Communism killed 94 million people in the 20th century

This topic is locked from further discussion.

Avatar image for Laihendi
#1 Posted by Laihendi (5871 posts) -

Here is a good and informative article

According to a disturbingly pleasant graphic fromInformation is Beautifulentitled simply 20thCentury Death, communism was the leading ideological cause of death between 1900 and 2000. The 94 million that perished in China, the Soviet Union, North Korea, Afghanistan, and Eastern Europe easily (and tragically) trump the 28 million that died under fascist regimes during the same period.

During the century measured, more people died as a result of communism than from homicide (58 million) and genocide (30 million) put together. The combined death tolls of WWI (37 million) and WWII (66 million) exceed communisms total by only 9 million.

It gets worse when you look at the lower right of the chartThe Natural Worldwhich includes animals (7 million), natural disasters (24 million), and famine (101 million). Curiously, all of the worlds worst famines during the 20th century were in communist countries: China (twice!), the Soviet Union, and North Korea. 

Communism is a killer. And yet some still say they support the idea: According to a 2011 Rasmussen poll, 11% of Americans think that communism would better serve this countrys needs than our current system.

http://reason.com/blog/2013/03/13/communism-killed-94m-in-20th-century

Deaths from laissez-faire capitalism - 0

Deaths from communism - 94,000,000

Communism is the most violent and destructive ideology in human history. I think it is clear which is the moral social system, and which is not.

Avatar image for DroidPhysX
#2 Posted by DroidPhysX (17098 posts) -
neato
Avatar image for Ace6301
#3 Posted by Ace6301 (21389 posts) -
Yeah communism as practiced in the 20th century sucked. Good to see everyone was smart enough to stay away from Laissez-faire though.
Avatar image for DroidPhysX
#4 Posted by DroidPhysX (17098 posts) -
Wonder how many laissez faire capitalist systems were implemented at the same levels as communist systems.
Avatar image for mattbbpl
#5 Posted by mattbbpl (15529 posts) -
This is the best false dichotomy you could come up with?
Avatar image for DirigiblePlums
#6 Posted by DirigiblePlums (142 posts) -

Here is a good and informative article

According to a disturbingly pleasant graphic fromInformation is Beautifulentitled simply 20thCentury Death, communism was the leading ideological cause of death between 1900 and 2000. The 94 million that perished in China, the Soviet Union, North Korea, Afghanistan, and Eastern Europe easily (and tragically) trump the 28 million that died under fascist regimes during the same period.

During the century measured, more people died as a result of communism than from homicide (58 million) and genocide (30 million) put together. The combined death tolls of WWI (37 million) and WWII (66 million) exceed communisms total by only 9 million.

It gets worse when you look at the lower right of the chartThe Natural Worldwhich includes animals (7 million), natural disasters (24 million), and famine (101 million). Curiously, all of the worlds worst famines during the 20th century were in communist countries: China (twice!), the Soviet Union, and North Korea. 

Communism is a killer. And yet some still say they support the idea: According to a 2011 Rasmussen poll, 11% of Americans think that communism would better serve this countrys needs than our current system.Laihendi

http://reason.com/blog/2013/03/13/communism-killed-94m-in-20th-century

Deaths from laissez-faire capitalism - 0

Deaths from communism - 94,000,000

Communism is the most violent and destructive ideology in human history. I think it is clear which is the moral social system, and which is not.

A staggering death toll can also be calculated by Colonialism and Capitalism in the 19th and 20th centuries
Avatar image for Zeviander
#7 Posted by Zeviander (9503 posts) -
inb4 communism = atheism
Avatar image for mattbbpl
#8 Posted by mattbbpl (15529 posts) -
inb4 communism = atheismZeviander
Wait... what?

I can't say I've heard that one before.
Avatar image for Zeviander
#9 Posted by Zeviander (9503 posts) -
I can't say I've heard that one before.mattbbpl
You must live under a rock. Stalin and Mao were apparently both incredibly huge atheists and killed in the name of atheism (according to most religionists).
Avatar image for theone86
#10 Posted by theone86 (21745 posts) -

Here is a good and informative article

According to a disturbingly pleasant graphic fromInformation is Beautifulentitled simply 20thCentury Death, communism was the leading ideological cause of death between 1900 and 2000. The 94 million that perished in China, the Soviet Union, North Korea, Afghanistan, and Eastern Europe easily (and tragically) trump the 28 million that died under fascist regimes during the same period.

During the century measured, more people died as a result of communism than from homicide (58 million) and genocide (30 million) put together. The combined death tolls of WWI (37 million) and WWII (66 million) exceed communisms total by only 9 million.

It gets worse when you look at the lower right of the chartThe Natural Worldwhich includes animals (7 million), natural disasters (24 million), and famine (101 million). Curiously, all of the worlds worst famines during the 20th century were in communist countries: China (twice!), the Soviet Union, and North Korea. 

Communism is a killer. And yet some still say they support the idea: According to a 2011 Rasmussen poll, 11% of Americans think that communism would better serve this countrys needs than our current system.Laihendi

http://reason.com/blog/2013/03/13/communism-killed-94m-in-20th-century

Deaths from laissez-faire capitalism - 0

Deaths from communism - 94,000,000

Communism is the most violent and destructive ideology in human history. I think it is clear which is the moral social system, and which is not.

The bolded is not true, Pinochet's government is one prominent example I can think of that is responsible for numerous deaths, I'm sure there are more.  If we're going to get technical we could start to get into all the dictators that the U.S. backed and see how many people they killed.  Does the Shah of Iran count in this calculation?  There's another large group of deaths.

Aside from that, you're painting in broad strokes.  To say that North Korean communism is the same thing as Cuban or Soviet communism is about the same thing as saying Nazi Germany's economy was pretty much the same as the modern U.S. economy.  Aside from that, just about every form of communism that's ever been implemented at a national scale is a pretty far cry from what Marx put forward as a functional form of communism (he did speak about crude communism which he called destructive).  Aside from that, Marx is not the penultimate authority on communism and there is a wide range of communist ideologies which vary, sometimes profoundly, from one another.  To say that governments who claimed a communist ideology (and I'd say authoritarianism in general is pretty opposed to communism on an ideological level) were responsible for killings, therefore communism as a whole is a failed ideology is wholly fallacious.

Avatar image for Laihendi
#11 Posted by Laihendi (5871 posts) -
[QUOTE="Laihendi"]

Here is a good and informative article

According to a disturbingly pleasant graphic fromInformation is Beautifulentitled simply 20thCentury Death, communism was the leading ideological cause of death between 1900 and 2000. The 94 million that perished in China, the Soviet Union, North Korea, Afghanistan, and Eastern Europe easily (and tragically) trump the 28 million that died under fascist regimes during the same period.

During the century measured, more people died as a result of communism than from homicide (58 million) and genocide (30 million) put together. The combined death tolls of WWI (37 million) and WWII (66 million) exceed communisms total by only 9 million.

It gets worse when you look at the lower right of the chartThe Natural Worldwhich includes animals (7 million), natural disasters (24 million), and famine (101 million). Curiously, all of the worlds worst famines during the 20th century were in communist countries: China (twice!), the Soviet Union, and North Korea. 

Communism is a killer. And yet some still say they support the idea: According to a 2011 Rasmussen poll, 11% of Americans think that communism would better serve this countrys needs than our current system.DirigiblePlums

http://reason.com/blog/2013/03/13/communism-killed-94m-in-20th-century

Deaths from laissez-faire capitalism - 0

Deaths from communism - 94,000,000

Communism is the most violent and destructive ideology in human history. I think it is clear which is the moral social system, and which is not.

A staggering death toll can also be calculated by Colonialism and Capitalism in the 19th and 20th centuries

Colonialism is not laissez-faire capitalism so it cannot be used to criticize it. Free markets do not kill anyone. A government seizing property with the threat of a gun, forcing millions into abject poverty does.
Avatar image for theone86
#12 Posted by theone86 (21745 posts) -

[QUOTE="mattbbpl"]I can't say I've heard that one before.Zeviander
You must live under a rock. Stalin and Mao were apparently both incredibly huge atheists and killed in the name of atheism (according to most religionists).

Marx admittedly was and atheist and did fit it into his philosophy.  I don't think he saw religion as compatible with communism, but I think it was more that he viewed both religion and capitalism as exerting undue control over individuals and he envisioned people eventually doing away with the old ways of doing things in both regards.  He never came out and said that the religious need to be killed or converted so that communism can propser.

As to actual communist leaders, they were implanting a state religion and traditional religion was incompatible with that.  I don't know how you look at the cult of personality and call it atheism, it's a religion.

Avatar image for mattbbpl
#13 Posted by mattbbpl (15529 posts) -
[QUOTE="mattbbpl"]I can't say I've heard that one before.Zeviander
You must live under a rock. Stalin and Mao were apparently both incredibly huge atheists and killed in the name of atheism (according to most religionists).

Interesting. I keep pretty diverse company, but most of them know the difference between an economic ideology and a religious stance. I'd imagine it takes a special kind of confused to be unable to differentiate between the two.
Avatar image for dude_brahmski
#14 Posted by dude_brahmski (472 posts) -
i really cannot take lai's words at face value.
Avatar image for chessmaster1989
#15 Posted by chessmaster1989 (30204 posts) -
I remember there being a lot of dictatorships masquerading as communism in the 20th century, but I don't remember much actual communism.
Avatar image for theone86
#16 Posted by theone86 (21745 posts) -

[QUOTE="Zeviander"][QUOTE="mattbbpl"]I can't say I've heard that one before.mattbbpl
You must live under a rock. Stalin and Mao were apparently both incredibly huge atheists and killed in the name of atheism (according to most religionists).

Interesting. I keep pretty diverse company, but most of them know the difference between an economic ideology and a religious stance. I'd imagine it takes a special kind of confused to be unable to differentiate between the two.

You'd be surprised how quick religious people can be to conflate views on religion with political ideology.  I had a history teacher once who would go on tirades about different philosophers because they were atheists and would often conclude that they wanted to kill religious people everywhere.  Both Marx and Nietzche were targets of these.  There is some fodder when you get quotes like "god is dead," and "religion is the opiate of the masses," (both often taken out of context, I might add), but the problem is when people automatically jump to the conclusion that these people are megalomaniacs who want to kill anyone who believes in a god.

Avatar image for Explosive_Bagel
#17 Posted by Explosive_Bagel (153 posts) -
but then 'murica came and saved the day
Avatar image for Laihendi
#18 Posted by Laihendi (5871 posts) -

[QUOTE="Laihendi"]

Here is a good and informative article

According to a disturbingly pleasant graphic fromInformation is Beautifulentitled simply 20thCentury Death, communism was the leading ideological cause of death between 1900 and 2000. The 94 million that perished in China, the Soviet Union, North Korea, Afghanistan, and Eastern Europe easily (and tragically) trump the 28 million that died under fascist regimes during the same period.

During the century measured, more people died as a result of communism than from homicide (58 million) and genocide (30 million) put together. The combined death tolls of WWI (37 million) and WWII (66 million) exceed communisms total by only 9 million.

It gets worse when you look at the lower right of the chartThe Natural Worldwhich includes animals (7 million), natural disasters (24 million), and famine (101 million). Curiously, all of the worlds worst famines during the 20th century were in communist countries: China (twice!), the Soviet Union, and North Korea. 

Communism is a killer. And yet some still say they support the idea: According to a 2011 Rasmussen poll, 11% of Americans think that communism would better serve this countrys needs than our current system.theone86

http://reason.com/blog/2013/03/13/communism-killed-94m-in-20th-century

Deaths from laissez-faire capitalism - 0

Deaths from communism - 94,000,000

Communism is the most violent and destructive ideology in human history. I think it is clear which is the moral social system, and which is not.

The bolded is not true, Pinochet's government is one prominent example I can think of that is responsible for numerous deaths, I'm sure there are more.  If we're going to get technical we could start to get into all the dictators that the U.S. backed and see how many people they killed.  Does the Shah of Iran count in this calculation?  There's another large group of deaths.

Aside from that, you're painting in broad strokes.  To say that North Korean communism is the same thing as Cuban or Soviet communism is about the same thing as saying Nazi Germany's economy was pretty much the same as the modern U.S. economy.  Aside from that, just about every form of communism that's ever been implemented at a national scale is a pretty far cry from what Marx put forward as a functional form of communism (he did speak about crude communism which he called destructive).  Aside from that, Marx is not the penultimate authority on communism and there is a wide range of communist ideologies which vary, sometimes profoundly, from one another.  To say that governments who claimed a communist ideology (and I'd say authoritarianism in general is pretty opposed to communism on an ideological level) were responsible for killings, therefore communism as a whole is a failed ideology is wholly fallacious.

Those regimes were not free capitalist societies. A dictator has nothing to do with laissez-faire capitalism. Also,

Through centuries of scourges and disasters, brought about by your code of morality, you have cried that your code had been broken, that the scourges were punishment for breaking it, that men were too weak and too selfish to spill all the blood it required. You damned man, you damned existence, you damned this earth, but never dared to question your code. Your victims took the blame and struggled on, with your curses as reward for their martyrdom-while you went on crying that your code was noble, but human nature was not good enough to practice it. And no one rose to ask the question: Good?-by what standard?Ayn Rand

Avatar image for Canuck3000
#19 Posted by Canuck3000 (40562 posts) -

Laihendi. With your intelligence shouldn't you at least be an Ivysaur by now?

Avatar image for Audacitron
#20 Posted by Audacitron (971 posts) -

inb4 communism = atheismZeviander

 

...except in North Korea.

 

Anyway, Jesus was totally a communist.  Remember the loaves and fishes?  Hand them all over to Jesus and he'll redistribute them to make sure everyone gets fed.

Avatar image for Yusuke420
#21 Posted by Yusuke420 (2770 posts) -

Laihendi. With your intelligence shouldn't you at least be an Ivysaur by now?

Canuck3000

LOL, also lai you have me covinced please link me to all relavent Rand reading material. If I'm going to bash it, I should at least read what this lady is droning on about. 

Avatar image for mattbbpl
#22 Posted by mattbbpl (15529 posts) -

[QUOTE="Canuck3000"]

Laihendi. With your intelligence shouldn't you at least be an Ivysaur by now?

Yusuke420

LOL, also lai you have me covinced please link me to all relavent Rand reading material. If I'm going to bash it, I should at least read what this lady is droning on about. 

Virtually every library in the country will have her major works. Atlas Shrugged and the Fountainhead are regularly used as topics for education essays and scholarship essay topics.
Avatar image for theone86
#23 Posted by theone86 (21745 posts) -

[QUOTE="theone86"]

[QUOTE="Laihendi"]

Here is a good and informative article

According to a disturbingly pleasant graphic fromInformation is Beautifulentitled simply 20thCentury Death, communism was the leading ideological cause of death between 1900 and 2000. The 94 million that perished in China, the Soviet Union, North Korea, Afghanistan, and Eastern Europe easily (and tragically) trump the 28 million that died under fascist regimes during the same period.

During the century measured, more people died as a result of communism than from homicide (58 million) and genocide (30 million) put together. The combined death tolls of WWI (37 million) and WWII (66 million) exceed communisms total by only 9 million.

It gets worse when you look at the lower right of the chartThe Natural Worldwhich includes animals (7 million), natural disasters (24 million), and famine (101 million). Curiously, all of the worlds worst famines during the 20th century were in communist countries: China (twice!), the Soviet Union, and North Korea. 

Communism is a killer. And yet some still say they support the idea: According to a 2011 Rasmussen poll, 11% of Americans think that communism would better serve this countrys needs than our current system.Laihendi

http://reason.com/blog/2013/03/13/communism-killed-94m-in-20th-century

Deaths from laissez-faire capitalism - 0

Deaths from communism - 94,000,000

Communism is the most violent and destructive ideology in human history. I think it is clear which is the moral social system, and which is not.

The bolded is not true, Pinochet's government is one prominent example I can think of that is responsible for numerous deaths, I'm sure there are more.  If we're going to get technical we could start to get into all the dictators that the U.S. backed and see how many people they killed.  Does the Shah of Iran count in this calculation?  There's another large group of deaths.

Aside from that, you're painting in broad strokes.  To say that North Korean communism is the same thing as Cuban or Soviet communism is about the same thing as saying Nazi Germany's economy was pretty much the same as the modern U.S. economy.  Aside from that, just about every form of communism that's ever been implemented at a national scale is a pretty far cry from what Marx put forward as a functional form of communism (he did speak about crude communism which he called destructive).  Aside from that, Marx is not the penultimate authority on communism and there is a wide range of communist ideologies which vary, sometimes profoundly, from one another.  To say that governments who claimed a communist ideology (and I'd say authoritarianism in general is pretty opposed to communism on an ideological level) were responsible for killings, therefore communism as a whole is a failed ideology is wholly fallacious.

Those regimes were not free capitalist societies. A dictator has nothing to do with laissez-faire capitalism. Also,

Through centuries of scourges and disasters, brought about by your code of morality, you have cried that your code had been broken, that the scourges were punishment for breaking it, that men were too weak and too selfish to spill all the blood it required. You damned man, you damned existence, you damned this earth, but never dared to question your code. Your victims took the blame and struggled on, with your curses as reward for their martyrdom-while you went on crying that your code was noble, but human nature was not good enough to practice it. And no one rose to ask the question: Good?-by what standard?Ayn Rand

Um, no, sorry, that's a cop-out.  If you're going to whitewash communism because of the acts of certain communist regimes then you can't be picky about which free market governments you want to prop up as examples.  Besides, you're not addressing the problem of capitalist societies without dictators supporting dictators.  Sure, they're not directly acting as dictators, but then why are they continuously propping up authoritarian regimes?

Acting as if I should take Rand seriously.  Your quote just shows how ignorant and fallcious her reasoning is.  Again, she is assuming that communism practiced on a national level is the same thing as any sort of communist ideology anywhere.  That's a genetic fallacy, you can't damn a whole ideology based on the actions of a select group of pracitcioners, especially when the original theorists said nothing of authoritarian enforcement of their ideology in the first place.  The fact that she takes killings to be a central part of all communism (the part about spilling blood) is evidence of how fallacious her reasoning is.  There are communists who just go out and live in the woods in self-sustainign communities, are they demanding that blood be spilled in the name of their code?  Are they morally bankrupt?  No.  Ayn Rand was a sociopath.  She was a deranged woman who admittedly suffered unduly during her life, but she took that experience and unduly blamed an entire group for her own suffering, and then proceeded to write sh*tty sophist propaganda slandering them writ large. There's no good reason to take her seriously.

Avatar image for HoolaHoopMan
#24 Posted by HoolaHoopMan (9634 posts) -
Wonder how many laissez faire capitalist systems were implemented at the same levels as communist systems.DroidPhysX
No deaths in Somalia bro. Or Colonialism. Or the Guilded age due to working conditions. I'd like some ice cream now.
Avatar image for dave123321
#25 Posted by dave123321 (35361 posts) -
Lai, how is the book coming along?
Avatar image for HoolaHoopMan
#26 Posted by HoolaHoopMan (9634 posts) -
Lai, how is the book coming along?dave123321
On chapter 5: Obama eats babies for breakfast.
Avatar image for Canuck3000
#27 Posted by Canuck3000 (40562 posts) -

I'm sure his book will be entertaining at the very least

Avatar image for NEWMAHAY
#28 Posted by NEWMAHAY (3824 posts) -
I assume laih is going to try to tie in Communism with Obama.
Avatar image for sonicare
#29 Posted by sonicare (56100 posts) -

Ever major attempt to implement communism has led to authoritarian oligarchies.  Lots of its supporters will state that they just didnt have the right people or the right situation.  But honestly, how good is a form of govt. if it is so dependent and fragile?  It sucks.  However, there are other forms of socialistic govts that do work or work better at least.  The problem with these communistic systems is taht they involve a massive surrendering of freedoms and rights.  People give their govt. full control, but that's often a set up for abuse.  Power corrupts.

Avatar image for mattbbpl
#30 Posted by mattbbpl (15529 posts) -
[QUOTE="dave123321"]Lai, how is the book coming along?HoolaHoopMan
On chapter 5: Obama eats babies for breakfast.

I wasn't really interested, but if he includes a chapter containing his thoughts on moral sexuality it could turn out to be quite entertaining.
Avatar image for mattbbpl
#31 Posted by mattbbpl (15529 posts) -

Ever major attempt to implement communism has led to authoritarian oligarchies.  Lots of its supporters will state that they just didnt have the right people or the right situation.  But honestly, how good is a form of govt. if it is so dependent and fragile?  It sucks.  However, there are other forms of socialistic govts that do work or work better at least.  The problem with these communistic systems is taht they involve a massive surrendering of freedoms and rights.  People give their govt. full control, but that's often a set up for abuse.  Power corrupts.

sonicare
Thank you. I hate these false dichotomy premises.
Avatar image for Slashless
#32 Posted by Slashless (9528 posts) -

 

...except in North Korea.

 

Anyway, Jesus was totally a communist.  Remember the loaves and fishes?  Hand them all over to Jesus and he'll redistribute them to make sure everyone gets fed.

Audacitron

JesuswasaPirate_zps02b8e79f.png

Avatar image for HoolaHoopMan
#33 Posted by HoolaHoopMan (9634 posts) -
[QUOTE="HoolaHoopMan"][QUOTE="dave123321"]Lai, how is the book coming along?mattbbpl
On chapter 5: Obama eats babies for breakfast.

I wasn't really interested, but if he includes a chapter containing his thoughts on moral sexuality it could turn out to be quite entertaining.

If his rants on OT are any indication the entire thing should be a riot. I'd expect a an entire section dedicated to Sun_Tzu.
Avatar image for PannicAtack
#34 Posted by PannicAtack (21040 posts) -
[QUOTE="HoolaHoopMan"][QUOTE="dave123321"]Lai, how is the book coming along?mattbbpl
On chapter 5: Obama eats babies for breakfast.

I wasn't really interested, but if he includes a chapter containing his thoughts on moral sexuality it could turn out to be quite entertaining.

I wonder if it'll have that bit about how parents have the "right" to rape their children.
Avatar image for redstorm72
#35 Posted by redstorm72 (4646 posts) -

Communism is an ideology. It can't kill anyone because it doesn't actually exist.

Avatar image for deactivated-59d151f079814
#36 Posted by deactivated-59d151f079814 (47239 posts) -
Now who was advocating for communism again?
Avatar image for leviathan91
#37 Posted by leviathan91 (7763 posts) -

And? :|

Capitalism is a superior economic philosophy but economics itself doesn't kill people. The communist nations of the past failed (or were crud) due to lack of equal rights, individual rights, and freedoms that not just America but most of the Western world benefited from.

Avatar image for Laihendi
#38 Posted by Laihendi (5871 posts) -

[QUOTE="Laihendi"]

[QUOTE="theone86"]

The bolded is not true, Pinochet's government is one prominent example I can think of that is responsible for numerous deaths, I'm sure there are more.  If we're going to get technical we could start to get into all the dictators that the U.S. backed and see how many people they killed.  Does the Shah of Iran count in this calculation?  There's another large group of deaths.

Aside from that, you're painting in broad strokes.  To say that North Korean communism is the same thing as Cuban or Soviet communism is about the same thing as saying Nazi Germany's economy was pretty much the same as the modern U.S. economy.  Aside from that, just about every form of communism that's ever been implemented at a national scale is a pretty far cry from what Marx put forward as a functional form of communism (he did speak about crude communism which he called destructive).  Aside from that, Marx is not the penultimate authority on communism and there is a wide range of communist ideologies which vary, sometimes profoundly, from one another.  To say that governments who claimed a communist ideology (and I'd say authoritarianism in general is pretty opposed to communism on an ideological level) were responsible for killings, therefore communism as a whole is a failed ideology is wholly fallacious.

theone86

Those regimes were not free capitalist societies. A dictator has nothing to do with laissez-faire capitalism. Also,

Through centuries of scourges and disasters, brought about by your code of morality, you have cried that your code had been broken, that the scourges were punishment for breaking it, that men were too weak and too selfish to spill all the blood it required. You damned man, you damned existence, you damned this earth, but never dared to question your code. Your victims took the blame and struggled on, with your curses as reward for their martyrdom-while you went on crying that your code was noble, but human nature was not good enough to practice it. And no one rose to ask the question: Good?-by what standard?Ayn Rand

Um, no, sorry, that's a cop-out.  If you're going to whitewash communism because of the acts of certain communist regimes then you can't be picky about which free market governments you want to prop up as examples.  Besides, you're not addressing the problem of capitalist societies without dictators supporting dictators.  Sure, they're not directly acting as dictators, but then why are they continuously propping up authoritarian regimes?

Acting as if I should take Rand seriously.  Your quote just shows how ignorant and fallcious her reasoning is.  Again, she is assuming that communism practiced on a national level is the same thing as any sort of communist ideology anywhere.  That's a genetic fallacy, you can't damn a whole ideology based on the actions of a select group of pracitcioners, especially when the original theorists said nothing of authoritarian enforcement of their ideology in the first place.  The fact that she takes killings to be a central part of all communism (the part about spilling blood) is evidence of how fallacious her reasoning is.  There are communists who just go out and live in the woods in self-sustainign communities, are they demanding that blood be spilled in the name of their code?  Are they morally bankrupt?  No.  Ayn Rand was a sociopath.  She was a deranged woman who admittedly suffered unduly during her life, but she took that experience and unduly blamed an entire group for her own suffering, and then proceeded to write sh*tty sophist propaganda slandering them writ large. There's no good reason to take her seriously.

Communism is the rejection of individual independence - work, action, property, thought, etc. It necessarily requires blind submission and conformity. It is a fundamentally suicidal ideology, and that is why any society that has implemented this basic principle of suicide has succeeded only in destroying itself.
Avatar image for Laihendi
#39 Posted by Laihendi (5871 posts) -
Lai, how is the book coming along?dave123321
It is going somewhat slowly right now but I will write faster once the semester is over and I have more time. I am still on track to finish sometime in June.
Avatar image for -Sun_Tzu-
#40 Posted by -Sun_Tzu- (17384 posts) -

Deaths from laissez-faire capitalism - 0Laihendi

lol

Communism is the most violent and destructive ideology in human history.Laihendi

lol

I think

Laihendi

lol

Avatar image for NEWMAHAY
#41 Posted by NEWMAHAY (3824 posts) -
[QUOTE="PannicAtack"][QUOTE="mattbbpl"][QUOTE="HoolaHoopMan"] On chapter 5: Obama eats babies for breakfast.

I wasn't really interested, but if he includes a chapter containing his thoughts on moral sexuality it could turn out to be quite entertaining.

I wonder if it'll have that bit about how parents have the "right" to rape their children.

did he seriously say that?
Avatar image for deactivated-5b1e62582e305
#42 Posted by deactivated-5b1e62582e305 (30778 posts) -

More moronic troll drivel meant to annoy and entertain OT. Keep it coming Trollhendi.

Avatar image for punkpunker
#43 Posted by punkpunker (3383 posts) -

people being ripped off - billions of dollars.

this degrades one's quality of life overall.

Avatar image for -Sun_Tzu-
#44 Posted by -Sun_Tzu- (17384 posts) -

people being ripped off - billions of dollars.

this degrades one's quality of life overall.

punkpunker
yeah but they're getting ripped off for freedom
Avatar image for ghoklebutter
#45 Posted by ghoklebutter (19327 posts) -

Deaths from laissez-faire capitalism - 0

Laihendi

LOL

Avatar image for dude_brahmski
#46 Posted by dude_brahmski (472 posts) -

[QUOTE="Canuck3000"]

Laihendi. With your intelligence shouldn't you at least be an Ivysaur by now?

Yusuke420

LOL, also lai you have me covinced please link me to all relavent Rand reading material. If I'm going to bash it, I should at least read what this lady is droning on about. 

i really wouldn't bother
Avatar image for ghoklebutter
#47 Posted by ghoklebutter (19327 posts) -
[QUOTE="Yusuke420"]

[QUOTE="Canuck3000"]

Laihendi. With your intelligence shouldn't you at least be an Ivysaur by now?

dude_brahmski

LOL, also lai you have me covinced please link me to all relavent Rand reading material. If I'm going to bash it, I should at least read what this lady is droning on about. 

i really wouldn't bother

i would it makes for an entertaining waste of time
Avatar image for Solid_Snake325
#48 Posted by Solid_Snake325 (6091 posts) -

Ever major attempt to implement communism has led to authoritarian oligarchies.  Lots of its supporters will state that they just didnt have the right people or the right situation.  But honestly, how good is a form of govt. if it is so dependent and fragile?  It sucks.  However, there are other forms of socialistic govts that do work or work better at least.  The problem with these communistic systems is taht they involve a massive surrendering of freedoms and rights.  People give their govt. full control, but that's often a set up for abuse.  Power corrupts.

sonicare
One of the only posts that actually makes sense. Some of you guys are frankly just idiotic for defending communism. It removes an unacceptable amount of liberties, it allows vicious opportunities for power, and overall fails because at its core, it assumes ideals in people that do not exist.
Avatar image for -Sun_Tzu-
#49 Posted by -Sun_Tzu- (17384 posts) -

at its core, it assumes ideals in people that do not exist.Solid_Snake325
No it doesn't

Avatar image for Solid_Snake325
#50 Posted by Solid_Snake325 (6091 posts) -

[QUOTE="Solid_Snake325"] at its core, it assumes ideals in people that do not exist.-Sun_Tzu-

No it doesn't

What a fantastic response. Thank you for opening my eyes.