TED Conversations

This conversation is closed.

If communism was working the way its progenitors wanted it to, would it be better than capitalism?

The main reason why communism was made was people wanted to be equal without getting restricted by their environment, but nowadays communism is abused by some dictators such as North Korean leaders. Besides, capitalism also has its own problem. There are so many people who didn't have opportunities to try what they really wanted to do due to their poverty or else.
If communism was working as it should be, would it be better than capitalism?
(When there are no dictators)

Topics: Communism

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.

  • May 7 2013: If Stalin and Mao are to be considered progenitors, or at least early leaders; then NO. The abuse resulting during their terms of leadership was genocidal and tragic. Better than capitalism??? That simple and fair question needs to be defined and studied more completely I suggest. Today's world is once again being led by a capitalistic nation (USA) and a communist nation (China); therefore a public analysis and debate and many PhD thesis' should be accomplished on this question.
    In reality, the nature of global institutions are actually blending this real world merging in many ways. The World Bank, United Nations, WTO and other global institutions all are operating on some sort of blended capitalism/communisim basis. The sovereign nations resultingly experience changes that brings them closer together.
    The defense industries of both nations must identify opposing theories in order to justify their own existence. Thank God that the overwhelming majority of people and commerce all over the world benefit MORE from peaceful industry. THAT reality holds the hope of the world really. Pray for PEACE !!! :):):)
    • thumb
      May 7 2013: this question is studied. the reason why you don't hear about it is actually two: one, because in the 80's, the consequences were not pleasant, all these theses put forward by mostly american economists were claiming that the soviet model is terrible from a humanistic viewpoint, but superior economically. so that's a moral dilemma, do we want to sacrifice freedom for greater economic progress. reason two is '90 and after, when it became evidently clear that the soviet model not only not better, but led to a total economic collapse. since then, those people formerly advocating socialist models retreated a little to regroup, and reformulate the same arguments on more obscure basis, according to rothbard's first sociological rule: nobody ever quits.

      there is another, lesser known line of investigation on the issue, done by economists in austria, in the 1910s and 1920s, ludwig von mises was the most well known. he gave a detailed logical analysis why a socialist economy can not ever work. unfortunately, this school of thought was destroyed by the nazi movement, and it is recovering ever since.
      • thumb
        May 8 2013: Any economic model that allows/fosters a cast society, as presently in the USA, will fail because wealth flows in a healthy economy. Economic stagnation is proportional to the stagnation of wealth.

        Institutional hook-capitalism assures economic failure. Governments that legally mandate consolidation of wealth for the entitled few are feudal economic models, not Capitalist economic models.

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.