4 ms·

One problem is the question of who gets to decide "ability" and "need" - since in that totalitarian world this is not voluntary & self-asserted.

by fche 11y ago

lqdc13 11y ago
Communism has nothing to do with totalitarianism though. EDIT to clarify: Here is a good link: http://www.differencebetween.net/miscellaneous/difference-between-communism-and-totalitarianism/ http://www.differencebetween.net/miscellaneous/difference-be... Basically they are so different that totalitarianism is considered far right while communism far left on the political spectrum.
- deleted 11y ago
  [deleted]
- fche 11y ago
  "has nothing to do with totalitarianism" So it just hasn't been done right yet ...? "totalitarianism is considered far right" This passive-voice definition is unauthoritative and wrong. Check a dictionary instead.
  - lqdc13 11y ago
    I think you are conflating the two because of the case of Soviet Union. A) Soviet Union was not communism. Communism never happened. Communism/communist society is an ideal. B) Soviet Union was a totalitarian state, yes. C) One of the main concepts in communism is that there is/should be no state. Totalitarianism assumes that there is a state. This is in every definition of communism and totalitarianism. Here I'm going to quote it from the first line of each from Wikipedia: "Totalitarianism is concept of a political system in which the state holds total control over the society" "Communism ... absence of social classes, money, and the state."
    - fche 11y ago
      "Communism ... absence of [...] state." So yeah, "hasn't been done right yet". Could you hypothesize who in a true-scotsman communist non-state would regulate people's output ("ability") & input ("need")? Who would enforce the laws? If "everyone and anyone" is an enforcer, then claiming there is "no state" is sophistry.
  - CodeMage 11y ago
    So it just hasn't been done right yet ...? That's right. You know how scientists had this theory that there is a particle they haven't observed yet, but should exist? They called it Higgs boson and constructed a lot of expensive equipment to try to prove that it exists. You have to make a distinction between theory and practice. You can criticize communism as a concept or you can criticize existing and past communist states, but those two are not the same thing. Dismissing communism solely because of Soviet Union, Cuba or China would be the same as dismissing democracy solely because of Richard Nixon or Condoleezza Rice.
    - fche 11y ago
      "You can criticize communism as a concept or you can criticize existing and past communist states, but those two are not the same thing." True. And yet I'm happy to criticize each.

One problem is the question of who gets to decide "ability" and "need" - since in that totalitarian world this is not voluntary & self-asserted.

by fche 11y ago

One problem is the question of who gets to decide "ability" and "need" - since in that totalitarian world this is not voluntary & self-asserted.

lqdc13 11y ago

Communism has nothing to do with totalitarianism though. EDIT to clarify: Here is a good link: http://www.differencebetween.net/miscellaneous/difference-between-communism-and-totalitarianism/ http://www.differencebetween.net/miscellaneous/difference-be... Basically they are so different that totalitarianism is considered far right while communism far left on the political spectrum.

deleted 11y ago
[deleted]
fche 11y ago
"has nothing to do with totalitarianism" So it just hasn't been done right yet ...? "totalitarianism is considered far right" This passive-voice definition is unauthoritative and wrong. Check a dictionary instead.
- lqdc13 11y ago
  I think you are conflating the two because of the case of Soviet Union. A) Soviet Union was not communism. Communism never happened. Communism/communist society is an ideal. B) Soviet Union was a totalitarian state, yes. C) One of the main concepts in communism is that there is/should be no state. Totalitarianism assumes that there is a state. This is in every definition of communism and totalitarianism. Here I'm going to quote it from the first line of each from Wikipedia: "Totalitarianism is concept of a political system in which the state holds total control over the society" "Communism ... absence of social classes, money, and the state."
  - fche 11y ago
    "Communism ... absence of [...] state." So yeah, "hasn't been done right yet". Could you hypothesize who in a true-scotsman communist non-state would regulate people's output ("ability") & input ("need")? Who would enforce the laws? If "everyone and anyone" is an enforcer, then claiming there is "no state" is sophistry.
- CodeMage 11y ago
  So it just hasn't been done right yet ...? That's right. You know how scientists had this theory that there is a particle they haven't observed yet, but should exist? They called it Higgs boson and constructed a lot of expensive equipment to try to prove that it exists. You have to make a distinction between theory and practice. You can criticize communism as a concept or you can criticize existing and past communist states, but those two are not the same thing. Dismissing communism solely because of Soviet Union, Cuba or China would be the same as dismissing democracy solely because of Richard Nixon or Condoleezza Rice.
  - fche 11y ago
    "You can criticize communism as a concept or you can criticize existing and past communist states, but those two are not the same thing." True. And yet I'm happy to criticize each.