Did atheism destroy the USSR?

Originally posted by FMF
Oh well then, it looks like you totally bought into the dehumanizing propaganda and still do. No families? No friendships? Imagine that.

What a cynical, jaded lot you British ex-pats are.

Originally posted by der schwarze Ritter
Tsk, tsk, tsk -- you ought to be ashamed Redmike. So you truly believe that communism as practiced to date is not "true communism," which remains noble, viable and should not be judged by past history? If you believe that, I've got a bridge in Minnesota I want to sell you.

None of these countries ever even claimed to be communist.

It really shouldn't be too difficult a concept, but communism, by definition, cannot exist in a single country.

Originally posted by der schwarze Ritter
Certainly there's a lot of wealth concentrated in the hands of a few Hollywood entertainers, software moguls and members of the political class, but you're not telling the whole story: California is also home to the most gang members, the largest prison population, most homicides, most auto fatalities, the most illegal immigrants, and has some of 526


This is just a sampling, but you know, one only has so many hours in the day.

Yes, CA has problems. This is very true. However it's not communist.

I agree with you on the illegal immigrants. Why are they coming to CA? Because we have work for them.

The predominant industry, more than twice as large as the next, is agriculture, (including fruit, vegetables, dairy, and wine). This is followed by aerospace; entertainment, primarily television by dollar volume, although many movies are still made in California; music production and recording studios; light manufacturing, including computer hardware and software; and the mining of borax.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California#Economy

The economy is less concentrated than you suggest.

Originally posted by AThousandYoung
California is the wealthiest state in the Union. Nice try.

mm, i wonder what the economic divide looks like here. especially if the largest item is agriculture.

Originally posted by whodey
This question makes about as much sense as others on this forum.

Discuss.

No. Socialism destroyed the Soviet Union, as it destroys every society and culture that adopts it. Capitalism does the opposite.

Incidentally, Islam is a form of socialism and also destroys the societies that live under its yoke. Productivity goes out the window in both cases.

Originally posted by SpastiGov
No. Socialism destroyed the Soviet Union, as it destroys every society and culture that adopts it. Capitalism does the opposite.

Incidentally, Islam is a form of socialism and also destroys the societies that live under its yoke. Productivity goes out the window in both cases.

The trouble is, for you and many others, the success of a society is judged on economic wealth and possibly its technological achievement (or at least you think you do). Many people, perhaps even most, do not see these things as the goal of their societies. Some believe a total dedication to their god is the mark of a successful society. Others believe that a successful world is one in which people are generally happy, have enough to eat and have time to have some fun with friends, nothing more. Others feel that success is when there are no more haves and have nots.

If you are to judge societies by how close they are to your own, you are always going to be disappointed, however those you judge may well not be.

Originally posted by Wheely
The trouble is, for you and many others, the success of a society is judged on economic wealth and possibly its technological achievement (or at least you think you do). Many people, perhaps even most, do not see these things as the goal of their societies. Some believe a total dedication to their god is the mark of a successful society. Others believe tha ...[text shortened]... e to your own, you are always going to be disappointed, however those you judge may well not be.

Well said. The word 'success' is often abused and open to misinterpretation. The term 'quality of life' is more appropriate.

But why do many people from Islamic and Communist societies try to leave their homeland in favour of capitalist/democratic ones? Better quality of life maybe ? Movement in the opposite direction is less frequent.

Often (certainly not always) economic success lays the foundation on which society can build the kind of life they dream of.

Originally posted by Wheely
The trouble is, for you and many others, the success of a society is judged on economic wealth and possibly its technological achievement (or at least you think you do). Many people, perhaps even most, do not see these things as the goal of their societies. Some believe a total dedication to their god is the mark of a successful society. Others believe tha ...[text shortened]... e to your own, you are always going to be disappointed, however those you judge may well not be.

I am familiar with Cuba. It may come as a surprise to many but I felt there was a general happiness among most of the native population. They seem to get execellent health care and edcuation. Food is often in short supply but they have enough of the basics, flour, rice, sugar etc etc. On evenings in Havana they gather around the waterfront and play their guitars and drums etc and sing together and dance. There was a great community spirit and almost no evidence of crime.

The discontent I heard came from the more educated Cubans who were working for the equivalent of $40 US /month.

Originally posted by Rajk999
I am familiar with Cuba. It may come as a surprise to many but I felt there was a general happiness among most of the native population. They seem to get execellent health care and edcuation. Food is often in short supply but they have enough of the basics, flour, rice, sugar etc etc. On evenings in Havana they gather around the waterfront and play their gui ...[text shortened]... I heard came from the more educated Cubans who were working for the equivalent of $40 US /month.

The reason there is no crime in Cuba is that there is nothing to steal and they're too weak from malnutrition. Did you know that in the 1840s, Cuba's plantation slaves ate better than the slaves who live under Castro do today? The reason they gather round the fire and sing and dance so much is because there's not much work and there aren't many cinemas and shopping malls to go to.

http://www.ncpa.org/sub/dpd/index.php?Article_ID=14372

http://www.ncpa.org/sub/dpd/index.php?Article_ID=14497

Originally posted by Wheely
The trouble is, for you and many others, the success of a society is judged on economic wealth and possibly its technological achievement (or at least you think you do). Many people, perhaps even most, do not see these things as the goal of their societies. Some believe a total dedication to their god is the mark of a successful society. Others believe tha ...[text shortened]... e to your own, you are always going to be disappointed, however those you judge may well not be.

Should we not judge other societies by how well they treat their children, women, the elderly or the mentally challenged?

Originally posted by Rajk999
There was a great community spirit and almost no evidence of crime.

I must accept your first hand knowledge of what you saw. It's possible Castro puts that element away without the formalities. The fact cannot be denied that in the late 70's Castro obviously had a "jail-house" overload!

*quote from article in WikiPedia
"I am sure that Cubans also remember the Muriel Boat Lift fiasco of Jimmy Carter in 1978. Carter accepted all the violent criminals Castro unloaded on us."

Originally posted by Redmike
Which part of your (unattributed) definitions do you think they met?

Sorry you could not analyze the previous post was from a dictionary...So here you are. "attributed" just for you. 🙂

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/communism
com·mu·nism- Show Spelled Pronunciation[kom-yuh-niz-uh m] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation
–1. theory or system of social organization based on the holding of all property in common, actual ownership being ascribed to the community as a whole or to the state.
2.(often initial capital letter ) a system of social organization in which all economic and social activity is controlled by a totalitarian state dominated by a single and self-perpetuating political party.
3.(initial capital letter ) the principles and practices of the Communist party.
4.COMMUNALISM.
[Origin: 1835–45; < F communisme. See COMMON, -ISM ]


http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/society
so·ci·e·ty - Show Spelled Pronunciation[suh-sahy-i-tee] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation noun, plural -ties, adjective
1. an organized group of persons associated together for religious, benevolent, cultural, scientific, political, patriotic, or other purposes.
2. a body of individuals living as members of a community; community.
3.the body of human beings generally, associated or viewed as members of a community: the evolution of human society.
4.a highly structured system of human organization for large-scale community living that normally furnishes protection, continuity, security, and a national identity for its members: American society.
5.such a system characterized by its dominant economic class or form: middle-class society; industrial society.
6.those with whom one has companionship.
7.companionship; company: to enjoy one's society.
8.the social life of wealthy, prominent, or fashionable persons.
9.the social class that comprises such persons.
10.the condition of those living in companionship with others, or in a community, rather than in isolation.
11.Biology. a closely integrated group of social organisms of the same species exhibiting division of labor.
12.Ecclesiastical. an ecclesiastical society.
[Origin: 1525–35; < MF societe < L societ&#257;s, equiv. to soci(us) partner, comrade + -et&#257;s, var. of -it&#257;s- -ITY ]

I suppose you still think the USSR was not a communist society? 🙄

1 edit - typo

Originally posted by Redmike
None of these countries ever even claimed to be communist.

It really shouldn't be too difficult a concept, but communism, by definition, cannot exist in a single country.

You say:
"none of these countries ever even claimed to be communist."
Answer: Political office in the USSR required being a member communist party.

"communism by definition, cannot exist in a single country." Your UNATRIBUTED definition, please give source.

Answer: Even using your stretched definition....Do you think the USSR was made up of only one country? Please 😴 Give source for that revelation.

Originally posted by MacSwain
Sorry you could not analyze the previous post was from a dictionary...So here you are. "attributed" just for you. 🙂

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/communism
com·mu·nism- Show Spelled Pronunciation[kom-yuh-niz-uh m] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation
–1. theory or system of social organization based on the holding of all property in c ...[text shortened]... TY ]

I suppose you still think the USSR was not a communist society? 🙄

1 edit - typo

You still haven't answered the question - which part of your definition do you think fits?
All you've done is provide a different definition.

The USSR was not a communist society.

Originally posted by MacSwain
You say:
"none of these countries ever even claimed to be communist."
Answer: Political office in the USSR required being a member communist party.

"communism by definition, cannot exist in a single country." Your UNATRIBUTED definition, please give source.

Answer: Even using your stretched definition....Do you think the USSR was made up of only one country? Please 😴 Give source for that revelation.

"none of these countries ever even claimed to be communist."
Answer: Political office in the USSR required being a member communist party.

[b]So what? Just because a party called 'communist' is in power doesn't mean it is a communist society.

The source for my point about communism in a single country is any basic work on communist ideas.

I understand that the USSR was many countries. Still doesn't mean it was communist. My point applies to any small group of countries too.