Not really. Under the ideas of Marx, communism is a state of affairs in which there are no social classes, money, or the state. He believed that the workers should take control of the state through self-ownership (later in his life, Marx, as well as Engels, believed that communism could be achieved through elections in places such as the U.S. or Britain). In time, the state would wither away, and no longer exist. The style of Marxism that dominated in all of these communist countries is that of Leninism, or it's more conservative variant, Stalinism. These two schools of thought were based on violent revolution, the concentration of power in the State, and a general mistrust of the general population (which is why there needed to be a "vanguard"), a far cry from what Marx and Engels envisioned. If what they envisioned is completely feasible is another matter entirely.

Exactly always it was just used as a form of control while those in charge and their friends still lived in weath.

It has. And it turned out that it's a utopian system that cannot be put into practice. When you do, something always goes wrong and it ends in a dictatorship.

Poor man Karl Marx always judged as the perpetrator of thing that actually on the opposite of his idea..

Has capitalism really been tried? Without government corruption or croneyism?

That's kind of a dumb argument ngl. That's like saying that, since the Nazis didn't get their "pure" society and "living space", real fascism hasn't been tried. Also, it's important to note that, for all ideologies, the actions of the followers are far more important than the ideology's own utopian vision.

even if it hasn't been tried, it is still 0%.

That's what communism ends up being- a dictatorship.

The communists always talk about the oligarchy/dictatorship phase as a "necessary phase" of transitioning to actual communism. But anyone who has ever worked with other human beings knows that ever passing from that "phase" into actual communism is a ludicrous fantasy - unless you consider very small tribes as communist, which is really still just primitive tribalism. So it's definitely just a complete scam aimed at desperate and stupid people.

Yes, it has. It just always ends up in dictatorship, mass corruption, mass deaths and bloody uprising. The only people who seem to think it's a good idea, don't know anything about it and haven't met anyone that lived through it.

Also America, which has studied this, has sabotaged multiple communist/socialist communities to make it seem like this is true

Name one country where communism made people's lives better.

Yes. It has been tried. However, true communism like Marx advocated for can only exist in theory as it ignores basic human conditions like greed, ego, and violence.

Yeah, really. Pure communism is just people sharing all ownership and all tasks according to their abilities and needs. Very small consenting groups can make this work.

As a theory/system, communism works perfectly. However, when overseen by a human being, it crashes. So does capitalism (as you are watching happening right now). Any system thought up by humans is flawed. The cunning will rise to the top and the meek will sink to the bottom. Every system on earth runs this way. For a while, there will be a middle-class, but it will soon be dissolved by the rich and will disappear.

Yes.it has. Many times. Sounds great on paper. In a static environment. Factor in people and human nature. It all falls apart.

Communism naturally devolves into dictatorship. It could not survive without one.

There is causation there, Communism leads to dictatorship not the other way around. Given people rights does not go well with communism for the basic reason that everyone are supposed to be the same, hence you cannot have something that someone else does not. Freedom and Communism cannot go together by the definition of these terms.

DUN DUN DUUUN!

Yes. True communism is theoretical only due to it ignoring basic human conditions like greed and violence.

Aaand youre missing the point

Exactly! In all so-called communist states, a dictator actually took some elements from the whole communist idea and did mostly the opposite to the original in the rest of their structure. For example, communism promotes absolute equality among all people. Guess how equall was Stalin to the regular guy in Murmans, for example.

Yes - when communism was still in its infancy there were communes set up to test things out - and within six months they fell apart because corruption will always exist, even among those who had the best of intentions when they started. And that was on a small scale with less then 1000 people... never mind trying to do it with millions

Sweet Burn.

This comment has been deleted.

Omg

Exactly.

This comment is hidden. Click here to view.

In Cuba it was going to be attempted but they had to become more totalist because of the USA

This comment is hidden. Click here to view.

It's common sense. Under communism, there is absolutely no motivation to go out and create something because you won't end up owning it anyway.

This comment is hidden. Click here to view.

Let's give it ANOTHER try. Good grief.

No pure form exists because none of them take into consideration 'human nature'. Aspects such as greed, crime, jealousy, fear, stubbornness, desire, and etc. are never factored in.

Yes, it is.

No but it fails slower and has alternative service providers so that fixes can be applied, that said most places are what's known as a mix economy, blending elements of capitalism, socialism and "traditional" (think the Smurfs or communities where economic surplus is given to the leader who shares it for the best of the village) economic models.

Exactly.

Trickle down economics isn't the same as pure capitalism, though. It's actually welfare for the rich. So I kind of consider it a perversion of capitalism. My personal preference though, is a mixed economy.