Would the UK population accept communism?
Discussion
FredClogs said:
Funny to choose an Iphone as the bribe, given that they're designed by a company pretty much run as a personality cult, assembled by an indentured workforce "freed" from the tyranny of communism to carry the guiding light of capitalism - by communists.
We do have a society that cares passionately about the poor but at the same time would happily stab someone in the face to get a new iPhone I think an iPhone is perfect
Style over substance
McWigglebum4th said:
We do have a society that cares passionately about the poor but at the same time would happily stab someone in the face to get a new iPhone
I do not believe there is just the one society. In this instance we have one group of people with money and probably iPhones who care loudly about those less fortunate. And in the other corner some of the less fortunate who would, in turn, happily stab the first group in the face for either item.We just need to get both groups in the same room and lock the door.
Johnnytheboy said:
vonuber said:
This country would be more likely to turn fascist first than communist.
Can you run through the differences for me?But the grey areas between any none democratic system of government generally over lap to the point of making what I just typed largely irrelevant
FredClogs said:
facism hold no illusions of inclusion and is a complete autocracy.
You're entitled to a personal interpretation of fascism, perhaps based on GCSE history lessons linking it to the National Socialist Party of Germany and Mussolini's opportunistic politics. The historical use (pre-WW2) was of the Etruscan, later Roman Fasces. These were symbolised as bundles of rods which represented strength by unity of numbers. In other words for most of time fasces were considered inclusive and the less rods in the bundle the weaker it became. The fasces image has been used in many places including US currency, in the Oval office, and either side of the flag of the United States behind the podium in the United States House of Representatives.The term is related to the modern Italian word fascio, used in the 20th century to designate peasant cooperatives and industrial workers' unions.
I guess in politics it can mean whatever you want it to mean.
4v6 said:
What kind of communism?
The one where everyone really is equal and no one,I mean no one gets more than anyone else, or the sort of half baked communism we see everywhere else where those in charge still give themselves more of everything than all the little people?
Comminism as in the first example isnt plausible as it fails to factor in human greed.
Exactly. We are all equal (except some of us are more equal than others) Animal Farm strikes again!The one where everyone really is equal and no one,I mean no one gets more than anyone else, or the sort of half baked communism we see everywhere else where those in charge still give themselves more of everything than all the little people?
Comminism as in the first example isnt plausible as it fails to factor in human greed.
gruffalo said:
I don't believe we would accept communism, while I agree we do accept queuing as an example I think that is more an overt politeness.
The reason I think we as a nation would not is that we are too questioning. 10 years ago or so I started working for a Chinese company here in the UK, in my first board meeting I asked a one word question of the UK MD, that was a simple "why", it caused many frowns and lots of shocked faces from the Chinese in the room, they quite simply couldn't understand what had just happened, a senior leader being questioned was unthinkable.
That is why I hope that we would never accept such a totalitarian idology as communism.
So it was their way or the Huawei?The reason I think we as a nation would not is that we are too questioning. 10 years ago or so I started working for a Chinese company here in the UK, in my first board meeting I asked a one word question of the UK MD, that was a simple "why", it caused many frowns and lots of shocked faces from the Chinese in the room, they quite simply couldn't understand what had just happened, a senior leader being questioned was unthinkable.
That is why I hope that we would never accept such a totalitarian idology as communism.
Johnnytheboy said:
Wouldn't iPhones lose their materialistic cachet if everyone had an equal one?
The workers would have the 16GB iPhone 5C. The tractor factory managers would have the 16GB iPhone 5S and the Commissars would have the iPhone 6 Plus 16GB. The president would get the 6Plus 64GB with the Apple Watch Gold Version.audidoody said:
gruffalo said:
I don't believe we would accept communism, while I agree we do accept queuing as an example I think that is more an overt politeness.
The reason I think we as a nation would not is that we are too questioning. 10 years ago or so I started working for a Chinese company here in the UK, in my first board meeting I asked a one word question of the UK MD, that was a simple "why", it caused many frowns and lots of shocked faces from the Chinese in the room, they quite simply couldn't understand what had just happened, a senior leader being questioned was unthinkable.
That is why I hope that we would never accept such a totalitarian idology as communism.
So it was their way or the Huawei?The reason I think we as a nation would not is that we are too questioning. 10 years ago or so I started working for a Chinese company here in the UK, in my first board meeting I asked a one word question of the UK MD, that was a simple "why", it caused many frowns and lots of shocked faces from the Chinese in the room, they quite simply couldn't understand what had just happened, a senior leader being questioned was unthinkable.
That is why I hope that we would never accept such a totalitarian idology as communism.
I think the UK has already accepted a form of communism. The state sector is massive and reaches into all aspects of our lives, and few question this. Many people believe our economic performance is the direct result of the Chancellor of the day and what he does in the control room of this thing called "the economy," as though he were running some sort of machine in a factory. GDP is our tractor output, and if this virtually meaningless number is positive then all is well. The news agenda is controlled by a huge and powerful state broadcaster, and alternative channels are heavily restricted by legislation on so called impartiality. Individuals can be prosecuted for what they say if it offends certain groups. The church is kept as a kind of curiosity to bring stragglers into line with things such as global warming or foreign aid, where people might otherwise have doubts. The means of production tend to be owned privately when they are making a profit, but the downside risks are underwritten by the state. Equality is not official policy but an endless well of guilt can be drawn upon by talking about "child poverty" in relative terms, evoking the image of starving, malnourished children in spartan workhouses to describe what is more likely a teenager at his games console with takeaway pizzas and a smart phone.
We don't formally have a single party state, but the three main parties who have shared government for the whole of living memory are identical on all major issues, and separated only by minor details of administration and budgeting. Even as this cosy consensus collapses around them they round on UKIP with one voice, accusing them of racism and of jeopardising the country by daring to oppose the orthodox view of the world.
It isn't as totalitarian and brutal as communism as it was implemented in Russia or China, but it's a different country at a different time. It is a far reaching system of control which centralises immense power in the hands of a central committee, and takes a dim view of dissent.
We don't formally have a single party state, but the three main parties who have shared government for the whole of living memory are identical on all major issues, and separated only by minor details of administration and budgeting. Even as this cosy consensus collapses around them they round on UKIP with one voice, accusing them of racism and of jeopardising the country by daring to oppose the orthodox view of the world.
It isn't as totalitarian and brutal as communism as it was implemented in Russia or China, but it's a different country at a different time. It is a far reaching system of control which centralises immense power in the hands of a central committee, and takes a dim view of dissent.
I think in the 50s - 70s Britain could have slipped into something closer to communism
all the centralised and nationalised industries and services, NHS, British Steel, NCB, British Leyland, National Bus, British Rail, etc etc, the big 'social engineering' central town planning, the unions
all the centralised and nationalised industries and services, NHS, British Steel, NCB, British Leyland, National Bus, British Rail, etc etc, the big 'social engineering' central town planning, the unions
Hugo a Gogo said:
I think in the 50s - 70s Britain could have slipped into something closer to communism
all the centralised and nationalised industries and services, NHS, British Steel, NCB, British Leyland, National Bus, British Rail, etc etc, the big 'social engineering' central town planning, the unions
...income growth, reducing national debt and affordable housing.all the centralised and nationalised industries and services, NHS, British Steel, NCB, British Leyland, National Bus, British Rail, etc etc, the big 'social engineering' central town planning, the unions
Hugo a Gogo said:
I think in the 50s - 70s Britain could have slipped into something closer to communism
all the centralised and nationalised industries and services, NHS, British Steel, NCB, British Leyland, National Bus, British Rail, etc etc, the big 'social engineering' central town planning, the unions
You would think so but if you look at this all the centralised and nationalised industries and services, NHS, British Steel, NCB, British Leyland, National Bus, British Rail, etc etc, the big 'social engineering' central town planning, the unions
from UKpublicspending.co.uk then government spending as a proportion of GDP dipped slightly in the 80s but otherwise it's been at roughly 40% of GDP since WW2, and hasn't been below 20% since before WW1. We have been addicted to big government for a century.
I can't find any figures on it, but I suspect that the privatisation of industry was mirrored by a huge growth of welfare, social services and other areas which are in some senses far more intrusive than a nationalised coal industry.
The point is people expect the state to provide for them in a way which it appears that people didn't in the 19th century.
Esseesse said:
^^^ I would have posted something longer, but AJS- has done it for me above.
Also, from where we are now, we're continuing to move that way.
If it goes on moving that way, the question will have two answers in effect, one for those with no choice but to stay and put up with it, and those who see a certain point reached and have the option to vote with their feet.Also, from where we are now, we're continuing to move that way.
Timing would be important to avoid potential capital controls, though having all your eggs in one country's basket even at this stage is risky.
If we do eventually leave the EU, that will represent a step back away from the failed folly and false promises of any form of communism. What eurodrones and europhiles would describe as middle ground politics is too authoritarian and too socialist already.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff