communists most daunting Challenge

[zeppelin935]

the most daughting challenge of of communism is the opposing school of thought that beliees that marxists systems of government arent pragmatic enough to serve a mulitude of indivual thinkers with indivisual desires. does capitalism pose the most fit suiter to solve this problem?

[Ocean Seal]

How so? Communism is about reaching a state where those desires can be met so long as they are reasonable.

Also, I if this is a human nature question, then its been answered a few hundred times on this forum.

[zeppelin935]

if communism is the most fit to accomidate our desires why hasnt it taken oven world wide by now or at least in the united states where disanfranchisment sparks in cycles. and their is no way that an aristocratic class and special interest are keeping it down communism has discredited itself and has left a world of unconvinced people.

[#FF0000]

if communism is the most fit to accomidate our desires why hasnt it taken oven world wide by now or at least in the united states where disanfranchisment sparks in cycles

Because that just isn't how things work.

[Ele'ill]

and their is no way that an aristocratic class and special interest are keeping it down

I wouldn't use your particular choice of words but I would say that the ruling class absolutely keeps alternatives at bay through the use of media, violent force (killing etc..), the judicial system, etc..

It isn't that lots of people don't want change- it's that a lot of people want change, don't have access to the information needed to engage in it, or they're killed, jailed and otherwise intimidated out of it.

[zeppelin935]

or is it that when we the majority o americans think of communism they think of uncle joe who starved a multitude of ukrainian citezens and still love the thought of concent of the people and by into american social mobility

[Ele'ill]

or is it that when we the majority o americans think of communism they think of uncle joe who starved a multitude of ukrainian citezens and still love the thought of concent of the people and by into american social mobility

I don't believe the majority of Americans think this.

[jinx92]

It isn't that lots of people don't want change- it's that a lot of people want change, don't have access to the information needed to engage in it, or they're killed, jailed and otherwise intimidated out of it.

this reminds me of the political conversations I've had with my father. Sometimes he would say something along the line of "you're right, but it's not going to change, so accept it." I'd always say, "Well, if everyone thinks the same way you're thinking, then you're right."

[zeppelin935]

so the majority of americans believe in marxists or fascists doctrins and are either too disorganized to do anything about it or to afraid of a government whose biggest act of violence sense the 60s was a rude breakup of anti nato riots in seatle or anti rage against the machine consert breakup at the dnc in 2000?

[zeppelin935]

by basic question is how can communism fulfill my needs and interest along with a polar opposite of mines interest when it resstrics us from fulfilling them without their over sight how can we prosper with massive govt forces in our way do chinese communist workers get their desires fullfilled how will communism be different if comes to existance in a new location

[Proukunin]

if communism is the most fit to accomidate our desires why hasnt it taken oven world wide by now or at least in the united states where disanfranchisment sparks in cycles. and their is no way that an aristocratic class and special interest are keeping it down communism has discredited itself and has left a world of unconvinced people.

because were always going to have counterrevolutionary countries involved in coup d'etat and rebellions against revolutionary rule, capitalist propagandist lies, and major bullshit imperialist nations feed the people.

[La Comédie Noire]

the most daughting challenge of of communism is the opposing school of thought that beliees that marxists systems of government arent pragmatic enough to serve a mulitude of indivual thinkers with indivisual desires. does capitalism pose the most fit suiter to solve this problem?

Capitalism doesn't really serve individual desires and thinkers, it creates them according to the needs of the ruling class.

[Ele'ill]

so the majority of americans believe in marxists or fascists doctrins and are either too disorganized to do anything about it

Let's talk about the left specifically- and no, people want change but do not have access to information or a formal educational process nor do they have access to adequate open media debate on the issue within the party system.



afraid of a government whose biggest act of violence sense the 60s was a rude breakup of anti nato riots in seatle or anti rage against the machine consert breakup at the dnc in 2000?

Fear of and on the receiving end of state repression. Those examples you gave are specifically regarding demonstrations. Let's take a closer look at how the state represses movement (movement building). FBI round-ups of 'anti-war' international solidarity activists, raids on houses during times where demonstrations are going to occur- not because there is a fear of demonstrating but to disrupt those group's ability to successfully organize past the date of the demonstration- the demonstration date is simply used as justification, everything from attacking and jailing independent media to setting up legal blockades that benefit the ruling class and those who protect it. The system that is in place is not democratic and offers no avenue towards change when people need it.

As for biggest acts of violence let's not forget war and those deaths at the hands of police.

[Rocky Rococo]

The real ideological success of the capitalist oligarchy in the US is that it gets free agents like the OP to go out doing its rhetorical dirty work for them, on their own time and not getting a dime. In singular, the OP, in aggregate, the Tea Party and its like.

[Ele'ill]

by basic question is how can communism fulfill my needs and interest along with a polar opposite of mines interest

Give an example of what you mean.



when it resstrics us from fulfilling them without their over sight

Who is 'their'?



how can we prosper with massive govt forces in our way

Organize, organize and organize then wildcat them till they piss blood.

[zeppelin935]

lets take a look at the communist left when was the last time that radicl leftist were ostracided by the govt? they arent right now radical leftist are frequent visiters to the white house seiu leader is the most frequent visiter during obamas admin. and the pres is sympathetic to bill aires and other violent radicals. but when we examin he right it is allways that any conservative stirs racism and sparks tim mcvay action where is the media outcry against maosympathizer valery jarret it is non existant because antileft narrative is nonexistant in our current admin and is nearly non existant in our media

[zeppelin935]

capatalism is not an oligarchy if anybody can participate in it in all honesty it rewards intellectual and physical labor

[#FF0000]

lets take a look at the communist left when was the last time that radicl leftist were ostracided by the govt?

Uh, when the FBI raided the homes of people from the Freedom Road Socialist Organization? The G20 protests year after year? And what about all of the police infiltrators in Anarchist groups and anti-war groups.



they arent right now radical leftist are frequent visiters to the white house seiu leader is the most frequent visiter during obamas admin. and the pres is sympathetic to bill aires and other violent radicals. but when we examin he right it is allways that any conservative stirs racism and sparks tim mcvay action where is the media outcry against maosympathizer valery jarret it is non existant because antileft narrative is nonexistant in our current admin and is nearly non existant in our mediaYou are out of your mind. People Red-Bait in the media all the time.

Do you know why they haven't been a big target though, "The Left"? Because Communists and Anarchists haven't been relevant in America for decades. Obama doesn't condemn leftists in his speeches because they hardly exist. There's no reason to mention them.


capatalism is not an oligarchy if anybody can participate in it in all honesty it rewards intellectual and physical labor


This isn't an argument. This is an assertion. Back up your statements.

[zeppelin935]

their is the contoling power of a communists govt.

[Ele'ill]

their is the contoling power of a communists govt.

Can you tell me a little bit about how a communist society would be structured?

[#FF0000]

What?

[Ele'ill]

They were replying to my question about what they meant by 'their'.

[Impulse97]

if communism is the most fit to accomidate our desires why hasnt it taken oven world wide by now or at least in the united states where disanfranchisment sparks in cycles. and their is no way that an aristocratic class and special interest are keeping it down communism has discredited itself and has left a world of unconvinced people.

This should really be in learning.

Your statement is partly true. Communism did take a hit with all the DWS's but, most of the reason it hasn't taken over is because of the simple fact that the Bourgeoisie exist. Thus, they will do anything and everything in their power, overt or covert to stay on top.

Try reading Debs.

http://www.marxists.org/archive/debs/works/1908/1908-unity.htm

Or RL it up.

http://www.revleft.com/vb/marx-39-s-t41211/index.html

Perhaps, some Che?

http://www.marxists.org/archive/guevara/1967/04/16.htm

:hammersickle::che::hammersickle:

[zeppelin935]

the organizes of the society would make the policies the disenters who still agreed to follow their practices would intagrate into the society and noncompromising disenters would fight them be prisoned and possibly executed because communism cant have community without cooperation it cannot handle dissent in thought and still be affective

[#FF0000]

the organizes of the society would make the policies the disenters who still agreed to follow their practices would intagrate into the society and noncompromising disenters would fight them be prisoned and possibly executed because communism cant have community without cooperation it cannot handle dissent in thought and still be affective

That is not at all what we advocate. :mellow:

[zeppelin935]

how is capitalism an oligarchy? if their is not a limit on the amount of people who can practice it and it allows everybody to join it not an oligarch it is internatianaly inclusive club if the govt above you allows for the system to be in place

[zeppelin935]

what is it that you advocate? if you had the world to mold what would you do with it?

[#FF0000]

Because capitalism requires an underclass, and if everyone on the planet worked hard and made the best possible decisions, there would still have to be starving poor people.

[#FF0000]

what is it that you advocate? if you had the world to mold what would you do with it?

Common ownership and democratic control over the means of production and a transformation from the current system of exploitation into a society organized by the workers themselves into one worthy of the descriptor "democratic".

[zeppelin935]

ok capitalism does require an undrclass but what if we only had one class and did not have enough food to feed everyone what critereon would deside who lives or dies? capitalism might not be completly fair but at least in this situation hard work would be part of the critereon on who eats

[#FF0000]

ok capitalism does require an undrclass but what if we only had one class and did not have enough food to feed everyone what critereon would deside who lives or dies? capitalism might not be completly fair but at least in this situation hard work would be part of the critereon on who eats

Thankfully technology today makes it real hard for folks to starve for any other reason than lack of access to food. And who in the world says that a communist society won't have rewards for people who work harder or do undesirable jobs? All we advocate for is a society wherein people don't have power over other people for the sole reason of owning capital.

[zeppelin935]

true democratic control? how will stop somebody from gaining power? and this is inevitable because people are either followers or leaders and some find comfort in people makeing desions for them how would avoid corruption

[zeppelin935]

who developed the technology the soviet union? and is communism flexable enough to cope with new crises tht arise

[#FF0000]

true democratic control? how will stop somebody from gaining power?

Checks and balances in how things are run, for one. Rotating executive positions is another popular method, where everyone has a turn at executive control for a very short amount of time. There are a lot of different methods and we'll definitely end up figuring out even more in the future when we're closer to establishing a communist society.


and this is inevitable because people are either followers or leaders and some find comfort in people makeing desions for them how would avoid corruption

Another assertion, and no argument. Tell me, do modern liberal democracies have the problem of Monarchs coming back and taking power?


who developed the technology the soviet union? and is communism flexable enough to cope with new crises tht arise

The technology came as a result of capitalism and the Industrial Revolution. If you ever read a page of Communist literature, you'd know that we acknowledge that capitalism had a progressive role in history but is now more harmful than beneficial, which is why we advocate for a socialist revolution.

And what sort of crises are you talking about?

[#FF0000]

Also, every sort of society is capable of collapse and failure. Whether or not communism is impervious to every falling apart isn't an argument against it.

[zeppelin935]

so the communists believe that capatalism has reached its zenith in progress and now has become to evil to tolerate? no not during the indtrial revolution when treatment of workers was horrible and imperialism at its peak but now when it in the midst of a time of the last one hundred years when television was created, computers ,the internet,makes the exchange of ideas easier how is the end of capatalist progress in sight we in america have a thriving middle class. which is the most productive in the world (not an assertion a fact) and they are among the weathiest peopl in the world how can you say that progress is at its end and if communism can bring about more progress than capatalism has show me the track record so that i can believe you

[#FF0000]

Communists have been calling for revolution since the 1800's, guy.


which is the most productive in the world (not an assertion a fact)Which we acknowledge. There is no comparison to the amount produced before industrialization compared to production after industrialization. Industry is a good thing. The problem is, though, that even though a lot of stuff gets produced, a ton of it is wasted while a ton of people still starve and live awful lives, on top of the corruption and unjust class system inherent in Capitalism.


if communism can bring about more progress than capatalism has show me the track record so that i can believe you Considering there has never been a communist society that's kind of difficult. :mellow: I would imagine, though, that the next step after "Be able to produce a ton of shit" would be "Produce to meet everybody's needs and everybody's desires as best as possible".

[Manic Impressive]

so the communists believe that capatalism has reached its zenith in progress and now has become to evil to tolerate? no not during the indtrial revolution when treatment of workers was horrible and imperialism at its peak but now when it in the midst of a time of the last one hundred years when television was created, computers ,the internet,makes the exchange of ideas easier how is the end of capatalist progress in sight we in america have a thriving middle class. which is the most productive in the world (not an assertion a fact) and they are among the weathiest peopl in the world how can you say that progress is at its end and if communism can bring about more progress than capatalism has show me the track record so that i can believe you
there is not a larger middle class, people may view themselves as middle class but they are working class. The middle class or the petty bourgeois are people who own small businesses in the last 30 years these businesses have been destroyed by the large corporations. Production in the US and around the world has risen but wages have not risen in at the same rate if at all. So no progress is not being made.

What do you mean by "so the communists believe........" what is your political preference?

[zeppelin935]

communists have been calling for revolution sence the 1800s why? if they got it would we have what we do now an if communism is such a powerful force and idea why hasnt anyone ever been ble to accomplish it isnt that what alot of your heroes like lenin were suppoose to do

[zeppelin935]

my political preferance is maximum libertarianism with hints of social conseratism to maintain decorum

[#FF0000]

communists have been calling for revolution sence the 1800s why? if they got it would we have what we do now an if communism is such a powerful force and idea why hasnt anyone ever been ble to accomplish it isnt that what alot of your heroes like lenin were suppoose to do

Because the working class has been on the losing side of the class struggle for the past 200 years. :mellow: simple as that.

[zeppelin935]

they have never been on the wrong side of a srruggle in the last 200 years they have gotten everything the wanted? why dont they want communism?

[#FF0000]

they have never been on the wrong side of a srruggle in the last 200 years they have gotten everything the wanted?

lol


why dont they want communism?

Because the State did a wonderful job of cracking down on communists and whipping folks into a nationalist fervor during World War 1, World War 2 and the Cold War.

[zeppelin935]

ad if they have never been on the wrong sid of a class struggle isnt the system in place working for them?

[#FF0000]

ad if they have never been on the wrong sid of a class struggle isnt the system in place working for them?

Considering working people are getting poorer and poorer, losing their homes and jobs, getting sent off to die in thoroughly pointless wars that benefit only companies with government contracts, all while the wealthiest continue to make bank in the most obscene manner, no, I wouldn't say capitalism is working for us.

[zeppelin935]

why is it easy for the govt to whip them into national ferver? dont communists have a strong enough minset to resist natianalism and how can push back a movement that strong so easily if the workers realy want communism

[#FF0000]

why is it easy for the govt to whip them into national ferver? dont communists have a strong enough minset to resist natianalism and how can push back a movement that strong so easily if the workers realy want communism

You are operating off the incorrect (and really, really stupid) idea that we think that workers just organically want communism just because they are working class people. That isn't true.

Why have communists failed in the past? That's a big question and there's no one answer. :mellow: I don't know what kind of answer you want. I think what I've been giving you is reasonable.

[zeppelin935]

how do companies benefit from the economic uncertainty that war brings?

if we would lower taxes on everybody the money supply would inscrease stimulating the economy and increasing the insentive for production How do communists plan to insentavise production?

[#FF0000]

how do companies benefit from the economic uncertainty that war brings?

Uh, lots and lots of government cash from contracts, guy. Also see: The Banana Wars.


if we would lower taxes on everybody the money supply would inscrease stimulating the economy and increasing the insentive for production How do communists plan to insentavise production?There's lots of theories or ideas but the best I can do is make conjecture. :mellow: It's late anyway so if you want answers, I think I'll point you to the RedStar2000 Papers (google it). I think RedStar touches on some theories you'd be interested in.

[zeppelin935]

i thought that working class people think that it is right to own the means of production due to the upperclasses mistreatment of the working class.
that is not organic and in some cases justified but if capitalism is so evil wouldnt the working class hae chosen being that out number the upper class what is stopping the workers of the world from uniting marxist ideals have spread the world over been excepted in some places why cant you guys stop your ideas from being perverted by those who eventually gain power

[zeppelin935]

government cash to compnies sounds alot like the definition of economic fascism not capatalism

[#FF0000]

government cash to compnies sounds alot like the definition of economic fascism not capatalism

Except it's been that way literally since the inception of Capitalism, so unless capitalism has never existed...

[#FF0000]

i thought that working class people think that it is right to own the means of production due to the upperclasses mistreatment of the working class.

Because working people don't think their problems are the result of capitalism. They don't take a class-based perspective, and so instead the vote for the Democrats or Republicans. The Communist message really just isn't out there in America at this point, and it doesn't help that the working class has been so thoroughly beaten down and disorganized.



why cant you guys stop your ideas from being perverted by those who eventually gain power

That's another big question. If I were you I'd start another thread on "Why the USSR turned out how it did" so you could get answers from all different strands of Marxist thought. Different communists have different opinions of the USSR. For the most part, folks will agree that it was at a tremendous disadvantage for not being industrialized, and for being the only Socialist state while in such a precarious position to start with.

[zeppelin935]

why should i trust a theortical dreamland when under capatalism we have concrete evidence on what works do to practice. when you guys havent even reached the stage of setting up your society anywhere near the way you want it every time somebody flies your communist banner countless human atrocities occur sure imperialism is bad but mao killed at least 50 million and stalin another 10 million on top of that and lets not forget our german national socialists whos hands are dirty with the most infamous genocide of all time.

[#FF0000]

Nazis aren't Socialists, bro.

[#FF0000]

And, by the way, 30,000 people starve to death every day and most of the world is unspeakably poor. That doesn't seem very successful to me.

EDIT: Oh, my bad. 100,000 people every day. Apparently more than half of the people who die in the world, and more than half of the children who die in the world, die of starvation. And that's just between 2001 to today.

So yeah, guy, you can point to government death counts all you want. I don't blame you, it's very easy. Especially when compared to counting the bodies that pile up as a result of capitalism, where you don't know where to begin, let alone where to end.

[zeppelin935]

ive realy aprecited your input but now i am going to bed :)

[zeppelin935]

how many people starve to death in china everyday?

[#FF0000]

how many people starve to death in china everyday?

Nowadays? Probably not many but I'd have to look it up. China hasn't been remotely Socialist in quite awhile, though, and even under Mao I would hesitate to call it Socialist (I am a Left Communist).

I would venture to say that starvation, was far worse before Mao than it was during Mao's rule though. I'll have to look into it, though. I'll get back to you.

[Blackscare]

I know it's elitist and shit, but I really really hate when people don't even make a little bit of an attempt to be understandable.


Also, this thread reminds me of when my little sister plays the "why" game to totally fuck with my head. Anyone who knows a 4 year old knows exactly what I'm saying.

[RGacky3]

The problem with the OPs argument (not the one hes making but the one he says is a daunting challenge), is the fact that its based on the false premis that we want ALL economic activity to be centralized in a central state, thats not what it is, things that effect everyone directly should be centralized (energy and so on), other things should be local, other things should be individual.