"Private Property rights protect the freedom of some people by denying freedom to others." Do you agree?

Need to simplfy and make it easy to understand. The rich get richer and to poor work hard to make it. We do not ever own our personal property such as land. Once it is payed off the government can take if from you for non payment of taxes. Also if you kill someone while trying to protect your personal property you can go to prison.

I find it ironic that Marx argued capitalism was the cause of the "exploitation of the many by the few," as that is exactly how I have always viewed communism. The Soviet Union and Eastern Europe were once prime examples of how communism not only exploited the many by spreading misery widely, but also ensconced the relatively few who ruled in luxury. I can't think of a single capitalist society in which dissenting citizens and other "undesirables" have been tortured and butchered, perhaps in the millions, as Stalin ordered.

In general, authors should not comment on their own essays, especially with an insult stating that a user who took the time to leave a legitimate comment just looks at things in black and white. Comments are intended for essays written by others. Having to write a lengthy comment about one's own essay may indicate to some readers that the author's essay was not sufficiently clear. It's bad enough that the essay was wordy; the problem should not be made worse by the addition of a wordy comment by the author. Authors also should not rate their own essays as good. The essay's grade of 58% seems a bit low, but justifiable.

The Soviet Union, Eastern Europe and China are the ONLY examples we have of Communism. You cannot judge a theory just by one example. And it only is one example, although many countries were communist, they were only satellite states of the USSR, it was a whole empire (with the exception of China, but that area is complicated) that had control.


Firstly Marx believed that Communism could only work when the current political system (capitalism) exhausted itself. And he believed that would happen naturally, just as feudalism collapsed naturally when it just was not working anymore, it could no longer sustain itself sue to industrialisation. Capitalism has not done that yet.


Secondly, he believed that communism would only work if the whole world became communist. The very foundations of capitalism are that of competition. The very foundations of communism are that of equality - they are diametrically opposed concepts. So to have half of the world communist and half of the world capitalist - with both sides desperate to show the other that their system was better - was just a recipe for disaster.


Stalin, like Hitler and other such fascist leaders were dictators. It is unfortunate for everyone that Stalin gained power, but has very little to do with the political theory of communism.


However, Stalin was determined to show the critical capitalists of the west that his empire was better than theirs. He took everything to extremity and put all his efforts into competing with the West, an idea that defies the very point of communism. All the resources went into strenghtening the military, and furthering the economy. But he had no real long term goal. While the economy grew at unbelievable rates, it was not stable as resources were being sent to the wrong places, the empire was secretly in turmoil as Stalin went mental slaughtering an estimated 20 million people.


He partly created the Cold War, the biggest competition imaginable between the two superpowers of the world, and, again, competition is against the very founding ideas for communism.


Not only that, but originally the Communist party in Russia was fragmented, its original purpose was to overthrow the Tsars (monarchy). It was split into two main groups, Bolsheviks and Mensheviks. The Mensheviks wanted Communism to be brought about peacefully and democratically. The Bolsheviks were impatient for a revolution. It was the Bolshevik revolution that kickstarted the rise of the Communist Party in Russia and thus the Soviet Empire. There are so many events surrounding the establishment of Communism around the world in the 20th Century that it is not really a prime example at all to argue the case against Marx's Communism.


The Soviet Empire followed one form of Commnunism - Marxist-Leninism - and the rise of a man as extreme as Stalin could not be predicted. The fact that capitalism is still functioning around the world and does not look ready to collapse is another factor that must be considered.

Any system whose opposes the concept of competition yet was forced to engage in something as huge as the Cold War cannot possibly survive.

And if the Mensheviks form of Communism had won over the Bolsheviks, that communism had come about democratically and through a parlimentary system, then who knows what might have happened.


I don't think that you can judge Marx's theories so quickly when the only non-theoretical example had circumstances that were as extreme, and did not completely support Marx's own personal theory of Communism.

Not sure if I should be commenting on the comments and not the essay, but since I have read everything I'd like to put in my 2 cents. I don't think johnjip should talk when he says 'authors should not comment on their own essays' since that's pretty much the only thing he does! You just have to look at his 3 essays to see that the majority of the comments are his own *sigh* wish I could make this comment anonymous, I don't want to start any fights again.

are exactly what essay's are all about. The english languague is expressive, what is the point of having languague if you don't use it to its full potential? Maybe its only wordy because you don't understand it?


Also, if you read the lengthy explanation, you might find that it is not commenting on the essay, thus neither adding or subtracting to it, but clarifying the unfounded point you made yourself about the former communist soviet union being a 'prime example' of how communism wouldn't work. As the lengthy comment states, there were many factors contributing to the collapse of communism in the soviet union (see my other essay - its an account for the collapse of communism) that were extreme and unusual. Not only that, but your comment has little relevance to the essay, as it is MARXIST political theory. Again, it was not Marxist communism that dominated the communist east. Although founded on certain Marxist principles, Lenin formed his own theories from that and Stalin, and extremist in his own right, added to that with his own terrifying policies. Not Marx.

Get your facts right.

by commenting on my own essay - im making a point

Why has everyone rated her comments badly? I liked the fact the essay was 'wordy' and she has a fair point to argue back at johnjjp.

johnjjp - she doesn't even mention anything ABOUT the soviet union/eastern Europe. The question is about private property rights in relation to the Communist Manifesto and she answers the question. The Soviet Union was led by Stalin, an exceptionally evil man, who corrupted the Communist theory. Thus, the Soviet Union cannot be held as a prime example. Countries which were initially capitalist, such as Germany, and Italy, also managed to produce fascists who took over and turned it into a dictatorship. The Soviet Union is no different - it was also run by a dictator and it is irrelevant which system is used since both capitalism and communism have been corrupted by fascists in the past. I feel like I know more about this now since also have finished an essay on it!


You say you can't think of a single capitalist country where "dissenting citizens and other 'undesirables' have been tortured and butchered"...well, there is one right under your nose! AMERICA. George Bush is openly allowing the torture of people in Guantanamo Bay. Furthermore, these people are being detained there without trial. The Irish news at the moment are reporting disputes between the Irish authorities and the United States because US planes are stopping off in Ireland to refuel before they go on to middle eastern countries. In these planes are American citizens who are being transported by the US authorities to these countries so they can be legally tortured, as under US law this is illegal. America, the ultimate capitalist country, fares little better than many dictatorships under close scrutiny.