Communism in Vietnam (1 Viewer)

[VanCarBus]

Errrmmm, I dont support the radicalness of Communism, but I dont agree with the way the Australian Viet Community operates either...

For u viets, n others

Ok OK,
Vietnam's communism party since 1975 when the south lost the war (even tho they claimed it a victory) ...

NOw, the Vietnamese Community in Cab here say that they will not support any COmmunist related activity in Vietnam nor Australia. This includes:

VTV ----> hated for being shown on TV, but I recon that if ppl dont wanna watch commi news, they shud just turn off their TVs


viet uni scholars ---> disliked because they came from rich commy families


viet atheletes (i.e. in olympics) ---> they are supported by commy


viet ppl going bac to vietnam for holiday ---> considered traitors


viet ppl not agreeing with the community ---> considered communists

I think thats disgusting,
What do u think?
Do u think the Austrlian Viet community is any fairer in terms of democracy than the communist party in Vietnam??

 

[zahid]

Communism Rocks U Fool...for the second time now.

 

[69^boi]

no in theory its rock because of all of the country resources is evenly distributed to everyone but in reality the greety communist party gets it all

 

[Xayma]

In reality they are socialists.

 

[katie_tully]

communism is great in theory, it's just every time it's been put into practice, you have crooked governments and extremists. it should probably stay that, just a theory. it hasnt worked yet, i doubt it'll work ever.

 

[neo o]

communism is great in theory, it's just every time it's been put into practice, you have crooked governments and extremists. it should probably stay that, just a theory. it hasnt worked yet, i doubt it'll work ever.

Oh sure, turning the individual into a mindless automation is a brilliant idea. What shall they think of next?

 

[katie_tully]

Oh sure, turning the individual into a mindless automation is a brilliant idea. What shall they think of next?

I was thinking more along the lines of, class struggle... but hey, automation is good also.

 

[neuro_logik]

Atleast they are not as bad as the Chinese government. Communism is a good theory but simply does not work properly in practise.

Democracy for all!!!!

 

[babydoll_]

Communism works in theory, but it doesn't work in Vietnam because the Cong Sang are too corrupt...

You should see the way they operate. Have you ever been back to Vietnam? When my family was getting driven back to our hometown, we got pulled over by cops because they could see we were clearly tourists (what with the suitcases and all) and they demanded a bribe (discreetly obviously) from my relatives. It was a few million dollars (which is a few hundred AU$).

Not only that, but children are brainwashed from an early age with the doctrines of the Communist party. Communism never works - people will always be greedy and want to be higher in society than others. You wouldn't believe the way they think. Having innocent conversations with my cousins always turned into political debates because that's the way they were programmed.

The Vietnamese community in Australia protest against this stuff for a reason. VTV is government sponsored TV, which means that its underlying content is Communist-biased. I agree some of the other stuff is a bit extreme - e.g. one of my classmates at uni is an international student from Vietnam, but my parents told me to be careful because he could be 'Cong Sang', cos they were the only people in Vietnam who were rich enough to send their kids overseas. I don't think it's true, cos I've gotten to know him better and he's not really political at all, he's a normal guy, just a bit fobby.

But overall, I think the actions of the Vietnamese community in Australia are justified, considering the circumstances.

 

[anti]

I'd just say that's a poor consequence of making things work effectively.

As for the success of Communist regimes.. note that most eventuated after a large-scale revolution against a ruling class. After a revolution a country is in disarray not just politically but also in production and finance. Without food no political party can sustain its people, so people have to work the land again, and on such large scale it's hard to work as individuals, so someone gets put in charge. But since that's precisely what they were revolting against ...

 

[thorrnydevil]

The hole idea that everyone is equal is good, however Communism lacks incentive for people to do absolutely anything. For example, a Uni trained doctor pr Lawyer are on the same as a cleaner. It doesn't work in practice, and this is evident through most of the Communist countries collapsing in the past decade.

 

[neo o]

It's great to see that so many people feel that eliminating indivual wants/desires and aspirations is a great idea in theory.

 

[anti]

neo, that's not the ideal of Communism, but it is sadly the way that actual implementations (or attempted ones anyway) of left-wing policies have resulted in.

It's probably because most Communist countries never really get out of the early stages of Communism before they disintegrate... hmm...

 

[neo o]

One of the aims of both socialism and communism is to eliminate exploitation. However, after the Stalinist movement came to power in Russia, socialist governments simply exploited the workers instead of the bourgeois of the previous capitalist system. Centrally planned economic models don't work, and 3 of the 5 remaming socialist states (China, Laos and Vietnam) all have market economies now.

Economically (and communism was as much an economic philosophy as it intended to deal with ideological concerns) communism reduced the efficiency of workers (it was meant to increase productivity) because under a socialist regime, all incentives to increase productivity are removed - thus socialist states are bound to fail before they reach communism.

Communism, both in theory and in practice is inherantly flawed because it doesn't consider human nature.

That's why Liberalism (I believe) is the ideal economic model because it grants people true freedom to achieve what they want.

 

[Not-That-Bright]

lmao i find it interesting how many people here actually support communism as an ideal, it doesn't even work in theory.

If all you're going to get is what you need, where's the incentive to work harder, to produce more, to improve, to make the job easier? In fact, if you are guaranteed what you need, where's the incentive to work? Most people won't look ahead far enough to see a collective good, they only see their immediate situation. Communism can never work. Marx was an idiot for thinking it could.

 

[neo o]

lmao i find it interesting how many people here actually support communism as an ideal, it doesn't even work in theory.

People aren't equal

 

[neuro_logik]

One of the aims of both socialism and communism is to eliminate exploitation. However, after the Stalinist movement came to power in Russia, socialist governments simply exploited the workers instead of the bourgeois of the previous capitalist system. Centrally planned economic models don't work, and 3 of the 5 remaming socialist states (China, Laos and Vietnam) all have market economies now.

Economically (and communism was as much an economic philosophy as it intended to deal with ideological concerns) communism reduced the efficiency of workers (it was meant to increase productivity) because under a socialist regime, all incentives to increase productivity are removed - thus socialist states are bound to fail before they reach communism.

Communism, both in theory and in practice is inherantly flawed because it doesn't consider human nature.

That's why Liberalism (I believe) is the ideal economic model because it grants people true freedom to achieve what they want.

North Korea has a very good plan, build nuclear weapons which then lead to the continual aid provided by America. If they stop then KaBoom!

 

[Not-That-Bright]

On a side note... anyone noticed that russia seems to be flexing it's military muscle? With this thing in Ukraine could russia make a move that leads to another cold war?

 

[Generator]

I can see no fundamental problem with the basic idea of 'From each according to his[/her] ability, to each according to his[/her] needs.'
I'm not saying that it would work, for as babydoll said we always want more, and I do agree with neo_o in that the liberal economic model is best suited to meet our desires as human beings (though there is a need to consider a more equitable framework, of course), but it (the above line) seems to be one of the few utopian ideals that may be worth striving for at some stage.

Sorry about the long sentence.

 

[Xayma]

Generator the problem with that comes is if someone can do less but require more. If you see that someone else works only 90% as hard for 130% of the goods you recieve you will probably try to minimise your workload.