Do you believe in freedom?

[GracchusBabeuf]

?

[Nolan]

What? :confused:

[GPDP]

Uh...

Shouldn't this be in Chit-Chat?

[sarmchain]

no i believe the worker is too stupid to know what to do, we need a glourious leader to tell them how to think and act and should the worker question this he should be thrown in prison or shot for thinking he knows better then the party , because we all have read the parts were Marx talks about how the party should rule over the proletrate with a iron fist making every descision for them

[mikelepore]

Instead of "believe in" [any noun], the question will make more sense if you wrote "believe in" [some assertion or proposition].

For example: "Do you believe that society shouldn't interfere if individuals pursue pleasure in ways that don't infringe on the enumerated legal rights of other individuals?" If that's what you're asking, my answer is yes. (E.g., don't shoot me for having a beer, even if you don't like beer yourself.)

If you're asking whether we today have, in the words of the prayer to the U.S. flag, "liberty and justice for all", certainly not.

[ArrowLance]

What is this freedom? The fact there is no context makes it look like a bourgeois lie.

[Guerrilla22]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GKyGyH9mWHk

[Искра]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ERiTX9Pa23c

I want you to believe every word I say
I want you to believe every thing I do

[syndicat]

What does this question mean? Are you asking whether we think that we should be aiming at a society where people are free? Or are you asking us whether we think the existing capitalist society is based on freedom? Or are you simply asking us whether freedom should be a primary value?

[GracchusBabeuf]

no i believe the worker is too stupid to know what to do, we need a glourious leader to tell them how to think and act and should the worker question this he should be thrown in prison or shot for thinking he knows better then the party , because we all have read the parts were Marx talks about how the party should rule over the proletrate with a iron fist making every descision for themSo, you think capitalism offers us freedom and communism leads to slavery?

[Crux]

You, sir, fail.

[sarmchain]

So, you think capitalism offers us freedom and communism leads to slavery?
no i think capitalism and authoritarian communism are both pieces of shit that need to be fought against

[GracchusBabeuf]

no i think capitalism and authoritarian communism are both pieces of shit that need to be fought againstGiven a choice, which one would you pick? An authoritarian workers state or capitalism?

[Orange Juche]

"Freedom" is an entirely subjective term, and what a libertarian capitalist would call freedom would greatly differ from what a socialist would call freedom. So to ask whether or not we believe in freedom, it comes down to how we interpret the question. In our own way, everyone here believes in "freedom," it's how they define freedom that is important.

Personally, I believe that an individual should be able to do as they like so long as they do not infringe on the safety, rights, and "freedom" of others (establishing a system in which people are labor-power products being one). I don't follow the line that allowing people to advocate whatever they want is a "bourgeoisie freedom, not real freedom." As soon as we shut off the human ability to express ourselves, we tread toward the consolidation of power through divisiveness. Nobody advocates feudalism anymore. Once a truly post-capitalist society comes along, one that advocates freedom and democracy to the fullest, I believe capitalism will follow feudalism. It will be so obviously beneficial and superior as a system, that opposition will be few and far between.

Democracy, to me, is synonymous with freedom and one cannot exist without the other. With economic and social democracy comes universal power, and with universal power comes true freedom for all. Freedom is not only the allowance to commit an act, but the capability to be empowered. It cannot exist in an individualistic society, which is inherently divisive in power, and therefore, in freedom.

So, no, I don't believe "freedom" as a concept is a "bourgeois lie." The lie is when someone states that we live in a free society, or our society promotes freedom (whether you live in the United States as I do, or elsewhere). "Freedom," in terms of freedom for all, is a meaningless phrase in the western world. The only freedom that exists rests in the hands of those with the power - whether they be the media, the government, or the big wig capitalists.

Anyways, thats my thought on it.

[Il Medico]

Okay, what's with all the trolly "do you believe in threads" shouldn't this shit be in chit Chat, or preferably, the trash?

[GracchusBabeuf]

Okay, what's with all the trolly "do you believe in threads" Talking about freedom is not trolling. This is a serious topic if the trolls stop derailing it.

[Q]

Trash please.

[RedAnarchist]

I've trashed two of the polls and I'll move this to Chit Chat.

[AK]

Given a choice, which one would you pick? An authoritarian workers state or capitalism?
Under an authoritarian workers state, the workers are more likely to be led to believe that they have achieved true socialism and that means that they probably will not organise for another revolution. Under capitalism, workers can clearly see that the capitalist system is to blame for many social and economical problems. I would rather live under capitalism than in an authoritarian workers state as there is a much higher chance that true socialism could be achieved.

[CartCollector]

Freedom yes, but for WHOM? To do WHAT?

That's the real question here.

[Black Sheep]

No freedom is a bourgeoisie lie.
Like sex.

[AK]

No freedom is a bourgeoisie lie.
Like sex.
Just cos you're not getting any.

[The Red Next Door]

What wrong with freedom and individualism? that why we have hard time getting people to come to our side.

[GracchusBabeuf]

The only freedom is for the bourgeoisie to exploit the workers.

[gorillafuck]

The only freedom is for the bourgeoisie to exploit the workers.
I can think of quite a few things besides that that fall under most peoples definition of "freedom". Such as perform whatever sexual acts you'd like, smoke marijuana, use whichever water fountain you'd like, read whatever books you'd like, wear whatever clothes you want to, have have reproductive rights, etc.

[GracchusBabeuf]

I can think of quite a few things besides that that fall under most peoples definition of "freedom". Such as perform whatever sexual acts you'd like, smoke marijuana, use whichever water fountain you'd like, read whatever books you'd like, wear whatever clothes you want to, have have reproductive rights, etc.Those freedoms are enjoyed only by people in imperialist countries and even in those countries, by privileged sections of the citizenry. Certainly the entire working class, immigrants and minorities do not enjoy all of them.

[ls]

Such as perform whatever sexual acts you'd like, smoke marijuana, use whichever water fountain you'd like, read whatever books you'd like, wear whatever clothes you want to, have have reproductive rights, etc.

Would it be "not free" if you were forced to use a particular water fountain, because the water supply is specially measured for the area? How about if it was voted by the soviets that marijuana is illegal and not to be used? And as for books, what if capitalist books were banned? Finally, what about if your favourite Nike, Adidas, Reebok etc clothes were all gone because they were made by heavily-exploited third-world labourers?

There is no such thing as true "freedom" and there never will be, it's always subjective.

[Bilan]

The only freedom is for the bourgeoisie to exploit the workers.

Or for silly people to say silly things. An often abused freedom.

[Bilan]

Given a choice, which one would you pick? An authoritarian workers state or capitalism?

Neither? What kind of shitty choice is that? To be openly oppressed by the state, or oppressed by the state under a veil of liberty?

[Jazzratt]

I believe in freedom because otherwise the terrorists win.

[Tablo]

Freedom is merely privileged extended unless enjoyed by one and all..

I fucking love the Internationale.

[Os Cangaceiros]

It's so cute when "anti-revisionists" feel like they're being "edgy" with their comments.

"Gwarrgg abolish freedom! Gwarggh Stalin! Gwwarrrgghh I'm an authoritarian bureaucrat!"

So clever.

[GracchusBabeuf]

It's so cute when "anti-revisionists" feel like they're being "edgy" with their comments.

"Gwarrgg abolish freedom! Gwarggh Stalin! Gwwarrrgghh I'm an authoritarian bureaucrat!"

So clever.
Great stereotyping. Next you'll be telling us ...

[Tablo]

It's so cute when "anti-revisionists" feel like they're being "edgy" with their comments.

"Gwarrgg abolish freedom! Gwarggh Stalin! Gwwarrrgghh I'm an authoritarian bureaucrat!"

So clever.
i 100% agree. some of these kiddies need to grow the fuck up

[Bilan]

A workers state will oppress petit-bourgeois for sure.:cool:

Any socialist who promotes oppression ought to think again.

[gorillafuck]

Would it be "not free" if you were forced to use a particular water fountain, because the water supply is specially measured for the area? How about if it was voted by the soviets that marijuana is illegal and not to be used? And as for books, what if capitalist books were banned? Finally, what about if your favourite Nike, Adidas, Reebok etc clothes were all gone because they were made by heavily-exploited third-world labourers?

There is no such thing as true "freedom" and there never will be, it's always subjective.
I suppose that's true.

But nonetheless I still hate how hard Lex Luther is trying to make himself/herself seem edgy.

[Jazzratt]

Next you'll be telling us ...

Yes, we will.

[Sarah Palin]

I don't like freedom

[GracchusBabeuf]

But nonetheless I still hate how hard Lex Luther is trying to make himself/herself seem edgy.
What's wrong withhttp://img97.imageshack.us/img97/774/japaneseanimehaircuts.jpg
:(

[ls]

In fairness Zeekloid, I think the question was a valid one.