Why Does Atheism and Left-Wing Politics Usually Go Together?

[Darkstar]

Communism is a fantasy. When applied to reality, it's disastrous.

However I believe a mix of socialism and capitalism and would lean to more socialism then it is now.

Capitalism has had its ups and downs. During the industrial revolution, it was pretty awful. In my opinion, socialism is the bandage to put over the wounds of a corrupt capitalism while those wounds heal. When the society has been reformed it should go back to capitalism, not proceed to communism like Marx said. Capitalism does need some regulation to keep people from being abused, though. The capitalism in America isn't perfect, but it's far better than the capitalism of old.

[Mister Agenda]

Show me any government that has total control over its economy and doesn't drive it into the ground.

China comes to mind, although they do it by refraining from exercising their total control to its fullest extent. Adding a dash of capitalism to their communism brought hundreds of millions of Chinese out of what the UN defines as absolute poverty, one of the most dramatic economic shifts of the last fifty years.

The other end of the tightrope they're walking leads to 'capitalist in all but name' I think, but arguably they're managing the transition semi-competently.

[5thHorseman]

Capitalism is fantastic whatever way you look at it. Look at the communist revolutions, were they ever successful? No. Cuba; dump. Russia; went broke, corruption inside out(not the reasons Reaganites likes to believe or say, it had been falling apart since the 70's) caused it to stagnate then rot. China, only successful because of Deng Xiaoping's socialist market ideology, ensuring a weird commucapitalist system that stopped the insanity of Maoism. Vietnam is/has going/gone the same way as China.

Even social democracies, the midway-ish point, are based around the capitalist system. It's not perfect (capitalism), but it's a fuck sight better than communism. Work hard, die in a gulag or a shitty dacha no ta!

The only revolution that lives on successfully is the American revolution. The furthest from communism, which allowed capitalism and individuals to thrive. And even with grotesque debts it still thrives in comparison today.

[Creed of Heresy]

Hell, I'm a liberal libertarian. More liberal than libertarian but basically I think government should do its job; protect its people, provide for them, and keep those with too much power in check. As far as capitalism goes; it's fine unless you start screwing people over without them having a chance of having an alternative.

That gets messy in a hurry, though. No easy solution to that problem, I can guarantee it.

[Tiberius]

China are an example of communists by name only. Practically all large companies manufacture stuff in China, so the Chinese do not have total control over what is made in the country, and how it is sold elsewhere. The fact that the Chinese seem fine with sweatshops is more of a sign that they are an oppressive regime that cares little about its own people.

[Darkstar]

China are an example of communists by name only. Practically all large companies manufacture stuff in China, so the Chinese do not have total control over what is made in the country, and how it is sold elsewhere. The fact that the Chinese seem fine with sweatshops is more of a sign that they are an oppressive regime that cares little about its own people.

If anything, China is the perfect example of why capitalism is better. They only survived by implementing capitalistic policies into their communist state. Capitalsim + communism...weird, they're polar opposites. +=
(okay, it isn't that stark)

[Tea Earl Grey Hot]

I was into anarcho-capitalistim for a while. It's a type of libertarianism that thinks the normal roles of government would be better handled by profit driven companies. It seems a bit too crazy to me now. Supposedly, human rights would be better secured under this system and would allow greater prosperity. Economists at the "Mises Institute" and atheist Stefan Molyneux are the largest advocates of it today.

I don't know what to think of it anymore. I have to take time to properly reevaluate my political stances but I'm just throwing it out here as something interesting.

[Darth]

You're all looking at capitalism from a utilitarian point of view (and yeah, I of course agree that it works a trillion times better) but I would argue that the system is itself more moral, a free market is based on voluntary exchanges between people.

Furthest I got was minarchy. Anarcho capitalists? And we libertarians get called crazy and extreme

[TaraJo]

Capitalism is fantastic whatever way you look at it. Look at the communist revolutions, were they ever successful? No. Cuba; dump. Russia; went broke, corruption inside out(not the reasons Reaganites likes to believe or say, it had been falling apart since the 70's) caused it to stagnate then rot. China, only successful because of Deng Xiaoping's socialist market ideology, ensuring a weird commucapitalist system that stopped the insanity of Maoism. Vietnam is/has going/gone the same way as China.

Even social democracies, the midway-ish point, are based around the capitalist system. It's not perfect (capitalism), but it's a fuck sight better than communism. Work hard, die in a gulag or a shitty dacha no ta!

The only revolution that lives on successfully is the American revolution. The furthest from communism, which allowed capitalism and individuals to thrive. And even with grotesque debts it still thrives in comparison today.

I've certainly seen some people bad mouth capitalism all together, but I'm not going to do that. I'll say capitalism does generally work. However, unrestrained, uncontrolled capitalism is what led to the bad conditions that preceded the French and Russian revolutions. Capitalism needs controls and regulations to prevent corruption by the captains of industry and other general people with power and privilege.

However, this kinda brings up a question for me: what should our economic policy be? Should the government try to form an economic policy that's fair or an economic policy to help the nation?

[Darth]

I don't see the two as mutually exclusive.