Why such a strong bash on capitalism?

[Knowledge 6 6 6]

Okay, just hear me out on this...

Capitalism of course relies solely on the individual, the person's needs, wants, etc. And, it does repay hard workers, and those dedicated to their job. Of course there cant be 100% success in every case, heck, even myself at my current job felt the bite of capitalism, when i see slackers getting paid higher than me, which pisses me off to the utmost...

Capitalism also divides ppl into classes, which is of course, ethically wrong and shouldn't be. Rich people are viewed as more acceptable, and 'more of a human' then those that are poor. Of course this is wrong, I totally agree with anyone on that, but you've got to see the justification for this. If you're not an 'asset' to the society in some way, you're a liability to the government, which pays for many benefits, such as healthcare, roads, public services, etc...why then should the government reward the 'liabilities' on their list? Here in Toronto, we've got this thing called Welfare, where we help those that cannot support their families based on their income. The government gives about $600/month to those families, plus food stamps (free groceries) to help out their families. Isn't that VERY humanitarian for a capitalist nation? (This is also performed in various American states as well)...

I'll be the first to admit, that yes, capitalism has its downsides, sometimes too many to name. But, you tell me, which type of system doesn't? Communism sounds great...on paper, but we've already seen it in action. Don't get me started on Cuba's horrid poverty, and what ISN'T being done about it. If Che Guevara were still living, this wouldn't be so.

"We are NOT a Minority"....

Che's words transcend. Always.

[elijahcraig]

Capitalism of course relies solely on the individual, the person's needs, wants, etc. And, it does repay hard workers, and those dedicated to their job. Of course there cant be 100% success in every case, heck, even myself at my current job felt the bite of capitalism, when i see slackers getting paid higher than me, which pisses me off to the utmost...

It does NOT rely on the "person's needs, wants, etc.". If that were so, millions would NOT be starving everyday, and millions would NOT be living in dirt and vomit while their land is stolen from them. Capitalism offers "needs, wants, etc." ONLY to the rich, only to the Capitalists, not to the majority. The top 2-3% control the world. That is capitalism. You can write it off as "can't be 100% success in every case", or you can look at it as it is: Oppression of the billions by the few. I hope that is not what you consider "success", or even a low level of.


Capitalism also divides ppl into classes, which is of course, ethically wrong and shouldn't be. Rich people are viewed as more acceptable, and 'more of a human' then those that are poor. Of course this is wrong, I totally agree with anyone on that, but you've got to see the justification for this. If you're not an 'asset' to the society in some way, you're a liability to the government, which pays for many benefits, such as healthcare, roads, public services, etc...why then should the government reward the 'liabilities' on their list? Here in Toronto, we've got this thing called Welfare, where we help those that cannot support their families based on their income. The government gives about $600/month to those families, plus food stamps (free groceries) to help out their families. Isn't that VERY humanitarian for a capitalist nation? (This is also performed in various American states as well)...

Capitalism is "humanitarian" here in America/Canada, in third world countries, America/Canada is a Imperialist slaughterer, destroying democracy, excecuting children, raping women and killing their husbands. Capitalism offers NOTHING to the great majority, only to the low-level workers of America, the labor aristocracy. All Imperialists are like this, they feed off of it to exist.

Classes existing is not only "wrong", but necessary for Capitalism to survive. Exploitation is the key to Capitalist survival. Without it, you have nothing.


I'll be the first to admit, that yes, capitalism has its downsides, sometimes too many to name. But, you tell me, which type of system doesn't? Communism sounds great...on paper, but we've already seen it in action. Don't get me started on Cuba's horrid poverty, and what ISN'T being done about it. If Che Guevara were still living, this wouldn't be so.

Cuba is an isolated country with little resources. You are feeding off the bourgeois press. "Poverty"? Go live in Haiti for a week, then go to Cuba and see how "horrid" it is.


"We are NOT a Minority"....

I don't quite know what you mean...if you mean "capitalists are NOT a minority", then you know nothing of capitalism.


Che's words transcend. Always.

Really? Then become a Communist and stop defending the enslavement of mankind.

[Regicidal Insomniac]

Capitalism does not rely on one's needs. Alternativly, it relies on one's desires, or vices.

Repaying hard work has never been the idealogical basis of capitalism. In fact it has been the very opposite- exploiting the hard work of others. Hitherto it has been the slaves that perform the most work, and recieve nothing, and the slaveowners that contribute the least to society yet reap the profits. Now it is the proleteriet who build the foundation of our society yet are disdainfuly rewarded, whereas the socialy irresponsible (to say the least) bourgeois minority elite reap the profits of their labour, and this couldn't be more true in trends of global capitalism.

From a sociological standpoint, those who do the most work for society are meagerly repayed and those who do the least are excessively endowed. That is the basis of capitalism.

[RedCeltic]

If you're not an 'asset' to the society in some way, you're a liability to the government, which pays for many benefits, such as healthcare, roads, public services, etc...

Here in the United States, we have a right wing third party that thinks the Republican party is made up of communists. They base this belief on the fact that today, the Republicans, although suggesting reforms to social security, would never dream of abolishing it. To do so today, would be political suicide. However, when President Franklin D. Roosevelt proposed Social Security, Welfare, and other such programs he was labeled a red/socialist/commie/pinko/ etc… from this very same republican party.

Why? Because Roosevelt’s “New Deal” Was essentially the platform that Socialists like Eugene V. Debs and Norman Thomas had been running on for years. Germany had social security 100 years before the United States… while this nation was still being run by men who would openly say things like, “Any man who pays his workers more than minimum wage is robbing his shareholders.”

Today, your country is considered this strange socialist land above ours to many conservatives in the south. Hillary Clinton, when she proposed single payer healthcare was labeled a commie.

Basically, capitalism is about turning a profit at any possible opportunity, even from peoples very basic human needs like food, healthcare, shelter, etc.. Socialism however puts people or society {(Social)ism} above profit, and says that a society who’s focus is on turning a profit, is destructive to society

[Knowledge 6 6 6]

Ok, you tell me...

Cuba's communist right? Why is there poverty? According to Marx/Engel's initial theory, communism is supposed to be total equality, there ISN'T classes at all. Why is there people struggling to survive?...

Okay, you've gotta valid point. Capitalism is totally ignorant of other countries and their needs/wants, in fact, I did a whole presentation on Sweatshop labour by Nike and other major corporations in America. I've watched various videos, read books, and the whole nine about indian children slaving to make persian rugs, taiwan girls involved in the sex trade, etc...all a result of capitalism of course...

You've gotta VERY valid point, in fact, you made me re-think my entire stance on capitalism. This, I ammend you for. However, if Communism is so 'great'...why is its BASIC philosophy of equality not being followed? If there is to be total equality...the state shouldn't be higher than the people...but it is. There shouldn't be authoritarian power because it initially shows dominance...but there is. My question is...why?

[elijahcraig]

Ok, you tell me...

Cuba's communist right? Why is there poverty? According to Marx/Engel's initial theory, communism is supposed to be total equality, there ISN'T classes at all. Why is there people struggling to survive?...

Cuba is socialist, not communist. Socialism is dictatorship of the proletariat, communism is classless. Socialism is suppression of the bourgeois counter-revolutionaries. You might want to study up on communism before you come with these "arguments".

Struggling? They are not a superpower, they have to struggle and work hard to fight imperialism and its trade embargos.


Okay, you've gotta valid point. Capitalism is totally ignorant of other countries and their needs/wants, in fact, I did a whole presentation on Sweatshop labour by Nike and other major corporations in America. I've watched various videos, read books, and the whole nine about indian children slaving to make persian rugs, taiwan girls involved in the sex trade, etc...all a result of capitalism of course...

What about the slaughter of millions by death squads and US-backed military dictatorships?


You've gotta VERY valid point, in fact, you made me re-think my entire stance on capitalism. This, I ammend you for. However, if Communism is so 'great'...why is its BASIC philosophy of equality not being followed? If there is to be total equality...the state shouldn't be higher than the people...but it is. There shouldn't be authoritarian power because it initially shows dominance...but there is. My question is...why?

Refer to my first response, and go read Marx and Lenin.

[RedCeltic]

Cuba has the highest living standard of any Latin American nation. The fact that they have a large embargo on them from the largest consumer of sugar and tobacco (and other products they sell) doesn't help their situation.

I myself, am not overly appoligetic of Castro, he's made some choices I disagree with... however it's quite difficult to understand the reasoning behind those choices, without firsthand expierence with the situation he has. The United States is a very large, and very powerful nation, a short swim away from Cuba. A nation that has been openly hostile to Cuba since the revolution, and a nation that will stop at nothing regain it's control of the Island nation.

[dancingoutlaw]

Here in the United States, we have a right wing third party that thinks the Republican party is made up of communists.

RedCeltic what is the name of this party?

[RedCeltic]

RedCeltic what is the name of this party?

I didn't name it because I'm unaware of the position of the party at large. However, I know personally the Albany NY representitive for the Constitution Party who was at a candidate's speach, and said while he works with the Republican Party on some issues, altogether most people in his party consider the Republicans too left wing, and would like to see such leftist mesures like social security outright abolished.

[dancingoutlaw]

didn't name it because I'm unaware of the position of the party at large. However, I know personally the Albany NY representitive for the Constitution Party who was at a candidate's speach, and said while he works with the Republican Party on some issues, altogether most people in his party consider the Republicans too left wing, and would like to see such leftist mesures like social security outright abolished.

I just looked at their website. Good Lord is it scary. Just enough of what I believe in .... private propery rights, return to local control of government... to be enticing... but too much religious control on life for my taste. They at once advocate individual liberty, local control of government affairs(which I support) and in their preamble that their lord is Christ (which I don't) I can see the appeal to some. Glad that this party has absolutly no power in the U.S. By the way I am Liberatarian only because that is the party that advocates most of what I believe. Not all mind you but most.

[RedCeltic]

It's interesting, I've learned over the years not to take for granted a person's outlook on any given issue, simply by party affiliation. I remember meeting a person collecting signatures for a Green Party candidate, at a Marajuana legalization rally, and I thought his face looked familiar. Sure enough I discovered that he had previously ran for office as a Liberiterian.

[Knowledge 6 6 6]

I didn't mean anything by my arguments, I didn't mean to offend anyone here. If i did, I'm sorry, it's just that, I'm very curious about the whole socialist/communist/capitalist query. I'm just looking for some answers for questions that initially were brought to mind...

Living in a capitalist society, indeed they do censor all the wrongs they do worldwide...obviously, because i doubt any government would like its 'wrongs' to be emphasized anywhere, heh.

But that's just me....

BTW - thx for answering my questions...:)

[RED FIRE]

Good to see,that your have now be enlightened,some what,by the comrades on che-lives.

[Rastafari]

Originally posted by [email protected] 13 2003, 01:58 AM

RedCeltic what is the name of this party?

I didn't name it because I'm unaware of the position of the party at large. However, I know personally the Albany NY representitive for the Constitution Party who was at a candidate's speach, and said while he works with the Republican Party on some issues, altogether most people in his party consider the Republicans too left wing, and would like to see such leftist mesures like social security outright abolished.
Thats what that Micheal Savage was in, right? The Paul Revere Society or some shit he started says the same stuff...no more immigration, kill everyone who isn't white and right, etc.

[F_Hayek]

Originally posted by RED [email protected] 13 2003, 03:12 PM
Good to see,that your have now be enlightened,some what,by the comrades on che-lives.
Call this enlighten?

Knowledge 666, you won't find many answers here besides "all evil is to be blaimed on capitalism", there are many more parties, like the libertarian, which oppose US-foreign affairs.

[Bianconero]

Knowledge 666, you won't find many answers here besides "all evil is to be blaimed on capitalism", there are many more parties, like the libertarian, which oppose US-foreign affairs.

So what, 'F Hayek' !?

If capitalism wouldn't oppress the people of the 'third' world, others (such as the western working class) would suffer. Either way it's wrong. Either way capitalism is to 'blame'. Just because some libertarian slaves of the capital want their parties to take profit of the anti - globalisation movement, it doesn't make their 'theories' acceptable.

[Knowledge 6 6 6]

after extensive research, yes, capitalism is to blame for like...everything almost, heh..

But, living in a capitalist nation, or being brought up in one, shouldn't be blamed on any person(s) living in the society. The system is wrong...not the people.

Holding hatred against any one person is destructive to humanity...it can only be combatted by utter love and concern for every human being, despite what decisions their governments make.

[Bianconero]

Holding hatred against those individuals who finance wars to underline their interestes in the 'third' world, holding hatred against those who have repeatedly mass murdered fellow comrades, holding hatred against those who base their wealth on dead children, who based their wealth on starvation and exploitation is not 'destructive to humanity'. And holding hatred against those who indirectly take profit from the system but refuse to learn and accept the truth is not 'destructive to humanity' either.

The hatred of the ruling class can't be answered with 'love - peace' - slogans. By wasting yourself like this, you only help the system you, obviously, criticize.

[F_Hayek]

Originally posted by [email protected] 13 2003, 05:42 PM
So what, 'F Hayek' !?

If capitalism wouldn't oppress the people of the 'third' world, others (such as the western working class) would suffer. Either way it's wrong. Either way capitalism is to 'blame'. Just because some libertarian slaves of the capital want their parties to take profit of the anti - globalisation movement, it doesn't make their 'theories' acceptable.
Wow, I must have misread something. Libertarians taking profit out of this group of grasssmoking fascists?

If you believe western working class people are going to give up on everything they now have you are making a bit of a mistake.

Too bad, knowledge 666, that you have gone to the dark side.;) Not the system is to blame but solemly the governments.

[Bianconero]

Wow, I must have misread something. Libertarians taking profit out of this group of grasssmoking fascists?

You sure are entertaining, cowboy. 'Grasssmoking fascist', eh? I did at least expect some creativity.


If you believe western working class people are going to give up on everything they now have you are making a bit of a mistake.

Your best argument, although it's still pathetic. What they 'have' are alms given to them by the ruling class who fear armed rebellion. The day 'third' world countries will crush their oppressors, it will turn back to them, to the corrupt workers of the western proletariat. Then, they will realize their hopelessness in capitalism.


Not the system is to blame but solemly the governments.

The governments are representatives of the capital. The capital finances them, they represent the capital. As simple as that. I'm actually devastated that it doesn't fit exactly into your 'theories'.

By the way, I've read somewhere that your name is 'Bas'. Can I call you 'Bassey' from now on? It's so cute.

[F_Hayek]

You sure are entertaining, cowboy. 'Grasssmoking fascist', eh? I did at least expect some creativity

Next time I'll come up with a even better one....


Your best argument, although it's still pathetic. What they 'have' are alms given to them by the ruling class who fear armed rebellion. The day 'third' world countries will crush their oppressors, it will turn back to them, to the corrupt workers of the western proletariat. Then, they will realize their hopelessness in capitalism.

This is no argument of mine. I am just stating a fact that you don't seem to realize. It would be highly amusing to see you go to a group of very muscled working class slaves to tell them that they are exploited and in order to fix this you are going to take half of their wealth because resources have to be redirected to the third world.


The governments are representatives of the capital. The capital finances them, they represent the capital. As simple as that. I'm actually devastated that it doesn't fit exactly into your 'theories'.

Hmmm, do you mean by the extortion called taxes? So how come that for instance in the Bill of Rights the power of the government was strictly limited? Thanks to the social democrates all over the world we are stuck with far too large governments.

But then again, maybe you think that everyone who thinks capitalism is better also thinks Bush is God.


By the way, I've read somewhere that your name is 'Bas'. Can I call you 'Bassey' from now on? It's so cute.

Why, are you a catholic priest?

[Bianconero]

This is no argument of mine. I am just stating a fact that you don't seem to realize. It would be highly amusing to see you go to a group of very muscled working class slaves to tell them that they are exploited and in order to fix this you are going to take half of their wealth because resources have to be redirected to the third world.

You obviously didn't try to read my post, instead you chose to post meaningless drivel. No surprise that you couldn't come up with something more 'convincing' (the very word 'convincing', even in a negative sense, is actually wrongly chosen in the context of your 'argument') than that.


Hmmm, do you mean by the extortion called taxes? So how come that for instance in the Bill of Rights the power of the government was strictly limited? Thanks to the social democrates all over the world we are stuck with far too large governments.

I'm sure your 'social democrates' are to blame for the 'far too large' government in the US, aren't they? And then, they too are to blame for capitalist military dictatorships in 'third' world countries that let western corporations exploit the people. You make no sense.


But then again, maybe you think that everyone who thinks capitalism is better also thinks Bush is God.

No, I'm sure you hate him for securing your wealth.


Why, are you a catholic priest?

Don't get me wrong, I know it's rather lame. But I thought, what the hell, by calling you 'Bassey' I can more easily picture you as some kind of pet, which would somehow legitimate your stupidity. You know, Bassey, it's one of these, how'd you put it, psychological things. Nothing personal, though.

[F_Hayek]

Unfortunately my post inhibits a meaningful argument. If you think that people are more perceptive for your silly theories than the contents of their wallets you may be right.


You make no sense.

Yes I am. I am sure that you ever heard of "absolute power corrupts absolutely". I never read any capitalist theory which clearly states that every economy should have a large government which can dictate people's life, do a bit of nation building on the other side of the Ocean or implement tradebarriers.


No, I'm sure you hate him for securing your wealth.

My god, you are ignorant. Do you read too many fairytales with clear disticntions between good and evil?

[Vinny Rafarino]

Originally posted by Knowledge 6 6 [email protected] 13 2003, 03:26 AM
Ok, you tell me...

Cuba's communist right? Why is there poverty? According to Marx/Engel's initial theory, communism is supposed to be total equality, there ISN'T classes at all. Why is there people struggling to survive?...

Okay, you've gotta valid point. Capitalism is totally ignorant of other countries and their needs/wants, in fact, I did a whole presentation on Sweatshop labour by Nike and other major corporations in America. I've watched various videos, read books, and the whole nine about indian children slaving to make persian rugs, taiwan girls involved in the sex trade, etc...all a result of capitalism of course...

You've gotta VERY valid point, in fact, you made me re-think my entire stance on capitalism. This, I ammend you for. However, if Communism is so 'great'...why is its BASIC philosophy of equality not being followed? If there is to be total equality...the state shouldn't be higher than the people...but it is. There shouldn't be authoritarian power because it initially shows dominance...but there is. My question is...why?
You must understand this;


Cuba is "communist" meaning they believe in the ideal that one day these country will evolve into a communist society. That's all "communist" means.

Cuba like every other "communist" nation are currently "socialist", meaning they are in the transitional period between capitalism and communism.

Cuba is also a socialist nation under extreme duress. It's not easy being the enemy of the USA.

[Bianconero]

Unfortunately my post inhibits a meaningful argument. If you think that people are more perceptive for your silly theories than the contents of their wallets you may be right.

I rest my case. You either haven't read my post or you simply are too stupid to understand. What it is, I don't know.


Yes I am. I am sure that you ever heard of "absolute power corrupts absolutely". I never read any capitalist theory which clearly states that every economy should have a large government which can dictate people's life, do a bit of nation building on the other side of the Ocean or implement tradebarriers.

So what? You seem to rather look at (already debunked) theory than at reality. 'Absolute power corrupts absolutely', is this your analysis of US - Imperialism? You sure are some kind of genius then, eh?


My god, you are ignorant. Do you read too many fairytales with clear disticntions between good and evil?

Bassey, you break my heart.

[sliverchrist]

There are so many angles, aren't there.

Hopefully being confused is only premature enlightenment.

[F_Hayek]

So if capitalist theory is debunked and Marx is archaic, are we going to introduce an new order?

Unfortunately your fairytale is just as imperialistic as mine (those are not my words). And is your brain so screwed after your overly enthusiastic smoking of spliffs that it is impossible to grasp that even a capitalist (as in libertarian) can disagree with mr Bush and his comrades?

[Vinny Rafarino]

Yes I am. I am sure that you ever heard of "absolute power corrupts absolutely". I never read any capitalist theory which clearly states that every economy should have a large government which can dictate people's life, do a bit of nation building on the other side of the Ocean or implement tradebarriers.


The ideal of "absolute power corrupts absolutely" is a saying, nothing more. This saying is not based in logic and rationaliy and is therefore wrong.

[Bianconero]

And is your brain so screwed after your overly enthusiastic smoking of spliffs that it is impossible to grasp that even a capitalist (as in libertarian) can disagree with mr Bush and his comrades?

Bassey, these clichés are so old. You should really try to give your posts some kind of innovation. It would certainly do some good.

Concerning what you actually wanted to say, there is not much left I'm afraid. I've said it several times and I'll say it again (as a sign of solidarity with the stupid), just because government doesn't exist in your 'capitalist theory' books, Bassey, it doesn't change the obvious: that capitalism is about exploitation. And you can tell me 100 times that you disagree with Bush, US foreign affairs, the role of governments today etc.

Bassey, it is of no relevance.

[F_Hayek]

Oh, you mean sometthing like "in socialism everyone is really free and no slave"?

[F_Hayek]

Originally posted by [email protected] 13 2003, 09:55 PM
Bassey, these clichés are so old. You should really try to give your posts some kind of innovation. It would certainly do some good.

Concerning what you actually wanted to say, there is not much left I'm afraid. I've said it several times and I'll say it again (as a sign of solidarity with the stupid), just because government doesn't exist in your 'capitalist theory' books, Bassey, it doesn't change the obvious: that capitalism is about exploitation. And you can tell me 100 times that you disagree with Bush, US foreign affairs, the role of governments today etc.

Bassey, it is of no relevance.
Yes, in some things I am a bit conservative I think.

So, since exploitation isn't abolished in your pity doctrine as well, want to discuss a new system?

[Bianconero]

No thanks, Bassey, but I'd like to discuss that 'evil' Guevara - quote down there. You even seem to be stupid enough to not understand your own signature. Oh well, Bassey.

[sc4r]

Originally posted by Knowledge 6 6 [email protected] 13 2003, 03:26 AM
Ok, you tell me...

Cuba's communist right? Why is there poverty? According to Marx/Engel's initial theory, communism is supposed to be total equality, there ISN'T classes at all. Why is there people struggling to survive?...

Okay, you've gotta valid point. Capitalism is totally ignorant of other countries and their needs/wants, in fact, I did a whole presentation on Sweatshop labour by Nike and other major corporations in America. I've watched various videos, read books, and the whole nine about indian children slaving to make persian rugs, taiwan girls involved in the sex trade, etc...all a result of capitalism of course...

You've gotta VERY valid point, in fact, you made me re-think my entire stance on capitalism. This, I ammend you for. However, if Communism is so 'great'...why is its BASIC philosophy of equality not being followed? If there is to be total equality...the state shouldn't be higher than the people...but it is. There shouldn't be authoritarian power because it initially shows dominance...but there is. My question is...why?
If capitalism is so great why are there no capitalist countries ?

That is the equivalent question to the one you asked about socaislism isnt it ?

I know the answer. Do you? Do you actually know what capitalsim is ?

[synthesis]

It would be highly amusing to see you go to a group of very muscled working class slaves to tell them that they are exploited and in order to fix this you are going to take half of their wealth because resources have to be redirected to the third world.That actually happens, every year, on April 15th, that is if you replace the latter half of your statement with "securing the interests of the American business community."

I do believe that's the Party line these days, anyways.

-Dom

[Durruti]

Both sides of this argument are partially correct. Often between the extremes on can find the truth... Capitalism is to blame for a great deal of the evils in the world, the rest can be blamed on governments. Corporations "govern" the people no less than governments do, only in a different way. It is the unquestiond autocracy of Corporations that is the root of their evil, and the root of the evil of the capitalist system. This system is "evil" because it makes slaves out of those who support it's entire structure. The very people who should democratically run these structures and, more importantly, benefit from them are instead crushed by them, while those who do nothing (or practically nothing but enrich themselves) profit from this corruption.
But how is this different from Stalinist "Communism"?

Socialism without Liberty is slavery; Liberty without Socialism is expoitation.

[sc4r]

First let me say I dont consider myself a stalinist, so what follows may be slightly off. However :

Stalinism basically is the idea that a strong vanguard leadership of very committed people is neededto allow socialism to put down roots in circumstances where it is being implemented in a society / country which has not previously had socialism (or even real democracy usually) and has to exist surrounded by hostile Capitalist or feudalist nations.

The (usually unstated) presumption is that while the population at large may want the benefits of socialism it will in a probability not fully understand them, will expect an immediate massive gain, and will have only a rudimentary knowlege of socialism.

The expectation in these circumstances is that it will be relaitvely easy for the population to become disillusioned or misled by the hostile external (and internal) influences and reject socialism long before it has had time to deliver benefits.

I'd say this is a fairly reasonable view especially given the actual history of fledgling sociaist nations which have not had a very strong, committed and unbending leadership.

Now the reality is that people are people. WE all do seek individual gain. It's in our nature to do so and we have been educated to do so. It is not at all surprising therefore that 'stalinist' leaders have usually (always?) awarded themselves some degree of personal comfort not available to all. BUT the other fact is that few (none?) have awarded themselves anything like the advantages that the top tier of capitalists award themselves, and most (all) have worked consistently to increase equality of opportunity, education, and material comfort/ security for the people in their societies. Many have gradually introduced democratic process (often in nations which previously had none at all).

My personal belief is that you have to risk having rather more democracy from the outset to ensure that progress is made at the fastest rate. This is especially true in nations which already have even the appearance of democracy. But I would have to concede that the Stalinists may be right and that this will never work.

The whole thing is about practicality. I'd love to see a perfect Socialism promised on Friday and delivered on Red Monday. But the reality is that things are just not that simple or easy.

The question is do you want to see progress towards full Socialism or do you want to talk forever about how great it would be if it already existed. The Stalinists take the former view, because they REALLY WANT SOCIALISM. AS for others - I think that what they really want is to go on mastermind and display their abstract knowlege.

[Vinny Rafarino]

Good post friend. I enjoyed your analysis.

[EneME]

I don't exactly know what I would consider myself, and I dont have any answers...I know that much. I do know that the Capitalist system has exploited not only 3rd world countries, but also those in the USA. Living in the USA makes it hard to find out the truth of what is REALLY going on in foreign affairs because of the media control by the Pentagon, we literally live in the Matrix....so I don't hold any narrow minded American at fault for not knowing (but its pretty sad/ignorant/pathetic...they're like deer in headlights when the real world hits them like a mac truck), but I do feel it is one's duty (who have broken through the barrier) to let America know whats happening beyond our borders.

Just because someone doesn't agree with USA's foreign affairs, doesn't mean we are pothead ignorants.... most leftests are well educated ppl and ppl who have lived, seen, and FELT the pain of the capitalist fist pounding down upon us. So excuse us for being a little defensive. Unfortunatly I dont think any person who lives in USA will ever really understand the struggle of the 3rd world unless they were to see it with their own eyes as it is with war....so eager to support a war abroad but never having felt the pain of war in their own neighborhood is something that can't be explained.

Getting back to the Cuba argument....I've had friends and prof's who have traveled to Cuba, and sure they live as if stuck in a past time, but they are definently not starving, they can only deal with the hand that has been past down from the colonialists. We have to remember the Cuba was a cash-crop for the imperialists, there has been nothing but Tobacco and Sugar plantations on their island, which will not feed hungry mouths. I believe they have done as well as could be expected...they have created some of the best doctors (through free education) and have a literacy rate that competes with USA's. How can we expect for a country like Cuba who doesn't have much to offer to the world trade, to be thrown into a Capitalist system...it would be eaten alive, as Haiti has been, and is still struggling to survive. If we take a look at all countries that have been held in the fists of colonialists...they have become what are now "3rd world" countries including the slavery in USA itself, those who created the powerful nation with the sweat of their brow are still struggling to rise above their history of enslavement. Slavery and exploitation hasn't ended...it still exists, but in a different form. We still have crops that scatter the globe...not meant for equal distribution, but for the consumption of the 1st world.

For example, after a disasterous earthquake in El Salvador, where tons of ppl were buried alive, the corporations way of "helping" the ppl was to build sweat shops closer to rural cities. The 1st world will always be powerful because of that slavery and colonization....ppl forget history now a days and we have to remember thats where we came from and how 1st world countries came to be so rich and powerful...if you ACCEPT what imperialism has programmed you to accept (mtv and material shit) then you have become what they want...a slave to the capitalist system.

Sorry if I went off topic...or if this was even relevant...just throwing in some 2 cents...this is my opinion and I'm really hoping for some feed back so we can enlighten eachother through discussion not arguments..

[dopediana]

Originally posted by [email protected] 14 2003, 09:23 AM
Getting back to the Cuba argument....I've had friends and prof's who have traveled to Cuba, and sure they live as if stuck in a past time, but they are definently not starving, they can only deal with the hand that has been past down from the colonialists. We have to remember the Cuba was a cash-crop for the imperialists, there has been nothing but Tobacco and Sugar plantations on their island, which will not feed hungry mouths. I believe they have done as well as could be expected...they have created some of the best doctors (through free education) and have a literacy rate that competes with USA's. How can we expect for a country like Cuba who doesn't have much to offer to the world trade, to be thrown into a Capitalist system...it would be eaten alive, as Haiti has been, and is still struggling to survive. If we take a look at all countries that have been held in the fists of colonialists...they have become what are now "3rd world" countries including the slavery in USA itself, those who created the powerful nation with the sweat of their brow are still struggling to rise above their history of enslavement. Slavery and exploitation hasn't ended...it still exists, but in a different form. We still have crops that scatter the globe...not meant for equal distribution, but for the consumption of the 1st world.

For example, after a disasterous earthquake in El Salvador, where tons of ppl were buried alive, the corporations way of "helping" the ppl was to build sweat shops closer to rural cities. The 1st world will always be powerful because of that slavery and colonization....ppl forget history now a days and we have to remember thats where we came from and how 1st world countries came to be so rich and powerful...if you ACCEPT what imperialism has programmed you to accept (mtv and material shit) then you have become what they want...a slave to the capitalist system.

Sorry if I went off topic...or if this was even relevant...just throwing in some 2 cents...this is my opinion and I'm really hoping for some feed back so we can enlighten eachother through discussion not arguments..
a strong bash on capitalism because it brings billions down under the pretense of everyone having a "chance at success." eneME, did you know that even though it rarely makes it to bigtime press, cuba has offered extensive medical service to nearly everywhere in latin america at one time or another free of charge? it's all about the love. i bash capitalism because capitalism puts things ahead of people. i choose communism because communism puts people ahead of things.

[suffianr]

Everyone overlooks Capitalism's fundamental flaw: profit.

And what motivates profit, if not greed? :ph34r:

[EneME]

a strong bash on capitalism because it brings billions down under the pretense of everyone having a "chance at success." eneME, did you know that even though it rarely makes it to bigtime press, cuba has offered extensive medical service to nearly everywhere in latin america at one time or another free of charge? it's all about the love. i bash capitalism because capitalism puts things ahead of people. i choose communism because communism puts people ahead of things.
Yeah I do know about that, and I think its awesome. I have lots of family who have gone to Cuba for medical treatment because they know its some of the best medical care, and because they have gone to my country free of charge before in times of crisis. I also agree with the fact that America and capitalism in general has put profit in front of the need of the people...humanity is something that is put on a back burner which is something unforgivable.