Communism: 100 Years of Failure

[Safety]

By one example, the example so many toss at libertarians, by people who fail to understand libertarianism.


"Do we have a one-world government? Or do you want a larger scale?"

No, we do not have a one-world government. On a global scale we have anarchy, rules without rulers. So your contention that "an absence of government on any large scale results in chaos, violence and an ineffective economy."

You do know that modern government, which is what you are defending as a necessity, has only existed 1-2% of man's existence. How was man able to do what you claim impossible?

Ask people if they rather live in today’s time or during the 98% (your assertion) when they have to worry about small pox, a neighboring village ransacking their town and raping their women, or worrying about living to the ripe old age of 34.

[Safety]

Concede with some dignity at least.


What I find interesting here is this is a repeat of the thread asking is atheism rational. There, rather than address the question, and demonstrate its rationality, you all attack theism as if showing it irrational shows atheism rational. Here instead of arguing for communism you take stabs at free markets, libertarianism and anarchism as if showing them wrong shows communism right. There is was unicorns, here it's Somalia.

There is nothing to concede, he has destroyed your argument that your perception of what society should be, does not work in a society this vast and diverse. You ask where has communism been implemented successfully, I ask you, where has your libertarian society that you argue for, been implemented successfully?

[Mister D]

It hasn't been falsified at all. It's been proven by history and your example of global anarchy and the resulting violence and conflict.

Yes, global conflicts and warefare are indeed decreasing and we are living in a time of unprecedented peace. Prior to global organizations and efforts to mitigate conflicts, war was far more common than it is now. War raged through Europe, Asia and Africa for hundreds of years.

https://www.scientificamerican.com/a...e-of-violence/

https://www.pri.org/stories/2014-10-...res-data-prove

This was cute.

Sense, to select a tiny slice of time and say "war is now uncommon" is a poor argument to begin with but what I found amusing was that you attributed this relatively peaceful period (similar to the Pax Britannica of 1815-1914) to "global organizations". No, Common Sense, it should be attributed to empire. The one you are safely ensconced next to.

[Chris]

Lol...enjoy your fantasies.

I didn't take a stab at free markets, I criticized the delusion that anarchy wouldn't devolve into chaos. Nor did I support or claim communism is right. Try reading what I write rather than tilting at windmills. You are allowing your dislike of me to retard your reasoning skills once again.

Like I said, try to preserve sodme dignity when you lose an argument instead of trying to turn it into a pathetic personal attack.

[Chris]

Ask people if they rather live in today’s time or during the 98% (your assertion) when they have to worry about small pox, a neighboring village ransacking their town and raping their women, or worrying about living to the ripe old age of 34.

What are you talking about? The cure for small pox is technological, not governmental.

[Chris]

There is nothing to concede, he has destroyed your argument that your perception of what society should be, does not work in a society this vast and diverse. You ask where has communism been implemented successfully, I ask you, where has your libertarian society that you argue for, been implemented successfully?

I argued nothing about how society should be, nothing whatsoever. It was CS who argued that when insisting that the government is necessary. But the is no government at the global level. Nor has there been a government for 98% of man's existence. Those are facts. They falsify his claim.

You ask where has communism been implemented successfully, I ask you, where has your libertarian society that you argue for, been implemented successfully?

This is what I just pointed out, how people tend to try to defend what they prefer by attacking the opposite.

The very notion of implementing a libertarian society, which would be through a government, reveals another thing I pointed out, that people do not understand what they argue against, so they invent strawmen. Libertarianism is not implemented. One does not implement a libertarian state. Utter nonsense.

Finally, analogy is not an argument. One might use analogy to compare two things so as to explain the unknown with the known. Or, in this case, contrast libertarianism with communism: one is non-authoritarian, the other authoritarian, one plans distributively, the other centrally, one is individualist, the other collectivist--libertarian individualism arose in the Englightenment, communist collectivism arose in reaction to individualism. --But that explanatory, not argument. Analogy is used to explain, not argue.

[Chris]

This was cute.

Sense, to select a tiny slice of time and say "war is now uncommon" is a poor argument to begin with but what I found amusing was that you attributed this relatively peaceful period (similar to the Pax Britannica of 1815-1914) to "global organizations". No, Common Sense, it should be attributed to empire. The one you are safely ensconced next to.

I don't even need to look at his links to know the source of his conjecture is Stephen Pinker and his The Better Angels of Our Nature: Why Violence Has Declined.

Pinker has been criticized for that. Specifically for narrowing his timeline to exclude major wars, i.e., "to select a tiny slice of time and say "war is now uncommon" is a poor argument to begin with."

[Mister D]

I don't even need to look at his links to know the source of his conjecture is Stephen Pinker and his The Better Angels of Our Nature: Why Violence Has Declined.

Pinker has been criticized for that. Specifically for narrowing his timeline to exclude major wars, i.e., "to select a tiny slice of time and say "war is now uncommon" is a poor argument to begin with."

Ah, I see Pinker is one of the moral evolutionists so that seems likely. I wonder if he'd like Pinker's views on race?

[Chris]

Ah, I see Pinker is one of the moral evolutionists so that seems likely. I wonder if he'd like Pinker's views on race?

Probably not much.

[Chris]

This was cute.

Sense, to select a tiny slice of time and say "war is now uncommon" is a poor argument to begin with but what I found amusing was that you attributed this relatively peaceful period (similar to the Pax Britannica of 1815-1914) to "global organizations". No, Common Sense, it should be attributed to empire. The one you are safely ensconced next to.

Thoughts on empire. The age of empires is done. The empires of Alexander, Monguls, Rome, Spain, France, England are long gone. Germany wanted it, so did Russia under communism. The US might be considered one but only a defacto one because there are no more superpowers. They've all broken up into nation states for ethnic nations, and continue to be--and people even in the US seek smaller states. History ended more or less in democracy.