If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Read the community guidelines before posting ✨
Options
russia redoes constitution and removes communist holiday
Former Member
Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/4123355.stm
theyre removing the holiday dedicated to the bolshevik revolution, even though it removed people from serfdom(owned by the land owners) and are replacing it with a holiday celebrating 1612 when russia became independant, so to speak as in everyone came under tsar control if thats independence who knows
strangely named after putins party too, hmmm
theyre removing the holiday dedicated to the bolshevik revolution, even though it removed people from serfdom(owned by the land owners) and are replacing it with a holiday celebrating 1612 when russia became independant, so to speak as in everyone came under tsar control if thats independence who knows
strangely named after putins party too, hmmm
0
Comments
I think if you actually look closely at what's going on in Russia you'll find that Putin's moving towards a strongly centralised power system, and just last week renationalised Yukos.
Actually... got a link to a site with different ideas about communism? Cuz that'd be an interesting read.
Well, the question of whether China is communist is a bit of a dodgy one anyway! But as for other socialist/leftist/communist countries, then you've got N. Korea and Cuba for starters.
+ how do you know the population of China is 'against communism'?
No. Merely unfeasible, naïve and idealist.
The problem is that 'equal' and 'fair' don't mean the same thing. Really, why is everyone entitled to an equal share of resources?
Which is why I'm not a communist. But if you think about it, it's only force that keeps a capitalist society going as well. Its only force that legitimises the state. It's only force that legitimises private property and profit.
Why aren't they?
Is this really the case Blagsta? Our society is capitalistic and I don't think we are repressed by force, most are happy to be living in a capitalististic state. The legitimacy of the (actions of the) state aren't seriously challenged by anybody really (tho' should be more often). We all think we legitimately own what we have worked for and paid for. Is your post correct?
Because an 'equal' allotment would mean everyone having a 1/6 billionth of the resources of the world. A 'fair' division would be what? Based on need? On the contribution of that person? How is it 'fair' for you and I to have an equal share of resources if you sit on your arse all day and I work 10 hour days? (I'm not implying that you do now! It's just to illustrate!) A communist system is only going to work if you have a near-unlimited amount of resources. The reality is that modern capitalism has produced the highest standard of living for the greatest number of people of any societal model we've tried.
no we are a regulated partially social based capitalist society
a mix of the 2, which is what works best for msot people
Errr yes, that is the case. We have to pay rent or mortgages otherwise we get arrested. We have to accept the conditions that our employers force on us or we get sacked or worse (see the miners strike), the police force originated to protect private property and the interests of landowners and factory owners etc.
If capitalism is so great, how come we have an excess of a lot of resources (e.g. restaurants and supermarkets throwing out loads of food, obese people, companies wasting energy, buildings sitting empty etc) yet people starve, die of cold and live on the street? Doesn't seem so good to me.
I'm not saying it's perfect, any more than democracy is the least worst system. However, and system other than Western Social Democracy has produced far far worse conditions for the vast majority of people than any other societal model.
Seriously, look at history. Tell me of a time and place and a way of living which had less people suffering, less people on the streets, dying of cold, starving to death?
Any idea which relies on people not acting like people isn't worth dealing with.
What else would you suggest? To be honest a more honestly capitalist system (with genuinely free trade, without subsidies for the developed world's industries) would be a hell of a lot fairer.
I don't know what to suggest. Idealogically I'm libertarian socialist, but practically I just don't know any more. But the answer certainly isn't free trade. That would be even more horrific than what we have now. There would be no provision for poor people, ill people, people unable to look after themselves. They'd just be left to die as they wouldn't be profitable to anyone. Do you really think that's a good idea?
Tell me, what does that mean?
I am afraid you've created a complete straw man there. 'Free trade' is the global model whereby nations neither impose tariffs upon foreign imports, nor subsidise their own industries. The effect of this is to ensure a level playing field globally. The system we have at the moment involves the developed world subsidising it's own, less competitive industries at the expense of the more cost-effective production in the developing world (the CAP is a case in point), whilst taxing imports from other nations. What this means is that the developing world is unable to trade effectively, or fairly with the developed. Currently we have a system of 'free trade for you, protectionism for us' which is entirely invidious.
In fact, were free trade to be instituted (as it has at certain times in the past), the standard of living of people in the developed world would rise as they would be able to compete on a fair basis.