Updated: January 29, 2023 Home » Quotes [ Lesson for Life ]
Karl Marx was a German philosopher, economist, sociologist, journalist, and revolutionary socialist. As much as the general public dislike Communism Socialism and have the opinion that it is bad, remember that Marx once said Democracy is the road to socialism, and it is true. Looking at today’s leading democratic countries, from the United States to the United Kingdom, from Germany to Australia, these countries have more social benefits than existing communist countries such as Cuba and to a lesser extent – China and Vietnam. From free healthcare in Canada, to unemployment benefits in Australia to free university education in Norway.
At the end of the day, there isn’t much difference between communism and democracy, both are ‘mob rules’. Joseph Stalin once said, it is the people who count the votes decide everything, not those that vote. In Democracy, we have an illusion of choice. In Communism, you have an illusion of hope.
History repeats itself, first as tragedy, second as farce.
Social progress can be measured by the social position of the female sex.
Religion is the opium of the people.
Democracy is the road to socialism.
Revolutions are the locomotives of history.
Reason has always existed but not always in a reasonable form.
Nothing can have value without being an object of utility.
The production of too many useful things results in too many useless people.
The meaning of peace is the absence of opposition to socialism.
Landlords like all other men, love to reap where they never sowed.
Political Theory – Karl Marx
Karl Marx remains deeply important today not as the man who told us what to replace capitalism with, but as someone who brilliantly pointed out what was inhuman and alienating about it.
Where did you find the photos that you use “Quotes On Communism Manifesto And Socialism Theories”
They are propaganda paintings by the USSR. Just google “USSR propaganda paintings”, same goes with North Korea, China, Cuba, and etc
Socialism destroys one’s incentive to work. After all, why work when I can rely on the gov’t to take from the producers and give to me, the unproductive one.
Why should a producer work if large percentages of what they make goes to unproductive types? Gosh, I guess the producers don’t have to do anything, either! Then what? Government run________? No thanks! I’ve seen the way gov’t runs things and I’ll stick with capitalism.
According to Vladimir Lenin, “He who does not work shall not eat” is a necessary principle under socialism, the preliminary phase of the evolution towards communist society. The phrase appears in his 1917 work, The State and Revolution. Through this slogan Lenin explains that in socialist states only productive individuals could be allowed access to the articles of consumption.
The socialist principle, “He who does not work shall not eat”, is already realized; the other socialist principle, “An equal amount of products for an equal amount of labor”, is also already realized. But this is not yet communism, and it does not yet abolish “bourgeois law”, which gives unequal individuals, in return for unequal (really unequal) amounts of labor, equal amounts of products.
This is a “defect” according to Marx, but it is unavoidable in the first phase of communism; for if we are not to indulge in utopianism, we must not think that having overthrown capitalism people will at once learn to work for society without any rules of law. (Chapter 5, Section 3, “The First Phase of Communist Society”)
In accordance with Lenin’s understanding of the socialist state, article twelve of the 1936 Soviet Constitution states:
In the USSR work is a duty and a matter of honor for every able-bodied citizen, in accordance with the principle: “He who does not work, neither shall he eat.”
In Lenin’s writing, this was not so much directed at lazy or unproductive workers, but rather the bourgeoisie. Marxist theory defines the bourgeoisie as the group of those who buy the labor-power of workers and engage it in the process of production, deriving profits from the surplus value thus expropriated. Once communism was realised, that is, after the abolition of property and the law of value, no one would live off the labor of others.
Neither did the principle apply to those rendered incapable of work by old age or disability. These groups would have a right to society’s products because they were not at fault for their condition. The elderly, in particular, had worked during their youth, and so could not be denied life’s basic necessities. The Soviet state would then, at least theoretically, provide a basic level of social security.
That’s because the first thing stalin/lenin did was take all the productive Farmers who produced all the food, rounded them up and shipped them off to the Gulags. Then gave their farms to the unproductive and useless idiots that fell for the scam. They of course Produce little too no food and what little was produced was seized by the Communist party to feed themselves, the prisoners in the Gulag and useful idiots that got their farms be damned.
Once communism was realized no one would live off the labors of others because no one would live.
It’s always amazing people think socialists won’t work when beyond-absurd and ever-increasing, unsustainable levels of inequality represents wealth taken by the idle rich from its producers via capitalism. It’s an astounding misconception. The world’s highest living standards and longest life expectancies are also the most democratic and most socialistic economies. It’s easy to see why intelligent democracies do better, with interventions such as universal health care, public ownership of industries, universal education, collective bargaining, regulation, etc.
Name when socialism worked , did you know right before China went communist they banned guns shortly after 20.000.000 political dissidents were executed look at Venezuela Russia why do people from those countries leave for America all that commie jargon has rattled your allready deteriorating brain!!!
Oh yes mao’s great Leap. I mean he only killed a mere 100 million or so of the most productive people in the country. What could possibly go wrong?
wha…what was that? famine? disease? mass death! no way anyone could’ve predicted Ttthhaaattt…
Move to China or Russia
So much proof to back that up. Suffering Venezuelans may disagree with you. God help them, God help us to help them. I won’t dare leave out the Holocaust, Cuba, Russia etc. The suffering I can not grasp and it ALWAYS STARTS THE SAME WAY. If not a military overthrow it’s socialism. Venezuela, And China to name two looking to the USA for hope as we’re their beacon. I can’t help think they must be shocked with all the proof we have from history, proof it’s occuring again so clearly, you could go down a list and check off what we’re experiencing with the Manifesto, and by listening to those who made it to America from their communist countries. One said he heard black lives matter and the hair on his neck stood up….he remembered the beginning of the forced division in his country. Could you imagine escaping it only to possibly endure it again?!
Truly “useful idiots” that aid the people, in our case the democrats. I think it was Stalin the coined the term. I’m unsure.The communist country’s innocent victims must think Americans are incredibly blind or stupid.They must be shocked. And we thought had a vote? We thought we did.
ZERO proof of socialism ever working in any documented history. Nothing to back up your statement. ZERO. It does however always proceed communism.
Scott, you obviously have no faith or respect for your fellow man. You’ll always be part of the problem.
Scott is a realist and doesnt want to have to eat his pets one day.
Atheist communism killed 150 million people since 1917 to achieve “equality”.
Much worse than WW2.
China remains officially atheist-communist and keeps its people in a state of terror.
The errors of Marxism have spread into Western countries.
Countries like Sweden and Australia run on capitalist economic engines with concurrent socialistic programs e.g. health and education.
This is the parasitic nature of socialism which eventually kills the host.
Sweden and Australia are not socialist economies.
Sweden and Australia are not examples of full centralized control of the means of production, distribution and exchange.