Hey!! I'm new to this but I've recently gotten more interested in politics so I'm going to give it a try.
I'm taking economics and government this year and surprisingly I'm enjoying it. It's probably because my teacher makes it really interesting but I never knew that I would actually look forward to my economics class!!!
Anyway, we have recently been talking about different types of political systems from Radical Capitalism to Communism. I just want to throw this out there: What type of government system do you think would be more effective for a country if they have had to go one extreme or the other? Radical Capitalism, which is literally no government involvement whatsoever, or Communism, which is when the government makes every decision for the people and there is no freedom.
My personal opinion is that Radical Capitalism would be more effective. Some may disagree with me because there are six countries in the world with communism and absolutely none with Radical Capitalism. However, It only takes one person to start a government in the form of communism. That explains why we have it in some parts of the world. Radical Capitalism is different because everyone has to agree that there is going to be no government and that will just never happen. Our society cannot agree on one thing.
Now, you probably want to know my reason for choosing Radical Capitalism. Here it is: If everyone had to work for their own money, clothes, food, etc.; they didn't have to pay taxes yet they also were not given money from the government, we would be a harder working nation and grow more productively. The people that don't want to work would not eat. They would no longer be able to rely on the government to make ends meet for them and they would have no choice but to work. At the same time, the people that work very hard would be able to keep what they earn. Everyone would value what they have more and respect each other more. If there could just be one country that starts this form of government I believe that it could be so successful.
So that's my opinion. I don't want to scare anybody away. If you don't agree with me at all that's is perfectly fine!!! PLEASE, Please, please tell me what you think and what your choice would be. I want to know other's opinions and discuss it. I've never actually had a debate before but I think it would be a cool thing to do on this website. So, all that being said, leave me your ideas and opinions!!!!!!!!
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
Extreme Capitalism. Just because it hasn't been tried, doesn't mean it doesn't work. Communism isn't a economic school though. Communism is a political school and Capitalism is an economic school. If you had done Communism vs. Anarchism or Extreme Capitalism vs. Extreme Kenysianism, then you would have an easier and better discussion.
I don't think extreme anything would be best.
As our country demonstrates we are in the middle.
Countries that followed far right or far left ideologies never survive.
Extreme capitalism ends up creating a bankrupt nation (see 1920s-->great depression X:)
We have yet to see a true communist nation.
However, no country is truly just one thing. Everything is mixed and matched.
+mspin
We weren't extreme capitalists before the great depression. Any economic school of thought can cause a depression. We're slowly heading toward one right now and we're not extreme capitalist but a mix of capitalism and keneysian. The depression of the 1920's was the Federal Reserves fault because it expanded the money supply to its breaking point, the same thing we're doing now.
That wasn't extreme capitalism.
The Feds had just begun fiddling with the monetary supply and the worth of gold (that they'd stolen), creating the artificial 'boom' in the '20s, and the entirely real 'bust' of the '30s and '40s.
The Great Depression was further extended by government intervention and WWII, which diverted supplies necessary for a strong civilian economy to the unnecessary waste and mutual massacre that was the Second World War.
We also have yet to see a true capitalist nation.
Weezyf, I agree with you that neither of the most extreme forms of government are ideal for any country. I was just wondering what your preference would be if those were the only two options. However, I have to disagree with what you said about communism. North Korea is an example that true communism exists. All of those people are controlled by the government and they have no say in anything. I'm not saying that the government there is successful or that it will last, but it is definitely a form of true communism.
True Communism doesn't exist, true Communism is pure Communism which can't exist because humans are corrupt animals. The government in NK is successful at being a totalitarian Communist country, but besides that it isn't the greatest place to live. It is only successful on whatever view you have on the situation. Kim Jong Il would tell you that it is highly successful while I would say it god awful.
North Korea is a socialist dictatorship.
Communism is a form of anarchy, where the people all willingly work for the common good and take only what they need. No government is required for the distribution or assessment.
As such, Marx's dream, while admirable, has never existed nor will it ever have the opportunity as long as Men are corrupt, violent creatures.