This will not explain the history or origins or theology of Communism; I will just explain here how it works as a system of government.
The key points of Communism are: There are no copyright laws, there is no private property, the government owns the economy, and no one can have an economic monopoly. In a nutshell, it doesn't sound like a workable idea, but the mentality behind Communism is to keep the corporations from having too much political control. To expound on a couple of these concepts:
*The reason there are no copyright laws is to keep all media available to the general public. Creators can still patent their works to keep other people from using them without permission, though.
*This is how the concept of having no private property works: You can "own" property as in have the right to inhabit it, build on it, and basically put whatever you want there. However, if you want to put something on undeveloped land, it doesn't matter who owns it: The government just has to OK whatever you're doing. There are limitations as to what you can do on land that is owned, but the government gets the deciding say.
*As previously mentioned, Communist governments maintain absolute control of the economy for the sake of preventing corporations from having too much (and in some cases, any) political power. And if you look at the political climate of this country lately, that almost sounds like a workable alternative.
*This last one is Communism's claim to fame: No sole individual, entrepreneur, or corporation can have a bigger piece of the economic pie than anyone else. The reasoning behind this dates back to the Bolshevist era in Russia, when the mentality was basically, "To keep everybody equal, we're going to have to let some people move up. And to make that happen, we're going to have to force some people to move down." The basic principle: Keep the political fate of this country in the hands of the government, and out of the hands of the corporations. This is why Communism is not a popular idea in America: Some people don't think the government should have that much power. On the other side of the issue, some people think the corporations shouldn't be able to have ANY power. Do you want the government controlling you, or do you want a corporation to own you? That's the big issue.
Communism just like its cousins Socialism and Progressivism is based upon the application of philosophia based dialectics and metaphysics. Marx & Engels used dialectics and metaphysics as the basis for their idealistic implementation system which they coined Communism. Communism is a theocracy as it requires the masses to align with philosophia doctrine, accepting dialectics and metaphysics as the means for justifying the end result.
Within communism the State is controlled by the Sage of philosophia (those who are proclaimed to be the wisest among the philosophia, ideal condition). Its idealistically presumed that the Sage are those who have reached a state of idealism, as to not be influenced by greed and other negative human traits (this ideal never plays out in actual application). The State owns and controls all means of production, Assets, and Communication (very much akin to the system of Aristocracy). People are part of the commune and their existence is for the good of the commune as a whole, there is no individualism (again akin to peasants within an Aristocracy).
Although sold to the public as an idealistic system, Communism historically winds up resulting in an tyrannical Dictatorship, as those appointed to power never want to release the power they posses. With no incentive or self motivation, the people of the commune, usually wind up in abject poverty. Communism is a theocracy (based upon philosophia doctrine, specifically Stoick) other doctrines are either prohibited or extremely scrutinized by the government.
Although communism appeals to many people in its ideal form, in practice it historically becomes dictatorial and tyrannical. Governments are historically not effective at running businesses, and Communist governments are no different, therefore the assets of the government (the commune) are never able to provide for the needs of the people, without turning to some form of capitalism in order to generate revenue and or barter commodities such as food. Russia and China are examples of two communist nations who adopted capitalism as a means of generating revenue in order to survive.
There are aspects of communism that are a good idea. There are portions of it that did not work well.
People suspected of communism were refused work
communism can be described as a form of socialism where there is no class system and the people under communism focus on shared production, not private ownership. The goal is for everyone to work to produce and not try to work for themselves.
Communism Communism its so great Lets join Stalin and start to hate-------procommunism Communism Communism its unfair you dont have to work so yer put on welfare-------procommunism lol
The only reason communism has failed is because of human flaw. In communism people are all supposed to share the work and be in the same class. But you get typical people who are just lazy and don't do their share of the work and just live off of what other people have done. Communism is a great idea but will probably never work because humans are a flawed species.
they work in factories because they have a corrupted communism government.
Japan does not have a communist government. Never has.
Communism or slavery.
Communism (classless stateless society) has never existed.
No, the collapse of the USSR does not actually prove that communism doesn't work, any more than the failure of Joe's Fish and Chips proves that restaurants don't work. The failure of the Soviet Union and its satellite states is just one example in which a paranoid version of communism didn't work. It may well be that it is possible to do it better. Although I offer no guarantees.
Yes: people in Communism are free to do worthwhile and rewarding work, and can live comfortably with free access to what has been produced. Under capitalism, the vast majority have to work for an employer and their consumption is limited by their wage.
People should work and share wealth equally
Anti-Communism is the opposite of communism.
In Communism there is no economy, as there is no money and no buying and selling. People are free to work and consume as they wish.
No, Karl Marx is generally considered the father of communism, although he was certainly not the first one to think about it. "Communism" existed in primitive forms in ancient tribal societies where everyone in the tribe simply worked common land or hunted to produce food for the entire tribe. Marx was the first person to propose a theory that communism is an inevitable result of the natural forces and conflicts caused by a modern industrialized capitalist society and how communism would work as a society. For his work developing the theory of communism, but not for inventing it, Marx is considered the father of communism. Lenin merely implemented some but not all of Marx's theories.
Because it was abused by greeded leaders and the socialism fell apart == ==
.The United States would work to stop Communism from spreading.
Depends on how that certain country handles it's economy. Communism is based on Economy. Depends on the countries resources and whether or not their leader is a complete Phyco path
The countries that are using Communism are Laos, China, Vietnam, and Korea. Communism is based on Marxism, that the government controls all production and Communism itself means "Everyone owns every thing another person has". this would lead to dictatorship. even though, the countries that use communism would end up with a good economy since everyone is willing to work for the gowernment
Das Kapital. by Karl Heinrich Marx (more a critique of capitalism than a theory of communism) The Communist Manifesto by Marx and Engels is much more appropriate.