NationStates Jolt Archive

Why do people equate communism with laziness?

Here we go again...

...Look, you're most likely going to get a lot of dickheads who'll just pull "information" out of their asses, tell you that the only form of Communism is Leninism/Stalinism (which is State Capitalism), and that "ALL DA COMMIEZ ARE EBIL!!!1!!1!1!!11!".

I just decided I'd warn you.

I understand that, I'm expecting it. But I also won't mind the people who actually have some viable argument as to why they think what they do

Why do people equate communism with laziness?
Get a job hippie!

Communists often have facial hair. Therefore, they must be too lazy to shave. Damn, dirty, lazy commies.

Get a job hippie!

hahaha I already have one, thanks

They're fighting the capitalist system by not taking part in it.

Communists aren’t lazy. They just want to give my money to lazy people.

They're fighting the capitalist system by not taking part in it.

I'm getting burnt in here! :p

Communists aren’t lazy. They just want to give my money to lazy people.

Actually, those are Socialists. Communists are for having no money at all.

The communists in the US I know are generally unwed white college-educated liberal effetes who dislike their bosses and so endorse a political and economic idealogy in which all their bosses go away, no longer threatening to fire them for being the lazy asses we know they are.

That's my take on it anyway.

hahaha I already have one, thanks

"Revolutionary" is not a job.

Actually, those are Socialists. Communists are for having no money at all.
Socialism is a necessary intermediately step between Capitalism and Communism, no?

The communists in the US I know are generally unwed white college-educated liberal effetes who dislike their bosses and so endorse a political and economic idealogy in which all their bosses go away, no longer threatening to fire them for being the lazy asses we know they are.

That's my take on it anyway.

Cool. It's unfortunate that there are people like that, and I now understand why some are against it, although would it just be an assumption that they are lazy, or is it a widely known fact?

The communists in the US I know are generally unwed white college-educated liberal...

Educated people...the bane of society!

Cool. It's unfortunate that there are people like that, and I now understand why some are against it, although would it just be an assumption that they are lazy, or is it a widely known fact?

It's an assumption that they are lazy, but well-founded. And in fact, nearly all communists assume that every manager and executive and business owner is lazy (just sits at a desk oppressing the worker) and doesn't deserve their higher wages. This, to me, indicates projected laziness as well as a basic ignorance of what it takes to start and manage a business.

I think that all of the capitalist should have a final battle with the communist. The first side to loose every person looses.

Educated people...the bane of society!

Pretty much. Oh, there's good education to be had, but it's bad when normal people go into a place of education, and come out proclaiming death for the bourgeoise (conviniently ignoring that they themselves are bourgeoise) and rights for "workers" (by which they mean people who work retail, apparently) and world government via revolution and oppression of dissent? Seems rather anti-social to me.

I think that all of the capitalist should have a final battle with the communist. The first side to loose every person looses.

Communists would win. Capitalists would keep backstabbing each other and looking out for their own interests, hiding at the back, whilst communists wouldn't give a shit about themselves and be willing to lay down their life for the good of the collective ;)

Communists would win. Capitalists would keep backstabbing each other and looking out for their own interests, hiding at the back, whilst communists wouldn't give a shit about themselves and be willing to lay down their life for the good of the collective ;)

I contradict!

Clearly, it's in the best interests of the capitalists to cooperate, otherwise they all get slaughtered by the violent communist state. Therefore the backstabbing is a minimal. Meanwhile, the capitalists because of their efficient economy, produce more weapons, better weapons, and wind up with more funding per soldier and superior equipment all around. And the capitalist mindset means that a soldier DOES place value on his life, so he goes prone when under fire while the communist decides his Marxism is an invulnerability shield! Of course the communists are well-motivated, and make banzai-like desperate charges against hopelessly overwhelming firepower, wasting their lives for the good of the collective while the capitalist war machine sits back and assists the good comrades in their violent self-destruction. The rebellion is crushed, and the communist survivors live their remaining years watching their kids buy the latest Japanese manga and eat at McDonald's.

MCDONALDS FOR TEH WIN! :D

Why do people equate communism with laziness?
I'm not under the impression that Commies are lazy. Just that human beings are lazy when everything is given to them. Big difference.

The communists in the US I know are generally unwed white college-educated liberal effetes who dislike their bosses and so endorse a political and economic idealogy in which all their bosses go away, no longer threatening to fire them for being the lazy asses we know they are.

That's my take on it anyway.
That's my impression as well. Not lazy, just bitter and resentful.

Socialism is a necessary intermediately step between Capitalism and Communism, no?

In some form, yes. But the stop between Capitalism and Communism never needs to be an iron-fisted dictatorship. The only reason any "Communist" country's ever turned out that way is because they never went through the Capitalist stage of development.

Every person I have ever known IRL who was 'for communism' has either been
a. unemployed
b. employed but didn't do thier job
c. employed and did the bare minimum of thier job, but whined about people with any work ethic whatsoever

and they all assumed that people with money didn't deserve it, they assumed that they stole it, inherited it, or enslaved others to make it. They whine about the "rich" and how they are "keeping all the money" and are waiting for a handout, because somehow sitting around whining means you deserve what someone else has worked for. (I know that is socialism, I am just saying that is what they do)

Then they start to tell me that if we went to a communist system that "everyone would be equal, and it would be fair"

It wouldn't be fair, because everyone is not equal, I work harder than someone else I think I deserve more than they do.

Every person I have ever known IRL who was 'for communism' has either been
a. unemployed
b. employed but didn't do thier job
c. employed and did the bare minimum of thier job, but whined about people with any work ethic whatsoever

and they all assumed that people with money didn't deserve it, they assumed that they stole it, inherited it, or enslaved others to make it. They whine about the "rich" and how they are "keeping all the money" and are waiting for a handout, because somehow sitting around whining means you deserve what someone else has worked for. (I know that is socialism, I am just saying that is what they do)

Then they start to tell me that if we went to a communist system that "everyone would be equal, and it would be fair"

It wouldn't be fair, because everyone is not equal, I work harder than someone else I think I deserve more than they do.

Taking into consideration that you live in the Bible Belt, I'm gonna go out on a limb here and say that these people you've talked to are idiots.

Communists aren’t lazy. They just want to give my money to lazy people.

Quite true, I have read all Marx's works, and frankly, all communism is paradoxical, nonesensical, and an utter fallacy.

Quite true, I have read all Marx's works, and frankly, all communism is paradoxical, nonesensical, and an utter fallacy.

Marx, eh? No wonder you think that way.

I contradict!

Clearly, it's in the best interests of the capitalists to cooperate, otherwise they all get slaughtered by the violent communist state. Therefore the backstabbing is a minimal. Meanwhile, the capitalists because of their efficient economy, produce more weapons, better weapons, and wind up with more funding per soldier and superior equipment all around. And the capitalist mindset means that a soldier DOES place value on his life, so he goes prone when under fire while the communist decides his Marxism is an invulnerability shield! Of course the communists are well-motivated, and make banzai-like desperate charges against hopelessly overwhelming firepower, wasting their lives for the good of the collective while the capitalist war machine sits back and assists the good comrades in their violent self-destruction. The rebellion is crushed, and the communist survivors live their remaining years watching their kids buy the latest Japanese manga and eat at McDonald's.

MCDONALDS FOR TEH WIN! :D


Pfft. You forget that those dreaded liberals that are a part of any capitalist society would just start protesting the war, and the war would be lost because of them. Don't you know America lost Vietnam solely because of those dirty hippies? :D

Besides - if all the communists were commies cause they wanted to be, the "no incentive" argument would be redundant, and people would love working for the whole, so their economy would be just as efficient and more resources could be spent on building up kickass equipment. After all, how did a backwards, agriculturally based country like Russia which was in a right state economically manage to compete with the US militarily for so long?

Quite true, I have read all Marx's works, and frankly, all communism is paradoxical, nonesensical, and an utter fallacy.

As opposed to believing the aristocracy, who do probably the least amount of work out of all people in society, are a class to be admired whilst those on welfare are all lazy?

Yeah, that's completely coherant and makes tons of sense :p

As opposed to believing the aristocracy, who do probably the least amount of work out of all people in society, are a class to be admired whilst those on welfare are all lazy?

Yeah, that's completely coherant and makes tons of sense :p
Did you just seriously use the word aristocracy? You're the European, not Chris. We don't have aristocrats, if you didn't already know. :rolleyes:

Pfft. You forget that those dreaded liberals that are a part of any capitalist society would just start protesting the war, and the war would be lost because of them. Don't you know America lost Vietnam solely because of those dirty hippies? :D

True, but the US won every battle, and the remaining 'communists' in Vietnam are hardly the sort to bring about the glorious global revolution of the proletariat were they? America may have lost the war, but that doesn't mean the communists won. ;)

Besides - if all the communists were commies cause they wanted to be, the "no incentive" argument would be redundant, and people would love working for the whole, so their economy would be just as efficient and more resources could be spent on building up kickass equipment.

But a command economy is never as efficient on a large scale. It doesn't matter how much love they have!

Besides, we all know many communists are not so because they want to be, but merely because they are ignorant and mislead. :P

After all, how did a backwards, agriculturally based country like Russia which was in a right state economically manage to compete with the US militarily for so long?

It didn't! It was just in the US governments best interest to make it seem like it was. All governments can benefit from having a foreign demon to compete with somehow. (Much like business benefits from a free market!) In reality, we now know the USSR was never on par militarily - especially their Navy, despite what we learned from watching The Hunt for Red October.

Did you just seriously use the word aristocracy? You're the European, not Chris. We don't have aristocrats, if you didn't already know. :rolleyes:

We're both European, oh foolish one.

I was referring to another thread where The blessed Chris said he admired the aristocracy and wished we could return to a Victorian like society, but that he hated those on welfare because they were lazy. Ultimate in hypocracy.

k0mmunizm is teh r0x0r!

We're both European, oh foolish one.

I was referring to another thread where The blessed Chris said he admired the aristocracy and wished we could return to a Victorian like society, but that he hated those on welfare because they were lazy. Ultimate in hypocracy.
Oh my. I definitely missed that gem. Sorry to place blame with you then.

Chris, you really advocate a return to the Victorian era, complete with a revival of the former aristocracy?

:confused:

I should know better than to get involved in threads where this kid's concerned.

We're both European, oh foolish one.

I was referring to another thread where The blessed Chris said he admired the aristocracy and wished we could return to a Victorian like society, but that he hated those on welfare because they were lazy. Ultimate in hypocracy.
Yes, well he’s a conservative. They are hypocrites by nature. Capitalism need not accompany social conservatism.

Taking into consideration that you live in the Bible Belt, I'm gonna go out on a limb here and say that these people you've talked to are idiots.
most of the people I talk to on a daily basis are. :( why else would I spend time on here but to have some form of intelligent conversation while my husband is at work. The funny thing is my kids are getting old enough to point out the stupidity around here themselves.

My 4 year old asked someone the other day "how does it feel to be so stupid?"
I had to explain that it wasn't nice although that particular person was really really annoying me with their idiocy.

most of the people I talk to on a daily basis are. :( why else would I spend time on here but to have some form of intelligent conversation while my husband is at work. The funny thing is my kids are getting old enough to point out the stupidity around here themselves.

My 4 year old asked someone the other day "how does it feel to be so stupid?"
I had to explain that it wasn't nice although that particular person was really really annoying me with their idiocy.

LOL! I feel that I have to complement your kid on that one!

LOL! I feel that I have to complement your kid on that one!
yeah the lady that she asked was really really dumb.

I felt so proud, but knew that as a parent I should probably admonish her for it, because she needs to learn how to not run around like an elite (even if intelectually she is) oh yeah, and to respect adults by not pointing out their stupidity or something.;)

Why do people equate communism with laziness?
I can't speak for anybody else, but I have a gut reaction of equating communism with laziness because the communists I have personally met all displayed more enthusiasm for venting their political opinions than they did for earning their own money.

Why do people equate communism with laziness?

Because most people have a dim view of human nature. Actually, scratch that, most people have a dim view of everyone else's human nature. In our own mind, we are usually the only competent person on the planet, and most other people exist primarily to annoy us with their incapability.

Put a little more generally, the basic idea in capitalism is that people only do things when they have an economic incentive to do so. In communism, where the stereotypical society provides the individual with everything he needs, there is therefore no incentive to do anything. Of course, this ignores the fact that people often do things for no incentive because they like to do them, but if you bring that up, you are a damn, dirty Marxist who clearly has a naive, pie-in-the-sky conception of what humanity really is.

I can't speak for anybody else, but I have a gut reaction of equating communism with laziness because the communists I have personally met all displayed more enthusiasm for venting their political opinions than they did for earning their own money.

this arguement makes little sense, i feel. right, just for a second, imagine you are a communist, be it state- or anarchist-communism, right? now, you dont like bosses, nor the currently predominant business structure, that if applied to social structures, would be described as totalitarian. so, im sure you can imagine they would feel bad if they were to start creating wealth for these people, and supporting the structure they are passionately against, yeah? so, it is less laziness, and more their opposition towards bosses (and presumably the bosses antagonism towards them. would you want to hjire a man dedicated to overthrowing you?) and principles that make them seem unemployed, lazy, etc., surely? granted some lazy people seeking an excuse might say they are communists, but that hardly reflects on the people who are communists, and who walk through streets with signs saying "work, bread or lead!" or similar during one of our beloved periodic capitalist depressions and mass unemployment. if you wandered up to one of the spartacists, busy fighting hitler whilst our good friends the capitalists funded him and the centre and right let him win power, and said "you are lazy!", youd be quite wrong, i feel. similarly, if you said it the communists at the paris commune, again youd be wrong. and if you said it to the spanish communists (both statist and anarchist) fighting franco, again youd be wrong. if you said it to the communists fighting in the foreign brigades, giving up their lives all over europe to go fight fascism whilst liberal democracy rolled over once more, youd be wrong. if you said it of the communists fighting mussolini, whilst our friends the capitalist elites befriended (or tried to befriend) him, youd be wrong. if you said it of the (real) communists who struggeled to defeat the western armies sent to invade what russia, defending what they beleived (as it turned out wrongly) to be communism, youd be wrong. i could go on, with allegedly lazy communists fighting fascism whilst our energetic capitalist friends let it come to power and other such instances but id hope that would have proven my point that communists are far from lazy.

this arguement makes little sense, i feel. right, just for a second, imagine you are a communist, be it state- or anarchist-communism, right? now, you dont like bosses, nor the currently predominant business structure, that if applied to social structures, would be described as totalitarian. so, im sure you can imagine they would feel bad if they were to start creating wealth for these people, and supporting the structure they are passionately against, yeah? so, it is less laziness, and more their opposition towards bosses (and presumably the bosses antagonism towards them. would you want to hjire a man dedicated to overthrowing you?) and principles that make them seem unemployed, lazy, etc., surely? granted some lazy people seeking an excuse might say they are communists, but that hardly reflects on the people who are communists, and who walk through streets with signs saying "work, bread or lead!" or similar during one of our beloved periodic capitalist depressions and mass unemployment. if you wandered up to one of the spartacists, busy fighting hitler whilst our good friends the capitalists funded him and the centre and right let him win power, and said "you are lazy!", youd be quite wrong, i feel. similarly, if you said it the communists at the paris commune, again youd be wrong. and if you said it to the spanish communists (both statist and anarchist) fighting franco, again youd be wrong. if you said it to the communists fighting in the foreign brigades, giving up their lives all over europe to go fight fascism whilst liberal democracy rolled over once more, youd be wrong. if you said it of the communists fighting mussolini, whilst our friends the capitalist elites befriended (or tried to befriend) him, youd be wrong. if you said it of the (real) communists who struggeled to defeat the western armies sent to invade what russia, defending what they beleived (as it turned out wrongly) to be communism, youd be wrong. i could go on, with allegedly lazy communists fighting fascism whilst our energetic capitalist friends let it come to power and other such instances but id hope that would have proven my point that communists are far from lazy.

Actually, your entire point is moot since he was talking about the communists he has met. And I doubt he met the "real" communists of WWII Russia, nor does their actions have any bearing on the psychology of modern communists.

Also I note with some amusement that you are not letting the bourgeoise tyranny of capital letters and apostrophes oppress the working non-capital letters. Hail the proletariat!

They believe that Communists are lazy because it is convenient for them to do so, or perhaps they're victims of anti-Communist propaganda.

And, unfortunately it's true that some people who call themselves Communists are lazy. So perhaps some people who view Communists as lazy are simply generalizing.

Chris, you really advocate a return to the Victorian era, complete with a revival of the former aristocracy?I take it that you don't believe that increasing capitalism to the point that it was during the Victorian era would cause Victorian-like conditions again?

Cool. It's unfortunate that there are people like that, and I now understand why some are against it, although would it just be an assumption that they are lazy, or is it a widely known fact?

Don't be daft, the only reason thse places work is through generalisations, there may be hard working commies (Alexi Stakhanov) or lazy capitalists but in the main capitalists work harder because they have more to lose, and they can see what perks wealth brings

I take it that you don't believe that increasing capitalism to the point that it was during the Victorian era would cause Victorian-like conditions again?
Unless you're an idiot, then you know damn well what I believe. We've been sharing threadspace for over a year now, JB.

Unless you're an idiot, then you know damn well what I believe. We've been sharing threadspace for over a year now, JB.I know. :) I was making an only slightly-serious point there.

I know. :) I was making an only slightly-serious point there.
I know you were. That's why I didn't bite the bait. ;)