So if in the ideal Marxism every one is the same how does leaders like Putin and his inner circle get all the wealth ( or China ). Is it by taking control of government businesses and the countries natural resources ? If that is so then it would seem someone is not being a good little commie.

So is Communism the ultimate fulfillment of socialism? What would happen when pyramid schemes such as social programs and social security go belly up, does things just naturally levitate up and away from a free market system to full blown communism ? Or could it just revert back to the forces of evolution where the rich get richer and the poor get poorer without the risk of revolution ?

Communism as explained in the Communist Manifesto has never been achieved mostly because of human greed. The "communist" countries we see today are more dictatorships with an elite cadre which exploits the resources and wealth for their own ends.

The true believers of communism completely disregard human nature. It assumes that humans by nature are good. That's why it ends up in dictatorship because that's the only way you can force people into from each according to his ability and to each according to their need. It's also the problem of pure democracy which is the tyranny of the majority. Once the majority realizes they can vote themselves the minorities stuff, it's over.



The uber left currently wants the entitlement system to collapse because they believe that in the resulting chaos they can get complete control.

From wiki,I normally wouldn't cite it but this is their people so they won't deny it...

The Cloward–Piven strategy is a political strategy outlined in 1966 by American sociologists and political activists Richard Cloward and Frances Fox Piven. The strategy aims to utilize "militant anti poverty groups" to facilitate a "political crisis" by overloading the welfare system via an increase in welfare claims, forcing the creation of a system of guaranteed minimum income and "redistributing income through the federal government

The Soviet Union was communist,,,it didn’t work. Putin/modern Russia is not communist

China adopted capitalism in the 80’s. But is run by a communist “party”. Basically just a dictatorship at this point because socialism/communism doesn’t work. The state controls the capitalism,,,along with everything else

Aka Fascism. The original meaning. When you hear the terms Public-Private partnership, run. Jack Ma, one of the richest people in China got disappeared for a while after getting a bit uppity and had to be brought back to the party line.

Social/communism look good on paper but never factor in two human traits, greed and laziness

People getting “disappeared” happens everywhere,,

Can’t think of any actual communist countries nowadays,,,,, maybe North Korea,,,Cuba??,,,,,, Venezuela??

Canada is a great example of country currently going down socialist sewer pipe

Jamestown was a proto-socialist settlement. They ditched that idea pretty quickly

Remember the hippie communes created in the US back in the 60's and 70's? They've grown into thriving communities today right? No, not so much. Communism destroys individual motivation and drives achievement to the lowest common denominator. Government run everything means everyone is poor except those in charge, and the proletariat is helpless to do anything about it without sustaining mass casualties. That's the situation in Russia and China today. It is also the goal of some political leaders in the US to ensure they retain their power and riches and was the motivation behind DEI.

You asked about Putin and communism in the OP,,,,,,,and then posted this link


What’s up????

Very good reply!

Communism vs Socialsim
There is no difference between communism and socialism, except in the means of achieving the same ultimate end: communism proposes to enslave men by force, socialism - by vote. It is merely the difference between murder and suicide."
Ayn Rand

Again,,,Russia and China are not communist. Both have embraced capitalism

There’s plenty of “non poor”/“rich” people in Russia/china that are actually just regular citizens

Good catch on your part ! I was just affirming your observation. The path to knowledge can be like tracks in the snow that go every where, some hounds can sort them out some can't.
Honest mistake on my part, I was just like those misinformed republicans in the article. Believe me if I was trying to deceive with a bunch of mixed up tracks it wouldn't be on a trapping forum, lol. I do like discussions when seeking knowledge preferably without the heated moments of name calling, etc.

I had a poster that hung in my classroom based on cows and government types also economic types:
Communism - You have 2 cows. Your neighbors help you take care of them and share the milk.
Russian Communism - You have two cows. You have to take care of them, then the government takes all the milk.
Democracy - You have two cows, Your neighbors decide who gets your milk.
Representative Democracy - You have two cows. You elect someone with best face for tv to tell you how to take care of your cows.
Fascism - You have two cows. The government takes your cows and shoots you.
Socialism - You have two cows. The government takes them and puts them in a barn with everyone else's cows, then gives you the milk it thinks you need.
Capitalism - You have 2 cows. You sell one and buy a bull.
There are more but I like these examples. Referenced this poster often.

Communism does not look good on paper. Communism does not fail because of human nature or greed. Communism is the vile and evil notion that the individual should subvert to the collective. As has been stated eloquently by someone more intelligent than me (although their name escapes me), it is a philosophy of envy. At its core, it is tyranny, and the tyrant is the collective.
It requires force, coercion and theft as foundational means to achieve its ends. It does not value human life, rather it values the same human effort and achievement which it seeks to vilify so highly that it happily sacrifices individuals like kindling in a bonfire to achieve whatever ends seem prudent... since the individual has no value, no price is to high to pay to ensure that the political class enjoys a life free from physical labor so that they can continue to determine what everyone else should consider to be good for everyone else.
There is no "good" in it at all. The logical conclusions are always gross inequality between a master, middle and slave class.
...and all that is only considering "real communism", the corruptions of the Soviets, the Chi-Coms, and even modern socialists are simply logical progressions from an already corrupt idea which then account for the realities of greed and human nature.
It is an idea so grossly incompatible with the idea of inherent individual rights that it should be immediately apparent that the only people who wish to adopt it are the people who stand to gain the most from it at the expense of others... you can't say that other people's greed is the only thing that causes your greed to fail.

There is no middle ground for me on this, lots of people (especially here in Canada) don't like me and see my views on this as extreme. I am OK with that.

Well, a "real" communist would say that countries like the USSR, China, etc weren't really communist, because in "real" communism, it's a classless society, with no ruling class. That's why they claim real communism has never been tried before. It's kinda like how we don't have real capitalism in the USA, we have more of a crony-capitalism system. The difference is, though, that almost-communism has killed millions, and almost-capitalism has improved the lives of millions.

If you want to know what communism, or anything, is all about, read about directly from the primary source. Get yourself a copy of the communist manifesto. It's a short read.


Don't worry, owning a copy won't make you a communist, any more than owning a Bible makes you a Christian , owning a koran makes you a muslim, or owning a dictionary makes you have a good vocabulary.

Correct,,,, “individual rights” must always supersede “ group rights”

You have potential to be a future Alberta resident,,,,,,

and everyone who thinks it is a good idea , will both say well it's never been done right in one breath and fail to see that it has never been done right because it is always a promise to the people the "useful Idiots" who take the bait and most of them end up dead in a few years because they are a liability to the party once the party is in power. and all it ever was was a ponzy scheme to grab power and control by the people who were most likely already the power players.

so don't fall for the shell game .