You must Sign In to post a response.
  • Category: Miscellaneous

    Are Communism and Socialism profitable business for the rich?

    Please consider the following facts:-

    (a) Lenin (Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov) was from the nobility (his father was awarded the Order of St. Vladmir and his mother was very rich).
    (b) Karl Marx came from a fairly rich family that owned a lot of lands. His nephews founded the renowned Philips company.
    (c) Fidel Castro's father was a rich sugarcane farmer in Cuba.
    (d) Che Guevara's mother was also from a famous noble family in Latin America. Che spent his childhood as a member of the upper-class Argentinian society.
    (e) Mao Zedong's father was among the richest farmers of Shaoshan province.
    (f) Ho Chi Minh's father was an imperial magistrate and held strong influence.
    (g) Sitaram Yechury is a Telugu Brahmin whose father was an engineer in a Govt Dept. and his mother was also a Govt servant. His uncle was the Chief Secretary of Andhra Pradesh. He married a lady who was the chief of BBC Hindi and now is the Resident Editor of the Indian Express.
    (h) Prakash Karat, Brinda Karat, and their friends/relatives, Prannoy Roy, Radhika Roy and Arundhati Roy are all people from rich influential families who were able to afford education in the fabled schools in Doon and later on in DU/JNU and abroad.

    These rich and aristocrats are very much interested in inequalities in the society. They enjoy inequality and utilize this for their own betterment.

    Are Communism and Socialism profitable business for these rich people?
  • #646549
    I was thinking it is the other way around. Coming from rich households these communists wanted the wealth to be distributed equally among the citizens, which ofcourse is never possible. In physics we call this a driving force. Only a difference can drive a change. To develop, you need have difference. Differences in wealth distribution can patronize business minded folks to come up with privatized institutions, profiting both the employees and the employers. If everyone had equal wealth there would be no such scope. Socialism is flawed in many ways. It's ideal. It's truly a cause worth looking up to. But it is heavily flawed and cannot be possible practically.
    Do rich cash in through communism? Seeing that only Putin and his family are thriving, in modern Russia, we can safely assume yes. The rich are the ones profiting from the "equal distribution".

    The stronger a light shines the darker are the shadows around it.

  • #646550
    "They enjoy inequality and utilize this for their own betterment." The author has made this statement but did not substantiate how all the people mentioned in the thread utilized the inequality for their own benefit. I wish the author to substantiate.
    " Be Good and Do Good "

  • #646552
    If we study the life of the Communist greats mentioned in this thread, we will clearly understand that these great men and some women also (like the fourth wife of Mao) enjoyed a grand lifestyle after preaching Communism and when they got the power.

    Studying their life, I commented: "They enjoy inequality and utilize this for their own betterment."

    Beware! I question everything and everybody.

  • #646554
    When criticising a person, one should not be vague. Whatever criticism against an individual should be substantiated by facts. Enjoying a grand style of life does not interfere with thinking about and helping the poor. Do not let the thoughts blurred by personal prejudices. Of the Indians mentioned, I do not find anyone utilizing their wealth, education, and party affiliation to exploit for their own benefit.
    " Be Good and Do Good "

  • #646556
    I strongly doubt some times as to when the communism and socialism fully forgotten and not even followed in total from where it taken birth, why Indians and some Indian parties are towing their ideas. I believe by communists, they wont have believe on God, they respect the labor class and fight for their rights. But over the years the Indian communists have changed. They are going to temple, talking about God, believing in astrology and also not fighting for the cause of labors. So they are changing their attitude probably less takers for their view and vision. And socialism also sails on same plank.
    K Mohan
    'Idhuvum Kadandhu Pogum "
    Even this challenging situation would ease

  • #646560
    It all depends on how they live and what ideals they work for. Jothi Basu, for example, lived a very simple life. He brought about superb reforms in agriculture. The power situation improved so much during his regime.

    His cabinet ministers were also very simple people. Perhaps where he failed was that he did not allow any major investment coming in, whether it is big manufacturing industry or the Information technology industry. Communism always talks about doing away with inequalities. These inequalities will always be there, whether it is pure communism or socialism or capitalism.

    Jothi Basu was a giant because for most of his life, he lived such a simple life and was a true communist. There is nothing wrong in the rich also talking about communism. The problem starts when they start behaving like the capitalists and the rhetoric is only reserved for others.

    However, even within the existing system, we have had very honest and dedicated communists. One such leader in Tamil Nadu, is one Mr Nallakannu, who leads a very simple life. The excesses of capitalism are always on his radar screen. He is the first to oppose any scheme affecting the poor. In fact, even today, the communist parties are in the forefront to fight against the Salem to Chennai highway project, which is an absolutely stupid project being promoted by the BJP at the centre and more morons in Tamil Nadu, who do even understand basics of ecological development and protection.

    Per se, Brinda Karat has participated in many an agitation and still has a good name. Much depends on what they do. We are never ever going to find Mahatma Gandhis anymore. Reform within the capitalistic framework is the key. Communism can never die. The excesses of capitalism to lead to mass movements, like what happened to Sterlite, at Tuticorin in Tamil Nadu. Of course, socialism is a very confusing topic in India. It was given a decent burial by Mr PV Narasimha Rao. The loss making State and Central Government enterprises are symbols of failed socialism. However, welfare of at least those thousands of people is at least the positive plus.

    For example, even a giant like BHEL has made losses. Now it is coming back to the black. However, one has to just visit the temples of peace -- the giant townships -- where people of all castes and communities and regions live together in absolute peace. Except for the Tata township at Jamshedpur, I cannot think of any other similar township. Today, socialism may be dead but the positive spin offs are all too visible.

    Sir, if the likes of Anil Ambani can still have debts of one lakh crore rupees and demand "debt restructuring " in some form, is this not excessive capitalism? How the hell did the bankers help him borrow such huge amounts? Will he ever repay at all?

  • #646567
    What I feel is uniformity in the living standards of the people is not possible. But many communists say that they will bring "equal distribution" of wealth. But what are the attempts made or steps taken for that is not known to me? The concept should be initiated by the individual who preaches this. Whatever excess amounts or wealth they personally posses can be distributed to some deserving people. As far as my knowledge goes I have not seen any leader from the parties which preaches this concept do that. At least food for two times a day is also not available for some people. This so-called Communism and Socialism preachers never see that they can arrange food for these people from their wealth. Once everybody has become equal, these people don't have anything to say and they will not have any point to talk. That is why they never want it to happen so that they can go on talking and continue their journey in politics.
    drrao
    always confident

  • #646584
    Deleted
    I love chocolates and ice creams!

  • #646600
    Communism and Socialism completely forgotten these days. All these parties never work for people.they just pretend. Communism is for people for justice they wanted equal wealth among the citizens, this fight since years not yet success. To exploit their own benefit has become headline,but some of the honest dedicated communist served for to rech their ambition

  • #646624
    The fact of the matter is that this all revolves around money & power. And therefore this got little to do with the welfares & upliftment of the weak or the poor population & rest is just a matter of blaming & coming-up with the justifications.

  • #646652
    1. "Jothi Basu was a giant because, for most of his life, he lived such a simple life and was a true communist. "-----Factually totally incorrect statement, Mr. Sivakumar.

    2. These Communists destroy the youth by preaching the Utopian and destructive ideology and enjoy the money meant for the poor as well as extracting money from the poor. It is true everywhere in the world.

    Beware! I question everything and everybody.


  • Sign In to post your comments