Do the Labour Party have Communist policies?

yes and also rubbish. All my friends who grew up in communist countries owned their houses and the land on it to this very day. All their parents had various salaries not the same.

Galaxy

So the right, certainly if you look at the podcasts that have emerged tend to explore the issues more at the moment, and some attempt to have views from both sides.
I don't think Corbyn is a communist, I think he has become a vessel for whatever is the idealist cause of the day.

Spot on.

Allira

David49

The only successful communist state is China, which is little more than state controlled capitalism, where you can become a billionaire as long as you follow party policy. Dissent by the workers is not allowed and there are party agents in every town and street to make sure they are obedient.

Not so good if you're Uyghur or another minority.

Chinese don’t recognize individual rights, all of us that buy Chinese goods support that policy. We have sanctions against Russia and Iran, cso they sell more to China negating the sanctions.
We don’t stand up for our democratic principles because it would increase the cost of living.

David49

The only successful communist state is China, which is little more than state controlled capitalism, where you can become a billionaire as long as you follow party policy. Dissent by the workers is not allowed and there are party agents in every town and street to make sure they are obedient.

Not so good if you're Uyghur or another minority.

MaizieD

PoliticsNerd

The trouble with democracy is it's not easy David. That's exactly why extremes can seem attractive.

Xi's life could easily be forfitted but that would be the same for a dictator. I don't think he is just a figurehead; he does seem to have personal power. I think this may just be how Communism works. Thankfully we (so far) don't have too many examples to judge it by.

Ultimate power, in most societies, rests with those who control the forces of coercion. While the ruler, or rulers, have control of the armed forces they able to stay in power.

The Chinese government control the army, through them them population, they also direct the economic policy, subsidies and rewards the companies that follow the direction.
Using cheap labour AND the latest technology they can undercut the prices of any western product, cars, electronics, solar panels and a whole range of other consumer goods.

What the US decides to do is not really much importance to them they have all the rest of the world dangling on a string.

PoliticsNerd

Maizie I do wish that didn't sound so true.

You do wish 'what' wouldn't sound so true? Power rests in control of the means of coercion (armed forces)

It is true. First thing we learned in politics /sociology when I did my degree.

Have a look at countries ancient and modern and disprove it

Tony Benn was always viewed as extreme far left,

He bequeathed several million pounds , his London house and his country estate to his family

Was he a champagne socialist?

Maizie I do wish that didn't sound so true.

David49

The only successful communist state is China, which is little more than state controlled capitalism, where you can become a billionaire as long as you follow party policy. Dissent by the workers is not allowed and there are party agents in every town and street to make sure they are obedient.

So

It isn’t a communist state is it?

PoliticsNerd

The trouble with democracy is it's not easy David. That's exactly why extremes can seem attractive.

Xi's life could easily be forfitted but that would be the same for a dictator. I don't think he is just a figurehead; he does seem to have personal power. I think this may just be how Communism works. Thankfully we (so far) don't have too many examples to judge it by.

Ultimate power, in most societies, rests with those who control the forces of coercion. While the ruler, or rulers, have control of the armed forces they able to stay in power.

The trouble with democracy is it's not easy David. That's exactly why extremes can seem attractive.

Xi's life could easily be forfitted but that would be the same for a dictator. I don't think he is just a figurehead; he does seem to have personal power. I think this may just be how Communism works. Thankfully we (so far) don't have too many examples to judge it by.

PoliticsNerd

I think "State Controlled" tells you it's Communist though David. If it was just an extreme form of Capitalism I think the economy would be controlled by individuals, not necessarily those running the government.

It's been discussed many times but these extremes do come very close together at the bottom of the political horseshoe. Only the word "dictatorship" separates them, sadly.

It’s hard to tell if President Xi is a dictator or the figurehead for a wider leadership group, it’s achieved more in 30 years than could have been achieved by any democratic system.

It’s amazing every western country supports the communist regime in China despite its democratic principles being zero.

I think "State Controlled" tells you it's Communist though David. If it was just an extreme form of Capitalism I think the economy would be controlled by individuals, not necessarily those running the government.

It's been discussed many times but these extremes do come very close together at the bottom of the political horseshoe. Only the word "dictatorship" separates them, sadly.

The only successful communist state is China, which is little more than state controlled capitalism, where you can become a billionaire as long as you follow party policy. Dissent by the workers is not allowed and there are party agents in every town and street to make sure they are obedient.

Allira

Caleo

Yes I meant to make you sufficiently uncomfortable to motivate you to edit your quite difficult post. I felt that I agreed with you but your wording seemed to me to not link up the dots.

I think I get it.

Living in the comfort of a country run by moderate governments of middle right or middle left, it's easy to expound far-left or far-right ideals because you haven't actually experienced them yourself.

They're just that - ideals. In practice it might not be quite as wonderful as you imagined.

I might have that completely wrong, of course!
Or probably 😀

Thank you Allira!

Like you Caleo, I can only write how I write. If you have a problem with what I wrote or how it was written, explain it to me and, of course, I will try and clarify it.

However, just asking me to "edit a difficult post" doesn't give me any clues, I'm afraid.

Caleo

Yes I meant to make you sufficiently uncomfortable to motivate you to edit your quite difficult post. I felt that I agreed with you but your wording seemed to me to not link up the dots.

I think I get it.

Living in the comfort of a country run by moderate governments of middle right or middle left, it's easy to expound far-left or far-right ideals because you haven't actually experienced them yourself.

They're just that - ideals. In practice it might not be quite as wonderful as you imagined.

I might have that completely wrong, of course!
Or probably 😀

Yes I meant to make you sufficiently uncomfortable to motivate you to edit your quite difficult post. I felt that I agreed with you but your wording seemed to me to not link up the dots.

Politics Nerd

I would have thought that you would recognise "thick" in that context as an example of someone being sardonic.

It is not intended to be or worded in that way. How do you think Caleo's post comes over Casdon?

When people use self-deprecation in this way it can be because they want to make others feel uncomfortable or it can be because they feel down. I chose to see it as the later and expressed my concern.

Surely no one on GN would disrespect a post that others have taken time and effort to write - even if their style isn't your style?

Naturally with the best will in the world one does not always succeed.

Don't worry, Politics Nerd----I was trying to not sound hostile .
I am quite intelligent in some ways but find politics difficult.

Any way thanks for your gloss on 'lip service'.

My attitude is to try to be disinterested , like John Rawls ' "Veil of Ignorance". Naturally with the best will in the world one does not always succeed.
l
ld one does not always succeed

Casdon

PoliticsNerd

I'm am sorry you feel that way about your capabilities Caleo. I am sure you are more able than you suggest. Belittling creates an unhealthy relationship, even when you do it to yourself.

"Lip-service" doesn't relate to to free speech. It basically means people who say one thing but do another. Hope that helps.

There is really no need to be so patronising PoliticsNerd. Your post comes over as a real rap on the knuckles from teacher, which is hurtful, and unnecessary.

I'm probably a thicko too, but I didn't take Economics at 'A' level or beyond.

Nor 'O' level, come to that, as there were no such subjects taught at school back in those days.

PoliticsNerd

I'm am sorry you feel that way about your capabilities Caleo. I am sure you are more able than you suggest. Belittling creates an unhealthy relationship, even when you do it to yourself.

"Lip-service" doesn't relate to to free speech. It basically means people who say one thing but do another. Hope that helps.

There is really no need to be so patronising PoliticsNerd. Your post comes over as a real rap on the knuckles from teacher, which is hurtful, and unnecessary.

Grantanow

History shows that true Communism is never achieved but is hijacked by a despotic ruling elite: Stalin, for example.

Most ruling elites tend to be despotic to a greater or lesser degree. It's part of the difficulty inherent in reaching a consensus on how a society should be organised and how its members can be brought to conform to that organisation.

We see it in our own history with repression, sometimes quite violent, of dissenters from the 'established 'norm' (established either by law or custom). For hundreds of years when religion was a key issue non conformists were the target of state repression ranging from not being allowed to participate in 'elite' roles to actual execution for their beliefs.

Once the sway of religion was lost there was the movement towards better conditions for workers. This was feared by the 'elite' and equally repressed. Campaigners were imprisoned, even transported, campaign groups banned by law etc. Any attempt at amelioration of the conditions of workers through parliament was vehemently opposed, improvement was piecemeal and very, very slow.

I won't even touch on present day repression in the UK...

The problem in the USSR was that it is much harder to achieve consensual change by revolution. So repression of dissent went harder and faster.