Capitalism or Communism? What Difference Does It Make?

Posted on March 28, 2016 by Robert Ringer Comments (39)

Font:

Quite the comedian, that Barackus fellow. What a knee-slapper it was in Argentina when he told a group of young Argentinians (as always, with a straight face) that there was no great difference between communism and capitalism and that they should just “choose from what works.”

He then went on to say, “So often in the past there has been a division between left and right, between capitalists and communists or socialists, and especially in the Americas, that’s been a big debate.” Gosh, I didn’t know there was a division between capitalists and communists. Now why in the world would that be?

Finally, the Marxmeister said, “Those are interesting intellectual arguments, but I think for your generation, you should be practical and just choose from what works. You don’t have to worry about whether it really fits into socialist theory or capitalist theory. You should just decide what works,” he added. If a person didn’t understand BHO’s very well planned-out agenda, he might be inclined to think he’s a bit confused … or knowledge challenged … or simply not too bright.

Yep, kids “should be practical and just choose from what works.” The question he didn’t challenge them to think about is, works for whom? I have news for you: Everything works, no matter how heinous, how destructive, or how malevolent it may be.

And communism is certainly no exception. Communism works — for those who hold the reins of power. In fact, it has worked incredibly well in Cuba for nearly sixty years — i.e., for BHO’s pals Fidel, Raul, and their Che-worshipping cronies. But for the general populace, no so much.

So don’t be anal and worry your little head off about whether something “fits into socialist theory or capitalist theory.” Just fly by the seat of your pants and do what sounds good to you at any given moment. In fact, if you listen to Uncle Bernie long enough, you might just end up getting all kinds of attention on “Watters’ World.”

Sorry, Barackus, but communism and capitalism are at opposite ends of the liberty-tyranny spectrum. Communism is literal slavery for the masses and thus specifically prevents people from bettering their lives. Capitalism, on the other hand, is the epitome of freedom and provides unlimited opportunity for all. Other than this minor distinction, you don’t have to worry about whether something fits into socialist theory or capitalist theory.

What people do with capitalism’s unlimited opportunity is an entirely different subject, and is the source of great confusion for those who have tapioca between their ears. Rather than looking in the mirror for the cause of their problems, they play the victimization card and blame their troubles on capitalism — the very system that offers a way out and a way up for them.

The modern term for this is “low-information voter,” and it, not global warming or any other form of witchcraft, is the biggest danger to our planet. Please quote me on that.

Robert Ringer

+Robert Ringer is an American icon whose unique insights into life have helped millions of readers worldwide. He is also the author of two New York Times #1 bestselling books, both of which have been listed by The New York Times among the 15 best-selling motivational books of all time.

39 responses to “Capitalism or Communism? What Difference Does It Make?”

  1. Gary Stone says:

    Amen, brother Ringer! Thank you for clarity – as usual.

  2. tom says:

    Robert – – Your article was PURE Ringerism – – you knocked it out of the park! Too bad you weren't speaking to those young folks down in Argentina or in America. History has shown that communism and capitalism are as far apart as night and day. However and unfortunately our young Americans from Kindergarten through university are tutored that socialism and communism are the best thing money can buy! Paraphrasing what that great Greek philosofer said centuries ago "Parents should never trust the tutors."

  3. I vote for "simply not too bright."

    • SteveR says:

      I believe he knows EXACTLY what he is doing, and is doing it intentionally. The President is not the power behind the office, he is a puppet with someone else in control of the strings.

      • Richard Lee Van DV says:

        Exactly what I said FROM THE BEGINNING of the Braaack! I'd bet "he" was many years in the making, and then "they" were able to sucker SENTIMENTAL voters into buying the first "black" president idea. Now "they" are trying to sell the "first woman prez" idea! SHE is NOT a woman, she is some kinda FREAK! So where has Congress been RE the Brackish One? Nobody tries to "modify" him? Why?

  4. Scott theczech says:

    Right! Capital (cash, material, human labor, credit, etc., etc.) is always present in any economic system. The question is; who controls it? Do you, the individual, control your capital, or does the collective, the state, the church, the king, the club, the brotherhood, etc., control it?

    • Richard Lee Van DV says:

      For example: my parents owned our house in Michigan built during WWII. I returned, again, 1994, and the Township REGULATED everything. Even assured me that if the house didn't meet THEIR requirements, they'd come and put a lock on my door! So, who "owns" the house my father built now?

  5. Jasper2 says:

    Yes, for Barakus, try anything that "works." He has a transexual wife to prove it.

  6. Marte says:

    You are SO right. It is the voter with tapioca for brains who is the biggest threat.

    If those brave men and women who came to this country with nothing, sacrificed, endured hardships, and worked hard to build good lives could see what their children's children's children are doing today…

    And if our Founding Fathers could see the disgrace that our government has become…

    They would all wonder why they bothered. Or, more probably, they'd wish they had the power to turn the whole lot of them over their knees.

    • Stephan F says:

      You’re right Marte. I often give thought to what those long gone esteemed veterans of WW2 would think about the tyrannical government we have today and how society has devolved into a Frankensteinian community of degenerates. Try to imagine what they would have thought if they could have known what the future would be. Does anyone really think they would have sacrificed themselves knowing how things have turned out? If given a second chance, I’m sure most of them would have joined me in response to being asked to go fight Hitler back then, “What? Are you kidding? PACK SAND!”

    • Scott theczech says:

      There is a fundamental lack of knowledge among our countrymen with regard to political and economic systems in general. This enables the power elite and the "deep state" to move our beloved system in any direction they'd like it to go, including collectivism in its' various forms. After careful study and much debate our founders decided to charter a system which places the maximum amount of control of capital in the hands of the individual. It worked marvelously until about 1913 when the so-called progressive(s) grabbed hold of the reins.

    • Richard Lee Van DV says:

      Like my Hungarian grandparents who joined those came to America before them, worked their way up and created a beautiful prosperous farm, and the Polish, the Germans and other nationalities in the community I grew up in, all up from nothing! Back when Detroit was NOT what I now call it: The Cesspool!

  7. Robert Robert Diamond says:

    Wow – a President with absolutely no appreciation for the system that made America great. No principles. No knowledge. And worst of all to the young and inexperienced socialism and communism sound "nice" where everyone shares and those who don't have are given and those who have give. But in actual practice have turned out to be terrible systems that are very inefficient creating hardships for all but the "insiders" at the top and very limited freedom and even serfdom for average folks. Thanks for bringing this up. I really wonder if the young generation will figure it out before we do further down the path to servitude as citizens serving a government.

  8. Nasdaq7 says:

    I love debating socialists and communists. There's an oversupply of them in the developing world. Now you don't want the US to become anything like the 3rd world do you? Then don't allow them to win anything. Treat them with more respect than they do you, but that's where it should end.

    If you think about it: what is freedom? Freedom IS low taxes. What does a Communist want? 100% of the income of employees or workers. What does a Socialist want? 50% to 70% of your taxes. Including export duties, import duties, property taxes, inheritance taxes, stock market trading taxes, they might actually want a lot more. What do Capitalists want? The highest consumer spending – that means LOW taxes. The lower the better, because they can stock up on inventories for longer. And the lowest business taxes – that means the highest return on any investment and sensible financial and price management. So capitalism represent everything that IS freedom and socialism is the shortcut to Communism, because debt increases, inflation increases, population increases, only capitalism can barely keep up with the demands of people, businesses and the poor.

    Socialists eventually run out of the generous money capitalistic businesses supply and they cannot spend anymore money. You don't want your country to be in debt, in a socialistic welfare state situation. You better hope that anyone that supports more welfare and debt doesn't win the election, because they will open the crack in the door to European sized / Russian / Cuban sized socialism. Socialism is more than just a dictatorship, it is a system where no one has the energy to fight anymore and everyone is fleeing the economic system. You have to form financial unions, socialistic forms of government to keep that level of welfare going. The European Union and the other alliances of countries are influenced by socialism. Only such financial unions can carry the welfare state indefinitely.

    It is a gross misallocation of resources. Eventually you just have no energy to fight the system.

  9. Smucko says:

    Great post, Mr. Ringer. Two points that I would like to elaborate on.
    Obama is our Head I.D.I.O.T. Most people define IDIOT as someone who repeatedly tries the same action and expect a different outcome (such as trying communism), but I.D.I.O.T.s (Individuals Determinedly Ignoring Obvious Truths) take it to another level. Simply put, the Truth is not in them. Obama doesn't care that we think he is an African American who is in over his head (clueless/ ideologue), as long as it gives him cover to continue driving America into the ditch by paying reparations for three hundreds years of raping and reaping colonialism.
    We are all Low Information Voters, either because of our own attitudes, or having to deal with the Power Brokers and supposedly Free Press who together run the voting system. Some examples of both obstacles:
    * I vote for the party that my Daddy said is for the working man;
    * All politics is local. (Even though we are continually federalizing every aspect of our lives);
    * I give Congress an 11% Approval Rating, but I want to keep My Guy in there because he takes care of our State, and we certainly don't need a 3rd Party;
    * I do my duty by going to the voting booth and pulling the lever for local officials that I don't know a thing about how they perform their job, or what their attitude is toward issues. The reason that I don't know is that I am not politically connected in my town, I don't have time to go to civic meetings, my local paper doesn't have any real reporters, and all of the candidates' campaigns claim that they are conservative, honest, and believe in Family Values. So I end up not pulling the lever for some positions, or just vote for the most familiar name;
    I am a Independent Voter who votes for The Man and not The Party, even though it seems that he ends up voting the way the party tells him to. Or I just vote for The Lesser of Two Evils. Both methods end up in frustration, and with nowhere to turn to for help in deciding;
    I can't trust the National Media, the Social Media, nor the candidates themselves to tell me the truth about where we are going in this country, because they spend all of their time on negative or sensational stories;
    * Congressional Hearings chaired by the likes of Grandstanding Gowdy are a joke in that they claim that they are going to get to the bottom of a scandal, but it always ends up in a Draw.
    * Now that the Hordes have discovered that they can feed at the Golden Trough, our three branches of government are bound to give them what they want — Free Bread and Anything Goes Circuses;
    * Obama once mocked the conservatives in this country for clinging to their guns and their religion, but it is looking more and more like that is all that we will have left. And the threat will not come from the outside.
    Sleep well, Des Moines.

  10. Reality Seeker says:

    It all depends on what you mean by "capitalism".

    Ludwig von Mises wrote in his magnum opus, "Human Action", that capitalism needs the term, "free-market", out in front of it. So "free-market capitalism" is far different than some form of cross-bred capitalism, e.g., crony capitalism.

    BHO is actually correct in his implication that the form of capitalism practiced in countries like the good ol' USSA, Great Socialist Britain, Euroland and (non)free-market Japan all share many socioeconomic aspects with communist China, Cuba and Peronist Argentina. The aforementioned countries are all more or less collectivist than individualist in nature.

    So, thank you, BHO, for once again pointing out another half-truth to the ignorant masses. That's why the masses love you so much, BHO, because their very inclination is to support a collectivist system. It doesn't matter if the political system is theocratic ( e.g., Islamic) pure communistic ( atheistic), fascist, racist, dictatorial, oligarchical or a republic. "Choose what works best for you". Meaning, choose what's best for the establishment. "Ask not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country". Yeah. Right. How about I ask my country to leave me alone to fully engage in free-market capitalism? How about that? Fat chance. Cruz won't lead anybody to a free market, neither will Trump.

    Recently, there's only one man that could have done a good job in leading America closer to a truly free-market: Ron Paul. So you had your chance, America, but you chose Obama — viz., the worst president in my lifetime.

    Now you can choose Trump or, maybe, Cruz ( if Cruz can cut a deal with the Washington insiders). Either will be better than Hillary, Biden or the communist Bern. But none will ever lead America toward a "free-market". America is an empire, now. And an empire needs a Caesar.

  11. Richard Lee Van DV says:

    After teaching on the college level for 15 years, I went in another direction after the Nixon regime cut off funds for Higher Education, and put me out of a job. I could have returned the following year, but I am happy I didn't. I would be at Great Odds with the types/kinds of students the universities have these days. I saw it begin in the 60s with co-ed dorms, and the partying began! The dorms rocked! In the 50s we had quiet hours for study. And all the rest of the downhill slide! I wouldn't send a daughter to college these days! Unless there are still some who CONTROL the behavior of students. We are in a super-sick time! from this geezer's point of view. It will be "interesting" to watch from that Better Place.

  12. Paul Herring says:

    It would seem from what I'm reading here that Americans aren't happy with their government. And the elections in November 2016 seem to just add their dislike. Whoever wins, it seems, will still not be popular with at least half of the American people, I guess this isn't anything new.

    But both capitalism and communism in their purest forms are quite workable. Either would deliver benefits to its citizens IF the ones taking the lead were perfect people. They're not though and thereby hangs the reason that none of these systems will work indefinitely.

    As a keen student of the Bible I've said it several times in this forum: the Bible at Jeremiah 10:23 from a modern Bible translation tell us why things are as they are. It says: "O LORD, I know that the way of man is not in himself: it is not in man that walks to direct his steps." This means that imperfect man would do well to allow God (Jehovah) to direct his steps.

    A commentator earlier here said that Mr Obama's strings are being pulled by someone behind the scene. This is true, but it isn't just Mr Obama who's being manipulated – all other political leaders worldwide are. Who's this unseen malevolent force? Revelation 12: 9, 12 tells us in clear terms that the Devil ( a real person) is behind all of the bad things which have happened on our once-beautiful home.

    But it isn't gloom-and-doom forever. The Bible also tells us that God's original purpose set out in the Garden of Eden will be fulfilled (see Isaiah 65, Revelation 21, Psalm 37 etc). Under that theocracy mankind will be able to live in peace and security. Democracy, communism and any of the other failed ideologies which have been tried and found wanting since Eden will be devices of the past.

    • Gordon Carlson says:

      Great thoughts, Paul!! For sure, the ONLY answer lies in the One above this mess!! KEEP ON looking up!! Our Redemption draws near – and nearer every day!!

    • Ragnar says:

      You could not be more wrong in you assessment of capitalism and communism, communism will always fail as there is no incentive to be productive. No production equals starvation which is what happens under communism no matter who is the force running the show. Capitalism is the opposite, the incentive to produce is so great you get a massive amount of production raising the living standard of everyone. Once pure capitalism is in effect and property is protected 100% it will last forever. Once everyone is free there will never be a return to slavery, just like there will never be a return of people thinking the earth is the center of the universe. It's a lot to understand but good luck.

      • Paul Herring says:

        An articulate observation, Ragnar. I did make a point about either system being OK if humans running the show were perfect. Because they aren't the incentive to misuse whatever power a human leader has will distort what might otherwise work. Hence, the need for imperfection to be removed from the human family.

        The Bible refers to the provision to make this happen as the ransom (see John 1:29). It might sound like a Utopian dream, but it is the hope the Bible holds out to those prepared to do things Jehovah's way.

  13. Gregory Greg says:

    Excellent observations Robert

  14. Rick D'Amico says:

    As Milton Freidman said: "The only places in the history of the world where the masses have escaped the misery of grinding poverty – the only cases in recorded history – is where they've had capitalism and free trade."

  15. Ronald West says:

    To Paul. And Satan is the god of this system of things. It is not surprising that things are as they are… and just a little while longer and the wicked one will be no more… and the meek shall inherit the earth… in the kingdom that Jesus said was no part of this world. There is not much time left to have faith in God's Kingdom thru Jesus. There is not one human politician who can save us from God's coming wrath.

    • Paul Herring says:

      Thanks Ronald. Yes, capitalism vs communism is one thing but theocracy is the only government which will bring lasting benefits to earth's inhabitants.

      • ◄Dave► says:

        Good grief… talk about tapioca between ears… Have you Piously Correct characters ever had a rational thought? Whatever does your superstitious beliefs have to do with comparing competing economic systems? Why bother to comment, if you believe like Obama that either one would work, if the Devil wasn't queering things up?

        I'm confused by your comments; which utopian dream is it that you most desire? A theocracy here on earth, so you righteous paragons of virtue can impose your dogma and lifestyle choices on the rest of us? Or, is it hastening Armageddon, so your wrathful god will destroy us awful heathens with a vengeance, while you special souls get raptured out of here?

        Has it ever once occurred to you that people have been blaming Satan for their travails, and anxiously expecting the apocalypse just right around the corner, ever since the first telling of the Revelations acid trip? Chances are pretty good that you too, will miss out on the prophesied 'end times' festivities.

        I suspect your great, great, great grandchildren will too. Of course, the way things are going in America, by then they will undoubtedly be down on their prayer rugs facing Mecca, praying to Allah five times a day… in Spanish. Which, of course, will at least fulfill your wish for a theocracy in America. 😉 ◄Dave►

        • Paul Herring says:

          Quite a diatribe here, Dave. If you have an alternative to theocracy (God-rule), please let's hear it. If someone feels the need to criticise others' thinking he should have a better solution.

          From what I've read in this forum there hasn't been any. Indeed, your own remarks reflect a gloomy future for the US, Even so, if a clever human was to come up with a workable world government I would still look only to the Bible's promise for the future. As mankind and Earth's Creator God, whose proper name in the Bible is Jehovah, is smarter, more able and certainly more loving than we humans. Reflecting that, he's made the way open for all of mankind to gain everlasting life on our Earth which in time will be returned to the paradise it once was.

          With respect, do you or any other person have a solution which is equal to that?

          • ◄Dave► says:

            Sure, that is easy, Paul: Individual sovereignty and responsibility, in a laissez faire stateless society. Why is it assumed by nearly everyone that we need rulers at all? The innate desire for Liberty is rarely entirely quenched in a subjugated man, whether serf, slave, or involuntary member of a collective. It matters not if the head of state is a monarch, dictator, elected leader, or a priestly shaman.

            A contumacious freeman supplicates to no potentate, rules himself, and harbors no desire whatever to rule others. The fact that you and your Piously Correct brethren desire a righteous ruler, makes you every bit as dangerous to my Liberty as any Muslim Jihadist, or Marxist collectivist. I will never submit; count on it; and trust me… I am not alone. ◄Dave►

          • Paul Herring says:

            It seems we'll have to agree to disagree or hopefully disagree without being disagreeable. We humans haven't experienced effective, caring rulership basically ever since time began (except perhaps for the Israelite nation under King Solomon) so it's no surprise that many find the thought of government repugnant. Most aren't doing a good job at all.

            But we haven't yet experienced theocracy, Dave. As a Bible student I can only repeat that God's kingdom offers benign rulership by the one who created mankind so he does know what we really need to be happy (Psalm 145:16).

            What I say here or elsewhere isn't important, but to me what the Bible says is.

          • ◄Dave► says:

            I have no particular desire to be disagreeable, Paul; but you keep saying outlandish things in this public forum, which is not at all about biblical prophecy. Such nonsense needs to be openly refuted, rather than garner any sort of respect for its piety. My opinions on matters of unverifiable superstition, are at least as valid as yours.

            How can you possibly say the world has not yet experienced theocracy? Are you unaware of Iran? For Pete's sake, the whole Muslim world is ruled by Sharia law. What about the "Divine Right of Kings" during the Dark Ages? Human history is replete with shamans ruling their tribes and nations, at the supposed behest of their gods.

            Please understand that your interpretations of the ancient text in your Bible, has no more validity to me, than the Jihadists' interpretation of the ancient text in their Koran. Since you both worship the same God of Abraham, how could anyone possibly know which dogma is correct? Who has the authority to decide, other than the individual thinker? What if his rational mind concludes that neither are? Does either have the right to force him to submit against his will? ◄Dave►

  16. Jim D says:

    << The question he didn’t challenge them to think about is, works for whom? >>

    Amen! This is the key question to ask.

  17. tpc1915 says:

    Can there be any doubt that we have a Marxist in the White House? I'm sure he and Valerie have received even more Christmas ornaments over the past few years! The low information voter is firmly in control…clueless.

  18. Marie says:

    The first Capitalists were the Jewish merchants , who brought Capitalism to Europe and disrupted the the power of the Aristocracy and the church . The Jews are hated , not because of their religion , but because they showed people the way to personal freedom . Trump is the only Capitalist in the presidential contest , and he is treated to every insult the anty-semites hurled against the Jews . Crystal Night was aimed to destroy Businesses , not the Jewish religion .

  19. Diplomacy, like politics makes for the strangest bedfellows…and Politics is the art of the possible. All that BHO did was to be diplomatic and tell the 'Cubans' that they have the govt they deserve.

  20. dsamms says:

    I find your posts informative and fair the majority of the time, Robert. I am not in complete agreement with one key area of your viewpoint here, however:

    "communism and capitalism are at opposite ends of the liberty-tyranny spectrum. Communism is literal slavery for the masses and thus specifically prevents people from bettering their lives. Capitalism, on the other hand, is the epitome of freedom and provides unlimited opportunity for all."

    What your article ignores is the fact that the success of capitalism as executed in the Americas from it's inception was built on the bigotry towards, mistreatment and ENSLAVEMENT of significant members of the 'mass population' to the exclusive benefit of the population which claimed authority over the continents at that time. In the US, this continued until less than 60 years ago. Based on that fact of history, capitalism and communism, contrary to your aforementioned perspective, can indeed have key elements in common… when applied with the wrong approaches.

    • Nasdaq7 says:

      "Capitalism is the worst form of government, except for all those other forms that have been tried from time to time."

    • Ragnar says:

      Capitalism is based on the protection of property, voluntary actions and contracts, communism is based on the gun. If capitalism is applied wrong then it's no longer capitalism. There is nothing in common between capitalism and communism – ever.

  21. boomerbeach says:

    As one who has spent some time in Argentina, observing wives, Mothers, GrandMothers marching around a Buenos Aires square, Thursday evenings, in memory of their 70-80s thirty + thousand "disappeared ones" … The same grudgy, green Ford Falcons, lights out in the night, 70mph on the BA expressways, the same Fords that once took loved ones away, Never to return, now, only blinking lights upon passing another…. The severance of Juan Peron's hands from his crypt, "the hands which once kept us safe"… Econ debacle of Austral currency value, once worth 2 for 1 U.S. Dollar, freely black market tradeable at 3 to 1, bottoming within months to 8,000 to one… Once pround people in a beautiful, grandiose Country attempting just to find 2 to 3 daily jobs just to pay the rent & keep food on the table. A country once #8 in World GNP, producing excess abundance, enough to put food on other world tables in times of war .. Rewarded with installation of a sub-RR system some 90yrs ago… A country now having regular econ debacles, worse than Mexico……
    So, what "Barackus" was implying, beyond your own understanding, was just find something that works for your Country in the 21st Century.

Leave a Reply