Do you think Communism is as bad as Nazism?

Theodoric

Ad Honorem
Mar 2012
2,821
The USSR was communist but not because they called themselves such. They met the definition. North Korea calls itself "democratic" but that doesn't make it so.
The USSR called themselves the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics.

I would say it is fair to call them communist by the US propaganda definition and the academic meaning of the term. With the US term, it's basically a synonym for bureaucratic totalitarianism. While the other meaning being a cashless, stateless, post-scarcity society which gives each according to their need and provides each the opportunity to contribute according to their ability. But it is confusing to conflate the two definitions, because the USSR was most certainly not a communist nation, they weren't even really socialist since socialism is basically a society where the means of production is in the hands of the working class, or in the hands of the people as a whole according to more recent definitions (not sure I like that one); and the USSR had control of the means of production by a bureaucratical government.

Democracy is also more than just voting, it is the ability to express your political views without fear of government persecution or repercussions for that expression; democracy is basically the government of liberal nations (and again, I don't mean the US definition which again basically means left-wing, since right-wing governments can be liberal too: i.e. Margaret Thatcher, Ronald Reagan, and George HW Bush were all part of the neo-liberal movement). None of the second world nations were democracies.

Anyway, I think both uses of the word communism are OK. Different words mean different things in different cultures. But it can also be problematic in the way "theory" is used by people trying to criticize science.
 
Last edited:

robto

Ad Honorem
Jun 2014
6,076
Lisbon, Portugal
For a start the Chinese government isn't communist. Hasn't been for decades. These days the regime has more in common with Fascism than Communism. So you should be using the Chinese as an example of right wing totalitarianism, not left wing.
What you mean by looking like Fascism? It's because they have an economic model very similar to Corporativism like the Fascist states in 1930s had? Other than that, I don't see anything similar to Fascism in modern-day China.
 

robto

Ad Honorem
Jun 2014
6,076
Lisbon, Portugal
There is a generally accepted definition of "communism" and if the regime doesn't conform to that definition then it isn't communist. It is irrelevant what they call themselves. The Chinese regime calls itself "the "People's Democratic Republic". They refer to their policies as "the principle of democratic centralism". Do you really want to claim that China has a democratic government?
China doesn't call itself "People's Democratic Republic" they call themselves literally the "People´s Republic of China", or PRC. There's no "Democratic" in the official name.

Besides, China in its constitution does define itself as "democratic" in the sense they guide themselves, and you stated correctly, "under the principals of democratic centralism", but the Communist Party of China explicitly makes the distinction between Western liberal democracy and their own kind of "democracy", therefore they aren't fooling anyone the way you think they are fooling when they say they are a "democracy".
 
Likes: Offspring

Offspring

Ad Honorem
Mar 2013
7,909
România
China doesn't call itself "People's Democratic Republic" they call themselves literally the "People´s Republic of China", or PRC. There's no "Democratic" in the official name.

Besides, China in its constitution does define itself as "democratic" in the sense they guide themselves, and you stated correctly, "under the principals of democratic centralism", but the Communist Party of China explicitly makes the distinction between Western liberal democracy and their own kind of "democracy", therefore they aren't fooling anyone the way you think they are fooling when they say they are a "democracy".
Yeah, Western liberal democracies don't have a monopoly on that word. This is like when some Americans pick a Western European country and say they don't have free speech, because it's not defined the same way it is in the US.
Yeah, I put it in the spectrum of Marxism-Leninism.
I agree.
 
Likes: robto
Oct 2013
14,438
Europix
Tell that to the “fired” ones, proof not needed.


1. There are people that are more than just fired, bro. In some places left for being considered too left, in others right for being considered too right.


2. I don't need to tell any "ones". I know what happened in my family in the last four generations. (but ok, You could have not know that, and anyway, it's personal, thus irrelevant).


3. Those fired, proof not needed, can curb their spine and change their stances and regain their jobs.

Which in some cases will not help them much: if the trend change (and it does) they'll be acused nolonger for being too right but for being too left. Or too brown, or too white. By the same. Because the mindset remained, and that mindset, as I said, hasn't an ideology, isn't specific to a certain ideology. It has just adaptability. Self interest. Stereotypes, if not stupidly.