Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

To be annoyed when people think communism is bad?

172 replies

waitingimpatiently · 27/10/2012 10:14

Not 'communism' in places like Cuba and Korea which has some sort of dictator, which a lot of people appear to think is real communism.

Why does there seem to be this ignorance?! Do people not research the things they believe in?! Karl Marx would be turning in his grave if he saw the state of some of these 'communist' countries. Surely, the images of heaven (that I see in jehovahs witness leaflets, where everyone is happy and eating breakfast with lions etc) is a communist idea! Everyone is equal, no money, no state, no class system.

I get that the sort of communism we see can be awful, but real true communism isn't bad at all!

OP posts:
SomersetONeil · 27/10/2012 11:45

...'off', even...! [hhmm]

aufaniae · 27/10/2012 11:46

Here's my rant for the day Grin

Currently we operate within a belief system, money.

It is a belief system as it's a shared understanding of how the world works, in the same way religions used to be.

Of course many people are still religious, but capitalism has replaced religion in many ways. It used to be that everyone in the West believed in the Christian god. It was unquestionable to not believe. People fought about their methods of worshipping the same god, but not about whether he was real. Everyone used to operate by the same moral code - whether they stuck by it or not, they knew the bible was a clear yardstick for morality, and it applied to everyone.

Now religion has become a personal preference, we have lost that particular shared moral code. In its place we have money and capitalism. We are so used to it, it is so much a part of our lives, that people are not in the habit of questioning it, in the same way the existence god was unquestionable, but still it governs how we live and relate to each other. It applies to all of us.

The actual pieces of paper - or computer code which makes the figures in our bank balance - have no actual real worth in reality. The banks stopped associating each piece of paper with an actual bit of gold a long long time ago. The whole system only works because we chose to believe in it. If we stopped believing in it, the system would collapse.

Along with the system of money come some powerful beliefs, such as that a person's labour is something which can be bought and sold. That "greed is good" and self-worth and the amount of money you have are linked, that mass accumulation of wealth by a small number of individuals is inevitable.

At the moment, people seem keen to stick to the money belief system we know and understand.

However empires come and go. The money belief system we have will eventually collapse.

In a system built on greed, not surprisingly, the rich are getting richer and more powerful and the poor are getting poorer The collapse of money may come about because those in power go too far, and the system becomes unbearable for enough people that we no longer want to assign value to money. (It is already pretty unbearable for millions, but not enough to tip the balance it would seem).

Or it may be that environmental disaster changes the primary concern for humanity to one of survival: the inability of a belief system based on short term greed to deal with a world-wide problem which threatens our very survival becomes so obvious that no one want to believe in money any more. Those who manage to survive the mass shifting of populations, extreme weather conditions, famine, floods (sound biblical? It could well be of biblical proportions!) may well not want to use the money-based system largely responsible for the problem, when picking themselves up after such devastation.

Or perhaps the system itself could collapse for economic reasons. It could be the root of its own demise. If the money system collapsed with little notice, it would cause great suffering as all our supply routes are based on money. How long would we survive here if imports largely stopped? It would be dire. I can't see people wanting to use money after that!

However it happens, the collapse of money ain't gonna be pretty. And Communism could start looking much more attractive then.

That's what I think anyway.

If you've managed to read all my ramblings, well done! Grin

Off to do something world-saving now like .. umm .. playing trains with DS. Grin

chandellina · 27/10/2012 11:48

It is a human and animal instinct to hoard resources or take resources from others, hence communism is impractical.

Bonsoir · 27/10/2012 11:50

Where and when has communism been successful on this planet?

ItsAllGoingToBeFine · 27/10/2012 11:52

aufaniae Fantastic post - and I read it all...

aufaniae · 27/10/2012 12:02

Aw thanks ItsAllGoingToBeFine, here's a Brew for getting through it! - (or Wine even if you feel so inclined, it is officially afternoon after all).

aufaniae · 27/10/2012 12:05

Bonsoir but has capitalism worked?

We live in a system of massive inequality (which is deepening) where enormous wealth and power is being accumulated by a small elite.

The very forces of money may make a comfortable living for many of us, but it is at the direct expense of immense suffering of people in other parts of the world.

Is that a system which "works"?

ShellyBoobs · 27/10/2012 12:07

If communism was pervasive, we wouldn't be able to discuss its merits, or otherwise, on the internet because the internet wouldn't exist.

Neither would modern drugs exist nor plentiful food. Nor pretty much anything else we take for granted.

CogitoEerilySpooky · 27/10/2012 12:09

"the collapse of money"

Money is merely a symbol representing the thing we happen to value most at the time. It's not a belief system. Money will not therefore collapse, it will simply be used to trade different things and the value of those things will reflect the scarcity. 2000+ years ago Roman soldiers were paid in salt (hence salary) and subsequently coins to the value of the salt. A few hundred years ago people kept tea-leaves in a locked caddy because it was so valuable - today tea is dirt cheap. Other things may become valuable in future after your predicted environmental disaster but those things will still be traded.

HeinousHecate · 27/10/2012 12:09

Why wouldn't it?

Why would we not be able to discuss things under true communism. Not the false types that exist and have existed and which are actually totalitarian regimes, but true communism, the ideal of all people being equal and working together.

What about that prohibits discussion, debate and medicine and food?

BeingBooyhoo · 27/10/2012 12:10

" but isn't heaven a communist place?"

you want people to change their views on communism based on the idea that it works in a fictional place? Confused

aufaniae · 27/10/2012 12:10

Climate change is serious threat. Evidence is mounting, and very few serious scientists doubt it now. They discuss instead how quickly and how big the effects will be.

It's possible it could threaten our very survival as a species.

Capitalism is responsible in large part for this state of affairs, and is offering no credible solutions to this most serious of problems.

Is that a system which works?

ShellyBoobs · 27/10/2012 12:12

It's nothing to do with prohibition.

I'm talking about 'the collective brain' which wouldn't exist under communism.

What incentive would there be for the invention and development of something like the WWW?

aufaniae · 27/10/2012 12:17

CogitoEerilySpooky yes, people have traded for a long time. Trading in salt is different to using modern-day money as salt has an actual value.

Money became a belief system when the banks stopped relating the pieces of paper to actual gold in reserves. Coins used to be actually made of metal, to the value they were worth.

Money is no longer something which relates to something of worth in the real world. Its worth is an abstraction. We choose to assign value to it.

Trading things is not the same as a capitalist system based on money with no real value. We could operate in a system of trading which did not use money in the way we do today.

ShellyBoobs · 27/10/2012 12:21

We could operate in a system of trading which did not use money in the way we do today.

So what you're proposing is exchange of goods, division of labour and specialisation?

Hey presto, the backbone and core of a free market economy.

It's as far removed from communism as you can possibly get...

HeinousHecate · 27/10/2012 12:23

Ah, I see. Good point. But would we be driven to invent and develop such things regardless, because that's who we are as a species. Do we invent things at least in part for the challenge of inventing? If so, that would still exist. Or do we invent things purely for personal gain? If so, then they wouldn't - if we were us, with our attitudes, just living under communism.

Would we want to make medicines? I think so. Would we want to ensure we as a group had plentiful food? I think so. Would we want technology? I think so. Because we wouldn't be us, just us as communists. We'd be totally different. With different desires, motivations and thought processes.

As I said upthread, I don't think we will ever have actual communism because it requires a level of selfless cooperation that I truly believe humans are incapable of sustaining.

But if we were, we'd see things so totally differently from the way we see them today that we can't look at it with our eyes and say we wouldn't do X, iyswim.

UltraBOF · 27/10/2012 12:25

I enjoyed that post, aufaniae.

ShellyBoobs · 27/10/2012 12:31

But would we be driven to invent and develop such things regardless, because that's who we are as a species. Do we invent things at least in part for the challenge of inventing?

Yes, I agree. But it's the incessant development of existing 'things' which improves and evolves them through each iteration.

Without a free market economy, you don't have the incentive to improve existing things. So, you might have an internet of sorts, if there was an initial need for it. It would very quickly have ground to a halt developmentally, though, as it's the opportunity to create value from it which has driven decades of the tweaks and changes which have given us what we have now.

aufaniae · 27/10/2012 12:32

ShellyBoobs you misunderstand me. I wasn't actually proposing system of trading not based on money.

I was simply trying to explain the idea of money as a belief system.

There are many different systems we could live in. We are so used to the status quo we often fall in to the trap if thinking it's inevitable or the only way things could possible be. It's not at all. Things are the way they are because of a complex set of chance historical events which brought us to where we are today. Things could have been very different. We often think it's the natural way of the world, but that's not true at all. This is just what we use now at this point in history, and it won't be around forever.

MousyMouse · 27/10/2012 12:32

well, I have nothing against communism per se but hisotry has repeatedly shown that it doesn't work.
humans are just too diverse characters for that, there will always be some who will take advantage.

aufaniae · 27/10/2012 12:34

Shellyboobs actually the internet has been largely developed by people who believe in the free sharing of ideas, not in selling them.

"Without a free market economy, you don't have the incentive to improve existing things."

^^ This. This is the belief system in action. humans have always had a desire to improve existing things. Money came much later.

HeinousHecate · 27/10/2012 12:34

But you're still working under the assumption that what drives us as we are now is what would drive us if we were actually a communist species.

lovebunny · 27/10/2012 12:34

i have read the 'communist manifesto'. i vaguely recall that women were not to be the 'property' of one husband, but should be available to all.
that's an improvement, then.

ShellyBoobs · 27/10/2012 12:48

Shellyboobs actually the internet has been largely developed by people who believe in the free sharing of ideas, not in selling them

Actually it hasn't. It may have initially come about through the desire to share but it's disingenous to claim it was 'largely' developed by people who believe in free sharing. Hence my comment that it may exist, but not as we know it.

amicissimma · 27/10/2012 12:52

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Swipe left for the next trending thread