Opposers of Communism

[RedAnarchist]

Have you ever actually taught yourselves about Communism? Or do you know absolutely nothing about it and block out all other peoples views?

[cubist]

xphile your barking up a fallen down tree the answer

is................................................ ... no we haven't bothered to learn about something that doesn't work, about something which is a threat to our existance, as tools in a society which is completely equal and fair a society so fair that arabs around the word hate us but its not our fault they hate us its they're fault for believing a god that isn't our god its not our fault we are trying to help them by introducing them to the global economy but exploiting them and it isn't until they owe us $300,000,000 that they find out they have been had

[fernando]

I think both communism and capitalism are stupid ideas...

Communism doesnt reward talent, we are all equal!
Capitalism doesnt give talent the chance to develop, only the rich can learn and become something.

Socialism would be a better choice, but I would have my own little set of rules for it

[Misodoctakleidist]

Originally posted by [email protected] 21 2004, 05:33 PM
Communism doesnt reward talent
You mean like the talent of owning a company?

[NYC4Ever]

Like I said before Socialism is the biggest enemy of Capatalism and Communism. Commies think that the EU is still capatalism, while Cappies think that its socialism. Well its both, and slow the process down for Communism and free enterprise. Or maybe Karl Mark was playing both fields? He called for communism to come out of advanced capatalist countries, well I dont think that the Batistas in Cuba or the rule in Russia was exactly advanced capatalism but actually corrupt capatalism with intervention from the government. Like the EU. So out of corrupt intervention from the government and appeasement and utter greed comes the downfall of a capatalist country and turns into Communist revolt. Mexico is ripe for this kind of revolt.

[lucid]

Originally posted by Misodoctakleidist+Apr 21 2004, 05:43 PM--> (Misodoctakleidist @ Apr 21 2004, 05:43 PM)
[email protected] 21 2004, 05:33 PM
Communism doesnt reward talent
You mean like the talent of owning a company? [/b]
Yes, like owning your own company.

You seem to think that every company owner is just some rich white kid that inherrited it all. Thats not true. There are hundreds of small companies for every one large. The people that put their assets at risk to start their business should be allowed to reap the benifits. Not every company is a Microsoft.

:rolleyes:

[Guest1]

Not every company is a Microsoft.
Yet every company strives to be one.

[fernando]

Originally posted by Che y [email protected] 21 2004, 07:33 PM

Not every company is a Microsoft.
Yet every company strives to be one.
And this striving is what can make things better an more efficient...

If you would give everybody the same about of food coupons, so everybody has 2 breads, a bag of rice, a certain amount of water and coffee, there would be no reward for people who work harder, or study more.

People want more, it's human nature, people want to grow and develop, and some people are willing to work really hard for that, and I dont see why they shouldnt be rewarded for their hard work!

Just look at the former communist states in eastern Europe..."companies" were very inefficient, being overstaffed (something very common in the former Sovjet Union's government institutions). The "normal" people were all the same, living of food coupons, each getting exactly the same. while their leaders lived in luxury...

I like to see these differences between people, rich people, less rich people...but we should all have the same chances to start off with.
Every person should be able to get an high education if they can (be smart enough) and want that, no matter how much your parents make, what race you are, what political ideas you have.

[Osman Ghazi]

There are hundreds of small companies for every one large.

True. However, the large companies control a thousand times more than the small. So in the end, the larger corporations are more powerful.

[NYC4Ever]

The drive of humans for bigger and better things is what fuels this nation. Competive buisness cancels each other out. I know thats a big myth to you guys but it happens. The mergers are a scary thing though.

[Y2A]

We know nothing about communism or socialism but have been brainwashed by the American Propaganda Machine into believe it is pure evil and thus as sheep we follow.

[Don't Change Your Name]

Originally posted by [email protected] 21 2004, 10:39 PM
We know nothing about communism or socialism but have been brainwashed by the American Propaganda Machine into believe it is pure evil and thus as sheep we follow.
Prove you aren't.

[NYC4Ever]

Originally posted by [email protected] 21 2004, 10:39 PM
We know nothing about communism or socialism but have been brainwashed by the American Propaganda Machine into believe it is pure evil and thus as sheep we follow.
I dont know Socialism in making a comeback. Its just in the form of appeasement by the upper class.

[Hiero]

Originally posted by [email protected] 21 2004, 07:41 PM

And this striving is what can make things better an more efficient...

If you would give everybody the same about of food coupons, so everybody has 2 breads, a bag of rice, a certain amount of water and coffee, there would be no reward for people who work harder, or study more.

People want more, it's human nature, people want to grow and develop, and some people are willing to work really hard for that, and I dont see why they shouldnt be rewarded for their hard work!

Just look at the former communist states in eastern Europe..."companies" were very inefficient, being overstaffed (something very common in the former Sovjet Union's government institutions). The "normal" people were all the same, living of food coupons, each getting exactly the same. while their leaders lived in luxury...

I like to see these differences between people, rich people, less rich people...but we should all have the same chances to start off with.
Every person should be able to get an high education if they can (be smart enough) and want that, no matter how much your parents make, what race you are, what political ideas you have.
So your saying people who are working at dead end jobs do so becuase they are striving for something better. This doesnt make sense.

Workers arent in competion a groupd of head people in the buisness are, the employors are striving for more profits so they will intentionaly or not , but the will expliot workers, cut corners and fire people for competion.Getting employee of the month isnt a reward.

While many owners of buisness big or small have workerd very hard for there succes the still have to give up that wealth for society(in other words who cares about them).

Most workers i know jsut want to feed there families and do stuff on the weekends and get a good pay out for retirment, a communist government in a 1st world can supply all that. Many people in Australia are leaving high paying jobs for lower paying simply jobs to relieve pressure.

Capitalism has created private schooling so under capitalism there is no way to get equal education.

Capitalism has create only a small percentage of people how actually a competing wich will lead to a contradiction, so therefore it is better to stop free compettion remove all owners of there possision remove there benefits and start a way towards communism

[Guest1]

Originally posted by fernando+Apr 21 2004, 02:41 PM--> (fernando @ Apr 21 2004, 02:41 PM)
Che y [email protected] 21 2004, 07:33 PM

Not every company is a Microsoft.
Yet every company strives to be one.
And this striving is what can make things better an more efficient...

If you would give everybody the same about of food coupons, so everybody has 2 breads, a bag of rice, a certain amount of water and coffee, there would be no reward for people who work harder, or study more. [/b]
Right... we shoudl reward people for selling a product they didn't have for several million? Cause that's what Bill Gates did, sold DOS, then went out and found a programmer who'd made an operating system. He then paid 20 000 dollars for it.

Yes, that encourages people to work really hard, doesn't it? The guy who put in the work is really encouraged to put in more, isn't he?

All Communists are saying is cut out Bill Gates, and all the mini-Bills of the world.

Face it, bosses do shit all and rob us blind <_<

[NYC4Ever]

Well then since communism is inevitible then maybe people should threaten to revolt. Get people to willingly contribute back to society or they&#39;ll know that a revolt would be unavoidable. Get what I&#39;m trying to explain? Cus, its like a standoff between the worker and the owner, so your saying we should give up our ambitions for everyone to be equal or educate people on the reason for communist result. I mean if they could see thier own greed, and the result if they still dont change willingly, then a communist revolt is well deserving. I think more education and less repression of Communism in schools would help people understand.

[Guest1]

NYC, be careful, with an open attitude like that you shouldn&#39;t hang out here too long.

You just might be convinced that workers can democratically and collectively run factories, or maybe even be convinced that they can do it without the government&#33; :lol:

Watch out&#33;

[fernando]

Originally posted by Che y Marijuana+Apr 22 2004, 04:50 AM--> (Che y Marijuana @ Apr 22 2004, 04:50 AM)
Originally posted by [email protected] 21 2004, 02:41 PM

Che y [email protected] 21 2004, 07:33 PM

Not every company is a Microsoft.
Yet every company strives to be one.
And this striving is what can make things better an more efficient...

If you would give everybody the same about of food coupons, so everybody has 2 breads, a bag of rice, a certain amount of water and coffee, there would be no reward for people who work harder, or study more.
Right... we shoudl reward people for selling a product they didn&#39;t have for several million? Cause that&#39;s what Bill Gates did, sold DOS, then went out and found a programmer who&#39;d made an operating system. He then paid 20 000 dollars for it.

Yes, that encourages people to work really hard, doesn&#39;t it? The guy who put in the work is really encouraged to put in more, isn&#39;t he?

All Communists are saying is cut out Bill Gates, and all the mini-Bills of the world.

Face it, bosses do shit all and rob us blind <_< [/b]
I find Bill Gates to be an extreme example...

But ok, why would you want to become a hard worker, or having lots of studies for ages when in return you will get just as much as some lazy person who doesnt do a thing (Im not saying every worker is like that. but some might be)

I say give everybody equal chances and then let them create their own thing, give them the support to do so, everybody should have a fair chance.

Im not a capitalist if that is the idea I have been giving you, but I dont think communism would work, it&#39;s not human nature to share everything, humans are selfish, we want more more and then even more than that.

[Y2A]

Originally posted by El Infiltr(A)do+Apr 22 2004, 12:15 AM--> (El Infiltr(A)do @ Apr 22 2004, 12:15 AM)
[email protected] 21 2004, 10:39 PM
We know nothing about communism or socialism but have been brainwashed by the American Propaganda Machine into believe it is pure evil and thus as sheep we follow.
Prove you aren&#39;t. [/b]
I can&#39;t because I&#39;m a sheep.

[Guest1]

Originally posted by [email protected] 22 2004, 02:58 AM
Im not a capitalist if that is the idea I have been giving you, but I dont think communism would work, it&#39;s not human nature to share everything, humans are selfish, we want more more and then even more than that.
It&#39;s not human nature to use condoms.

Or to have skyscrapers, or cars, or an economy. Human nature is overrated and infinitely debatable. What you call human nature, I call a product of the society we live in and the education we receive. In the end though, it doesn&#39;t matter who&#39;s right, because society is all about surpassing human "nature" and creating something bigger together.

Or would you rather we went back to caves and forgot how to make fire?

[fernando]

Originally posted by Che y Marijuana+Apr 22 2004, 09:01 AM--> (Che y Marijuana @ Apr 22 2004, 09:01 AM)
[email protected] 22 2004, 02:58 AM
Im not a capitalist if that is the idea I have been giving you, but I dont think communism would work, it&#39;s not human nature to share everything, humans are selfish, we want more more and then even more than that.
It&#39;s not human nature to use condoms.

Or to have skyscrapers, or cars, or an economy. Human nature is overrated and infinitely debatable. What you call human nature, I call a product of the society we live in and the education we receive. In the end though, it doesn&#39;t matter who&#39;s right, because society is all about surpassing human "nature" and creating something bigger together.

Or would you rather we went back to caves and forgot how to make fire? [/b]
the whole going back to the caves is something Im against...I dont know why you think Im pro to that :blink:

You want to surpass the human nature of greed, good luck trying, how would that be...killing off all opposition, sending people to re-education camps when they dont agree with you? Indotrinate them into believing that the leader is almost a god-like creature (just lookat Stalin and Mao)...

Im not pro communism, but Im also not pro capitalism...it&#39;s like choosing to either have aids or cancer or something like that.

[Y2A]

The stupidity of these labels just makes me laugh. Like morons putting labels on themselves "join a camp" and make buddies. It just goes to show how these people don&#39;t really believe the crap they spew out. A real communist doesn&#39;t wear che shirts or try and hijack latin american culture by having poster names in spanish.

[Professor Moneybags]

Originally posted by Misodoctakleidist+Apr 21 2004, 05:43 PM--> (Misodoctakleidist @ Apr 21 2004, 05:43 PM)
[email protected] 21 2004, 05:33 PM
Communism doesnt reward talent
You mean like the talent of owning a company? [/b]
No, the talent of existing by your own efforts.

[Professor Moneybags]

Originally posted by [email protected] 21 2004, 10:39 PM
We know nothing about communism or socialism but have been brainwashed by the American Propaganda Machine into believe it is pure evil and thus as sheep we follow.
Speak for yourself. We say the same about your stance on capitalism.

[Y2A]

I&#39;m obviously being sarcastic.

[Professor Moneybags]

Sorry, I thought I was quoting someone else.

That&#39;s a wicked avatar, who/what is it ?

[STI]

Originally posted by Professor Moneybags+Apr 22 2004, 10:07 AM--> (Professor Moneybags @ Apr 22 2004, 10:07 AM)
[email protected] 21 2004, 10:39 PM
We know nothing about communism or socialism but have been brainwashed by the American Propaganda Machine into believe it is pure evil and thus as sheep we follow.
Speak for yourself. We say the same about your stance on capitalism. [/b]
There&#39;s a difference. We&#39;ve lived in capitalism our whole lives and have been taught it in school since we were 4 years old.

[NYC4Ever]

The TYPICAL AMERICAN COMMIE:Some of them, born into the luxury of American freedom, believe that liberty can exist passively, that somehow the world&#39;s natural state will always settle into utopian harmony. Others, in an attempt to absolve themselves from the unearned guilt they harbor living in a nation of prosperity and wealth, try to buy morality on the cheap by pronouncing themselves for the &#39;good&#39;. To them, the derivation of the &#39;good&#39; is based on a simple, yet peculiar standard: the powerful and competent are wicked, while the feeble and impotent are innocent - regardless of the context.
Anyways, pure capatalism is evil as much as pure communism is as well. I mean no one is going to do a 180 with thier psyche. It depends on human nature being basically altruistic.That would be a dream. Communism is no different than capitalism, only worse. You guys are no different than your capitalist foes who you think are labotimizing human society. You defend all of the re-education camps as a cappies fear and misuse of labels, and murdering people as resisters to the revolution. This why Communism failed at every attempt.
Now I grant you that I see no difference in this and full scale capatalism where the ruling elite still rule and people starve. I know you say that true Communism has no state but in the end of all of its attempts its still forced socialism. Then the cycle begins all over again as the nation devolves back into capitalism. So in theory we share a common enemy and thats Socialism. The ruling class&#39;s failed attempts to appease the masses with concessions, and it slows down the process of pure communism. Plus, it would take a very very generous group to return the state to the people if they weren&#39;t corrupted by the power already, which nearly in all transitionary periods it has failed.
I think an education of the results of what communism leads to in schools will at least help people to acknowledge the seeds of their own greed. Contributing back to society through charity and goodwill, and less focus on greed and also realizing who you&#39;re stepping on to get to the top. and Socialism does not help&#33; Out of free will, you can help out and volunteer and hope that people will follow. But even this is as much a dream as real Communism. Otherwise your turned over into your own greed and sin, and I think, well, a Communist revolt is well deserving, and all of the chaos that follows. You reep what ya sow.
Either way, man is doomed. History just tells me that. Oh and why do some leftists, especially commies, support and read Noam Chomsky, the EU, the UN and such?

[El Che]

NYC4ever


Anyways, pure capatalism is evil as much as pure communism is as well.

You could say Communism is "good" Capitalism is "evil" but thats a crude simplistic take on the matter. Strickly speaking, Capitalism is nither good nor bad, it&#39;s the natural outcome of class struggle. Likewise, Communism is nither good nor evil, just a more advanced form of society.


Oh and why do some leftists, especially commies, support and read Noam Chomsky, the EU, the UN and such?

He is good at exposing Imperialist hypocrisy (focusses mainly on the U.S).

[NYC4Ever]

Communism is an advanced form of society? I could see that, but do you really think that a group can really be that generous to follow through with all of the 10 planks of Communism? Can they really give the state back to the people? That is the point I&#39;m trying to make, that no communist experiment has ever pulled through the transitionary period.
I mean that would be the same attempt that Imperialist dogs here in America tried to do with Chile in 1973 and their failed experiment with Neo-Liberalism. But hey just stick around for a few more years because America is becoming very Socialist and soon the world. Capitalism may not be a perfect system, but it is the best one we have. Man is doomed.

[Sabocat]

because America is becoming very Socialist

Could you outline how America is becoming very Socialist?

Clinton all but ended Welfare, Unemployment is running out on people unable to find work with no extensions for the fed. govt&#39;, there is a non stop attack on Social Security, Medicare has been privatized and gutted (as of 2006), radical christian fundamentalists in executive office or directly influencing executive office, etc. etc.
In what way is the U&#036; becoming more socialist?

FDR&#39;s New Deal, and Johnson&#39;s Great Society programs have all been nearly eradicated. Those plans, were an appeasement to the masses on the verge of rebellion who were looking for socialist reform.

[NYC4Ever]

Greedy capitalists that dont contribute anything back to society are well deserving of a communist revolt. Some of those appeasements are still intact and besides Repubs are becoming ever increasingly unpopular, and Democrats will come in for them. They are the closest thing to socialism in this nation and will continue to throw concessions at the people. Bread and Circus.
Besides, to a cappie any fed. or state controlled thing is socialism. You know that. :) The system will collapse under its hypocrisy and corruption. But I still believe and will always believe that Communism will not work. Its a nice utopian dream of an advanced society but you guys always deny human nature whether it is man made or natural. Either way its here to stay.

[El Che]

NYC4ever,


Communism is an advanced form of society? I could see that, but do you really think that a group can really be that generous to follow through with all of the 10 planks of Communism?

What on earth are you talking about?


Can they really give the state back to the people?

The discussion of Leninism, and revolutionary methods in general, is an ongoing debate within the left.


That is the point I&#39;m trying to make, that no communist experiment has ever pulled through the transitionary period.

Marx predicted that Socialist revolutions would take place first in advanced Capitalist nations. Infact this didn&#39;t happen. What happened was that where Socialist revolutions did take place they were in backward, feudal countries that didn&#39;t really have the conditions to achieve communism. Various other factores play a role in these failures as well (Capitalist counter-revolutionism, Stalinist distortions, etc). But as they say, the struggle goes on.

[NYC4Ever]

Sorry What I meant to ask is do you really think that the leaders of the revolution and of the state would go through and willingly turn the state on over to the people during the transition? The problem behind these ideals during Lenin and Stalin was governing an enormous country where the language and cultural barriers propounded by illiteracy was beyond the grasp of the "dreamers". By establishing a wide spread propoganda campaign in multiple languages, Party positions were created in the provinces, these in turn became a homoginized aristocracy of sorts. The framework of the communist party became nothing more than the mafia. Corrupt.

[Professor Moneybags]

It depends on human nature being basically altruistic.That would be a dream.

The idea that sacrifice is good is altruistic. The truth is, sacrifice ain&#39;t good. It&#39;s actually fatal.


Now I grant you that I see no difference in this and full scale capatalism where the ruling elite still rule and people starve.

I&#39;ll remember that one next time I hear about the "obesity" crisis in America. How many starving people do you see in places like Hong Kong and the US ? Truthfully.

My friend, your knowledge of capitalism is riddled with false premises.

------------------------------------


There&#39;s a difference. We&#39;ve lived in capitalism our whole lives and have been taught it in school since we were 4 years old.

Correction, you&#39;ve lived in a "mixed" system.

[Guest1]

NYC, you have alot to learn.

You are arguing against Stalinism, which is not Communism, and Leninism, an ailing breed of Communism long abandoned by many Communists.

There are still Leninists of course, but I don&#39;t take them seriously. Even if a good friend of mine is one :P

The majority of active Communists I&#39;ve met here in Canada have been either Anarcho-Communists, or Libertarian Communists. Very far from the group you are speaking of.

As for human nature, my point is, if you want human nature, go back to the caves. Furthermore, most evidence actually points to humans being social creatures, rather than individualist. Hence the development of society.

In fact, Darwin himself said that the most successful species are not the strongest, they are the ones most capable of adaptation together. The ones who build societies and look out for each other.

[monkeydust]

Looks like we&#39;ve opened another can of worms here.........

Fernando


But ok, why would you want to become a hard worker, or having lots of studies for ages when in return you will get just as much as some lazy person who doesnt do a thing (Im not saying every worker is like that. but some might be)

A fair question, and one that is posed many times.

Firstly, some people may genuinely want to work for "the good of society". This should be encouraged where possible, though I recognise that alone this is a fairly flimsy argument, of course we cannot just assume that everyone will suddenly become nice, altruistic, gregarious and selfless. That would be absurd. Though it&#39;s worth noting that many of the great contributors for humanity (Darwin, Einstein etc.) were not motivated by money, and in fact their work was at the time often heavily criticised.

Secondly, some people may wish to work because they find the job itself intrinsically valuable. With infinite social mobility, one will be able to gravitate towards the profession one actually wants. Some people, actually enjoy teaching, for example; others might find a job as a Doctor very rewarding. Some will work because they enjoy it.

The third reason I present is essentially a selfish one. Working hard will gain one considerable social recognition and prestige. A hard worker will be someone to "look up to". Similarly, someone who contributes something incredibly valuable to society, whether it be a form of art, an invention or a new scientific theory will be an ibject of great renown.

In the same way there will be considerable social pressure to work. Someone who is lazy may well be an object of scorn, someone "looked down upon" by the vast majority. Thus it would not be in ones interests to "sit on ones arse".



I say give everybody equal chances and then let them create their own thing, give them the support to do so, everybody should have a fair chance.

That&#39;s what we say as well my friend.



NYC4ever


This why Communism failed at every attempt

If a man falls over while running, does that necessarily mean that running doesn&#39;t work?

What if a man rund on a slippery slope then falls, would running still not work?

No actual Communist society has ever been achieved. he reasons for the fall of the numerous &#39;transition&#39; states are complex. Due both to the inherently flawed (in my opinion) nature of State Socialism and the incidental factors of the time. (i.e. Vehement Allied Opposition). In any case, citing the failed examples of such &#39;transition&#39; states as irrevocable evidence for why Communism can never work is most silly.



Can they really give the state back to the people?

Unlikely

That&#39;s why the &#39;transition state&#39; (if there need be one at all) should be directly under the control of the workers themselves. We shouldn&#39;t blindly follow our &#39;rightful&#39; leaders.



Sorry What I meant to ask is do you really think that the leaders of the revolution and of the state would go through and willingly turn the state on over to the people during the transition?

What leaders?



but you guys always deny human nature

Please. Neither you nor anybody else knows what human nature actually is.

It may be the case that humans are actually selfless, generous, altrustic and gregarious, it&#39;s unlikely, though it may be the truth.

In any case, I&#39;d like to pose this question to you.

What part of your human &#39;nature&#39; assures that Communism cannot work?

[NYC4Ever]

I guess Ive bought into the cappie theory that there is human nature and it is selfishness and to look after oneself, but then your&#39;re trying to brainwash me into believing that that is brainwashing. Anyways I think communism much like capitalism as well falls off at the abolishing of God and morals. I look at it in the ways of being brought up in a Christian home. Communism could work under New Testament teachings, but then so can capitalism if everyone willingly contributes back to society. I could&#39;ve explained this concept a little better, but I forgot most of it while I was picking up my brother from school, lol. It&#39;ll come back to me. :lol:
But all in all it brings you back to you and the material. Much like Capitalism does in the same way. Whats the difference between a ruling elite and a ruling state? I dont ever see Communism taking its true form so I always think it will result in Stalinism. I know the difference between Stalinism and Communism, I was just arguing about the way it usually always reverts to that.
Anyways you guys do have a great dream though. I can see why you all are so captivated by it. It does point out that there is alot of American propaganda out there to hide it. Though I just go by a hunch that it can&#39;t ever work. Then again niether can capitalism.

[El Che]

Left


Unlikely

That&#39;s why the &#39;transition state&#39; (if there need be one at all) should be directly under the control of the workers themselves. We should[n&#39;t] blindly follow our &#39;rightful&#39; leaders.


Completely agree. The idea that all Socialists are authoritarian is nothing but bourgeois propaganda. Don&#39;t believe everything they teach you in school.

[NYC4Ever]

hey what about liberation theology? I was reading about Cesar Romero and his whole Marxist-Christian ideas? Whats that?

[NYC4Ever]

So its the idea of Socialism being authoritarian is what screws it up?

[El Che]

Authoritarianism can certainly be contrary to the objectives of the revolution but it isn&#39;t the only factor that will determine success.

[Guest1]

Authoritarianism and leader-worship were the main problems of the so-called "Communists" of the 20th century.

Real revolution will not be led. It will be grown. It will flow from the roots of the world, from the hearts and minds of the oppressed peoples of this world. That is how the revolution will happen. Some may then try to hijack it, Leninists, Maoists, Stalinists. They&#39;ll call out "Yes comrades&#33; Join us&#33; We will show you the way&#33;", when really, they&#39;re the ones joining us, and we the people will show them the way.

They will suffer deeply as their old ideologies are smashed by the people they have betrayed time and time again. Then they will be given a choice: join us in a world without leaders or bosses, a world of Democratized factories and city-collectives, a world without racism, sexism or homophobia... either that, or be the first experiments in Democratic justice.

[RedAnarchist]

Well said, CYM :D

[Guest1]

Thanks XPhile :)

I take it you&#39;re not a Leninist :P In fact, I have pretty much the exact same political compass score in your signature.

Damn, my Leninist friend&#39;s gonna get so ticked. He&#39;s made the mistake of getting me to join his little "Marxist discussion group".

Get this, first thing that happened when I met him...

Him: "You&#39;re a Marxist? Me too&#33;"
Me: "Yeah? Cool. I&#39;m an Anarcho-Communist"
Him: "What do you think of Authoritarians?"
Me: "Stalinists, enemies of the revolution."
Him: "Cool"
Me: "Leninists, at best misguided."
Him: "..."
Me: "Fuck... you&#39;re a Leninist? Uhh... know who I just laugh at? Trotskyists, still stuck in 1917."
Him: "..."
Me: "Fuck, you&#39;re a Trotskyist too?"

[Professor Moneybags]

The idea that all Socialists are authoritarian is nothing but bourgeois propaganda.

The opposite of free market is command economy; Socialism is usually very authoritarian in terms of economics.

[NYC4Ever]

Che Y Marijuana,
Well said but will it ever happen? The same goal was going on in the US towards Libertarianism with Reagen, where we would be on the road to end a two party system. You have your Stalins, Lenins and Maos. And we have our Bush&#39;s and Reagans. Democrats are our authoritarian socialists much like the pikes the rule the EU. You say its still capitalism, I say its socialism.

[Hoppe]

Originally posted by [email protected] 23 2004, 08:08 PM
Che Y Marijuana,
Well said but will it ever happen? The same goal was going on in the US towards Libertarianism with Reagen, where we would be on the road to end a two party system. You have your Stalins, Lenins and Maos. And we have our Bush&#39;s and Reagans. Democrats are our authoritarian socialists much like the pikes the rule the EU. You say its still capitalism, I say its socialism.
I admire your long breath NYC4Ever, but it&#39;s no use. Even if the government intervened in the economy for 100% they&#39;d still call it capitalist.

[El Che]

Moneybags


The opposite of free market is command economy; Socialism is usually very authoritarian in terms of economics.

No, the opposite of "free" market is a democratically run economy. As Marxists know full well, the economic is the most important. In economic terms there is no freedom in Capitalist society, what exists is the tyranny of capital, so how can you say society is free? We seek to end that tyranny which, too, is a form of authoritarianism.

[Nyder]

Originally posted by El [email protected] 23 2004, 11:32 PM
Moneybags


The opposite of free market is command economy; Socialism is usually very authoritarian in terms of economics.

No, the opposite of "free" market is a democratically run economy. As Marxists know full well, the economic is the most important. In economic terms there is no freedom in Capitalist society, what exists is the tyranny of capital, so how can you say society is free? We seek to end that tyranny which, too, is a form of authoritarianism.
Obviously that&#39;s a poor euphemism for a command economy.

What else would you mean by a &#39;democratically run economy&#39;? There has to be a vote everytime someone wants to change their prices, or wants to start a new business? Cut out the rhetoric and be practical for a change.

[El Che]

Obviously that&#39;s a poor euphemism for a command economy.


It&#39;s not a euphemism for anything, it just clarifies the nature of this "command".


There has to be a vote everytime someone wants to change their prices, or wants to start a new business?

Prices and businesses are things that exist and play a role in Capitalist economy. You can not take these concepts and apply them to a Socialist economy where they would serve no purpose. The function of prices, or in other words money, is accumulation of wealth. Businesses are the concrete manifestation of this accumulation. Both things exist in the service of private interest. If the social purpose of economic activity switches from the persuit of private interest to the rational meeting of needs these &#39;fictions&#39; disappear into thin air.

[God of Imperia]

So you&#39;re saying there won&#39;t be any money? Or do I misinterpretate your reply?

[Hoppe]

The function of prices, or in other words money, is accumulation of wealth

Prices have another usefull purpose and that is exactly why you guys would have a hard time running your publicly owned companies.

Things do not just fall into place.

[Don't Change Your Name]

Originally posted by [email protected] 22 2004, 07:58 AM
I find Bill Gates to be an extreme example...

But ok, why would you want to become a hard worker, or having lots of studies for ages when in return you will get just as much as some lazy person who doesnt do a thing (Im not saying every worker is like that. but some might be)
Why? Because in such a society:
- nobody will like you if you are some lazy idiot
- your job will probably affect you on a closer way
- you won&#39;t get a job so you would end up isolated, no organization will allow you to use public property if you don&#39;t for a long time, and you will only get fed if there&#39;s enough food, thus the rest of the people will force you to work, and those who accept people into jobs will be those working on them, and they don&#39;t want to be blamed for your lack of productivity because they will be blamed by others too.
And btw what kind of incentive DO I HAVE IN CAPITALISM to become a hard worker if I will surely never gain as much as others like Bill Gates do just because they made some moves and suddenly they became multimillionaries?????


Im not a capitalist if that is the idea I have been giving you, but I dont think communism would work, it&#39;s not human nature to share everything, humans are selfish, we want more more and then even more than that.

In such a society there won&#39;t be such a thing as private property so people won&#39;t "share" because they will all have the same thing (with few exceptions that might appear).


I can&#39;t because I&#39;m a sheep.

Then prove you are one.

[MiDnIgHtMaRaUdEr]

Authoritarianism and leader-worship were the main problems of the so-called "Communists" of the 20th century.

Admiring a leader is harmless, provided that leader is dead, otherwise it leads to blind obediance.


Real revolution will not be led. It will be grown. It will flow from the roots of the world, from the hearts and minds of the oppressed peoples of this world. That is how the revolution will happen. Some may then try to hijack it, Leninists, Maoists, Stalinists. They&#39;ll call out "Yes comrades&#33; Join us&#33; We will show you the way&#33;", when really, they&#39;re the ones joining us, and we the people will show them the way.

Like it or not, leadership, to one extent or another, is necessary. The masses must be coordinated together in a unified effort to achieve a common goal in order to accomplish anything, and people cannot subconsciously realize this on their own. No one forced the people to follow their leaders. Lenin, Mao, and Stalin did not hijack the movement. All they did was give a call to action. They spoke their ideas, and the people rallied for them to make it a reality.


They will suffer deeply as their old ideologies are smashed by the people they have betrayed time and time again. Then they will be given a choice: join us in a world without leaders or bosses, a world of Democratized factories and city-collectives, a world without racism, sexism or homophobia... either that, or be the first experiments in Democratic justice.

Why do you always refer to your own ideals as those of "the masses"? I find it rather amusing that you honestly believe that society is capable of managing itself. Altough people should have some participation in the affairs of their community, the management of society should be left to the Communist party.

[NYC4Ever]

Midnight Maurader proves that people want to control and that communism will never work.

[MiDnIgHtMaRaUdEr]

Now where did I prove that Communism doesn&#39;t work? The only think I think that won&#39;t work is all the stateless nonsence all the other guys are talking about. The purpose of government is not to furfill some carnal urge to control, but to manage society responsibly and ensure a healty, productive life for everyone.

[BOZG]

Communism cannot exist while the state exists you fucking idiot.

[MiDnIgHtMaRaUdEr]

Communism cannot exist while the state exists you fucking idiot.

Yeah, if you are an anarchist.

[Guest1]

Originally posted by [email protected] 25 2004, 05:34 PM
I find it rather amusing that you honestly believe that society is capable of managing itself. Altough people should have some participation in the affairs of their community, the management of society should be left to the Communist party.
With an attitude like this, why are you a Communist?

Communism is about workers taking control for themselves. Democratic control. If you don&#39;t trust the workers to make their own decisions, how are you a Communist?

Oh, that&#39;s right... you&#39;re not&#33;

MiDnIgHtMaRaUdEr just proves we have other enemies. He is one of those people who will be given that choice, I&#39;m sure.

Pfft... no one forced the people to follow Mao and Stalin my ass&#33; :lol:

[NYC4Ever]

Its people like Midnight Maurader that frighten people into thinking that it cant work and thats why people fight wars from keeping it out of their country.

[BOZG]

Yeah, if you are an anarchist.

Or Marxist, Or Leninist or any other varying shades of communism. You take the position of the social democrats. You&#39;re an idiot.

[Guest1]

Originally posted by [email protected] 25 2004, 11:49 PM
Its people like Midnight Maurader that frighten people into thinking that it cant work and thats why people fight wars from keeping it out of their country.
People with enough education understand just how isolated people like MiDnIgHtMaRaUdEr have become within the movement and ignore them.

No one gives any respect to the views these people spout and the movement has moved on and left them in the dust.

As bosses are fired and democracy takes root within the factories, their cries for the people to trust them and give them power will be met with fierce resistance and anger. As they begin to feel ignored, they will do all they can to sabotage the democratic society growing without them.

We will be there to respond swiftly. Then they&#39;ll see just how much we "rally for them".