Political Theory

Have you been to communist countries?I don't think so.I have been there and saw the truth you live normally of course in a different country than yours might be a little change for ya about how you live.But they live normally just like us . Wake up in the morning brushes teeth eats breakfast goes to work,finishes lunch continues working than goes home finishes dinner and cares about family and reads the Bible or whatever their religion is.You live there normally you buy what you buy you pay for what you need to pay for.You are free!

And sometimes you are hungry because there is not enough food for everybody or you have to stand in queues just to buy a loaf of bread. Or the only thing you can get on TV is programs about how good your government is and how good the president is - yes just normal stuff.

To correct the above two, Communism has not been achieved nationwide; there are authoritarian "socialist" states, few of whom are socialist, that are labelled "communist" by those attempting to smear it using animosity left over from the Cold War. Although, conditions in, say, 1960s China or the Soviet Union are underrated, and frequently the average citizen enjoyed a relatively high standard of living than before (and, in the case of the Soviet Union, after) communism. For true communes, everyone lives and works together in small communities; the social aspect of working ensures relatively high productivity, although true communes have so far been limited to groups of 20-30 individuals (a large group of 100 in New Zealand) that tend to be agriculturally based. Overall, Communism is a "utopian society" idea only achieved in the aforementioned tiny communes, although feasible on a larger scale; and the ideology is smeared by authoritarian socialist nations. BTW--no queues for bread. Indoctrinated much?

If you are a selfish person who only wishes for yourself to succeed (AKA getting rich), then you won't like communism but if you are a kind person who values equality and wishes there are no beggars on the streets or people living in extreme poverty, then you MIGHT like Communism. Communism is a system of governance where there are no economic classes or no "low income families" or "high income families". It is a system where money and private ownership is abolished, everything belongs to the people, all of them and not just the richest 5% of the population who own 80% of the capital. Now, if you drive a Porsche and live in a great seaside house, then you probably won't be too happy donating you car or house for scrap metal to be made into standard houses for the whole country. Greed is natural. If you are Christian then it is because Adam and Eve ate the fruits of sin and if you are not then for you it is because it is human instinct to survive. Either way, Communism will not work because we will all take more than we need for we are greedy. In a true Communist country, there's no such thing as wages, taxes, etc, you work for the country and you receive free things required by you. In this type of society, only human beings who are not selfish and only take what they need will make it work. Obviously, humans are not like that. 30 years ago, in China, the hospitals gave out free medication and many people went to trick the hospital into giving them traditional medicine for their supposedly sick son who has a "cold". In truth, the medicine was taken back home and boiled with water to make soup. You see, that is why no country can ever make Communism work. The word "Communism" has an overall positive affect in poor countries, so how do you seize power easily? You brand yourself with the word "Communism" and do things that has to be the cruelest and most immoral things in the world, in the name of "Communism". The USA is not too happy with anybody taking power in other countries besides their "type" (rich and greedy executives) so they brand everyone else other than capitalism as "bad". North Korea is giving them this opportunity as they are in truth, a dictatorship but branded themselves with "Communism". This makes Communism an easy target for Western propaganda. So now every time you hear the word "Communism" you think executions and mass murders even though that is not the case but as the media has already done a great job at brain washing you, you automatically think that. Communism WILL be good if executed truthfully but no country has any means to do that.

_____________________________________________________________

Communism doesn't work because it fails to understand a principle of economics that everything is relative. If I say I am wealthy, what does that mean? Wealthy based on who's definition? I live in an apartment, I own a car, I have some money put away for retirement, etc. Not wealthy by western standards but if I were to take all that I have and move to Nigeria, I'd be very well off.

Additionally, if you try to make everyone rich, you only devalue the meaning of being rich and therefore you haven't made everyone rich, you've only made everyone the same level, which is usually poor.

Communism also fails to understand that people get to be wealthy not by stealing and cheating but by hard work. When you remove the incentive for someone to work hard because their efforts will be punished (taken by the state) then why will they work hard? They'll do the minimum because the results will be the same.

Communism as a theory looks great...its utopian...which is why it fails whenever practiced.

The original Jamestown colony functioned like a commune...and it failed miserably. Everyone received equal shares of food and material regardless of whether they worked or not and the colony almost collapsed because...surprise, people stopped working. The colony florished when people had to earn their keep by working.

Finally, Communism is flawed because the "ultimate goal" is a stateless society where everyone just lives in harmony and there is no need for government. This fails to realize that nature abhors a vacuum. If leadership is absent, someone will step up and take power. This is what Communists today do not understand when they say there has never been a true Communist state...there has but what always will happen is someone will role in and take power be they Lenin, Stalin, Mao, Castro, you name it.

Communes are most successful when they exist inside a Capitalistic nation...ironic.

Unlike Yanquis, Mexicans never had any tradition of self-rule when Mexico gained independence. Instead, they respected the Macho ruler and the Strong man. Their own attitude held them back at the national level. They would not be successful at that level until they had experience electing local politicians and local mayors. Also, until Mexico put in the secret ballot, great intimidation existed at the polls. At the national level, coup d'etat followed coup d'etat. Finally, Mexico began to break old habits.

There have been some form of elections in Mauritius since 1948. When Mauritius was a British Colony, its leader was called the British Governor, later known as the Governor-General of Mauritius; historically, as in most colonies, the British government and the King or Queen chose this person, who was often from England. But gradually, the citizens of Mauritius were able to gain more influence in choosing their own government. The first nation-wide elections occurred in August 1948, and demands for greater voting rights and autonomy grew from there.

By 1961, Mauritians were allowed to elect a Chief Minister (it should be noted that in the United States, a "minister" is a religious leader of a Christian congregation, but in British terminology, a minister also refers to someone holding a governmental position of leadership). In 1967, a constitution was approved; and in 1968, the country's first prime minister was chosen, as Mauritius became an independent state, and a Commonwealth realm. Its first Prime Minister was Sir Seewoosagur Ramgoolam, a respected political figure who had been a leader in the fight for independence. Mauritius became an independent republic in 1992. It has a parliament, a president (largely a ceremonial figure) and a prime minister.

Communism and it's evil twin socialism are already starting to die in the U.S. Look at the Bluest of the Blue States - New York, California, Michigan, etc. and see for yourself. The liberal Democrat political systems in those states have managed to drive away the most productive and better equipped individuals with their high taxes and broad intrusion on business and the private sector. Those precise productive individuals who are responsible for creating jobs and opening possibilities to those less able to provide for themselves. As such, the liberal-dem political class responsible for the current state of economic activity, or the lack thereof, within those states, mirror the creativity suffocating mindless bureaucracies that utterly destroyed communism in Eastern Europe and wherever else (see Cuba, and soon Venezuela) it reared its ugly head. Communism and socialism are inherently evil, based on the false premise that everyone is equal and therefore everyone should share in the fruits of overall production and a good life, when in fact, the only equality communism and socialism provide is equal misery for everyone. If communism is such a wonderful pathway to bliss, why doesn't communal living enjoy a bigger following in the U.S. After all, its been tried on many occasions and many levels, and never succeeds to any extent. If it (communal living) has to be coerced, as communism and socialism usually do, then there is no freedom, and without freedom the American capitalistic-based system cannot endure. And without capitalism, the dark ages of tyranny and oppression for all but the self appointed elect will once again fall over humankind. It is my firm belief that the endless yearning and desire for freedom in most individuals will reject that totalitarian darkness, and in the end communism and socialism will not survive.

Agenda setting

Charles de Secondat, Baron de Montesquieu wrote "The Spirit of Laws" in 1748

Ciranjiva Roy (1913-1981), a Brahmin Indian cast into poverty following partition in 1947, father of children, attained a comprehension of this life we lead in 1966 that is unlikely to be fully understood in the short term, although he conveyed much of this comprehension to all who met him both in Calcutta from 1968 on and then in USA from 1969 on. This writer met him late in 1970 and was elevated forever after, as were my friend, and though his form passed on we all love the memory of the most enlightened person we had the good fortune to know.

Marx did not see Socialism as a transitional stage to Communism. In one text he distinguished two stages of Communism, but he did not label the first stage as Socialism.

Ding Xiaoping or Mao Zedong. I am not sure.

it woeks because the political party chooses the nomine for a presidency and a candiate for the democracy.

http://forum.globaltimes.cn/forum/index.php

In a democracy people have the right to choose whether or not to own. In communism, no-one has the right to own as ownership of everything is collective.

It is a federal republic. At least theoretically, it is a democracy. It however, has weak institutions, and the "rule of law" is not always enforced, especially against organized crime.

well i think the best prime minster was tony Blair because he exclaimed the rights and wrongs and was prime ,minster for a long time

By using us troops to invade after the prime minister was removed by radicals

They invaded Grenada when there was a communist revolution.

In a dictatorship, only one person's opinion matters. In a democracy, multiple people's opinions matter. As a result, you are more likely to have disagreement in a democracy than a dictatorship. This disagreement is usually termed as "gridlock" by those who are annoyed by it.

Democracy accommodates different social groups by providing equality to all in terms of economic, political and social life. A democratic government also makes several provisions for the weaker sections of the society, such as the introduction of reservations in education etc. Hence, a democracy involves not only the strong groups of the society, but also the weak groups.

(From merit nation)

Usually, in all modern states, be they democracies or dictatorships, the only authority with the legitimate use of violence is the STATE and its appointed actors (military, police, security agents, etc.).

No. They should be in the kitchen in case a man needs a sandwich made for him.

social democracy

I don not think there is a specific word for it. It does not happen often. I suppose you would call it a come-back or maybe a resurrection or resuscitation or second chance .

Direct and indirect democracy.

There is Direct democracy, which is also called a pure democracy, that exists where the will of the people is translated into public policy (law) directly by the people themselves, in mass meetings.

There is also Inderect democracy where a representative is chosen to represent a larger group of people. These select few represent the popular will of the people. ( This is the type of Democracy the US uses)

Prime Minister leads a Democracy Government.