Communism is when all property is owned publicly
Look at what others have said and respond with your original opinions.
1. Communism is when all property is owned publicly, and workers are paid according to what they can do and accomplish. In a communist society there are no private properties, and it eliminates all economic classes. There are still a few communist countries. These countries include North Korea, China, Vietnam, Laos, and Cuba.
The effects that communism has had on a nation is the fact that people are not equal. Everyone makes different amounts of money, live in different types of habitats and have differing titles in the workplace. Some people have poor work habits because they don`t want to give their all if they don`t get the same pay or benefits others get.
Communism leads to economic corruption and poor work habits. It wanted people to give up their private land and hand it over to become a collective society.
2. While some nations, such as China, Cuba, North Korea, Laos, and Vietnam, still adopt a communist government today, historical examples of communism and socialism have yielded mixed results throughout history. For instance, in the Soviet Union, communism led to industrialization and social progress, but also resulted in extensive tyranny, economic struggles, death, and political persecution over the years (Morris, 2023). Cuba has seen poor economic performance, but it has also maintained elevated levels of life expectancy and education and North Korea`s communist government has become infamous for its violations of human rights, poverty, starvation, violence, and nuclear conflict (Morris, 2023). Tyranny, death, unsuccessful economics, loss of human rights and property, famine, poverty, and forced sacrifices are many common negative effects that can be seen in past and current communist regimes. The violence, oppression, and crises that have been shown to characterize communism and socialism, enable governments to demand any sacrifices they choose from their people (Victims of Communism Memorial Foundation, 2020). While there have been some benefits to communist and socialist governments throughout time, history has also shown us that these systems can and often do lead to corruption and inefficiency in the government. Some of the poorest and most corrupt nations today are those that were never formally socialist nations but followed socialist economic policies.
3. So, diving into Karl Marx`s ideas, he felt that crime was primarily attributed to how frustrated the working class was because of capitalism as a whole. He held the belief that if things were made fair for everyone, crime would decrease. That is why he was in favor of switching to socialism or even communism (Siegel, 2018). Fast forward to today, and we have notorious countries like China, North Korea, and Cuba saying they are communist. But honestly, there is a difference between what Marx was dreaming about and how it all came to fruition (Murphy, 2018). Smaller communist countries like Moldova satisfied their citizens with their policies and practices. Countries with Marx`s socialist ideologies like Denmark, Sweden, Iceland, and Finland, hold titles for the best quality of life, safety, and education (Martela et al., 2020). Some countries that went the socialist or communist route did score some wins, like better access to education and healthcare for everyone. In contrast, there has been a downside, like not having a lot of political freedoms, political corruption, and economic issues. So, does going communist mean prosperity or corruption? It is not black and white, and there are too many individual factors that come into play for a rash judgment to be made. Every country`s experience is different, and there is much more involved than just the type of government.
4. In restorative justice, seeks to examine the harmful impact of a crime and then determines what can be done to repair that harm while holding the person who caused it accountable for his or her actions. What are the concerns and challenges of restorative justice? Should this be a consistent model for every outcome?
5. One example of a crime committed by the U.S. government is a war crime. Criminologist Scott Bonn argues that the George W. Bush administration manufactured public support for war with Iraq by falsely claiming that (a) its leader, Saddam Hussein, was involved in the terrorist attacks of 9/11, (b) Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction, and (c) Iraq represented a grave and growing threat to U.S. security. He continued to assert that the war was a function of a "moral panic "engineered by the Bush administration with the support of the U.S. news media. He further states that he believes that the war in Iraq amounts to a state-organized crime. The United States had ignored international law governing military occupation and violated the human rights of the Iraqi people. Its invasion of Iraq caused many individuals and groups to condemn their actions. Furthermore, this crime can lead to serious effects on the social classes, which will result in a lasting, destabilizing impact on the safety and security of communities, nations, and regions which could last as long as ever (Siegel, 2018).
6. I will be discussing war crimes committed by the U.S. government. The specific event I will be referencing is the 2004 attack on Makr al-Deeb in western Iraq. In this attack, the U.S. forces killed more than forty civilians, with the majority being women and children (Higgs, 2004). Following the attack, a U.S. military official stated that they believed this city was a military target containing smugglers and foreign fighter routes. However, this was not confirmed before the attack; it was based on suspicion (Higgs, 2004). A witness who was a resident of Iraq stated that the attack began abruptly at 2:45 a.m. and continued until later in the morning, when all of the homes were destroyed. In an attempt to defend their actions, the U.S. claimed that they were fired at first, which is unfortunately not correct given the multiple Iraqi witness accounts that were given following this devastation. Human Rights Watch stated that U.S. military tactics repeatedly showed a push toward aggressive tactics, heavy shooting within residential areas, and dependence on lethal forces (Higgs, 2004). Robert Higgs, the author of this article, has a Ph.D. in economics and has been a visiting scholar at both Stanford and Oxford Universities. He concluded this article by pointing out examples throughout history and even art that describe similar behaviors to this instance with the U.S. military and the justification that is typically given in defense of the violence and murders of innocent civilians. He encourages us and the government to avoid prejudging circumstances and to allow for consistency in trials and fair consequences. Unfortunately, some of these trials are not fair or consistent, which leads to increased tension not only with international nations but also within social classes. War crimes instill mass devastation and repulsion toward the offenders. Additionally, it fosters a lack of trust between civilians and the government/military. I believe in this situation, there were multiple options that could have been pursued instead of immediate destruction. They could have bordered off the city and conducted an investigation to confirm their suspicions before acting on them. I believe this event and the efforts to justify the decision that was made to attack Makr al-Deeb also causes the social class to lose respect for the military and the ability of the government to conduct thorough and consistent investigations of war crime behaviors.