back to your original point. a communist country could never succeed unless the philosophy was adapted universally. and the idea of its ideology being spread through war completely contradicts its own existence. Also a balanced communist country could never succeed with an existing capatalist nation.

In order for revolution to occur in a country they proletariat must of course support Communism and for that revolutionary country to achieve socialism global revolution must happen. We aim to achieve a society in which all the means of production is controlled by the community. In order for that to happen we must have an economy that is more industrialised than any capitalist economy could be. No one country could possibily achieve that on it's own. Thus global revolution is needed.

Most of those posting on this topic seem to have socialism and communism confused. Blanket medical coverage and all manner of social welfare programs are used in varying forms in a wide range of industrialized countries. However, that doesn't make heavily socialized countries like Japan, Sweden and Denmark communist. The economic system is still very capitalistic compared to a communist system.

Communism is socialism that employs worker communes and collectives under the mantle of a planned society. The pitfalls are obvious and well documented. While this type of system appeals to those with few skills, the lazy and the stupid, it is pure torture for those that are motivated, highly skilled and industrious. One-size-fits-all societies ignore basic human nature and individuality such as instinctual feelings like ownership. They also remove immediate goals that result in productivity and replace them with abstractions that many do not find compelling.

Inevitably, the planners and governing elite find way to enhance there lives, and once again, classes come into existence. With classes comes the inevitable resentment. Wost of all, since communism only appeals to the poor and disenfranchised, the balance of the society has to be forced into the system, and that results in sufficient bitterness to eventually undermine the whole exercise.

While communism might have represented novel thought in Marx and Engel's time, it is laughable in the context of what has been learned since. Most of the benefits can be had with democratic socialism, while the pitfalls can be avoided entirely.

Trying to explain away the singular failure of communism over the last century by indicating that the various leaders made mistakes or didn't adopt a pure enough system simply ignores the reality that over the same period other economic systems have prospered by contrast, and appear much more immune to errors of leadership.

Let me be blunt. Any system which required me to drag along the likes of useless noloads and dreamers that inevitably champion communism would result in me murdering them in their sleep, and using their remains for fertilizer and hog feed, which is a higher use than they are currently enjoy. If the shoe fits, you know who you are. I wouldn't even be interested in being one of the planning elite for such a system, because free markets with sufficient regulation are much more efficient, flexible to changing demands and perform the same functions automatically.

Most of the failures of pure capitalism can be easily tuned through common sense regulation and social programs. The US could currently use more tuning, but that's not sufficient reason to junk the system. In addition, people are free to organize communes and collectives should they care to.

oc

I agree, Mr calm

though its ashame we cant have that amount of equality - its a great ideal...
but inevitably impossible for the way that we are... Sort of like being told EVERYONE will have a glass of milk in the morning and a breakfast bar.... wohoo, sure hunger might decrease a little but (*)(*)(*)(*) would life in the mornings be boring after years of the same food!!!! -and I feel sorry for those who hate milk

__________________
Pour vous, je vis... mon papillon. Le vrai roi.

I didn't get that one Sherlock. If you believe communism is about making everyone eat the same food, the same drinks, having the same life, you are wrong.

... *laughs*...sorry... you know I would guess that I dont know what I say too.... It was just an anology for the equality, such as the same pay... even with different levels of responsibility... in part it was also in agree-ence with the fool of a feather where I say that people will always be looked after and will look after other people... and so in our minds there is always status... structure... we are naturally capitalist -though im not sure thats a good thing- I apologise for my lack of explanation ...*gives a humble curtsy*

would you not seek a different kind of juice.. when your forced to drink only milk every morning? It is something to believe in.. but from the communism Ive read of... it gives rise to capitalist rebellion... anyway... perhaps? what do you think...?

__________________
Pour vous, je vis... mon papillon. Le vrai roi.

Why do you say such a thing? In simple tribes there are primitive communism.

I think you haven't read communist works before.
There will be no need for a capitalist rebellion, because no people will suffer in a communist society. Those who will make a capitalist rebellion, would be those who are the rich and powerful. In communism you have none that is more rich or powerful then others.

... ok, as i know nothing... im all eyes... teach me... what exactly is communism. isn't there two types or something... ... all have equal rights... umm.. am i right so far?

__________________
Pour vous, je vis... mon papillon. Le vrai roi.

There are several different trends of communists. The only real communist movement nowadays is the 'Marxian' one, started by Marx and Engels. Out of the 'Marxians' there are mainly Marxist-Leninists and Maoists. Marxists-Leninists include Marx, Engels, Lenin, Trotsky, Guevara and Castro (althrough the last two were influenced by Maoism a little). Marxist-Leninism was the main trend in early Soviet Russia and currently in Cuba.

China and Vietnam were the main examples of Maoism and currently there is an Indian and Nepalese Maoist rebellion.

There are differences in these trends, obviously, but we all want one end goal: a society that has no classes, no state, no army and no money. Factories etc are run by the people who work in them and the community distributes goods according to need. Because only what is needed is produced, people can spend their time doing whatever the hell they want to. We call such a society communism (lower case 'c').

To get to there society needs to pass through a transition period called socialism or Communism with a capital 'C'. In this period, there is a state and there are classes and money etc etc. But the working class are the dominant class, and they prepare society for communism.

This is really simplistic and brief. There have been hundreds of Communists who dedicated their entire lives to contributing to the cause. Below are a couple of works to get you started:

Principles of Communism (Engels, 1847)
Communist Manifesto (Marx, 184. (Only bother with chapters 2 & 3).

Find them at marxists.org

Works how, to have them muzzled, jailed, and murdered? Russia and China are great examples of how communism stifles innovation. Other than defense products the Russians produced nothing of quality. Cars, machinery, planes, engines, health care, you name it...nothing but the poorest of quality. Education was the only area of strength, yet they failed in the long run at that too because of the environment that results from communism...a lack of competition. China's the same, they only began to become mroe productive as they moved towards capitalism. Communism is a failed experiment.