communism is it all ahead of its time

[cubist]

i have been thinking about this, and i am of the thinking that communism is nirvana of all poltical streams, but is it too advanced for the huamn race, and is it impossible becuase of the way the human race isn't progressing on the social or physcological front.


With it becoming apparent that it is nurture rather than nature that effects our chidren and our thinking,

200 years of capiatlism has corrupted the minds of our nations into believing that there is no otherway, religion is used to ease the pain of the system and as a result is deluding a vast majority of people into a land of no hope, where they believe we are fallable and weak, and naturally greedy (so it's ok to be greedy and ruin eachothers lives).

could it be that Marx allthough he was right, didn't know how bad imperialism was going to affect us, i we ever going to get the oppurtunity to see true communism in place, even if watching from the skies above?,

now i don't know about all of you but you can't just implement communism, you are going to have to wait for or accelorate the decay of the capiatalist economy (GW is doing this at a good rate at the mo :) )

if you disagree please share i would love to hear how you plan on doing so (that isn't sarcasm i would really like to hear it)

i suppose what i am trying to say is CAN WE ACHIEVE OUR GOAL OR ARE WE JUST DREAMERS, i believe we can but i have honesty no idea of how or when.

ideas criticism what ever please, i am bored of reading theory of the past its about time we write the theory of the future

[cubist]

apologies to lard lad i should open my eyes sometime,i didn't realise there was a thread sort of about starting the future

[The Feral Underclass]

Originally posted by [email protected] 30 2004, 07:15 PM
could it be that Marx allthough he was right, didn't know how bad imperialism was going to affect us, i we ever going to get the oppurtunity to see true communism in place, even if watching from the skies above?
I don't understand?


now i don't know about all of you but you can't just implement communism, you are going to have to wait for or accelorate the decay of the capiatalist economy (GW is doing this at a good rate at the mo :) )

if you disagree please share i would love to hear how you plan on doing so (that isn't sarcasm i would really like to hear it)

There are organisations and movements in the UK who are trying to build a communist society. Go out and join one.


i suppose what i am trying to say is CAN WE ACHIEVE OUR GOAL OR ARE WE JUST DREAMERS, i believe we can but i have honesty no idea of how or when.

See above.

[Hate Is Art]

what he means is that Marx didn't take into account how farreached and deep Capitilism would sink it's claws in! There is a very real danger that by the time Capitlism has destroyed itself that we only inherit some kind of shell of an earth. Burnt out and used up, exploited, that it my main worry about the movement!

I think he is also saying that Capitilism has gone of for so long that change may soon become completely impossible!

[VukBZ2005]

Communism is not ahead of it's time. Communism is achievable considering
that the Material Conditions for it are there.

[Hate Is Art]

Care to elaborate that one?

[The Feral Underclass]

Originally posted by Digital [email protected] 30 2004, 11:18 PM
what he means is that Marx didn't take into account how farreached and deep Capitilism would sink it's claws in!
Possibly.


There is a very real danger that by the time Capitlism has destroyed itself that we only inherit some kind of shell of an earth. Burnt out and used up, exploited, that it my main worry about the movement!

What is the point in thinking this?


I think he is also saying that Capitilism has gone of for so long that change may soon become completely impossible!

Capitalism has existed for 200 years maximum, and in its present form has lasted for 50 years. Feudel society existed for over 500 years.


Care to elaborate that one?

He means that society is so bad that communism can be achieved for that reason. The conditions of society are at such a point that communism becomse possible. I tend to agree. The material conditions exist because of cpaitalism and communism was a logical process out of that. Communism is a logical conclusion of capitalism and is not ahead of its time at all.

[gaf]

reply to fragment: CAN WE ACHIEVE OUR GOAL OR ARE WE JUST DREAMERS,

i think without dreaming you can not get any goal that's what they don't have
that's why it won't work .dreams means yourself... are they???
well i prefer my dream to their fuckin' reality

[Essential Insignificance]

Communism is not ahead of it's time. Communism is achievable considering
that the Material Conditions for it are there.

Care to elaborate that one?

It’s not ahead of it’s time; explicitly, but that is always going to depend which nation(s) you are referring too and the mode of production that has ensued in the course of history; the relations of production and the intercourse that corresponds to it.

Historical proceedings in the 20th century pay testimony to it…the 20th century "Leninist revolutions", Russia, East Europe and China…never turned into communism, namely, because the material production was not there as yet, instead however, they went through socialism-if your like-and came out with capitalism.

Marx’s hypothesis is paying authentication to these events…as he said that the mode of production must pass through the capitalist, to set the foundation for the eventual demise of itself; with the communist revolution in consequence, and ultimately then, the entailing of socialism.

[cubist]

yes, i see,

what i mean is that with the economy as it is in 2029 (expected crash of the US market by statistical analisys from unconfirmed source i will look it up again), that china and europe between them would stabilise the US economy, thus meaning that america can get back on top to assist with stabilising should anyother major nations loose value of there economy,

what i am saying is that with out revolution it is probs never gonna happen, but with revolution it would have to be a global revolution of the major economic countries simultaneously from looking at how russia and cuba struggled with the strength of capitalism

[Essential Insignificance]

what i am saying is that with out revolution it is probs never gonna happen, but with revolution it would have to be a global revolution of the major economic countries simultaneously from looking at how russia and cuba struggled with the strength of capitalism

Cuba and Russian struggled as they did; because there were both extremely backward countries, with no technological progression, compared with other European and North American and South American countries.

To survive they did have to compete and struggle on a colossal scale; and look what "devastation" happened in Russia because of it. And where did they’re end up after all this proxy fighting; capitalism, it was on the cards!

I don’t think that it would have to be globe concurrently after the first or second or even third revolution; as I have credence that the highly evolved capitalised nations have already furnished the foundations for communism to work; and I think it would. Regardless of other capitalised nations aggression towards them.

[cubist]

ES sorry forgot i posted this,

I believe cuba and russia struggled technologically becuase of the in ability to compete with the capitalist market, realistically when i look at it i see that america and the other major players are only so advanced due to two things, one money the can generate revenue for research and justify it alot easier than a communist nation ever could, Two the amount of wars they have had,

War advances technology more than anything most technology originally was developed for a purpose in War be it Sat Nav for missiles to anti sinking mechanisms in boats, in all cases its primary purpose was to advantage one side in a war.

the question is though and still stands as, Can a communist country today survive and compete with capitalism being as strong and successfull (for the boegoisie).


in refernce to those that believe that societ sorry state is enough to allow communism i fear are even more in the clouds than me, Society is too vain to understand the concept of communism the boegoisie hav ethem were they want a nation taht doesn't care who's in power a nation and more people play the lottery than vote that is so far in debt per person that its nation debt has amounted to $24.000 per head in a nation as large as america, society is ideal for the morons who count and this is what must change

[redstar2000]

...and more people play the lottery than vote...

The rational choice, of course. With the lottery, there is the very small finite chance that you will win and be personally liberated from wage-slavery.

In bourgeois elections, your chance of liberation is zero. If you can't win, why play?


...that is so far in debt per person that its national debt has amounted to $24,000 per head...

It's not clear exactly what you're speaking of...

If you're talking about government debt, this is simply a transfer of wealth from taxpayers (workers) to finance capitalists (purchasers of government bonds).

It's therefore unlikely that a capitalist government would ever want to pay off its debt -- a very important section of the capitalist class wants the government to borrow money.

If you're speaking of personal debt (plastic), this simply represents the efforts of much of the working class to maintain the standard-of-living that used to be possible from earned wages. People increasingly use plastic to pay for groceries, gasoline and auto repairs, even rent! As long as they can keep up with the minimum payments each month, they can acquire additional credit for the asking.

I think the use of consumer credit has vastly increased the "life-span" of capitalism; consumer spending accounts for an astonishing two-thirds of all economic activity in the U.S.

How long can it continue?

If I'm not mistaken, Marx referred to credit as "fictitious capital"...capital that doesn't really exist except on paper but nonetheless demands a rate of profit just like real capital. In his time, the way that fictitious capital was "wiped off the books" (when it grew too large and burdensome) took the form of periodic crashes and resultant economic depressions.

There "ought" therefore to be a "plastic crash" at some point in the not-too-distant future. And it "ought" to have a very radicalizing effect on the working class as they are forced "downwards" to a standard-of-living that their wages will actually pay for.

But we shall see.

:redstar2000:

The Redstar2000 Papers (http://www.redstar2000papers.fightcapitalism.net)
A site about communist ideas

[synthesis]

Capitalism has existed for 200 years maximum, and in its present form has lasted for 50 years. Feudel society existed for over 500 years.

Feudalism was dominant from about the 9th to the 18th century. It existed earlier, was still a force to be reckoned with until the 1950s, and still exists today (e.g. Bhutan). However, it can be reasonably considered to have been the major mode of production for at least 900 years.

The point is, if the cycles of history are at all similar, capitalism will have a much longer lifespan than some vanguardists will acknowledge.

[cubist]

i mean personal credit debt which does make up part of the national debt

in the UK for 55 million people the credit deficit has just entered the trillion pound mark.

yes Redstar i concour that the credit facilities or plastic usage as you call it as certainly extended the life of capitalism which is why i was saying i believe marx underestimated the true power of the beast ,

and indeed we shall see i would love to see in my life time but ifeel it is acentury or two too early

[Essential Insignificance]

Cubist,

I not identifying with the point that you’re trying to transmit to me, but I suspect it’s a rebuttal of my posts; but it comes into view however, that Redstar2000 has handled your qualms and uncertainties.

Good Day.