Current Events > Why hasn't there been a communist revolution in the USA yet

(+) Yeah! (+)

Half my family literally lives in a communist country, and they find it simultaneously shocking and hilarious that anyone in the United States would actually want to copy them.
---

Hard to win a revolution with this...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mbdUWkqTDH8" data-time="
---

Never underestimate the power of laziness
---

Because Communism doesn't work, plain and simple.

Government can barely manage to run itself as it is and you want to put them in charge of production? That's the single dumbest idea ever.

Capitalism with a few Social Systems in place works. It isn't perfect, and the US in particular is in desperate need of reform, but it's more effective then every other system. Hell if they made the 1% pay their taxes the way everyone else does the economy would straight itself out damn near overnight.

But delusional people have this pipe dream of free tuition, universal healthcare, and cost of living sustainable without a job are just plain stupid. You have to trade for services.
---

Millions die and suffer under communism
---

There's already been several, mostly in the 1910s.

Questionmarktarius posted...

There's already been several, mostly in the 1910s.

There was a communist revolution in the USA in 1910?
---

REMercsChamp posted...

Questionmarktarius posted...

There's already been several, mostly in the 1910s.

There was a communist revolution in the USA in 1910?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Communist_Party_USA

Questionmarktarius posted...

REMercsChamp posted...

Questionmarktarius posted...

There's already been several, mostly in the 1910s.

There was a communist revolution in the USA in 1910?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Communist_Party_USA

And you expect me to read all of that I'm guessing
---

Antifar posted...

Capital has done a better job than the left in this country at creating hegemony.

Capitalism made America the most prosperous country in the world and is responsible for nearly all the largest advancements in society since its inception, and you hate it. Communism in the mean time produced 100s of millions of deaths.

Godnorgosh posted...

Coffeebeanz posted...

Half my family literally lives in a communist country, and they find it simultaneously shocking and hilarious that anyone in the United States would actually want to copy them.

Have you considered that China isn't communist? That might clear up some of your bafflement.

Despite the Communist dictatorship?

REMercsChamp posted...

Questionmarktarius posted...

REMercsChamp posted...

Questionmarktarius posted...

There's already been several, mostly in the 1910s.

There was a communist revolution in the USA in 1910?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Communist_Party_USA

And you expect me to read all of that I'm guessing

Meh.

tl;dr:
Communists showed up around 1919.
Then, again in the late 1940s - McCarthy fucked them over.

Godnorgosh posted...

Herugrim posted...

But delusional people have this pipe dream of free tuition, universal healthcare

These already exist in some countries today. Why couldn't they exist in a post-capitalist society?

Those countries have massive deficits. Its unsustainable. So is ours, but that doesnt change their situation.
---

Communism only sounds good to people who fucked up their life beyond repair and want someone else to keep them going.
---

http://fortune.com/2017/07/10/climate-change-green-house-gases/

About 100 companies have been responsible for about 71% of the worlds greenhouse gas emissions.

Capitalism is set up to kill far far more

Because contrary to what certain people around here say due to various mental complications, this country is not overflowing with people of communistic ideology.

Ayyyyyy post 69
---

Because communism was just a red herring.

ScazarMeltex posted...

AlephZero posted...

ScazarMeltex posted...

Norway, Sweden, Finland, Denmark, Belgium, The Netherlands, England

All capitalist countries.

Hence why I said Democratic socialist counties in the post.

Social Democrats are capitalists. You seem to have your terms confused.
---

Nobody wants Communism or even socialism. The most people want is universal healthcare, a livable wage, and more government oversight when it comes to corporations. Socialism is too red for America (and even the DSA which is close to but not full blown socialism is too red and dangerous), and communism is downright dangerous.
---

Sorry, Communism itself is a tired cliche.
---

Godnorgosh posted...

tennisdude818 posted...

Godnorgosh posted...

Herugrim posted...

But delusional people have this pipe dream of free tuition, universal healthcare

These already exist in some countries today. Why couldn't they exist in a post-capitalist society?

Those countries have massive deficits. Its unsustainable. So is ours, but that doesnt change their situation.

Germany is running a budget surplus and has free tuition and universal healthcare. You're just straight-up bullshitting here.

Germany benefits from a shared currency system with clear winners and losers that is also unsustainable, but they still hold a pension time-bomb.
---

tennisdude818 posted...

Godnorgosh posted...

tennisdude818 posted...

Godnorgosh posted...

Herugrim posted...

But delusional people have this pipe dream of free tuition, universal healthcare

These already exist in some countries today. Why couldn't they exist in a post-capitalist society?

Those countries have massive deficits. Its unsustainable. So is ours, but that doesnt change their situation.

Germany is running a budget surplus and has free tuition and universal healthcare. You're just straight-up bullshitting here.

Germany benefits from a shared currency system with clear winners and losers that is also unsustainable, but they still hold a pension time-bomb.

Stop telling godnorgosh that he can't have free stuff for doing nothing. It's not nice.
---

Godnorgosh posted...

It seems to me that our system is much less efficient and sustainable than Germany's

Well the country is also a hell of a lot bigger and more complex than Germany.
---

I like how the actual communists here are bringing up modern day socialist programs as an indication of how reasonable their position is. In reality, over of half of Americans are already fine with ideas like nationalized healthcare, people realize we can still have a capitalist economy in principle while making some critical services nationalized. Communism is however vastly different from just programs like nationalized healthcare or even universal basic income. Read the Gulag Archipelgo, I dont think humanity has ever seen such evil at a mass scale than the communist experiments of the 20th century.
---

many socialists i've listened to do not consider(and shouldn't) the scandinavian countries socialist

they're capitalist with "social" programs

the word "social" is confusing

the whole idea about "means of production" and such doesn't mean we cannot redistribute wealth in whatever way we want

we already agree to taxation and it can go to whatever the government wants really so its not entirely contradictory

the current culture may discourage it for whatever reason but just believing in that doesn't make someone a socialist

a socialist wants worker ownership of the means of production, whatever that means
---

Godnorgosh posted...

REMercsChamp posted...

tennisdude818 posted...

Godnorgosh posted...

tennisdude818 posted...

Godnorgosh posted...

Herugrim posted...

But delusional people have this pipe dream of free tuition, universal healthcare

These already exist in some countries today. Why couldn't they exist in a post-capitalist society?

Those countries have massive deficits. Its unsustainable. So is ours, but that doesnt change their situation.

Germany is running a budget surplus and has free tuition and universal healthcare. You're just straight-up bullshitting here.

Germany benefits from a shared currency system with clear winners and losers that is also unsustainable, but they still hold a pension time-bomb.

Stop telling godnorgosh that he can't have free stuff for doing nothing. It's not nice.

It seems to me that our system is much less efficient and sustainable than Germany's, if we're using the national debt, student loan debt and medical debt as measures.

Also, we don't want free stuff. We want the value of our labor, which is more than enough to enable us to afford decent education and healthcare. If you don't like free stuff, end welfare for the rich.

The student loan bubble is enabled by government policy. The government backs student loans while at the same time making it very difficult to discharge student debt through bankruptcy. So schools can jack up prices without any fear of empty seats.

The government broke US healthcare is numerous ways, not the least of which being how the FDA delays/prevents drug releases by forcing years of testing, costing millions to billions. They play it safe because they look worse if a drug that hurts people is released than if a life extending drug is prevented from reaching the market altogether.

Prices skyrocket in the sectors of the economy that are most touched by government. As a result of those price increases, people like you call for more government involvement in those sectors. It's a vicious cycle.
---

Godnorgosh posted...

Kazi1212 posted...

people realize we can still have a capitalist economy in principle while making some critical services nationalized.

We can't really, because one of those "critical services" involves holding 100 companies accountable for producing 71% of global emissions and preventing a continuation of that pattern. That is not going to happen under capitalism.

Perhaps, but it doesn't seem to me implementation of communism is the answer either. Im not saying there are easy answers here to the sustainability issue moving forward, but I do think the 20th century has given us an abundance of examples of the unforeseen consequences of socially engineering an entire economy.
---

I may have to brush up on my history, but was Stalin's Russia the only place in the 20th century where genocidal violence occurred under the name of erecting a communist society?
---

Kazi1212 posted...

I may have to brush up on my history, but was Stalin's Russia the only place in the 20th century where genocidal violence occurred under the name of erecting a communist society?

Maoist China and Khmer Rogue Cambodia are also famous examples.
---

There was hope to be found in the ruins of war in those countries occupied by the United States. Whereas the Soviets took anything of value from their zones of occupation, the Americans set out to rebuild. In Germany, Eisenhower told his staff that the success of the occupation policies being imposed on the defeated nation could be judged only in fifty years. If after half a century the Germans had a stable, flourishing democracy, then the occupation could be considered a success. To bring that about, Eisenhower called in German reporters and told them that he wanted a free press in Germany, meaning that when he did something they disagreed with, it was their responsibility to criticize it in their newspapers. This invitation to criticize their conqueror came as a great surprise to reporters who had just emerged from twelve years of working for the Nazi propaganda machine. Eisenhower called in labor leaders and told them he wanted a free, independent labor movement. He told the schoolteachers they should teach their students that there were a number of legitimate points of view on various subjects and that they should learn to make up their own minds. To teachers who had worked for the Nazis for twelve years, the notion that schools should encourage independent thinking was astonishing.
---

southcoast09 posted...

Because communism has proven, in every instance, to make things astronomically worse.

---

The truth was that the U.S. Army in northwest Europe liberated not only France, Belgium, Holland, and other conquered nations but it also liberated Germany. The difference between being occupied by the U.S. Army and the Red Army was, for nearly the next half century, apparent to all the world. In Asia, the horror of Japanese occupation was replaced in the Philippines by national independence, promised by the Americans before the war and delivered on July 4, 1946. In Japan, the Americans under General MacArthurs leadership emulated Eisenhowers actions in West Germany, bringing democracy and freedom to that nation, and in the process, liberating
---

the Japanese people from their military dictators. The American determination to lead in the reconstruction of Europe and to restore or create democratic regimes there was complete. It had many expressions, the best known and most important of which were the Marshall Plan, begun in 1947, and the creation of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) to defend Western Europe from the Red Army. By 1953, West Germany had recovered its independence and joined NATO, meaning that less than a decade after the war the United States and Germany were allied with the nations of Western Europe in an anti-Soviet alliance. Stalin responded by creating the Warsaw Pact. Once again, as in 1939, Europe was re-arming, entering into antagonistic alliances, bluffing, threatening, and rattling sabers.
-Stephen Ambrose
---

I'm impressed how Godnorgosh actually communism-splained.
---

AlephZero posted...

ScazarMeltex posted...

Norway, Sweden, Finland, Denmark, Belgium, The Netherlands, England

All capitalist countries.

Not only that, but they have less regulations on corporations than we do.

Plus they have a lot less demographics however some places like Sweden and Denmark foolishly let in hundreds of thousands of refugees and deny the problems caused by it.
---

Godnorgosh posted...

You'll find that this isn't how the transition from feudalism to capitalism occurred. That took place due to changes in material conditions that in turn resulted in a structural revolution (which was itself violent, but that's beside the point). That underpins the distinction I'm making between Stalinism (and similar ideologies) and post-capitalism.

Correct me if Im wrong, so you're saying the transition from feudalism to capitalism occurred almost as a means of necessity that underpinned the fedual system? I don't disagree with that, I also think our current system of economy will transform over time due to a similar logic, that line of thinking isnt just grounded in the logic of dialectical materialism, its also game theory. However, thats not to say anyone can know with certainty whether our current economy will evolve into the vision of communist ideology, and it seems me there has been more evidence against that vision than for it just from what has historically transpired.
---

All communist see themselves as the leader and everyone else as the peon follower that needs to die for their cause.
---

HiddenLurker posted...

All communist see themselves as the leader and everyone else as the peon follower that needs to die for their cause.

What is their cause exactly
---