How come Communism can't Exist Independently 08 05 2022

 Meaning, if they are all providing for their own needs and everyone else there how come they need to attack other countries?

When they attack another country are they not in fact stealing that other countries resources?

So again how come they can't create their own "Resources?"

Because they don't have enough in COMMON to make it worthwhile?

Because they don't have enough COMMON good to do so!

And what is COMMUNISM?  In effect it is a form of Government where you don't have to give credit where credit is due?

And hence you end up with no credit!

And if you have no credit it really doesn't matter whether you are perceived to have credit or not; your nation isn't going to be able to provide for its own needs because of that restraint!  In other words you created a form of Government whereby it is defined to be all in common?

And then you didn't really give credit where credit is due, because by definition that isn't how that form of Government works.  In effect it is guised tyranny.

What does it mean to be an independent nation?  It means, "Hey look buddy go get your own lunch!  You can't have mine today!  And I have no desire to have whatever type of swept up crumbs you could conjure up."

Can Communism lead by example?  Apparently not!  To lead by example means this, "Look at what I am doing independently than you; do you think you can beat it?  You do think you can win against me under fair terms?"  And look at that moral?  It is just this, "I would respect your work if you did.  But would you respect my work if I did?"  See what I am getting here?

Why does Communism need to look to other nations in order to support it?

Because there isn't enough COMMON good present in it to support itself.

Does it amount to this?  We will create stodgy factories and drink potato liquor until we find ourselves in a mess with other nations, because we didn't have enough COMMON good to support ourselves?

I hope that some of you enjoy my stream of conscience writings.  I hope you see the common good represented by them.

© 2022 Thomas Murphy

Part II?

Capitalism is a Business Economy.  But what happens when Capitalism is forced to make business decisions regarding people?  They better be fair ones, right?  But who should be able to determine what are fair business decisions regarding the people in a democracy?  Should the people who got rich selling tobacco determine what fair decisions are regarding the people?  Should the people who got rich selling alcohol determine that?  How about the Chemical Co billionaires who evaded environmental liability?  Who feels they are the best people to make what amounts to business decisions regarding people?  Where are we going to draw the line?  What happens in Capitalism when those who draw the line have all the money and are not going to draw the line fairly?

So let's say that you get a Real Estate mogul as President.  He lives his whole life by raising the rent and evicting those who can't pay?  Then he is believed to organize a riot whereby essentially our very own Government is evicted?  And it isn't like he is ever going to read this slump over with his hands on his face and cry is it!

© 2022 Thomas Paul Murphy