Okay, we get Communism debates every few months or so but I think it's about time for another one. Also this is great practice for my exams next week, I'll water it down a touch.

Karl Marx (1818-1883) was a humanist and invented the Marxist theory. He was an early Atheist and was even exiled from Berlin in 1843 for being so.

He gave his own "Materialistic theory of history". History for him was not the history that we know, but a history of class struggles. He spoke of 'Dialectical materialism' - his goal of a classless society.

This is Marx's history of the world:

Feudalism → Capitalism

Or, split up into smaller chunks:

Feudalism (industrial revolution etc.) → Lords and Servants → Owners and Workers

Marx said that Capitalists own money. The workers depend on Capitalists... not only depend on them but workers are owned, designed and controlled by Capitalists. For Marx, labour is the "essence of human life". Capitalists value material goods, not people. Mankind's biggest danger is economics.

In fact, Marx was sure that change would happen or will happen, soon. He said that the natural flow, just like Feudalism naturally flowed into Capitalism, Capitalism will naturally flow into Socialism.

Here's Marx's predictions, after Capitalism:

Feudalism → Capitalism → Socialism

Or, again, split into smaller chunks:

Feudalism → Lords and Servants → Owners and Workers → Conflict → Revolution → Communism

He said that there will be no more history during Communism. The world will continue as Communist forever more.

What is Communism, exactly?

• Equal Power
  
• No wages
  
• Classless society
  
• No property ownership
  
• People: for the good of all
  

People's jobs won't change much during Communism, either. "From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs." Bakers would still be bakers. Hairdressers will still be hairdressers.

Criticisms of the Marxist theory
This all sounds very nice and cosy, but there are criticisms of course. There have been dozens of Communist societies around the world but many, if not all, have fallen back to Capitalism. Also, there would be no wellfare. We live in a wellfare state, where would it go? Many people also would like to own their own property. Marxism was sure that the world would become Communist, but still it hasn't and, arguably, we're doing fine without it.

Okay, I've given you the information, let's debate. This is a very open debate about Marxism and Communism so you may discuss anything to do with it. Could Communism work if the world was Communist? Why did Communism not work in the Soviet Union or China (China is debatable)? What's wrong with Capitalism anyway? Will we yet turn to Communism?

Debate about anything regarding Communism.

Communism works well in theory, until someone thinks they get more because they do harder work.

Yes, there's also the issue of everyone getting paid the same for completely different jobs.

A labourer arguably works a lot harder than a hairdresser but they get exactly the same.

Is this fair?

Well that's what I ment. If people were to work sightly harder for the sam ething and not complain, it would arguably be a perfect society.

To answer your question, no, it's probably not fair, however, putting in the extra effort for the good of your fellow man is part of the communist spirit. Also laborers would probably retire 5-15 years early than a hair dresser.

I don't think it is fair, no. On a similar vein is motivation. Because a farmer gets paid the same as a chef, everyone will want to be a chef and there will be a huge shortage of farmers (this isn't the best example but pick you're own if it fits).



Even worse, within the individual jobs there is no incentive to work hard. If you have a capitalist factory worker paid by the number of products he makes per day and a communist worker who will be paid a set wage whether he works hard or sleeps, which do you think will be more productive?



Then there's ingenuity. Imagine, for example, that a farmer works out a machine that can harvest, thresh, plough, sow, and fertilise a field all in one go (again, I know bloody well that this is impossible, but work with me here). This is much easier and more efficient than the old system - it means he only has to drive around each field once each year. If this farmer is in a capitalist system he will think "hey, this is brilliant" and make one for himself and then a load more on top of that to sell to the other farmers. He might sell hundreds of these and retire early and go to live in a mansion somewhere. Those hundreds that he sold will have increased the efficiency of the entire farming sector in the capitalist country giving it a competitive advantage over countries without the machinery.

Now imagine the same farmer in a communist system. He'll make himself one, but he can't be bothered to make a load more and distribute them around - what would be the point? The other farmers will keep using the old technology until it brakes at which point they get given new old technology. There is no room for advancement in a communist system.

Ah, I was hoping someone would get onto progression in a Capitalist society.

Well said.

这是新加的空白文章12，可以在ubb可视化编辑器中，添加和修改文章内容。

Go and watch Animal Farm

Quote from Garuda

Go and watch Animal Farm

Animal farm is not a critique of communism, but rather totalitarianism, whatever form it takes. George Orwell regarded himself as a democratic socialist. "Every line of serious work that I have written since 1936 has been written, directly or indirectly, against totalitarianism and for democratic Socialism."

When it comes to communism, I think it gives too much credit to humans. Bakunin said that "“Freedom, morality, and the human dignity of the individual consists precisely in this; that he does good not because he is forced to do so, but because he freely conceives it, wants it, and loves it.” Sadly, this doesn't apply to most of us.