Seriously, the "ruling class" isn't supposed to exist either!

Who really should have the power is the people itself, that would make decisions through councils ("soviets" in Russian).

However, that's rather difficult because it's direct democracy. Now, if there were indirect democracy, such as we have right now, the "ruling class" would be forced to leave the administration.

The problem is that all "communist" countries have been dictatorships, and the few democratic ones (The Spanish Republic, Chile in 1970) were subjects to fascist and neoliberal coups.

The other communist countries followed the ideals of 1917's revolution, which was done urgently and without thinking it through in reality. Read "A critique on the Russian Revolution" by Rose Luxemburg.

Seriously, there are ways and ways of communism, and if it hadn't been for the Russian Civil War (which made communism adapt to war, in a way that it could never dis-adapt to it), we would have true communist parties today.

1. Capitalism is unsustainable. Capitalism requires constant economic expansion in a finite world and is therefore unsustainable.

2. Capitalism is undemocratic. Wealth is a form of political power, wealth is distributed unequally in capitalism. In a democracy, political power must be distributed equally. Therefore, capitalism is undemocratic.

3. Capitalism is inhuman. Above, the author makes the argument that greed is human nature. This is ignorant of 50-plus years of research that indicates that social status is a much more powerful motivator than money. In fact, people are almost genetically programmed to be naturally altruistic. Capitalists are making a circular argument: they are looking at the behavior of individuals raised under capitalism, a system which rewards greed, and then concluding that greed is human nature!

There is no excuse for anyone to be homeless because the homeless in America are either lazy or insane. If they are insane, they should be living in a mental hospital, and if they are not insane, they should be working, and if they are disabled, they can get on disability. If they cannot afford to feed their children, they can get food stamps, and during that time, they can be working toward a better life. We all have the opportunity to have a better life if we work for it, and maybe if we work hard enough, our children can go to college, then their children can go to a better college, and so on. It is up to every single person to better himself or ask for help. Help is available for everyone.

Some people have talents that others don’t have, for example, my husband’s boss has a talent for building a business, and he hires people who have a talent for working for his business. It doesn’t mean he’s better than his employees, it means he’s used his talent to give jobs to people who cannot create their own business, and the money earned from that job allows the employees the opportunity to get an education or whatever else they want to do.

I do, however, think people should keep their money out of the bank, for the banks are the true owners of the people, and they achieve this by “holding” your money for you, for a price, and that price is called “interest” and is created out of thin air. If we just exchanged cash instead of paying banks to “hold” our money, we would get to keep all of our money.

I can tell you a few things that my parents told me, from what they experienced, first-hand.

Food was rationed, and you could hardly find anything to buy in the stores, so people would spend huge amounts of money to buy stuff off the black market, like cigarettes, or coffee, which were hideously overpriced.

One adult's food ration per month consisted of one whole chicken, 10 eggs and 1 pack and a half of butter (I'm not making this up).

If you wanted to buy anything in stores, you had to get in line for it(especially milk) sometimes at 4 o'clock in the morning, to be there when the transport arrived, because there was rarely enough for everybody.

My father, who was a weapons engineer, made about one quarter of the money a tractor driver made per month.

The working class was favored, so were members of the party.

Cars were classed into "even, and uneven numbers" And one weekend, the even-numbered cars were allowed to drive, the next weekend, the others.

There was no press or television, except about the greatness of the party and the leaders, during which they lied about how great our production had been.

Heat during winter was not always guaranteed. For instance, my parents told me they would sleep in the kitchen, on the floor, to warm up from the oven, because the res of the apartment was freezing cold.

Hot water, again, didn't exist. If you wanted to bathe, you had to warm it on the stove.

If you tried to elope to a foreign country, they went after your remaining relatives(that's if they didn't manage to shoot you on the border).

Plus there was a secret police, which meant nobody could be trusted. Many people were secretly "informers" for the party, so you had to be very careful about speaking against the leader, the party, or the regime.

There were countless cases of priests who worked as under-cover informers and ratted on those who came to confession, if they spoke against the party, or plans of escape.

I could go on, and, on, and on. It was like a bad sci-fi novel.

In the former Soviet Union, for example, the arts were greatly encouraged, and children were selected at early ages to train for ballet and gymnastics, for example. This was to prove the superiority of the Soviets as far as physical fitness and beauty, etc., and you probably don't remember (but since I was born in the Dark Ages, I do), but the Soviets were the premier powerhouse athletes in the Olympics for probably 40 years, at least. They dominated gymnastics, couples figure skating, ice dancing and hockey, to name a few events.

China, on the other hand, had its arts severely suppressed for years under Chairman Mao and his Cultural Revolution. They have gotten away from this, and have now re-embraced the arts, including sending great gymnasts to the Olympics. Their men's team is in perpetual contention for the gold medals.

In both countries, the average citizen often had his or her job more or less chosen for him, depending on performance on aptitude tests and academic performance.

However, having a child in the Bolshoi Ballet in Russia ensured a family a better apartment and a more luxurious lifestyle, since their child was, essentially, a government employee.

I also remember how closely the Soviet athletes were guarded at the Olympics -- to keep them from defecting to the West. The famous gymnastics coach Bela Karolyi and his wife coached the powerhouse Soviet team to victory in Montreal in the 1976 summer games. They numbered the Olga Korbut and Nadia Comenici among their students. Then they defected and have a gym in Texas. Bela coached the US women's Olympic gymnastics team in the 1996 Atlanta summer games when they took home a ton of gold. Remember the big guy holding Kerri Strug after she won the gold medal in vault after injuring her ankle on her first run? That was Bela.

So, innovation and invention and the arts may be encouraged under a communist regime -- if the inventor or artist can make a case for his or her art benefiting the state. That, after all, is the ultimate aim for every worker in a 20th Century style communist state: to benefit the State, and by nebulous extension, the worker. Never is it, or has it been "ars gratia artis," though -- "Art for art's sake."

I do have a few questions though. What happens to inventors? Are they allowed to invent and innovate, or must they just work?

What about the arts? Are they considered produce? Can people choose their work or are they just allocated jobs?

I think that the basic idea of communism itself is vague and illogical, i.e., to create a classless society. Well, there will always be people who are more talented or ambitious or gifted or loved than the others and obviously they would want their rightful and honored place in the society because they contribute to the society in ways in which it is not possible for other people to contribute.

I have always been fascinated with World War II and everything that went on. It is insanely cool. (you're allowed to think I'm a bit weird) But I am also glad that I wasn't born in that time period. The courage they must have had to do what they did. Considering that if Hitler hadn't done some of the mistakes that he had, he would have won. Kind of scary, huh?

This really helped my understanding of communism a bit better.

Capitalism breeds an aristocratic society where the rich can send their young to the best schools with the best educational resources and most expensive facilities. The money the rich have can buy opportunity in many forms.

I am no supporter of communism, socialism or capitalism, for that matter, but in reality and practise, I have to say the latter has proven most successful.

Personally, my political stance is to be decided as there is no form of political ideology I currently 100 percent agree with and believe aspects of all ideologies have their merits.

Until someone comes up with a new ideology that incorporates the best ideas of each system in a way that will show to be successful, then I denounce my democratic privilege as I currently believe there is no one solution to the vastly different classes, cultures and ideologies of our species.

If anyone out there has devoted their lives to this cause then you have my support as long as you remain pure and fair to everyone who deserves it and never seek personal gain then you have my full support and I would be glad to evaluate your conclusions somehow. (the catch 22 is that on the other side of the greedy you have the downright lazy and opportunistic welfare bums who would do anything to swindle a free living).

The idea of communism is everybody works for the whole. It's the perfect idea (according to my boyfriend), but it can't work. And I still don't understand why people still support it! It's impossible to achieve because of humanity's greed.

Communism strips the power of the people; there is no freedom as all the media is censored, which in turn limits freedom of expression. Communism has too much power in one place (the government), and that power is easily corrupted. It is a weakness.

If anybody can vouch for communism, I will listen, but I probably still won't agree.

Capitalism and communism operate on the same principles; it just looks different as a brand.

coke zero or pepsi max?

one highlights the "zero" factor and the other the "max" factor, but in the end of the day they are exactly the same claiming to have less calories, so is it zero or mas? Doesn't matter. You'll end up choosing one or the other, and still have bad health.

As the article says, Communism in practice is, unfortunately, rarely the ideal it seems to be. It looks good on the outside, but it's too easy for despot rulers like Mao and Stalin to get to power. Ask the Russian and Chinese citizens how they'd like to have either of those two back in power and I can guarantee you (because I have Russian and Chinese friends) they are not in favor of the idea.

Also, neither Russia nor China ever achieved a "classless community." There was the ruling class and the proletariat, or the working class. The ruling class had big houses, cars and country homes. The workers had two-room apartments and had to stand in line to buy groceries. I remember that world before the Iron Curtain came down. It wasn't good.

Our government is not ran for or by the people it is run by greed, that's the only reason it works. Take greed out of people and this government fails for a more socialist aspect of governing. And the greedy can be shipped to antarctica for all I care!

Richest country in the world and the majority of our wealth is held by only a small fraction of the people in it. No reason wealth couldn't be redistributed to better serve our society. No reason people need to sleep on the street or go hungry in this country.

If we actually had a government of the people, by the people, for the people we would truly have a socialist government. The simple fact that it's so hated and despised shows how we have a government of tyrants holding the rest of the country below them instead of trying to pick them up to their equal level.

Start with Orwells 'Animal Farm.' it's quite short and a very easy read.

Then read Ayn Rand "We The Living"

"Doctor Zhivago" (the movie) will also help you.

That should get you well on your way to understanding communism.

For more advanced study look to Friedrich August Hayek, Milton Friedman and other works by Rand, particularly "Atlas Shrugged".

You might also want to read the Constitution of the United States of America.

Did you not read the article? It clearly stated that communism in practice is unfortunately not true to the pure definition of communism. It even mentioned Chairman Mao.

It is good for those if they have nothing (in the pure from) but in used forms that's too much. It is centrally planned so it can complete most of the goals it sets out to do, but what constantly comes back is at what cost.

In truth, it is easy to have everybody be equal. Just take everything away and put the profits into the army.

Ask a US citizen what Communism is and you'll get a slightly different answer. And by 'slightly' I mean the complete opposite.

Does the government control all means of production and are there no privately owned businesses? If so, do the farmers work on land owned by the government?

If all production is government owned, is the revenue from such production distributed evenly amongst the people to sustain equality?

Is it practically possible to have a classless society with no inequality of income especially if demographics differ from household to household and also the level of skill and experience would differ for each job.

Although most communist parties have taken control through a revolution, is it possible in theory for a communist party to have traits of a democracy such as voting for a bill or electing a new government?

Also how would any capitalist society possibly undergo socialism?

Look at the fact that with all said and done, these people pushing this bill have not covered everyone as they purport (there will still be millions not covered).

Look at the journalists who don't follow the rule of government in Russia and remember the mysterious deaths of those who tried to talk out of line with the government.

So, before you embrace socialism and communism, look at the facts. Don't try to be too smart and sage in your theories and evaluations. Just keep it simple, because it is.

According the definition of communism by the man who coined the phrase, communism *is* stateless and classless. Socialism is the transitional period between capitalism and communism. All the nations deemed "communist" have never even progressed out of the infant stage of socialism.

For more information research Marxism.

what stability is