Pedantry, pedantry, pedantry. Firstly by the nature of the parties and the electoral systems - or lack thereof - in the countries in question, the analogy is completely flawed. Secondly, you’re throwing a nice little red herring out with conflating the name of the country with the people running the country. No-one said anything about that before this, so don’t try and drag us off onto that little tangent. Thirdly, the point here is that Fred is wrong in saying that the US won the “war” on Communism, because Communist entities continue to exist, and some even run countries. Thus if he believes that constitues success in that war, and is the kind of success he anticipates the US having in the “War on Terrorism”, we’re in some pretty deep shit.
Not always a bad thing.
I disagree. The fact is, “communism” is a term used to describe a certain specific type of political-economy. If a nation is to be accurately described as a “communist” country, its political-economy must be “communist”.
China simply does not have a communist political-economy. Sure, it has elements of communist central planning and state-ownership of assets. But, so do Taiwan and Japan. That doesn’t make either of those nations “communist”.
BTW, where do stock markets fall in communist political-economic theory?
Deng rightly paved the way for a less idiological-based litmus test when he said that the color of the cat does not matter… since then, China has transformed from a communist state to a largely capitalist state, with elements of both communism and socialism still present. Even if China cannot be termed a “capitalist” or “free-market” state, it still cannot be termed a “communist” state any longer either.
That is what you are doing, actually. Except, you are saying the name of the party of those running the country is determinative of he issue. I am merely pointing out the discrepancy between the name of the country and the actual type of government structure of the country to illustrate that names frequently are misleading, if not obviously erroneous.
I wouldn’t dream of doing so intentionally. In any event, I think I am on point, per my remarks above.
Do they? Again, I agree with FS that the CCP is not actually “communist”. Neither, IMO, is the Communist party in Vietnam actually communist… only in name.
If the people who currently commit acts of terrorism eventually cease committing acts of terrorism, but still call themselves terrorists… well, I’d call that a success for our side.
Like I said, names are often irrelevant. Some people refer to “terrorists” as “freedom fighters”.
What’s in a name?
So you disagree about China and Vietnam. What about the others?
I think the others are primarily authoritarian dictatorships that care little about the implementation of actual communist political-economy theory.
I think China and Vietnam both have command economies, but that is changing. They have defintely been communist for many years and neither was defeated by the US.
Didn’t the US lose the Vietnam war? Talk about revisionist history. What’s going on with that Fred?
However, these countries are going through some enlightenment. That enlightenment in terms of economic policy has more to do with the realities of how markets operate I don’t think that was a US invention though they are masters of it as are many other countries.
Cuba has initiated dollar-based economies for visiting tourists as did the Soviet Union and China before it. It is, however, to a large extent still “communist” in practice as well as in theory. Would anyone say that Cuba is a model for anyone else in Latin America? At one time, do not forget, it was. Obviously, that has changed.
Laos is undeveloped and is a dictatorship. It is still primarily socialist-communist. That, however, is changing. It is more akin to Burma than a genuine “communist” country.
Finally, North Korea is a f***ed up mess regardless of how you want to look at it. I would argue that it is still primarily communist even though it too is introducing capitalist-based reforms. Anyway, who wants to model their nation on North Korea? Ergo my earlier point is valid. Communism as a model, as a theory, as a threat is pretty much dead in the water. Good riddance to one of the worst theories to ever raise its ugly head.
Also, I think we have a 50-year battle on our hands with reforming the Middle East. There will be setbacks like we had with regard to Vietnam. The solution, however, will not be throwing in the towel when the going gets tough or using policies akin to those of Carter where we attempt to appease or “understand” this process of violence. We must fight it like Reagan and one day, we may find that it too has gone the way of communism.
I have every expectation, however, that a unique and stupid theory will emerge to replace it. Perhaps, Multiculturalism? Borgism? Who knows? But never underestimate the stupidity of those on the left. I don’t.
But the US hasn’t defeated Communism has it Fred?
It might be going the way of the dodo but its not like some kind of US victory.
[quote=“Fox”]But the US hasn’t defeated Communism has it Fred?
It might be going the way of the dodo but its not like some kind of US victory.[/quote]
The last man standing wins. War of attrition and all that.
I think, given the various active US policies aimed at spreading democracy and containing communism over the years, it is fair to say that the US (or the US-led opposition) has defeated communism.
The wars in Viet Nam and Korea and in many other places were really just hot battles all part of the cold war. The US and the USSR/PRC were the representatives of competing ideals. So, maybe it is the ideal espoused by the US that has dfeated communism…
But, that’s really splitting hairs, innit? 
Well having just returned from El Salvador and Nicaragua, um, yes, actually I would say we have. Been to Shanghai or Saigon recently? Hell, even Lao is open for tourism and other business. What exactly would you say is still communist and successful?
Actually, it is. The Europeans were all about appeasement and understanding and cohabitating with communism. Reagan and Thatcher were against it because it was an evil policy. I remember living under communist governments and the levels of demoralization could not be imagined. The pointlessness of doing any kind of meaningful economic activity and its dolorous effects on society cannot be underestimated. Why do you think so many Cubans are willing to flee the worker’s paradise?
The US along with the UK stood firm against communism when everyone else wanted to buckle. That is why when you ask the leaders of the former Eastern Block who they support and appreciate for past support, it is America, America and more America. No one ever mentions France except between spits. Let’s not even talk about Germany.
So yes, we have won. We beat communism, except perhaps at our universities and even there we are taking the fight for tomorrow’s minds to a whole new level. We have won. Now, we must address Islamofascism. The fourth theater of mindless leftist nihilism to confront us. We will win. We are winning. Each election. Each new constitutional right is a step in OUR direction. We woke up late to the threat but we are dealing with it.
Naturally, and unfortunately, so many Europeans, Canadians and Leftist Americans have failed to learn the lesson of history. More peace marches? More Understanding? More dialogue? Bah! Let’s free Syria and Iran and see what the people there have to say about their gratitude to any “peace marchers.” Hell, ask them today. They want to be free. The leftists in the West are not their friends and they know it and will tell you. That is why America remains hugely popular among the average Iranian.
Let’s examine a typical detainee at Guantanamo. Let’s wring some tears for these poor detainees and let’s forget about any innocent US soldiers they may kill. They are as they have admitted themselves looking for martyrdom. Why not give it to them?
Well having just returned from El Salvador and Nicaragua, um, yes, actually I would say we have. Been to Shanghai or Saigon recently? Hell, even Lao is open for tourism and other business. What exactly would you say is still communist and successful?[/quote]
Success has nothing to do with it. Does Communism still exist? Yes. Therefore it hasn’t been defeated. It may well be on the way to extinction - and I expect it is - but it hasn’t been defeated yet.
Communism has been defeated. China is not communist. Vietnam is not communist. Lao is not communist.
Cuba and North Korea are probably still communist. China and Vietnam and Lao have leaderships that claim to be communist but it does not bear out with reality. You are equating the fact that they are dictatorships with communism I think though that is a natural progression.
When the only two regimes that remain communist are North Korea and Cuba, communism is failed and dead.
Burma has a military junta but its poor economic performance has not given all military juntas a bad name, at least not yet. See the difference?
No one wants to go communist anymore though some may consider a military junta. Know what I mean?
[quote=“fred smith”]Communism has been defeated. China is not communist. Vietnam is not communist. Lao is not communist.
Cuba and North Korea are probably still communist. China and Vietnam and Lao have leaderships that claim to be communist but it does not bear out with reality. You are equating the fact that they are dictatorships with communism I think though that is a natural progression.
When the only two regimes that remain communist are North Korea and Cuba, communism is failed and dead.[/quote]
Failing and dying. They still exist, yes? Meaning the “war” has not been won yet. And until it has been, there’s always a chance it won’t be, although I hope to God it will, and I wouldn’t put money on the alternative.
And regardless - communist entities continue to exist, yes? They may not all rule countries, but they exist. Is this the same standard you want to hold the “War” on Terrorism to? A 差不多 victory?
There are still Nazis. Does that mean we did not win World War II? Even after Germany was defeated Spain and Portugal remained fascist until the mid 1970s. Would you argue then that we had not won the war against fascism?
When was the war on facism again? There was World War 2, against the Axis, but I don’t recall anyone declaring a war on facism, although I could be wrong. And if there was one, then no, it hadn’t been won then.
Fine live with your interpretation. We have won 99.9 percent of the war on communism and merely 0.1 percent remains so we cannot declare total victory. Satisfied?
Yes. Now is that the standard you want to hold the “war” on terrorism to? “Ah, close enough, we got most of them”?
Oh, and when was war declared on fascism again?
I wish I shared your optimism, Fred. I just have a sad feeling that it is not always easy for a nation realize how destructive communism is until that nation has tried it themselves and experienced the lack of freedom and the poverty that it creates.
Are you truly confident that there are no places in today’s world that are in danger of falling for the lie:
I do agree with you in the sense that I don’t think the people there are really all that gung-ho about communism per se, they are just gung-ho about not being poor anymore.
Someone comes along and says: “You know there’s this great system where everyone shares the economic pie equally! It’s called communism, and it means you won’t be poor anymore.”
Thus, they aren’t saying “Yay communism!” They say “Yay whatever-the-name-of-that-system-is-where-we-won’t-be-poor-anymore!”
Of course later they realize that communism in practice doesn’t mean sharing the pie equally, it just means having a smaller total pie (with the big pieces now going to the communist party cadres instead of the rich landowners, and with the weak now getting a small piece of a small pie, instead of a small piece of a large pie).
I’m just not confident that this is as well understood as you seem to think it is…
I see what you mean Hobbes but you are confusing communism with populism. Populism is alive and well in Latin America but do not mistake this with communism. That was a whole different kettle of fish. The state will most likely not control 100 percent of the politics and economics ever again regardless of how much Chavez barks or the “dispossessed Indians” march in La Paz. Ecuador. Well, same shit different bananas.
[quote=“Tetsuo”]Yes. Now is that the standard you want to hold the “war” on terrorism to? “Ah, close enough, we got most of them”?
Oh, and when was war declared on fascism again?[/quote]
Seriously Fred, I want to know.