A place where ModDB members can debate civilly, and learn from each other's views.
I've seen some here arguing that communism is a good form of government just because the premise is decent (the idea of everyone being equal in class and money would be a dream come true). This is a logical fallacy considering what the rest of communism is about. For Marx (the father of communism) there needed to be three phases that needed to be completed for communism to arise:
Phase 1: A revolution must take place in order to overthrow the existing government.
My response: No problem here. Bad systems are replaced all the time and if communism really is to make everyone equal then overthrowing the current government would not be a bad idea.
Phase 2: A dictator or elite leader must gain absolute control over the proletariat. During this phase, the new government exerts absolute control over the common citizen's personal choices -- including his or her education, religion, employment and even marriage. Collectivization of property and wealth must also take place.
My response: This is where we reach the flaw in communism. The premise was fine but the actual system isn't. The system would have us abandon freedom (I'd argue we're not truly free currently but we have a higher level of freedom that the restrictions communism would impose upon us). Communism would have one leader ruling over us deciding what would best suit us, controlling us and what we do.
Censorship is still with communists today. Speak against their ideology which is part of their communism and they scream bloody murder and try to censor you.
In a communist society you will not be able to question anything the government declares to be truth.
Phase 3: All non-communists to be destroyed in order for the Communist Party to achieve supreme equality. The government would control all means of production.
My response: This has never been achieved so I have no real response to add. I've already spoken about about the dictatorship.