1. A mid-19th century fairy-tale by author Karl Marx that builds on the earlier fairy-tale of Socialism, and describes a society in which industries are motivated as effectively by the mystical concept entitled the "public good" as they are in the real world by the evolutionary principle of personal gain with no oversight to define the "public good" and no need for merits or reprimands.

2. An extreme form of collectivism in which everything is produced and distributed collectively and no attention is given to the need to decide what should be produced and in what quantities in any effective way, much less to the need to motivate anyone to actually produce it.
None. Communism does not exist. It is impossible. There are no historical examples. "Communist" countries like the USSR and China operate a system of brutal totalitarian Socialism, and openly admit that they "operate a Socialist system that will according to them eventually evolve into Communism". Communes and co-operatives that work within larger systems are NOT examples - these are private companies that are owned by their employees. They have a larger market to respond to in order to know what to produce, are profit-based, and have a system for firing free-loaders.
by EngineerofSouls July 04, 2010
pure fucking evil.
kim jung ill is communist, he practices communism

kim jung il is pure fucking evil.
by karatabeatch March 08, 2010
A socio-political system that, in theory, is a FLAWED IDEA, yet when put into action, becomes a COMPLETELY SELF-DESTRUCTIVE NIGHTMARE. Anyone who claims that Marx was a genius or that communism will work if it is not explicitly 'Stalinist' is not a clear-headed person and probably shouldn't be trusted. An accurate summary of Communism, in a nutshell, is John Lennon's "Imagine". Everybody lives in harmony, blowing kisses and skipping hand-in-hand under the rainbow without a care in the world. But Communism kills all incentive to create one's own success, because in the end everybody works for whatever the Government deems to be "in the nation's best interest". Why would someone create a product that might otherwise yield great profit if they don't stand to get filthy rich off of it? Answer: they wouldn't. That's the fatal flaw. No profit incentive = no entrepreneurship = no trade = no money = a broke citizenry = a broke government = an economic collapse and a rude awakening. If u disagree, just shut up because you're wrong anyway.
With Communism: "I'm gonna start a company that makes flashlights. Question: "why?" Response: "uhhh good question. nevermind".

With Capitalism: "I'm gonna start a company that makes flashlights. Question: "why?" Response: "Because that's what people need right now and they will buy it if they think its a good product. I'll get really really rich and then ill buy a new house, which will cost lots of money to pay for and lots of workers to build. And the workers will build it because they get that money, which they will use to pursue their own interests in life".
by "GIMME YO CHANGE!!" - OBAMA October 14, 2009
First of all, Communism is an idea that never actually worked in any country.
There are certain ideas of Communism. It promotes equality and in theory turns out to be a classless society.
To put it simply, in Communism- you contribute what you are able to do, and you get paid the same amount of money as everyone else.
What that means is, if Im able to work 7 hours, and my friend Johnny is able to work only 3 hours, we would both earn the same amount of money, say 100 dollars. In theory, people would be happy and okay with the idea that the guy in a cubical next to them in an office works half as much (because that's all they are able to work), but gets paid the same as a guy who works twice as much as him.
In an ideal Communism, there is no set line of productivity. Communism depends entirely on the people. In theory, people would honestly work as much as they are capable of working. Some can work more, and some can work less. But in theory, everybody would be honest with themselves and work as hard as they can, without slacking off. When Russia gave Communism a shot, it failed miserably. People understood that since there was no line of minimal productivity, and since there was the idea of "do what you can, get what everybody else gets", people simply said that they were only capable of working two hours, and still got a set payment of money. So in reality, people werent doing shit, producing very little, and the government still payed them.
However, the govenment COULD NOT suddenly set a line of minimal productivity, as it would go against the idea of people working as much as they are honestly capable of working. As it turned out, people saw that they would still get payed a set amount of money no matter how much they worked, so they simply did as little as possible. What Russia did do, however, was tell the people to work for longer. Russia told the people that they should work longer, as they couldnt set up a line of productivity. So, the little work that people did over four hours was now divided over 7 hours. So per hour, people were doing very little.
The theory of Communism is not meant for people. We have our own nature. Of, out of nowhere Communsm did work with humans, it would completely change our nature, and therefore change everything about humans and human history. The bottum line is that COMMUNISM DOESNT WORK WITH PEOPLE.
Communism always turns into a dictatorship-like country.
However, there is a form of Communism in the lives of ants and termites. They do what they are able to do, work hard, and share the food with the whole colony. Is this really exactly "ideal Communism"? Not exactly, but it is something. You have to remember that ants and termites have this sort of nature and are born into this. Humans are not meant to live in Communism. It doesnt work.
In my opinion, Fidel Castro had the least catastrophical form of Communism. He was able to hold his country together all this time. Are all the people happy? No. Fidel is only able to hold his shit together because he has the help of the military, and this would not be present under ideal Communism. This is just one example of what Communism turns into.
by Sovietsky Sayus April 27, 2007
A utopian idea for common wealth which relies on an idealized society. In practice it succumbs to corruption and promotes oligarchy. When it fails, capitalism inevitably takes over providing a more practical and efficient allocation of resources.
Communism => Capitalism
by Anonymous November 02, 2002
An Idealistic system of government. Started with Karl Marx (author of The Communist Manifesto), and has never been acheived by any country in its idealized form.
The basic principles stand that because in capitalism the owner (bourgoise) always pwns the working class (proletarians). Marx's solution was to eliminate all class, have everyone equal, and eliminate money, government, and social systems. Although utopian when carried out correctly, the idealogy has been consistently defeated by the natural human greed, hax0rs, and the need for being the best. Because Humans are naturally greedy, and by evolutionary stand points always strive to acheive maximum 1337ness, the theory of Communism developed by Marx is practically implausible and ideal.
Bob: Although capitalism is a good idea, it breeds two seperate classes, and tends to cause poverty.
Jim: Yeah, but communism is impossible for humans to use, so we are basically screwed.
by Honest Abe December 22, 2004
An economic system that works in theory but not in the real world.
communism would be good for society if all people weren't naturally selfish.
by Vanessa N July 06, 2004
Free Daily Email

Type your email address below to get our free Urban Word of the Day every morning!

Emails are sent from daily@urbandictionary.com. We'll never spam you.

×