It seems you can't call it exactly communism or democracy anymore when they are really combined. But the step between a democratic society of some sorts and the transition to a communistic one deserves more attention. In fact it doesn't have to be a mere inbetween step at all, it could be the 'end of the line': it's called socialism.
The problem with democratic socialism (I'm a democratic socialist) is that it leaves the capitalists free to return and claw back the socialist measures when things go wrong. In many ways, that's what happened in Britain. We had our socialist phase after WWII, and then because of the excesses of the left, especially unions, as well as economic decline, it all swung back the other way under Thatcher. We're still seeing the consequences of that now. But when people talk about communism, it's usually the old Soviet model they have in mind. I prefer to talk about Marxism really, as the Soviet system was only one possible system based loosely on Marx, or their interpretation of Marx. The good German may have been wrong about some things, but I do feel that overall his critique of capitalism does stand up, especially on the social level. What nobody wants (no-one I know anyway) in another round of totalitarian dictatorships - and that's the bogey they use to paint anything that smacks of Marxism, socialism or communism as black as possible. In the UK democratic socialism did a great deal for ordinary people. Now we're seeing welfare replaced by food-banks, loss of educational opportunity, and probably coming soon the dismantling of the free healthcare system. along with big tax breaks for the wealthy and for corporations, and the biggest differential in incomes between the haves and the have nots we've ever experienced. Class war? Some would say so. It's just that the working class haven't woken up to the idea yet. If they ever do, maybe we'll see the return of democratic socialism.
Doesn't matter what system you call it. Those in political seats when they have the support of other seats, they have the control.
It stil matters if you live under a forced dictatorship or in a functioning democracy (to give 2 obvious examples). Or in a thoroughly corrupt system or not. So the system (and the fitting definition for it) certainly matters.
Communism, like fascism (to me the two are almost exactly the same except one is run by bureaucrats and one is run by corporations), is antithetical to democracy. Governments that rule with authoritarian control (call it communism or call it fascism... same shit, different name) don't give a shit about what the people want. Democracy is a ruse, because even so-called "democratic" nations are not really democratic. The best slaves are the ones who believe themselves to be free. Westerners think they're free because they have money to buy things and pick from two hand-selected puppets every four years.
[SIZE=12pt][/SIZE] Democracy is a ruse, because even so-called "democratic" nations are not really democratic. The best slaves are the ones who believe themselves to be free. So what would be your alternative?
Well, as I have said before, I am basically an anarchist, so I see no alternatives coming from a system that is hierarchical and controlled by big money interests. People keep voting for the same corrupt, establishment candidates election after election, so I don't see the point of offering a real solution until more people start wanting one. But I don't see that happening any time soon.
The estimates are that within twenty years commercial fishing will no longer be possible because there simply won't be enough wild fish left in the oceans. Within fifty years every land animal much larger than a dog will either be extinct or only exist in zoos and, by the end of the century, eight percent of the earth will be a polluted desert. The idea that either capitalism or communism have won anything is a joke in bad taste.
The world has actually never seen communism, or democracy for that matter, execpt on a very small scale. What we generally mistake for communism is actually state controlled totolitarinism and what we mistake for democracy are generally representative republics. Both democracy and communism at their core are mob ruled, which is why neither have really worked in practice
The difference between democracy and communism is in a democracy the players believe they are doing right and following the law. Even if they skirt a few laws or the entire book they believe they are doing what is just and fair. Communist know they are criminals and they flaunt it.
The agenda of communism is to empower the poor and unprivileged in society and prevent their exploitation by the rich or privileged. Marx emphasized the dictatorship of the proletariat, which means that the power should remain in the hands of the proletariat to prevent further exploitation of them. He probably was not able to foresee that proletariat tyranny itself could be a danger to people or the common citizen in the form of Stalin or Pol Pot. If he had, he probably would have modified his works, and brought in a stern democratic element to bring in more accountability. Finally let us realize that democracy is also not fallible, as Socrates was poisoned in democratic Greece. Democracy in a sense empowers the proletariat, which makes the majority of the population, and any potential leader must bow to their whims and needs. In Indian states like Bengal, Kerala and Tripura, communist parties have been elected to power democractically, and also have had been forced out of power by the people themselves through voting. So I would say yes, democracy and communism can be compatible.
Ya but the rich in powerful under communism only get more so. Can't stop people from organizing and conspiring to rule the roost.
Some democracies are more bureaucratic than others. Israel is on one end of the spectrum and both France and Japan are highly bureaucratic. Both these countries are very civilized places to live in. They both have easily have the best inter-city trains in the world.
When Romania was under communism, Nicolae Ceaușescu was a king in all but name. I am usually against the death penelty but I was glad he was shot when the Soviet communist bloc collapsed.
