Communism: Good or Bad?

[kalexander]

Originally Posted by Nick

Kalexander how can being selfless be immoral? Let's say for instance my neighbor needs help building a fence and I decide to offer to help him. By your reasoning it would be immoral of me to offer my neighbor some help. So I guess to be moral by your standards I should just wreck the fence as soon as he's done simply because I don't like the way it looks, and after all according to you being selfish is moral so I wouldn't be doing anything wrong.

What is selfless? It means being not concerned with your own needs or welfare, correct?
So when you say you should be selfless, you are saying that this value, or guide to your actions, is better than to be "concerned with your own needs or welfare". You are saying as a general rule, you should be more concerned with others' needs than with your own.
Now, consider your example. Your neighbor is building a fence. He needs help, so to you, on your moral code, it is the best thing you can do to stop whatever you are doing to accomplish aims that are important to you, in order to help him.
By the moral code I suggest, the moral thing to do is to be self-reliant, which also includes being goal directed. By this moral code, if you are working on your homework for college, or enjoying time with your wife or kids, or working on some project that is interesting and fun to you, you should first weigh your benefits and losses if you go and help your neighbor, before going there to do the job.
If, for instance, you are doing nothing important to you with your time, you might go help your neighbor. What does it cost you?
There are also lots of unanswered questions in your example. For instance, what happens if your neighbor building the fence is a hot-looking, single, young woman? Or, what if your neighbor is a crook, or some kind of bad person? Suppose they're your friend, and you enjoy your friendship with them?
Clearly, there are different moral actions you could take, depending upon circumstances.
And the latter part of your comment, that by my moral code you should wreck his fence if you don't like its looks--that would be violating his property rights--something you won't have in your communist/socialist state.
And I don't advocate being "selfish". I advocate being self-reliant and doing what's in your own interest. "Selfish" is being callous in regards to others, which is just plain mean, and does not fall within my moral code.
There are many people who promote the moral code of selflessness, so they can go around collecting the unearned benefits of the suckers that buy into that immoral code.

[Nick]

I guess where we differ than is in our definitions of the word "moral."I don't think it's immoral to be selfless and you do. However I do see your point that no one can be completely selfless all the time because than you'd never get any of your own projects done. Although I still don't think it's immoral to perform an occasional selfless act out of generosity.

[Liam]

Originally Posted by kalexander

What? Should you get your opinions from Oprah or Homer Simpson? What a frivolous perspective.
Each of us are given a certain amount of time alive. Any influence on us is worth considering and assessing.

No, I like to think that most people are intelligent enough to research a particular topic themselves and formulate their own opinion.

Worked for me.

[Airman]

people write to much... to tell you the truth communism is great in theory, but it will never work as long as greed is around, and greed will never cease to exist... which totally sucks because I love communism... I mean um... GO DEMOCRACY... (pfft)

[hasselbrad]

Originally Posted by Airman

people write to much... to tell you the truth communism is great in theory, but it will never work as long as greed is around, and greed will never cease to exist... which totally sucks because I love communism... I mean um... GO DEMOCRACY... (pfft)

That's pretty much been the point of everyones' posts. It seems great, in theory. Not very practical in real life, though.

[kalexander]

Originally Posted by hasselbrad

That's pretty much been the point of everyones' posts. It seems great, in theory. Not very practical in real life, though.

No. Lousy in theory, _and_ rotten in application.
You all can seek to live in a place where everyone kisses each other's ...
No thanks: I'd rather live in a place where everyone stands on their own two feet, and are damn good at what they do.
I lived once in Central America, where there was a community of Mennonites. One day I offered a Mennonite farmer walking down the road a ride into town. He asked me how much for the ride, and I told him not to worry about it. He politely asked me to stop the car and I let him out.
Then I said, OK, $0.50, at which point he accepted the offer and paid me the money. His value system said that free lunch was unacceptable.

This is a much different value system than altruism, and I think much better. It's not "greed", but self-reliance/competence.

[hasselbrad]

You're right. Theory sucks too. I like that story about the Mennonite farmer.

[MarkOB]

The economic philosophy of communism doesn't work, as has been said. The social philosophy believes in equality - an equal share of the misery for all.

It really can be put as simply as that.

You get these wiseguys now who say 'Oh, well, what happened in Russia, that's not REAL communism.' Because communism is concurrent with dictatorship so often, the 'real' communists like to distance themselves from the rest.

Democracy has never been rebranded. It has only ever modernised.

Communism has been rebranded more times than Madonna.

[johnnyboy]

The ideals of Communism are perfect in a perfect world, but too bad, it isnt. Communism would be the perfect government if humans (all of us) weren't so damn greedy

[kalexander]

Originally Posted by johnnyboy

The ideals of Communism are perfect in a perfect world, but too bad, it isnt. Communism would be the perfect government if humans (all of us) weren't so damn greedy

Complete bunk.

The "ideals" of communism stink. No privacy, nothing for your exclusive use, conformity to a stupid theory. "Equality" of everyone, rather than equal justice under the law is completely boring and only caters to the envious crowd.

Loving everyone equally is similarly bunk. Rather than paying people with affection for their earned traits of character, communists would adore Stalin, Doctor Death and any two-bit whore equally as much as Keira.

This is a disincentive to become a better person, and creates a world of little, weak people, rather than strong, able ones.

Communism is a scam theory used by those who want to steal the accomplishments of others, peddled to the ignorant or intellectually lazy in order to pursuade them to vote away their own property, using the envy of others as the bait.

As I said, communism is stupid, unsound theoretically and catastrophic when implemented on any kind of person, greedy or not.

[Airman]

privacy has nothing to do with communism, we aren't talking stereotypical communist remarks, we're talking about the theory of communism itself... and i repeat privacy has nothing to do with communism... and to add to my previous post, communism is so simple it's complicated cool huh?!

[Nick]

It seems that the point that keeps being reiterated is that Communism is good in theory but it's not a practical idea in the real world. So since most of us can agree on that try expanding your thoughts a little. No Communism isn't practical, but why? What is it that makes Communism so impractical? Is it really because humans are inherently greedy? How can we be so greedy considering that from the time we are small children we are taught to share? Than when we are adults suddenly we are expected to make as much money as possible so we can be good little Capitalists. So we are basically living in a hypocritical society where as children we are basically taught Communist ideals but than as adults we are expected to be greedy and make lots of money. This makes me think that maybe humans aren't inherently greedy, maybe we are only greedy because in this society that is what is expected of us.

[hasselbrad]

Originally Posted by Nick

It seems that the point that keeps being reiterated is that Communism is good in theory but it's not a practical idea in the real world. So since most of us can agree on that try expanding your thoughts a little. No Communism isn't practical, but why? What is it that makes Communism so impractical? Is it really because humans are inherently greedy? How can we be so greedy considering that from the time we are small children we are taught to share? Than when we are adults suddenly we are expected to make as much money as possible so we can be good little Capitalists. So we are basically living in a hypocritical society where as children we are basically taught Communist ideals but than as adults we are expected to be greedy and make lots of money. This makes me think that maybe humans aren't inherently greedy, maybe we are only greedy because in this society that is what is expected of us.

Sharing the swings so that everyone gets a turn during recess isn't communism. That's being polite. The sort of sharing we (as in my generation) were taught was polite. The sort of sharing that is taught in schools now is communist. When I was a kid, you got a list of school supplies and your mother bought them for you...for you. Nowadays, teachers send a list home that parents are supposed to buy, and then the teachers collect the supplies and put them into a common box for everyone. That is communism. That is the reason my daughter isn't going to public school. I realize this doesn't happen at every school, but it happens in enough of them. I'm sure the NEA would love nothing more than to help lead the fight to cram socialism down our childrens' throats. Makes it easier for the Democrats to brainwash later.
I love how someone who works hard and makes a lot of money is simply labeled greedy. Nevermind the fact that most people who do make a lot of money give very generously to charity. Is that greedy?

[Nick]

Oh yes the whole give to charity to make myself feel better trick. That's all it is when those bluebloods give to charity it's just to make them feel better so they can sleep at night. They don't really give a damn about the charity they're donating to.

[hasselbrad]

Originally Posted by Nick

Oh yes the whole give to charity to make myself feel better trick. That's all it is when those bluebloods give to charity it's just to make them feel better so they can sleep at night. They don't really give a damn about the charity they're donating to.

Whatever it takes.
You're right...maybe those evil bluebloods should put their checkbooks away. We don't need arts programs, homeless shelters or cancer research.

[Nick]

I didn't say we didn't need any of those charities, it's not the charities I have a problem with. I have a problem with aristocrats, you can't tell me most of those people aren't greedy. How do you think they became so wealthy? Yeah sure some of them give to charity but like I said it's because it makes them feel good not because they really care about those organizations. I think if you're going to give to a charity you should do it because you really believe in what that organization is doing not simply because it makes you feel good.

[Jasper]

Originally Posted by Nick

I didn't say we didn't need any of those charities, it's not the charities I have a problem with. I have a problem with aristocrats, you can't tell me most of those people aren't greedy. How do you think they became so wealthy? Yeah sure some of them give to charity but like I said it's because it makes them feel good not because they really care about those organizations. I think if you're going to give to a charity you should do it because you really believe in what that organization is doing not simply because it makes you feel good.

Um, I don't know about you dude, but when I give to charity. It makes me feel good. That's pretty much the whole point of doing it. To help others, and making you feel good in the process.

[hasselbrad]

I guess rich people should just turn to drugs to feel good. Fuck helping the poor and downtrodden.
Lord knows if I was living under an overpass, I sure wouldn't want any help from some rich bastard just so he'd feel good! :err:

[Nick]

I think you're all missing my point, I'm not saying giving to charity is a bad thing. I just don't like people who give to charity solely for the purpose of feeling good. Feeling good shouldn't be your motivation for giving to charity, truly and honestly wanting to help the less fortunate should be your motivation. I think there are a lot of people who give to charity because they've done something that they know is immoral and they think giving to charity will cancel out that immoral act somehow.

[hasselbrad]

Originally Posted by Nick

I think you're all missing my point, I'm not saying giving to charity is a bad thing. I just don't like people who give to charity solely for the purpose of feeling good. Feeling good shouldn't be your motivation for giving to charity, truly and honestly wanting to help the less fortunate should be your motivation. I think there are a lot of people who give to charity because they've done something that they know is immoral and they think giving to charity will cancel out that immoral act somehow.

The good feeling that comes from helping others is the by-product of wanting to help others. I buy Christmas presents for needy kids because I want to help them have the best Christmas they'll probably ever have. It gives me a feeling that's similar to being high.
My point is that it's impossible to separate the wanting to help from the good feeling it produces.
And, I think your last statement is false...that's why they go to church.