StarGateWars Forums

[KMA]Avenger wrote:

MEZZANINE wrote:I also agree with Lith & JTs comments, Democracy controls through lies and manipulation rather than force so is the least harmful form of government to it's people.

thats the same as choosing the lesser of 2 evils right?

making a choice based on which you hate (or will do the least amount of damage to you/society) the least is no choice at all mate...you should know that

It's not a choice mate, I was lucky enough to be born in a Democracy, and for all it's many many flaws Im very glad I did given the alternatives.

But essentially YES IMO it is the best of many bad options since no-one has yet found a perfect way to rule or govern a nation.

Cole wrote:Do you think both are compatible?

History proved otherwise (USSR, North Korea, Cambodge, Cuba, China, USSR's satellites,...)

all of your examples are, as far as I remember, states that were forced to communism by a minority through a revolution. Thus they do not prove otherwise, it just did not happen yet that a communistic party got an outright majority in a vote in a democratic state.

I believe many of you just know the examples mentioned above and connect communism with Stalin and other dictatorships without knowing much about the theory itself. I've read "Mannifest der Kommunistischen Partei" (="Manifesto of the Communist Party") by Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels aswell as most of "Das Kapital" (="Captial") by Karl Marx and in my opinion communism can work together with democracy as it can be seen as an economic system and does not need to be a merger of economics and political system (e.g. sovereignty of a few / dictatorship).


- Reschef

There are actually a lot of flaws with using communism as an economic system. They great economist Adam Smith, who brought about many principles that are true today, talked about trading based off comparative advantage and how important it is to a good economy. Under a communism, this is almos impossible. Also, David Ricardo's book Principles of Political Economy and Taxation is a book that explains how Adam's Smith's principles still hold true, and goes on to explain more about them.

Communism tries to control the economy, which might sound nice but it is a big mistake. It's the same as the effect it would have on the economy if you put price ceilings or price floors in a market. It wouldn't be able to reach equilibrium. The economy is best left alone, with a few good policies being inserted by the government from time to time. Trying to control the economy limits "the invisible hand" as Adam Smith put it.

I think it was my business prof who explained that communism is better for newer/poorer countries whereas democracy is for mature countries. He said both Systems have great flaws, and therefor a mixture of democracy and communism is needed to run a successful country. No country is all out democratic, even USA and canadian governments have ideas of communism embedded in them.

I'm talking about purely economical principles as that was brought up. Economics is not about democracy or communism, it's about markets and trade. Democracy just happens to have a system (mostly) which allows free trade versus communism where it is controlled. Controlled trade is bad for an economy, free trade is good. Now even in democracies you see controlled trade at times (Tariffs) but that's the best we've got at this point in time.

xDaku wrote:I'm talking about purely economical principles as that was brought up. Economics is not about democracy or communism, it's about markets and trade. Democracy just happens to have a system (mostly) which allows free trade versus communism where it is controlled. Controlled trade is bad for an economy, free trade is good. Now even in democracies you see controlled trade at times (Tariffs) but that's the best we've got at this point in time.

I think what you are comparing is capitalism and communism.

Comparing democracies and with communism, is like having 6 communist parties which run on laws of communism being elected to rule the country.. I think the OP is asking if choosing communist parties democratically is allowed or not.. I don't see any problem, as long as all the parties are of course communist and run on basic communism laws.

KnowLedge wrote:

xDaku wrote:I'm talking about purely economical principles as that was brought up. Economics is not about democracy or communism, it's about markets and trade. Democracy just happens to have a system (mostly) which allows free trade versus communism where it is controlled. Controlled trade is bad for an economy, free trade is good. Now even in democracies you see controlled trade at times (Tariffs) but that's the best we've got at this point in time.

I think what you are comparing is capitalism and communism.

Comparing democracies and with communism, is like having 6 communist parties which run on laws of communism being elected to rule the country.. I think the OP is asking if choosing communist parties democratically is allowed or not.. I don't see any problem, as long as all the parties are of course communist and run on basic communism laws.

I was comparing a free market economy to a centralized economy. In this case, the free market economy works in a democratic system while a centralized works in a communist system. What I'm saying is that the biggest problem with the laws of communism on a completely economic basis is that they meddle too much with Adam Smith's invisible hand, which is a core principle of economics. Fact is, and a huge majority of economists believe this, is that a centralized market economy (like in communism) just cannot be as good an economy as possible.

not breaking the invisible hand can be a bad thing.

For example if a government is trying to get its home companies big, it must impose a tarrif to get the going for the first a couple of year.. great example is Acer in Taiwan. ofcourse it is bad for everything to impose any sort of tarrif or control anything, but it must be done if a country wants to get better. if not then the international companies will just take over the market in your own country.

this is just one example of an area where controlling is needed. i understand its bad, but it is needed because the country needs to think about its own home companies.

the day the whole world signs a pact like the one euro has, will be the best day ever because this will mean we have all merged and are now one country with single laws. THis will ensure most productivity and efficiency.

I totally agree with you about the invisible hand, after all competition is the major driving force for invention and innovation..

The problem with that is that by imposing those tariffs you are not going to be maximizing on your production possibilities frontier thereby lowering your economy. Tariffs are never a good thing, they are mostly put into place for morals. And again, morals isn't a big part of communism, equality is. There's a difference.

I like the discussion here,

But to answer the OP's question; Communism and Democracy can theoretically exist together in a society.

Since one is a system of Economics and the other is an outline for the delegation of authority. And those two things are not inherently opposite to one another.

eg. If you don't like the way the members of your communist government are running your country, you could vote in new ones. These new officials will now be delegated the responsibility of running the economy; which is controlled by the government that these members now represent.


Realistically it will probably never happen, because when governments try to exercise that kind of control on a population they end up corrupted by the amount of authority and time it takes to implement that kind of control.

Cole wrote:Do you think both are compatible?

History proved otherwise (USSR, North Korea, Cambodge, Cuba, China, USSR's satellites,...), not to mention their slogan ("dictatorship of the proletariat") but I'm curious to hear arguments that agree both are compatible. Arguments that are arguments, which means, not the kind of "arguments" provided by students supporting communism who usually answer "capitalism is evil, it leads to social classes conflict, oppresses the weak, communism supports the workers against the evil and useless-to-the-production managers. All poor and middle class people unite under communism to fight the evil greedy elites"

That's caricatural and slighty ridiculous, but I swear that's the kind of speech I hear from communist students in my university.

Poor you at your Uni. The one I still occasionally turn up to the communists and all the lefties have been completely destroyed to the extent that all bar one position is controlled by Conservatives. The communist team was that bad that it actually got less votes than the Conservatives 'Joke Communist' ticket.

MEZZANINE wrote:

[KMA]Avenger wrote:

MEZZANINE wrote:I also agree with Lith & JTs comments, Democracy controls through lies and manipulation rather than force so is the least harmful form of government to it's people.

thats the same as choosing the lesser of 2 evils right?

making a choice based on which you hate (or will do the least amount of damage to you/society) the least is no choice at all mate...you should know that

It's not a choice mate, I was lucky enough to be born in a Democracy, and for all it's many many flaws Im very glad I did given the alternatives.

But essentially YES IMO it is the best of many bad options since no-one has yet found a perfect way to rule or govern a nation.

i just cant agree with that kind of mentality mate. whats wrong is wrong and voting for whatever or whoever simply because you dislike them a little less than the opposition is not a vote or choice...its hit and hope mentality praying you've made the right choice.

[KMA]Avenger wrote:

MEZZANINE wrote:

[KMA]Avenger wrote:

MEZZANINE wrote:I also agree with Lith & JTs comments, Democracy controls through lies and manipulation rather than force so is the least harmful form of government to it's people.

thats the same as choosing the lesser of 2 evils right?

making a choice based on which you hate (or will do the least amount of damage to you/society) the least is no choice at all mate...you should know that

It's not a choice mate, I was lucky enough to be born in a Democracy, and for all it's many many flaws Im very glad I did given the alternatives.

But essentially YES IMO it is the best of many bad options since no-one has yet found a perfect way to rule or govern a nation.

i just cant agree with that kind of mentality mate. whats wrong is wrong and voting for whatever or whoever simply because you dislike them a little less than the opposition is not a vote or choice...its hit and hope mentality praying you've made the right choice.

I never said I voted, I havent voted in over a decade as the only political parties the current system gives a chance at of power are IMO bad compromises, and there is no party that represents my views or I trust enough to vote for.

In the UK we have 2 main parties, a 3rd party which in the past has had no chance of getting power on their own but has formed a couple of coalitions to get their say, and several small no-hoper parties. It's pretty much been a 2 party system for the last century, but in the last election the 2 main parties both got so few votes that due to voter apathy and disillusionment that the 3rd party was needed in coalition to form a majority government.

IMO we got the best option this time around, even though the coalition was formed after the election so is wasnt an option anyone voted for. So much for democracy

AH!

i see where your coming from now...and yes, wasn't much of a choice.
and as far as democracy goes...i see all 3 parties as different heads on the same hydra or body...

or you could say that the left and the right are sheepdogs guiding us left and right with a 3rd sheepdog (the lib dems) in the rear to scare the crap out of the voters and make sure they don't escape to the rear.

the whole thing is nothing more than a farce-an illusion designed to make us think we have a choice.

[KMA]Avenger wrote:AH!

i see where your coming from now...and yes, wasn't much of a choice.
and as far as democracy goes...i see all 3 parties as different heads on the same hydra or body...

or you could say that the left and the right are sheepdogs guiding us left and right with a 3rd sheepdog (the lib dems) in the rear to scare the crap out of the voters and make sure they don't escape to the rear.

the whole thing is nothing more than a farce-an illusion designed to make us think we have a choice.