Since when was Communism/Socialist the incarnation of pure evil?

Question

Please, elaborate people.

It's sickening

Answer 1

Always has been evil.http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/False%20R...  http://www.stopthenorthamericanunion.com...

Answer 2

Since the US deemed it so.

If you think capitalism works better, come on over to the us now, where gas is 5$ a gallon, jobs scarce, food expensive, and nobody has had a raise in years.

Answer 3

it was only the incarnation of pure evil when the USA were trying to stop it

BUT it's not viewed in a very positive light mostly because of the Cold War - the idea of Communism worked on paper, but, as was seen with the USSR, it didn't neccessarily work in practise.

that also links back to the US hatred of communism - the legacy of the Cold War in, for example, modern-day Russia, will be different to in hte West

Answer 4

In a perfect world, Communism would be a utopia as Karl Marx depicted it in his Communist Manifesto.  Ideally, Communism means that ALL people are equal and have equal access to goods and services.  However, in governments that implemented Communism, there was a dictator, then making it a Dictatorship (USSR, Cuba). Unfortunately, the word Communist was inaccurately used to describe these governments.  Unless you are a Sociologist or Social Scientist, you don't know the true definition of communism.

In writing (as in Karl Marx theories) it looks great.  But has he theorizes as well, we as human beings cannot be content with equality.  There will always be someone in power: the Bourgeoisie, and the working class: Proletariat.

Maybe in a perfect world, we could see what Karl Marx's Utopia really looks like.

Answer 5

Because for all of the times it's been tried, and in the name of "it works on paper", people have died due to everything from malnutrition to straight dictatorial rule and murder.

Collectivism flourishes off of mediocrity.  It's an excuse to half-*** through life, because someone else will pick up your slack.  It's platitudes from our politicians, playing Robin Hood in the name of "helping the little guy", when we all know, the only person really benefiting is the politician whose name is in the paper as a "good guy".  

Look at our current example of the windfall profits tax on our oil companies.  Not only is it socialism, it's failed policy...it's been tried by Jimmy Carter and the results were disastrous.  However, now that we're again in an oil crisis, consumers are looking for someone to blame, and that someone is the oil companies.  Rather than come up with a rational solution that should inevitably lead to less government intervention, we're adding MORE government intervention while simultaneously chastising a faceless oil company.  The "little guy" now has someone to blame and the political figures who could potentially follow through with a socialist principle like this will look like heroes to the uneducated and ignorant.  Sticking one to the big guy is all that they care about...the short term...when in reality, it'll lead to an imbalance of oil supplies, and will most likely blow the bubble up further.  It has harnessed an unparalleled greed, where once, it was the oil companies and their profits who were considered greedy...what does that make people looking to pillage their revenues?  

Socialism is not about "the people".  It's about the imposing government and their quest for power and outright rule over the public who will eventually come to "need government" to live.  In a few words, it's essentially job security for politicians.  Look at our current president.  I don't care which side of the aisle you're from, he's managed to disenfranchise everyone with more than just the war, but with larger government, the opposite that all of us "R's" were looking for; maybe not in terms of physical workforce and more desks, but in terms of how much further the government's reach extends into our lives.  Socialism not only validates big government but encourages more.  For all of the complaining that so many on the left seem to do about Bush, he's playing into your hands and giving you exactly what you want...a more controlling and powerful government, where we're essentially pawns in a game of global chess, where the only winners are the self-loathing bureaucrats reaping "success" from our complacency.          

It has never worked, and it will never work, especially in America, which was founded on the principles of individualism and entrepreneurship, the very antithesis of collectivism.  Even if a socialist agenda succeeded in making its way to the White House (only 5 months to go for that) and maintains power for 40 years let's say...what happens if god forbid that government collapses for whatever reason?  Where does that leave us?  After 40 years of collectivism, we'll be so reliant on the government to bail us out again that we'll be helpless and hopeless.

It seeks to take power out of the hands of the population, and into the hands of big government.  These same people--these bureaucrats--who can't even keep their own lives in order are going to be entrusted with 320,000,000 more lives to handle.  How is that responsible?

EDIT:  Capitalism is by no means the perfect solution, especially when some corporations have taken it upon themselves to pervert the system for their own gain.  All socialism would do is offer that same ability to politicians as well.  

If our current state of capitalism is a broken arm, socialism seeks to fix it via a lobotomy.

Answer 6

it;s not necessarily "evil". It's simply a means of stifling the individual. it removes incentives for improvement, creativity, free thought, self fulfillment.