Antithesis Vs Communism
Will Rogers once stated, “Communism is like prohibition; it’s a good idea but it won’t work.” Since it’s inception in mid 1800’s, Communism has been an idea that has had its ups and downs. Based on the idea of eliminating class antagonism, Communism is a synthesis of two separate entities. In a class system there exist owners and workers. Owners control the majority of the wealth and means of production. These persons were referred to as the bourgeoisie where as the workers, who only earned a small wage, were known as the proletariat. These two units can be seen as a thesis and antithesis, and by combining these two a synthesis, or in this case Communism, was created. Communism is against the ownership of private property. This alone
…show more content…
However, I beg to differ on this fact. I feel it human nature that we are competitive and I believe it has negative consequences to suppress this. If you look at any “lesser” animals on the planet there nearly always tends to be one dominant animal per clan or group. If you look at some of our closest relatives such as gorillas, there is always a Silverback that proceeds over the group. Sometimes other males compete for this title and this is simply seen as normality. I then must argue that Communism itself was created by competition. As I stated earlier, a thesis and antithesis were in conflict and in turn created the synthesis of Communism. How can a conflict be created without competition? Competition created the conflict which bred Communism. Thus, if Communism was in effect and as the other side stated, conflict was “abolished,” how could another ideal such as Communism be created? It is in turn destroying progression and possibilities. I often look back upon the essay written by Arthur, titled “Equality, Entitlements, and the Distribution of Income,” as well as the other by Singer called “Famine, Affluence, and Morality.” Singer believes in radical change for society and believes we must completely redevelop our morality. He believes in a relatively equal distribution of goods which reminds me quite readily of Communism. However, Arthur disagrees with this point and brings in the fact that we, as animals, feel compelled to keep entitlements and/or
However, I beg to differ on this fact. I feel it human nature that we are competitive and I believe it has negative consequences to suppress this. If you look at any “lesser” animals on the planet there nearly always tends to be one dominant animal per clan or group. If you look at some of our closest relatives such as gorillas, there is always a Silverback that proceeds over the group. Sometimes other males compete for this title and this is simply seen as normality. I then must argue that Communism itself was created by competition. As I stated earlier, a thesis and antithesis were in conflict and in turn created the synthesis of Communism. How can a conflict be created without competition? Competition created the conflict which bred Communism. Thus, if Communism was in effect and as the other side stated, conflict was “abolished,” how could another ideal such as Communism be created? It is in turn destroying progression and possibilities. I often look back upon the essay written by Arthur, titled “Equality, Entitlements, and the Distribution of Income,” as well as the other by Singer called “Famine, Affluence, and Morality.” Singer believes in radical change for society and believes we must completely redevelop our morality. He believes in a relatively equal distribution of goods which reminds me quite readily of Communism. However, Arthur disagrees with this point and brings in the fact that we, as animals, feel compelled to keep entitlements and/or