To everyone who claims communism works only in theory… or will never work for one reason or another. The same can be said of democracy. It works great in theory, but eventually fails as well. I don’t believe what America lives in now is much of a democracy. I think it is a weak plutocracy under the guise of democracy.
The law of human nature that defeats communism is “Absolute power corrupts absolutely.” The law of human nature that turns democracy into plutocracy is simply selfishness and greed. When people are given the power to do what they think is in their best interest they will try to benefit themselves as much as possible. This creates competition and competition between parties is crushed in the name of a free capitalist market and majority rules. Thus resulting in the formation of classes and ultimately class struggle.
Communism has a hard time survivng in this world because nearly every national economy follows capitalist ideals. It is hard to survive in a competitive market when your philosophy and well being revolves around your ability to cooperate with your fellow man. A communist nation can not easily compete against multiple nations trying to do what is best for themselves.
Ever see the movie, A Beautiful Mind? A crazy mathematician at an Ivy League school writes a paper that his professors claim undoes the last couple hundred years of economic theory(Adam Smith’s laissez-faire economics). John Nash, the main character, is inspired by a hot blonde that all of his friends want a shot at. If they all try to woo her all of her girlfriends will be turned off when they come after them because they don’t want to be second choice. What he suggests to his friends is that they put personal ambitions aside and each go after a different girl because it is cooperation that will benefit them the most. If they compete, at best one guy gets one girl. If they cooperate, five guys get five girls. That which is best for the individual and has a positive or neutral effect on the community is best overall. Cooperation is the driving force behind the communist ideal.
It would be my preference to be under a socialist government(aiming for a communist society), because I feel it would be easier to deal with a a few corrupt leaders every so often than a nation of selfish and greedy people.
Capitalism mixed with democracy only encourages people to take advantage of each other getting more and more wealthy and as wealth grows so does power. The poor suffer and the rich prosper. You start with people like the founding fathers who believed the governement should have little control over society as evidenced by the Bill of Rights.
The founding fathers were libertarians(or at least I will assert so considering what I’ve been told about the originally profound affect Thomas Paine had on the people at that time). Because of the laissez-faire economic theory made so popular at the time by Adam Smith, our little peaceful country has slowly evolved into the money and power hungry superpower it is now. We were a libertarian people, but to protect our fortunes and the freedoms of those in control, the laws had to be made stricter and stricter. We have gradually advanced linearly up the compass towards the authoritarian end.
We will continue to follow this direction until the plutocracy gains too much power that people cannot reverse it. At this point the government will slowly evolve into an oligarchy and then into a tyranny as the political participants continue to compete themselves into the top spot. Between the plutocracy and the tyranny the people’s hope lies only in their ability to revolt and change our economic theory where competition is unnecessary. This is where the socialist step towards communism begins.
(Note: I wrote this as a two part response to peoples’ allegations that Communism is a bad theory in the Newgrounds political forum. It was much longer to compensate for the relative ignorance of definitions of terms and the idea of a 2D political system than the linear one most are aware of. I’ve eliminated most of the explanations seeing as this is generally a more intelligent audience. I repost it here for general feedback. I thought some of my claims and theories deserved a little more attention than the complete ignorance it was given in the flash geek corner of the internet. So now I leave it to yall to determine its merits. I look forward to the ensuing discussion.)
Posted on 12/05/2006 at 09:50 AM 
Okay, I’ll bite. Theocrat, you give an example of cooperation from A Beautiful Mind:
More realistically, in premodern societies, competition often led to one guy getting five girls, and four guys getting no girls. The outlawing of polygamy leveled the field somewhat.
The problem with this bland avowal is that it’s not easy to define what’s “best for the individual”, and it’s notoriously difficult to define “a positive effect on the community”.
Ingolfson, you’re a traffic planner? Did you send all these trucks from Germany to Italy that rumble past my apartment, or was that the EU? Basically, I agree with your assessment of European socialist democracies- they are topheavy and maddeningly bureaucratic, but more humane and farsighted than America, especially with the current Administration.
Governing us tribal apes is an immensely complex balancing act. There’s nothing natural or obvious about it, and it’s all but impossible to predict what form of government will produce what future.
If individuals are expected to work too much for the whole and incentive is not rewarded, you have what I saw behind the Iron Curtain- stagnation and hopelessness ("They pretend to pay us, we pretend to work"). If there is no responsibility for the whole, you have the tragedy of the commons and robber barons. Striking a balance between cooperation and individualism is what makes human society possible. Some societies do it better in some ways than others, but none is perfect- as Kant said, “Aus so krummem Holze, als woraus der Mensch gemacht ist, kann nichts ganz Gerades gezimmert werden”. (out of such crooked wood, as man is made, nothing completely straight can be built). We are not like ants- culture is not built into us. It is a art which must be taught, and learned.