In this game communism actually works, so It´s an inaccurate simulation.

[Maximvs]

In this game communism actually works, not only in a democratic way but also in an economic way.

In reality it failed miserably in both, democracy and human rights and more so in economic efficacy and efficiency.

The problem I see is that this game threat marxists "political theories" or " political ideas" as they were laws of nature. As an example, in theory theocratic goverments should be the perfect goverment, because "is the goverment of god" what´s more perfect than that ? well... the reallity doesn´t work like demagogues, power mongerers or just naive people say or belive it works.

In a communism Economy is stagnant and desicions need a lot of burocratic layers: as an example to fire or hire a worker is not as "easily" as in a private factory, also to move a businness or change production ( make chairs instead of tables ) or slaughter more or less animals, even cut a tree, all the controls, forms, autorization to change or innovate even in emergency situation relies in some sort of burocratic control and accountable. Even change a truck tire ( buy the new one)

All of this make corruption rampart, and people working behind and parallell to the system, somethimes just no taking decicions for the fear of punisment or plain fatigue of burocratic work.

As an example China was pretty poor until it change the system towards a more liberal economic system ( while not full liberal, in game cound be interventionist) same for Vietnam, and all eastern ex-Russian satellite countries.

Cuba and North Korea are the only communist economies today and the results are pretty lean and obvious.

It´s hard to represent corruption, stagnation, autocraric despotism and plain stupidity in game. So for a " solution " for this I would suggest the following:

All factories and production buildings consumes bureaucracy. As all productive decicions are taken from goverment top to bottom and then the response have to go from bottom to top it required a lot of bureaucrats.

Efficiency of factories and RGO should be seriously diminished by default (underproduction, ineffciency, plain steal, politicking ) If you want to avoid this you should use an Autoritary decree ( a new one) or pay a burocratic cost.

That´s a solution for the game as it´s current game system works, it represent, more or less, the "historical materialism" de facto, and all humans in game are honest, robots and predictable in it tastes and decicions.

[NEON]

Ursprünglich geschrieben von Obi Hung Kenobi:

Ursprünglich geschrieben von Potato Head:

I haven't said I'm witty, I am actually quite stupid! Give me heads up when you're making fun of me, I wanna laugh at me too!

ur too ez, just sit in a room quiet by urself and look how kimlin makes fun of himself

u can be like him

bye bye loser

See you soon!

[Supply Slut]

Ursprünglich geschrieben von Obi Hung Kenobi:

you must be like 13 years old to think anyone gives a f about ur politics on steam

Person says nobody cares, after posting a dozen comments. In other news, politician says they don’t like politics.

[kgkong]

Ursprünglich geschrieben von Obi Hung Kenobi:

are people so autistic and stupid here that they lack common sense n when someone is making fun of them? lol

jesus, no wonder these threads go on forever

What does autism have to do with intelligence? That's just an ignorant comment dude.

[RandyNewman]

Ursprünglich geschrieben von V:

Ursprünglich geschrieben von AmesNFire:

It's a lot of people simply repeating what they were told without considering the historical, political, or economic contexts. Also a lot of cold war propaganda and general ignorance on the topics; as educated populations tend to ask too many questions regarding the status quo.

Oh thank the gods someone else said it. Like seriously, 90% of everything everyone in here has said is either blatantly false, or so mired by propaganda that any grain of truth is buried under a beach of falsehoods.

Unlike almost everyone else in this thread, I've actually gotten to visit a communist country, and it is absolutely nothing like the West pretends. You know what the worst part about Vietnam is? The climate. At least for me bc I have asthma. Everyone wants to talk ♥♥♥♥ about them, while completely ignoring the fact that the USA tried to invade and decimate them with a war started by a false flag attack. The US has been proven to be the bad guy SO MANY TIMES. Iran-Contra, CIA drug trafficking, United Fruit, torturing innocent bystanders in the middle east, indefinitely detaining anyone they want in GitMo, being one of two countries out of every other single country in the UN to vote no on lifting the blockade and embargo on Cuba, despite decades of repeat confirmations from the international community that the accusations of human rights abuses in Cuba are absolutely unsubstantiated, training the Taliban because they didn't want Afghanistan being friends with the Soviets, training literal terrorists in south america that massacre entire villages, including infants. Like exactly how much does the US actually have to do until people realize that they have never been the good guys?

It's fine. The American Empire is steadily declining, possibly outright collapsing.

Its going to speed up its own decline by continuing to make all the wrong moves. It's own citizens are going to defend and cheer on every wrong move it makes, even as their own lives gradually get worse.

"What's America doing wrong?" Wrong answers, only.

[Madzap]

Ursprünglich geschrieben von Bardin Goreksson:

Ursprünglich geschrieben von Dojaeni:

I seem to recall someone saying that communism is perfect - on paper.

What's worth keeping in mind is that Marx's original manifesto never called communism an alternative to capitalism, but a successor, to be implemented in a country that already had industrialization and a facsimile of human rights. The USSR was never the intended location for the revolution, that was Lenin's idea.

I wonder how communism would've worked if first-world far-left movements like the Canadian Commonwealth Party or French and British Syndicalism had succeeded instead of eastern European communism? And can the modern-day 'Nordic model' (a heavily-regulated semi-free market with strong worker protections) be called a successful example of socialism?

Personally, I don't think communism would have worked under any circumstances, originating from 1st world countries or not, during the 20th century. The interesting question, however, is what will happen when A.I. and machines dominate virtually all forms of production? What will happen when it is virtually impossible for human labor to compete with machines, which isn't too far off if you just look at the progress of A.I. in the last couple years.

[Magero]

Ursprünglich geschrieben von Madzap:

Ursprünglich geschrieben von Bardin Goreksson:

What's worth keeping in mind is that Marx's original manifesto never called communism an alternative to capitalism, but a successor, to be implemented in a country that already had industrialization and a facsimile of human rights. The USSR was never the intended location for the revolution, that was Lenin's idea.

I wonder how communism would've worked if first-world far-left movements like the Canadian Commonwealth Party or French and British Syndicalism had succeeded instead of eastern European communism? And can the modern-day 'Nordic model' (a heavily-regulated semi-free market with strong worker protections) be called a successful example of socialism?

Personally, I don't think communism would have worked under any circumstances, originating from 1st world countries or not, during the 20th century. The interesting question, however, is what will happen when A.I. and machines dominate virtually all forms of production? What will happen when it is virtually impossible for human labor to compete with machines, which isn't too far off if you just look at the progress of A.I. in the last couple years.

AI aside, your allegations about "communism would have never worked" is very funny.
Tell that to all the countries that adopted socialists laws and ideas that helped and continue to help a lot of people today.
Saying that, how's that health system going in America ?
What ? Can't hear you... 1000/2000 dollars for an ambulance ? Insuline being insanely expensive ?
Yeah... Good old capitalism doing it right for the people in the name of "freedom".
State capitalism/communism are bad and capitalism too but heh, you're free to be broke after one trip to the hospital I guess :p.

[Kimlin]

Ursprünglich geschrieben von Magero:

Ursprünglich geschrieben von Madzap:

Personally, I don't think communism would have worked under any circumstances, originating from 1st world countries or not, during the 20th century. The interesting question, however, is what will happen when A.I. and machines dominate virtually all forms of production? What will happen when it is virtually impossible for human labor to compete with machines, which isn't too far off if you just look at the progress of A.I. in the last couple years.

AI aside, your allegations about "communism would have never worked" is very funny.
Tell that to all the countries that adopted socialists laws and ideas that helped and continue to help a lot of people today.
Saying that, how's that health system going in America ?
What ? Can't hear you... 1000/2000 dollars for an ambulance ? Insuline being insanely expensive ?
Yeah... Good old capitalism doing it right for the people in the name of "freedom".
State capitalism/communism are bad and capitalism too but heh, you're free to be broke after one trip to the hospital I guess :p.

Which nations? All of the nations that get to forgo having a military budget because they are protected by the US military. Just how much money would any of those nations have available for any of their welfare programs when they have to increase their defense budget by 100 B.

[吐球球的巴雷特]

Ursprünglich geschrieben von Bardin Goreksson:

Ursprünglich geschrieben von equinox1911:

Also, the command idustry of the USSR did work.
It idustrialised the biggest nation in 20 years (1919 -1939) to a point where it was able to defeat the european axis. Furthermore it had a strong showing from ~1955 -1965 providing most of its citizens with moderrn housing and amenities.

That's a good point. The Soviet regime was oppressive and inefficient, BUT it was far less oppressive and inefficient than the Tsarist regime that proceeded it. Only a handful of communist countries, like East Germany and North Korea, were true hellholes. Countries like Cuba and Vietnam weren't really any worse than western-aligned dictatorships like Chile or pre-reform South Korea.

North Korea is definitely not communist economies.
In socialist or communist countries, the chairman should be indirectly elected, but the chairman of North Korea is hereditary. What is the difference between this and the monarchical king and emperor?

[Dark Sun Gwyndolin]

Ursprünglich geschrieben von 阿北:

Ursprünglich geschrieben von Bardin Goreksson:

That's a good point. The Soviet regime was oppressive and inefficient, BUT it was far less oppressive and inefficient than the Tsarist regime that proceeded it. Only a handful of communist countries, like East Germany and North Korea, were true hellholes. Countries like Cuba and Vietnam weren't really any worse than western-aligned dictatorships like Chile or pre-reform South Korea.

North Korea is definitely not communist economies.
In socialist or communist countries, the chairman should be indirectly elected, but the chairman of North Korea is hereditary. What is the difference between this and the monarchical king and emperor?

I fully agree that modern N.Korea is essentially a monarchy (or as Christopher Hitchens put it, a necrocracy, since their de jure head of state is long dead). I was referring to the early Cold War, back when S.Korea was also a dictatorship.

[吐球球的巴雷特]

Ursprünglich geschrieben von Bardin Goreksson:

Ursprünglich geschrieben von Dojaeni:

I seem to recall someone saying that communism is perfect - on paper.

What's worth keeping in mind is that Marx's original manifesto never called communism an alternative to capitalism, but a successor, to be implemented in a country that already had industrialization and a facsimile of human rights. The USSR was never the intended location for the revolution, that was Lenin's idea.

I wonder how communism would've worked if first-world far-left movements like the Canadian Commonwealth Party or French and British Syndicalism had succeeded instead of eastern European communism? And can the modern-day 'Nordic model' (a heavily-regulated semi-free market with strong worker protections) be called a successful example of socialism?

modern-day 'Nordic model' (a heavily-regulated semi-free market with strong worker protections) cannot be called socialism, because socialism is a social system of public ownership, and even what China calls itself (Society with Chinese Characteristics) also claims that public ownership is the main body, and multiple ownership common development.

The most essential feature of capitalist countries is the social system based on private ownership of means of production.

[DinoMight]

imagine being so butthurt over a troll forum post on community tab of a game

[kgkong]

Imagine gaslighting people cause others are actually attacking people over being butthurt themselves for whatever reason that they have to attack others.

This thread itself isn't troll. It's actually got some good talking points in it. It's relevant to the game, though some folks have taken it to more philosophical degrees. Which itself is fine. A few people have been discussing and debating over their differences in ideologies and opinion and have been doing so quite respectfully.

[sammwich]

Ursprünglich geschrieben von equinox1911:

Also, the command idustry of the USSR did work.
It idustrialised the biggest nation in 20 years (1919 -1939) to a point where it was able to defeat the european axis. Furthermore it had a strong showing from ~1955 -1965 providing most of its citizens with moderrn housing and amenities.

I'm sure a lot of people have replied to this or similar posts, but I need to chime in that the communist "economic miracles," once you look at them impartially, are all clearly just Keynesian economics. In each instance, the government made massive investments in the economy with the specific purpose of causing growth (rather than welfare or healthcare, e.g.). It is a well established fact that that large increases in investment, whether public or private, cause economic growth. In each instance of a communist economic miracle, it was followed by significant period of economic stagnation when the investment tapered off or ended. In some cases, the growth was primarily funded by the expropriation of existing wealth and ended once that initial windfall ended.

As such, one can not objectively credit the communist economic system with the tremendous initial growth seen in a number of communist countries. Quite a number of capitalist or state capitalist countries have demonstrated similar growth and for the same proximate cause, an influx of capital directed at purposes meant to increase productivity.

The metric of success for the command economy of the USSR is not how it fared from 1919 to 1939, going from an agrarian to an industrial economy, but how it fared once it was an industrial economy. The first period is a period that naturally sees exponential growth (that's what this game is about). The second period saw ever steady, but diminishing growth. Capitalist countries have boom-bust cycles, with an average increase outpacing communist countries.

[Simonson [29th Ret.]]

Remember to make all wages = zero.

Communism has failed wherever it has been tried and with only millions of deaths to show for it.

[Simonson [29th Ret.]]

Ursprünglich geschrieben von Magero:

Ursprünglich geschrieben von Madzap:

AI aside, your allegations about "communism would have never worked" is very funny.
Tell that to all the countries that adopted socialists laws and ideas that helped and continue to help a lot of people today.
Saying that, how's that health system going in America ?
What ? Can't hear you... 1000/2000 dollars for an ambulance ? Insuline being insanely expensive ?
Yeah... Good old capitalism doing it right for the people in the name of "freedom".
State capitalism/communism are bad and capitalism too but heh, you're free to be broke after one trip to the hospital I guess :p.

Communism has never worked, and healthcare in the U.S. is the best in the world. We have the best doctors and the best care. As long as you have insurance (which you do if you have a job) you can go to the doctor whenever you want and the price is like $35.

Nobody is broke after one trip to the hospital. You deal with the cost, which the vast majority of people do. Even those who cannot pay still get care, as their fees are often waived. There are also several charity hospitals where you can go for zero cost (Children's hospitals mostly, which are once again the best in the world) as well as "socialized" hospitals where you can be taken care of at no cost run by the state. The socialized hospitals are horrible, as you would expect because it's run by a government that has no incentive to help you.

On top of all that, your decision to get care or not is left in your hands, not by some bureaucracy who has determined that you sitting around playing video games are a drain on the state.

So yes, it is freedom. You take care of yourself in America. It's a free country. You make choices and you live with them. The problem is we have a bunch of weaklings who can't take care of themselves anymore and want a permanent mommy and daddy making sure they're tucked in every night with their juice box.