Section 8
Oct 28 2003, 02:20 PM
Crime
Some claim that crime would be rampent under communism. They point this out because they have been dependent on government and law their whole lives. The first thing one most do to examine this comment is offer a reason why there even is crime. Crime is made out inequality, the murderer, robber, etc. all attack out of inequality. Most of this inequality can be traced back towards capitalism and other governmental systems. The main thing causing inequality is economics. The rich man poor man is responsible for most crime. Under communism, everyone would be financially equal, henceforth that crime would be destroyed. Also materialism would become a thing of the past. Since material possessions have never played a large role in a communist society, then theft of them would be unheard of. Greed would die out along capitalism.
Production
Many claim that under communism, a worker wouldn't work as much as the others if he was getting paid less. Once again this is a product of capitalist thinking. Under communism one wouldn't try to work less as his fellow men are toiling. They would recognize that their work depends on how much they earn, but inadvertently. If there are more goods, than all the citizens will have more goods, so in a way the worker is determining his wages.
Revolution
Yes, revolution. By far the worst part of a communist society, yet sadly it is the only way to achieve equality. Would it be violent? Yes. Would people get killed? Yes. The sad factor is you can have no victory without suffering defeat.
Thanks
-Section 8
ro4444
Nov 1 2003, 12:12 AM
| QUOTE (Section 8 @ Oct 28 2003, 09:20 AM) |
Crime
Some claim that crime would be rampent under communism. They point this out because they have been dependent on government and law their whole lives. The first thing one most do to examine this comment is offer a reason why there even is crime. Crime is made out inequality, the murderer, robber, etc. all attack out of inequality. Most of this inequality can be traced back towards capitalism and other governmental systems. The main thing causing inequality is economics. The rich man poor man is responsible for most crime. Under communism, everyone would be financially equal, henceforth that crime would be destroyed. Also materialism would become a thing of the past. Since material possessions have never played a large role in a communist society, then theft of them would be unheard of. Greed would die out along capitalism.
Production
Many claim that under communism, a worker wouldn't work as much as the others if he was getting paid less. Once again this is a product of capitalist thinking. Under communism one wouldn't try to work less as his fellow men are toiling. They would recognize that their work depends on how much they earn, but inadvertently. If there are more goods, than all the citizens will have more goods, so in a way the worker is determining his wages.
Revolution
Yes, revolution. By far the worst part of a communist society, yet sadly it is the only way to achieve equality. Would it be violent? Yes. Would people get killed? Yes. The sad factor is you can have no victory without suffering defeat.
Thanks
-Section 8 |
| QUOTE |
| Crime is made out inequality, the murderer, robber, etc. all attack out of inequality. |
Some crime is attributed to this. However, when you consider crimes committed for personal reasons, theser are more common.
Enron. The guys involved in the Enron scandal weren't poor. They still committed crimes.
A man kills his wife over an arguement. Wealth has nothing to do with this scenario.
| QUOTE |
| The rich man poor man is responsible for most crime. |
Rich people commit crimes too.
| QUOTE |
| Under communism, everyone would be financially equal, henceforth that crime would be destroyed. |
There would still be personal crimes.
| QUOTE |
Also materialism would become a thing of the past. |
Every person wants as much as he can get. Even if a person gets his equal share he will want more, something he can not get legally since other people are supposed to receive the same amount he is.
| QUOTE |
| Since material possessions have never played a large role in a communist society |
Maybe in theory.
| QUOTE |
| Since material possessions have never played a large role in a communist society |
There are still objects that people cannot get due to the constraints of communism. The problem is communism allows for no rewards for harder work, for to do so would upset the theoretic balance of equality. Therefore there is no way to get ahead and advance unless you do so through taking advantage of the system. This means that the communistic society would a. quickly break down or b. total government control would be required to keep order. In the former we see anarchy; in the latter a few people control the rest of the people.
| QUOTE |
Many claim that under communism, a worker wouldn't work as much as the others if he was getting paid less. Once again this is a product of capitalist thinking. Under communism one wouldn't try to work less as his fellow men are toiling. They would recognize that their work depends on how much they earn, but inadvertently. If there are more goods, than all the citizens will have more goods, so in a way the worker is determining his wages.
|
This assumption never makes it past the theoretical level. The worker, first and foremost, would realize that on a national scale, him alone would not make a significant change. Indeed, it is hard to motivate people to work for the behalf of others, unless he is properly compensated. If the man doubled his amount of work his compensation would not be doubled, or anywhere close to that amount. Therefore, unless communism was applied to a single independent city, it would not work.
| QUOTE |
| Yes, revolution. By far the worst part of a communist society, yet sadly it is the only way to achieve equality. Would it be violent? Yes. Would people get killed? Yes. The sad factor is you can have no victory without suffering defeat. |
Communism does not create equality. The natural racisms, sexisms, and other personal biases that some people will invaribly hold will upset this balance. Also people are going to take advantage of the system however they can to become more powerful, something that happens in any system. Therefore you need a police force. But then the police force has total power over the people. So you need a government to control the police force. So now the government has complete control.
Section 8
Nov 26 2003, 12:22 AM
Sorry, I reformed my politics after my leave. I now believe that police is necessary, just not as large as we have it right now. I also believe in an elected police force. Sorry again.