[Frieza_Prexus]

I was debating whether or not I should derail the thread with a tangent about communism. Given that it has been relatively slow the last few days I'll make just a post or two about it.

I'll be the first to admit that I used some hawkish language in my initial post, but I will stand by it. Though, admittedly, the strong stance against communism I took could make it appear as if I were acting on emotion as opposed to strong reasoning, but I'll illustrate why I oppose communism on a logical basis.

Originally Posted by PosterOfStuff

But the only thing holding me back from believing you (sadly) is that you have an education about Communism, that is based on fantasy. Didn’t America go through a period where the public was goaded like sheep into fearing the big bad Communist. And it seems that this still perpetuates to this day. Even to intelligent, well educated and thoughtful individuals like yourself.

Perhaps you arrived at the conclusion that I am uneducated about communism is because of hawkish language I used to decry it. The standard McCarthyist type person who thinks communism will eat their children will oppose it just as I did. Maybe it is my own fault for failing to make a logical distinction between myself and the former.

Ultimately, I use the doom and gloom language to show that communism can only function as a government under one scenario. That one scenario is a very bad place. That scenario is forced compliance by the government. It would appear as if there were two, but if you examine it closely, you'll find that there is only one. The "second" is complete and voluntary participation by the entire populace. The problem with that is if it were entirely voluntary there would be no laws for it. Ergo, voluntary participation between willing participants. IE No longer communism, but freedom!

You get communism only through government force. It cannot exist as a form of government without force. There will always be elements of society that wish to do things their way. The only way then to be a true communist state is the use of force.

I bring up imprisonment and death because there are no other real ways to force a person into compliance. If you're going to have some penalty for non compliance it must be heavy enough to work. Even if it starts out very light, you must take it to its endgame conclusion. A good example of how that can spiral out of control is if you don't pay a $50 parking ticket and see what happens if you let it all play out. If you protest against the penalties hard enough via noncompliance eventually you'll end up in jail.

I've seen the argument made that you simply garnish wages or something of that nature intending to be as non confrontational as possible. But then you have a black market forming. So now police raid the market and the leaders are arrested and so on and so forth. Again, the only way for communism to function as a government is brute force. This scares me.

I use the freedom versus slavery example because I believe it accurately portrays the relationships and differences between a capitalistic and communistic government and its people. However hyperbolic it may appear, I believe the analogy is fundamentally sound.

Originally Posted by Devil's Advocate

It would appear that you are arguing that any use of forced compliance is bad and that any government using it is one not worth having. Are you an anarchist?

Obviously, some force will be used. The great debate amongst philosophers since the beginning is what is an acceptable level of force. Going back to the two fundamental laws I stated earlier:

Originally Posted by Richard Maybury

Do all that you have agreed to do and do not encroach on other persons or their property.

I personally believe an acceptable level of force is something that furthers those two laws.

Originally Posted by Devil's Advocate

By that standard we should just lock everyone down. Then no one's rights will be violated!

This can easily be solved by simply restricting the government in the same way another person would be restricted. If the government is bound by the same laws we are, then there is no problem. We must find the right combination of laws that preserves the maximum amount of freedom for ourselves, while limiting our ability to harm others.

And a final note on the morality of government:

Originally Posted by Thomas Jefferson

It is strangely absurd to suppose that a million of human beings, collected together, are not under the same moral laws which bind each of them separately.