why it had "-ism" at the end of each leaders, because it was strictly not socialist or communist.
Stalinism
Maoism
Leninism (Closest to being communist, rather than socialist)
Marxism (Did not lead a country)

Seeing as you believed Russia was poor, it was quite amusing that Russia managed to achieve higher standards of living than America did, especially before WWII. Especially as Russia has public medical care!
The effects of World War II was a dark age for Russia, as their country was continuously bombed, and the surrounding areas were in poverty (Both Nazi invasions and Stalin's corrupt management of the country).

[Martinerrr]

Under Lenin's rule, Russia had a far better economy than America did. It had mass production and allowed a lot of jobs for the Russian people. Lenin was the only closest thing to communism, however it was still socialist.
Also please note that country being poor is irrelevant compared to purchasing power.

Why in your opinion did the Cold War end?

Edit: Oops, sorry. Couldn't be arsed to read the full posts, nevermind.
I'm staying out of this. I guess.