High School Commie's Guide

[Clarksist]

Whenever I argue agaisnt capitalism I ussually get one arguement, "How can you complain about capitalism, look at all it has given you..."

how do I argue with that?

Yeah, I mean, it has given great things like exploitation, environmental destruction, coercion by the state... get my drift?

[Red Menace]

I was arguing with someone about why a boss should be payed the same, and the other person argued that the boss is the boss, and they should be payed more, because they are taking the risk if the business fails *assuming they are the owner* so they need to be payed more. I didn't know how to reply

[grove street]

Originally posted by Digital [email protected] 29, 2004 01:06 pm
"if Communism is so great how come it failed and if capitilism is so shit how come no one has overthrown it yet"

I hate this one!!!!
Tell them that there was heaps of failed attempts at Captalism before fedualism was fully overthrown.

If Cuba was to go bankrupt and become Captalist tomorrow, would it be because Captalism is better then Socalism or would it be that the U.S embargo was too much for one island nation to handle?

This is what happened in the USSR and Socialist Albania. They didn't collapse because of Socialism, but because during the Cold War America and many of the other Captalist nations of the world invested almost all of their nation's capital to undermine Socilaist economies. This combined with revisionism within in the USSR and later Albania after Hoax's death is what caused these societies to collapse.

The Captalists love to use the collapse of the USSR as an argument against Communism, yet they make no mention of how for decades their country's sqaundred their nation's capital and resources to undermine the USSR. People living in America and many other Captalist countries during the Cold War payed the highest taxes in history, all used to undermine the USSR's economy.

[The Grey Blur]

Originally posted by Red [email protected] 04, 2007 06:53 am
I was arguing with someone about why a boss should be payed the same, and the other person argued that the boss is the boss, and they should be payed more, because they are taking the risk if the business fails *assuming they are the owner* so they need to be payed more. I didn't know how to reply
Well if the business fails it's the ordinary worker who'll be out of a job. The boss is generally bailed out by his banking connections or other big business friends. Always remember that it is in fact due to the Capitalist market, of production on a "supply and demand" basism that means a business would ever "fail" in the first place.

[here for the revolution]

the idea that a doctor should be paid the same as a dustbinman makes a LOT of sense. I'm not trying to offend anyone here but a doctor is, i think we all agree, a higher skilled individual. However if the doctor didn't work a few people would get sick and possibly die. If a dustbinman doesn't work entire streets would be filled with garbage and many many people would die of lack of hygiene, obviously in this case a dustbinman is MORE important than a doctor

[Ihavenoidea]

o thats very helpful! Seeing as there are so many consercatives in my parts.. And their little hellspawns are even worse then they are.

[here for the revolution]

yeah iv found it quite useful at skool, recently my leftism has become the subject of conversation in maths (its far more interesting). so id jus like to say fanks a bunch redstar, i need these things to get me through school.

[slybackstabber]

I'm a Marxist in highschool (going into my junior year) and I've pretty much hit a snag.

I go to school with a LOT of rich kids, who naturally are always reading books on
business and how to get rich fast.

Problems, of course, come up all the time between myself (the only Marxist in school!) and the hordes of righties I confront sporadically in debates.

The usual lines I get?

-Anyone can get rich if they work hard enough!
-Do you think it's fair for a doctor to be paid the same as a janitor?
-We should have the freedom to get as rich as we want to.
-Communism is dead!
-If communism and socialism is so great, then why are all socialist countries living
in dire poverty?

These questions are rhetorical in nature, and not designed to provoke a genuine discussion. The people asking these questions usually know squat about the history of capitalism, its dynamics, or about socialist ideas. Nor are they trained to listen and respond to nuanced arguments. Nor will they concede anything when shown to be wrong or uninformed. They've been thoroughly indoctrinated and think they have a monopoly on the "truth." So it's an exercise in futility "debating" anything with them.

[back door man]

They were even worse off before they had socialism. Places like Russia and China were shitholes still living in the middle ages before their revolutions; socialism created their modern economies out of nothing.
Eh... the Republic of China was no shithole, Shanghai before the communist takeover of '49 was an economical and intellectual capital of the world. And after the communist takeover it was mostly thanks to Jiang Zemin's capitalistic leanings that led to a new powerful economic growth in China, most notably, Shanghai.

[j0m017]

By the by. anytime someone asks you ill conceived questions about communism. you could direct them to this thread. this has certainly cleared my head of all the capitalist gobbledegook that has been jammed down my throat throughout school.

[Goatse]

-Anyone can get rich if they work hard enough!

Hardly. If someone is born into poverty, can't afford a decent education, they'll be forced to get a low paying job. Their own children will be born into poverty and the cycle will continue.


-Do you think it's fair for a doctor to be paid the same as a janitor?

Why not? Both serve vital roles in society. If there were no street cleaners, there would be widespread diseases, pandemics that doctors couldn't control


-We should have the freedom to get as rich as we want to.

That's a bit ambiguous - ask why they think that.


-Communism is dead!

Again, ask them why they think this.


-If communism and socialism is so great, then why are all socialist countries living
in dire poverty?

All countries which have had their previous masters overthrown by leftist revolutions have had great economic advances. Note that they have all occurred in poor parts of the world, ie China, Russia etc.

[vivalarevolucion2020]

-Do you think it's fair for a doctor to be paid the same as a janitor?


Like you were saying Goatse, we need janitors, street cleaners, well basically cleaners because they are a very important part of our society. I know people who want to grow up to be doctors because of the money. in a communist society it would be possible for "cleaners" to get paid enough for people to want to be them.

Another thing is that when kids want to grow up to be firemen or other "heroes" that maybe the "cleaners" could be one of those people.

[Fodman]

I have heard an argument from a cappie to my communist friend that went like this:

Cappie: You're a Communist?
Commie: Yes
Cappie: Well give us your stuff then!

misguided cappie cretin

[RaptorJesus]

Originally posted by The [email protected] 24, 2007 05:36 pm
I have heard an argument from a cappie to my communist friend that went like this:

Cappie: You're a Communist?
Commie: Yes
Cappie: Well give us your stuff then!

misguided cappie cretin
The capitalist in this case seems to be confused about the distinction between private and personal property. Communism is dedicated to abolishing private property, but not personal property. Indeed, in the Communist Manifesto it is stated that communists are not opposed to that which is "Hard-won, self-acquired, self-earned" by members of the proletariat.

[ExpansiveThought]

It seems futile to attempt to convince the right-wing fundementalists in training that they do not need to be "as rich as they want". Rarely witnessed is a sucessfull attempt to proselytize these individuals against their programmed consumerism, which in their thinking is entirely justified by their beloved meritocracy. Although this doesnt mean theres no hope in trying

[here for the revolution]

how about stop arguing with the right wing muppets and simply causing them some harm?if you agree there is currently a pretty good gun thread running
lol

[Issaiah1332]

I get this alot

"Communism is not much better than capitalism, the only difference is instead of the minority oppressing the majority; the majority oppresses the minority. Should the minority not count?"

[cantona]

haha :D
"Communism will never be achieved as long as there is free will"

[Issaiah1332]

Originally posted by [email protected] 28, 2007 10:07 pm
haha :D
"Communism will never be achieved as long as there is free will"
Free will? I dont exactly know what that means...

You will find that proponents of capitalism will use such vague things to support their claims.

[Sonnie]

I don't believe that there is anything at all wrong with Buddhism either. Though communism/anarchism requires a state to be free of religion, Buddhism, I do believe is an exception. It's hardly a religion, for all it asks you to do is ask for truth, and find peace in your world. I think any communist who disagrees with this philosphy had to have misinformed about what it is.

[acornsr4squirrels]

love this thread... only one problem. here's how a typical conversation goes for me:

"You're a communist? Communism will never work because (example given)."

My response, "Well, actua....."

That's about where they cut me off with, "You're so stupid! Hey look everyone, he's a communist!"

....what the hell do I do there? I can't refute anything because I'm not given half a second to speak?

[VeratheFastest]

I would not engage these individuals in politics. Politics and religion are touchy topics that can hurt friendships.

How many people know you are a Communist? Please don't tell me the whole school?!

[acornsr4squirrels]

oh no not the whole school. i mean my friends know of course, and often ppl DO want to learn more and debate, and I'm glad to talk with them. problem is, the ppl I know I should just leave good enough alone and not talk with usually bring it up (basically using it as a joking insult).

another thing I've learned is that a lot of people see communism and anarchism as more of a "religion" with a dogmatic set of beliefs rather than as a political/economic/social system. So an argument I get a lot of times is: "Communism/anarchism (I never use "anarcho-communism" because it confuses people) won't work because it requires everyone to have the same views." I think I saw this earlier in the thread.

The way I try to respond is by trying to emphasize that anarchism/communism is a system, and not some cult where everyone is brainwashed to think the same way.

The other one I hear a lot is the whole thing about greed, but I remember seeing a lot of replies about that earlier in the thread.

[Kropotkin Has a Posse]

I have trouble with people who firmly believe that anybody can become rich. They always provide anecdotal evidence as well and they're nigh impossible to beat in their ignorance. Any pointers? I feel all right debating them online but in person it's not as simple.

[Issaiah1332]

Originally posted by [email protected] 13, 2007 04:53 am
I have trouble with people who firmly believe that anybody can become rich. They always provide anecdotal evidence as well and they're nigh impossible to beat in their ignorance. Any pointers? I feel all right debating them online but in person it's not as simple.
Tell them that nearly 85% of the rich get their money via inheritance.

Another tactic is to find out what he/she or their parents does for a living and if they are not bourgeois or petty-bourgeois you can tell them how they are being exploited.

[Issaiah1332]

Originally posted by [email protected] 12, 2007 11:44 pm
I would not engage these individuals in politics. Politics and religion are touchy topics that can hurt friendships.

How many people know you are a Communist? Please don't tell me the whole school?!
HAHA...my whole school knows I am a commie, mostly because of one debate that branched into multiple debates.

[WrittenInTheStars]

Not many people in my school know that I'm a Marxist, but the people that do know don't seem to really care one way or another. But I'm sure that's all going to change next school year since I'll be taking debate. ;)

[Question everything]

Originally posted by [email protected] 16, 2007 01:29 am
Not many people in my school know that I'm a Marxist, but the people that do know don't seem to really care one way or another. But I'm sure that's all going to change next school year since I'll be taking debate. ;)
Not many people now about me either (not that I've accually tried to hide it, it's really obvious but I guess nobody can take a clue), Those that do (Most of them that do know about me are pretty smart), are my friends and they don't exactly see it a good thing but they don't really care when I do talk to them however they have no idea what I'm talking about... it's kinda depressing accually... :(

[Sickle of Justice]

Communism goes against human nature



an interesting take on this from the evolutionist veiwpoint: if the instincts and physicality of a species is conditioned by they're environment, then that isn't universally true. the primary environment for humanity is society, therefor if you're greedy its because of capitalism. greed is a product of class divisions.

[Sickle of Justice]

yeah, i actually have tried converting peole at my school. they're most common argument is indifferance. that is damn annoying.

[here for the revolution]

its strange rele....
about 1/2 my year now knows im a communist and i havent been given much shit for it, even though i am in a fairly middle/upper class public school
also 1/2 my best m8s r actually religious and they dont care
and also id rather they all knew how i felt than jus believe i think the same as them
and i have a myspace, screen name `comrade (my name)`
tbh, i fink its best if everybody knows how u feel, at the end of the day the worst thats happened to me is a few people saying
`communism doesn't work`
and walking away before i can reply
i mean if ur at a skool with a large population of fascist and/or neo nazis, yeh ur probly gonna get a hard time, but that will only help you find comrades

[kroe]

Hey... I'm in exactly your position. I go to a snotty, well-thought of private all-girls school. I'm going to be a junior in the fall and I, too, am the only Marxist in my grade (probably in the whole school, for all I know). There is one Socialist in our grade, but she isn't as left as I am.
What is your family's political philosophy? My father is a moderate and my mom is a Democrat, which makes things a lot easier than if they were Republicans, but neither is at all comfortable with the idea of Communism or even Socialism.
Anyway, good luck with everything.

[ShyFox]

You know, the biggest problem I have is trying to make anyone consider anything farther than moderate socialism as workable. There are some people who are really stubborn on this one, one of my best friends included. I mean, I enjoy the sport in the verbal sparring, but it's hard to convince her that it can ever be anything other than a big failure. So I put on my cap and head off to social studies to continue this debate when the topic comes up. She isn't stupid, we're both in all the same AP classes, including social studies. Therein lies the problem: we're both equally good at arguing. She doesn't even have the guilt factor going for her that the Ukrainian girl whose grandfather actually had a run-in with Stalin at age 4 does and she can still get me to be quiet sometimes. Suggestions?
I guess I'm lucky on the home front at least: my mom is safely on the left-hand side and my dad is an unabashed socialist. :)

[( R )evolution]

Shyfox, you are new here. Dont worry, look through the arguments here and you will realize that you can complete own every1 and convert your friend. There is a lot of lies going around surrounding communism/socialism or any left movement for that matter. Look through the pages here and prepare yourself for your friends argument and when you prove her wrong on every point then she will begin to see your way. Socialism is completely workable, look at what state capitalist societies did to China and the USSR it completely transformed them from shit holes into world powers. Just imagine if this was truly socialism, not a shitty form of it then it would be over. Socialism is very workable. Just stay around, look through some old threads. I suggest you look at this site. It is great for beginners

http://www.worldsocialism.org/articles/what_is_socialism.php

Also, look at the principles of communism by Engels , I think it is in the learning section or look in the study groups/

[Hate Yer State]

"1) Communism is inhuman
What animal do you know that would not try to look after there pack or family?
2) Communism is anti-democratic
Democracy - "The Rule of the many"
Ask the world, would they rather help themselves and their family and feel a sense of worth or just be a clone and be provided with everything.
3) Communism is unsustainable
It's been tested for years and DOESN'T WORK!"

What would be the best way to respond to this if I'm leaning towards Libertarian/Anarcho Communism? Thanks.

[AfterABottleOfGin]

I think I know the situation of a lot of you...
I dont think that anyone, apart from me is a commi in my year, although there are some goodmeaning socialists...
If i look at my closest friends, i think there is one socialist, two cappies, even one close to fascist... always interesting discussions :D
The most heard one for me is "And the SU, that went wrong, not?"
When do they going to understand that Stalinism =/= communism/leftism (as i see it)???

[Janus]

Communism is inhuman
What animal do you know that would not try to look after there pack or family?
Communism isn't about turning out drones but about giving people the full fruit of their labor and preventing them from being exploited so that they can properly look out for their families, themselves, and their community.


Communism is anti-democratic
Communism is supposed to be ultra-democratic.


Ask the world, would they rather help themselves and their family and feel a sense of worth or just be a clone and be provided with everything.
That doesn't make sense. Obviously, in a capitalist society, it's in their best interests to look out solely for themselves as altruism simply isn't rewarded.


3) Communism is unsustainable
It's been tested for years and DOESN'T WORK!"
Because it wasn't communism. What we do know is that bureaucratic socialism in one country doesn't work.

[Rebelde]

i often get the "communism stifles peoples freedom". how should i reply to that?

[Janus]

i often get the "communism stifles peoples freedom". how should i reply to that?
Communism seeks to destroy the state, capitalism, and end socioeconomic inequality all of which of which are severe restraints on one's freedom. Thus, in essence, communism is based on the principle of maximum freedom simply because freedom can only be achieved through equality.

[MarcX]

Originally posted by [email protected] 03, 2004 02:21 am

I'm a Marxist in highschool (going into my junior year) and I've pretty much hit a snag.

I go to school with a LOT of rich kids, who naturally are always reading books on
business and how to get rich fast.

Problems, of course, come up all the time between myself (the only Marxist in school!) and the hordes of righties I confront sporadically in debates.

The usual lines I get?

-Anyone can get rich if they work hard enough!
-Do you think it's fair for a doctor to be paid the same as a janitor?
-We should have the freedom to get as rich as we want to.
-Communism is dead!
-If communism and socialism is so great, then why are all socialist countries living
in dire poverty?

You get the idea. I was thinking, instead of EVERY SINGLE TIME someone brought this
up in a debate, and me debunking it through a long explanation, that there should
be quick, 'snappy' answers to ignorant statements and questions like these.

My REQUEST, really, is that you perhaps give a go at writing some kind of 'guideline'
for us younger Marxists who have to deal with this kind of bullshit every day.

Just thought you might want to consider it.

-Snitz

Short answers to dumb questions:

Anyone can get rich if they work hard enough!

Sam Walton, founder of Wal-Mart, "worked hard" and "got rich". Then he died. His three kids are now worth over 12 billion dollars each!

How hard did they work, climbing out of their mama's birth canal and all?

The Walton family need never lift a finger again...their fortune will grow inevitably.

When her parents die, Bill and Melinda Gates' little girl is going to be one of the richest individuals on the planet...did she work really hard for that money?

There are now hundreds of members of the Rockefeller family...all of whom are wealthier than 99% of all Americans...did they work "really hard" for their inheritances?

Capitalism is a big casino; for every huge winner there are tens of millions of losers...and work (hard, easy, or non-existent) has very little to do with it.

Do you think it's fair for a doctor to be paid the same as a janitor?

Why not? If there were no janitors, housekeepers, sanitation workers, what would happen? You'd either have to do all that clean-up yourself or things would get filthy, germs would breed, you'd get sick and die.

As a matter of fact, death rates started to decline in the second half of the 19th century...when medicine was still mostly quackery. Why? Because major European cities started building sewer systems and people stopped living in their own shit.

Every person who makes a genuine contribution to society deserves a living wage...an income sufficient to live with dignity.

We should have the freedom to get as rich as we want to.

Where do you think riches come from? Do they fall out of the sky?

You cannot create wealth out of thin air. The wealth that society as a whole produces is finite...a dollar in your pocket means a dollar less in someone else's pocket. Behind every rich person stand hundreds or thousands or even millions of poor people...losers in the capitalist casino.

So you are in the same ethical position as the old Confederate slave-owner...who thought he should have the "freedom" to buy as many slaves as he wanted to.

Are you willing to fight, kill, and even give up your own life for that "freedom"?

Communism is dead!

So why are you talking to me? If communism were really dead, you wouldn't waste a second of your time talking to a total nutball.

What you're really saying is that you hope that communism will "stay dead".

We'll see.

If communism and socialism are so great, then why are all socialist countries living in dire poverty?

They were even worse off before they had socialism. Places like Russia and China were shitholes still living in the middle ages before their revolutions; socialism created their modern economies out of nothing.

There's really only one semi-socialist country left -- Cuba -- and if you want to compare it with some place, compare it to Jamaica or the Dominican Republic or even Costa Rica...places where many (most?) people still live like it was 1850!

It's true that capitalism has been restored in Russia and China -- which is where that "communism is dead" stuff comes from. But that didn't happen because people wanted it to...there were objective material conditions that caused that to happen.

It's a complicated question; but the short version is that communism can only come into existence after a capitalist economy has developed as far as it can. Thus the people in Russia, China, etc. never had communism even though the ruling parties called themselves "communists". What they really had in those places was something they called "socialism"...but which was actually a kind of capitalism without capitalists. Eventually, the party bosses donated their red flags and membership cards to a museum and became openly capitalist themselves.

In the real world, things are not always what they seem.

:redstar2000:

The Redstar2000 Papers (http://www.redstar2000papers.fightcapitalism.net)
A site about communist ideas
Actually bill gates is leavening less then 1 % of his money for his faimly giveing the rest to charity

[Sloth]

-If communism and socialism is so great, then why are all socialist countries living
in dire poverty?

I live in Canada a democractic socialist nation. we have national health care and free education (with the exception of college and university) and I CERTAINLY dont think that i'm living in poverty

[LordMortis]

Originally posted by [email protected] 03, 2007 06:30 am
Actually bill gates is leavening less then 1 % of his money for his faimly giveing the rest to charity
That's still several hundred million dollars for the family: enough to allow them to go throughout life without working a bit.

[The-Spark]

I get all too often " if communism is so great why arnt the people in communists countries aloud to leave?"

[The New Left]

Originally posted by [email protected] 06, 2007 08:43 pm

-If communism and socialism is so great, then why are all socialist countries living
in dire poverty?

I live in Canada a democractic socialist nation. we have national health care and free education (with the exception of college and university) and I CERTAINLY dont think that i'm living in poverty
Canada is not a democratic socialist nation, we are ruled by the conservative minority, the NDP are democratic socialists. But yes, we have socialist values like universal health care and Public schools. I think Canada would be an excellent socialist nation, but very gradually.

[The-Spark]

woops typo above me, i get questions like "if communism is so great why are people in communist countries not aloud to leave?"

[midnight marauder]

some of you might find this article useful as an introduction to anticapitalism that people can relate to. it's quick and easy and lays out a few easily accessible charges that are very easy to understand, and things that most people already know (which is a good thing -- people need to have their problems with capitalism reified and laid out in front of them in a way that explains why things are the way they are because of our economic base). here it is:

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

An Unsustainable System
Anti-Capitalism in Five Minutes

By ROBERT JENSEN

We know that capitalism is not just the most sensible way to organize an economy but is now the only possible way to organize an economy. We know that dissenters to this conventional wisdom can, and should, be ignored. There's no longer even any need to persecute such heretics; they are obviously irrelevant.

How do we know all this? Because we are told so, relentlessly -- typically by those who have the most to gain from such a claim, most notably those in the business world and their functionaries and apologists in the schools, universities, mass media, and mainstream politics. Capitalism is not a choice, but rather simply is, like a state of nature. Maybe not like a state of nature, but the state of nature. To contest capitalism these days is like arguing against the air that we breathe. Arguing against capitalism, we're told, is simply crazy.

We are told, over and over, that capitalism is not just the system we have, but the only system we can ever have. Yet for many, something nags at us about such a claim. Could this really be the only option? We're told we shouldn't even think about such things. But we can't help thinking -- is this really the "end of history," in the sense that big thinkers have used that phrase to signal the final victory of global capitalism? If this is the end of history in that sense, we wonder, can the actual end of the planet far behind?

We wonder, we fret, and these thoughts nag at us -- for good reason. Capitalism -- or, more accurately, the predatory corporate capitalism that defines and dominates our lives -- will be our death if we don't escape it. Crucial to progressive politics is finding the language to articulate that reality, not in outdated dogma that alienates but in plain language that resonates with people. We should be searching for ways to explain to co-workers in water-cooler conversations -- radical politics in five minutes or less -- why we must abandon predatory corporate capitalism. If we don't, we may well be facing the end times, and such an end will bring rupture not rapture.

Here's my shot at the language for this argument.

Capitalism is admittedly an incredibly productive system that has created a flood of goods unlike anything the world has ever seen. It also is a system that is fundamentally (1) inhuman, (2) anti-democratic, and (3) unsustainable. Capitalism has given those of us in the First World lots of stuff (most of it of marginal or questionable value) in exchange for our souls, our hope for progressive politics, and the possibility of a decent future for children.

In short, either we change or we die -- spiritually, politically, literally.


1. Capitalism is inhuman

There is a theory behind contemporary capitalism. We're told that because we are greedy, self-interested animals, an economic system must reward greedy, self-interested behavior if we are to thrive economically.

Are we greedy and self-interested? Of course. At least I am, sometimes. But we also just as obviously are capable of compassion and selflessness. We certainly can act competitively and aggressively, but we also have the capacity for solidarity and cooperation. In short, human nature is wide-ranging. Our actions are certainly rooted in our nature, but all we really know about that nature is that it is widely variable. In situations where compassion and solidarity are the norm, we tend to act that way. In situations where competitiveness and aggression are rewarded, most people tend toward such behavior.

Why is it that we must choose an economic system that undermines the most decent aspects of our nature and strengthens the most inhuman? Because, we're told, that's just the way people are. What evidence is there of that? Look around, we're told, at how people behave. Everywhere we look, we see greed and the pursuit of self-interest. So, the proof that these greedy, self-interested aspects of our nature are dominant is that, when forced into a system that rewards greed and self-interested behavior, people often act that way. Doesn't that seem just a bit circular?


2. Capitalism is anti-democratic

This one is easy. Capitalism is a wealth-concentrating system. If you concentrate wealth in a society, you concentrate power. Is there any historical example to the contrary?

For all the trappings of formal democracy in the contemporary United States, everyone understands that the wealthy dictates the basic outlines of the public policies that are acceptable to the vast majority of elected officials. People can and do resist, and an occasional politician joins the fight, but such resistance takes extraordinary effort. Those who resist win victories, some of them inspiring, but to date concentrated wealth continues to dominate. Is this any way to run a democracy?

If we understand democracy as a system that gives ordinary people a meaningful way to participate in the formation of public policy, rather than just a role in ratifying decisions made by the powerful, then it's clear that capitalism and democracy are mutually exclusive.

Let's make this concrete. In our system, we believe that regular elections with the one-person/one-vote rule, along with protections for freedom of speech and association, guarantee political equality. When I go to the polls, I have one vote. When Bill Gates goes the polls, he has one vote. Bill and I both can speak freely and associate with others for political purposes. Therefore, as equal citizens in our fine democracy, Bill and I have equal opportunities for political power. Right?


3. Capitalism is unsustainable

This one is even easier. Capitalism is a system based on the idea of unlimited growth. The last time I checked, this is a finite planet. There are only two ways out of this one. Perhaps we will be hopping to a new planet soon. Or perhaps, because we need to figure out ways to cope with these physical limits, we will invent ever-more complex technologies to transcend those limits.

Both those positions are equally delusional. Delusions may bring temporary comfort, but they don't solve problems. They tend, in fact, to cause more problems. Those problems seem to be piling up.

Capitalism is not, of course, the only unsustainable system that humans have devised, but it is the most obviously unsustainable system, and it's the one in which we are stuck. It's the one that we are told is inevitable and natural, like the air.


A tale of two acronyms: TGIF and TINA

Former British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher's famous response to a question about challenges to capitalism was TINA -- There Is No Alternative. If there is no alternative, anyone who questions capitalism is crazy.

Here's another, more common, acronym about life under a predatory corporate capitalism: TGIF -- Thank God It's Friday. It's a phrase that communicates a sad reality for many working in this economy -- the jobs we do are not rewarding, not enjoyable, and fundamentally not worth doing. We do them to survive. Then on Friday we go out and get drunk to forget about that reality, hoping we can find something during the weekend that makes it possible on Monday to, in the words of one songwriter, "get up and do it again."

Remember, an economic system doesn't just produce goods. It produces people as well. Our experience of work shapes us. Our experience of consuming those goods shapes us. Increasingly, we are a nation of unhappy people consuming miles of aisles of cheap consumer goods, hoping to dull the pain of unfulfilling work. Is this who we want to be?

We're told TINA in a TGIF world. Doesn't that seem a bit strange? Is there really no alternative to such a world? Of course there is. Anything that is the product of human choices can be chosen differently. We don't need to spell out a new system in all its specifics to realize there always are alternatives. We can encourage the existing institutions that provide a site of resistance (such as labor unions) while we experiment with new forms (such as local cooperatives). But the first step is calling out the system for what it is, without guarantees of what's to come.


Home and abroad

In the First World, we struggle with this alienation and fear. We often don't like the values of the world around us; we often don't like the people we've become; we often are afraid of what's to come of us. But in the First World, most of us eat regularly. That's not the case everywhere. Let's focus not only on the conditions we face within a predatory corporate capitalist system, living in the most affluent country in the history of the world, but also put this in a global context.

Half the world's population lives on less than $2 a day. That's more than 3 billion people. Just over half of the population of sub-Saharan Africa lives on less than $1 a day. That's more than 300 million people.

How about one more statistic: About 500 children in Africa die from poverty-related diseases, and the majority of those deaths could be averted with simple medicines or insecticide-treated nets. That's 500 children -- not every year, or every month or every week. That's not 500 children every day. Poverty-related diseases claim the lives of 500 children an hour in Africa.

When we try to hold onto our humanity, statistics like that can make us crazy. But don't get any crazy ideas about changing this system. Remember TINA: There is no alternative to predatory corporate capitalism.


TGILS: Thank God It's Last Sunday

We have been gathering on Last Sunday precisely to be crazy together. We've come together to give voice to things that we know and feel, even when the dominant culture tells us that to believe and feel such things is crazy. Maybe everyone here is a little crazy. So, let's make sure we're being realistic. It's important to be realistic.

One of the common responses I hear when I critique capitalism is, "Well, that may all be true, but we have to be realistic and do what's possible." By that logic, to be realistic is to accept a system that is inhuman, anti-democratic, and unsustainable. To be realistic we are told we must capitulate to a system that steals our souls, enslaves us to concentrated power, and will someday destroy the planet.

But rejecting and resisting a predatory corporate capitalism is not crazy. It is an eminently sane position. Holding onto our humanity is not crazy. Defending democracy is not crazy. And struggling for a sustainable future is not crazy.

What is truly crazy is falling for the con that an inhuman, anti-democratic, and unsustainable system -- one that leaves half the world's people in abject poverty -- is all that there is, all that there ever can be, all that there ever will be.

If that were true, then soon there will be nothing left, for anyone.

I do not believe it is realistic to accept such a fate. If that's being realistic, I'll take crazy any day of the week, every Sunday of the month.

[Axel1917]

Originally posted by LordMortis+July 07, 2007 07:36 pm--> (LordMortis @ July 07, 2007 07:36 pm)
[email protected] 03, 2007 06:30 am
Actually bill gates is leavening less then 1 % of his money for his faimly giveing the rest to charity
That's still several hundred million dollars for the family: enough to allow them to go throughout life without working a bit. [/b]
Plus the massive profits generated by Microsoft. It is just a cheap trick for him to brush up on his image.

I would recommend reading some basic Marx/Engels for starters. See:

http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/sw/index.htm

One thing you will learn when you absorb Marxism is that all of the people opposing it have never even bothered reading these works, i.e. they have no clue what they are talking about. All they do is attack strawmen that are put forth in the lie books from history classes.

Plus, if communism is so dead, why bother mentioning it? Why do they spend all kinds of money on official propaganda books in the schools to scare people away from it if it is really dead? The bourgeoisie clearly perceive it as a threat, and therefore invest a lot of money, probably billions of dollars, to defend their system of exploitation.

[acornsr4squirrels]

okay, okay, so here's the one argument i ran into that i seem to feel really awkward about.

"theoretically, even if people start out equal, they will inevitably form hierarchies and classes will form... history proves it so."

i always get the feeling of "where do i start?!" i tried to respond with "well, if i'm equal to you why the hell should i work for you" but that doesn't seem to work.

[RedStarOverChina]

The reason why people end up forming hierarchical societies is the emergence of the idea of property. Property is what divides people into classes...The idea itself is an human invention, of course.

When the idea of property is absent, people will just take what they need from nature/society...Under communism, when people could have whatever they need, hording goods brings no benefit what-so-ever and those who horde goods will look really ridiculous...Kinda like Mormons who stockpile a ton of supplies in their basement. (--RS2K)

So there will not be hierarchy or economic classes when property is abolished.


Just had a debate with a Christian regarding religion & politics. He was visibly shaken at the end. :P

[postmodern-jellybelly]

Originally posted by [email protected] 25, 2007 03:01 am
Just had a debate with a Christian regarding religion & politics. He was visibly shaken at the end. :P
Funny you say that.
There's nothing I hate more than getting in an argument with a Christian.
I mean, they think that nothing else is right but the Bible (which is rediculous) and when you talk logic, they just say "well, that's not what it says in the bible."

Then I get flustered and they feel like they've accomplished something, which flusters me more until I just cuss them out.

They've accomplished something, alright: I know know that they're mostly idiots...

[Fawkes]

woops typo above me, i get questions like "if communism is so great why are people in communist countries not aloud to leave?"
1. There are no communist countries currently in existence.

2. What countries are they referring to?

[The-Spark]

Originally posted by [email protected] 08, 2007 10:43 pm

woops typo above me, i get questions like "if communism is so great why are people in communist countries not aloud to leave?"
1. There are no communist countries currently in existence.

2. What countries are they referring to?
Fuckin cuba, i try to say their socialist and shit like that, but their always like i wouldnt want to live in a country like that cuz then i could never leave

[Fawkes]

Originally posted by The-Spark+August 08, 2007 05:50 pm--> (The-Spark @ August 08, 2007 05:50 pm)
[email protected] 08, 2007 10:43 pm

woops typo above me, i get questions like "if communism is so great why are people in communist countries not aloud to leave?"
1. There are no communist countries currently in existence.

2. What countries are they referring to?
Fuckin cuba, i try to say their socialist and shit like that, but their always like i wouldnt want to live in a country like that cuz then i could never leave [/b]
People are free to leave from Cuba. They are just not permitted to enter the U.S., and that's not because Cuba doesn't want their citizens to go to the U.S., it's because the U.S. won't let Cubans in.

[UncleCyril]

There's nothing I hate more than getting in an argument with a Christian.

Since I haven't been restricted yet, I'll recommend to you 'The God Delusion' by Richard Dawkins for a wealth of anti-religion arguments.

Ian

[RHIZOMES]

Originally posted by The-Spark+August 08, 2007 10:50 pm--> (The-Spark @ August 08, 2007 10:50 pm)
[email protected] 08, 2007 10:43 pm

woops typo above me, i get questions like "if communism is so great why are people in communist countries not aloud to leave?"
1. There are no communist countries currently in existence.

2. What countries are they referring to?
Fuckin cuba, i try to say their socialist and shit like that, but their always like i wouldnt want to live in a country like that cuz then i could never leave [/b]
You're thinking of *North Korea*, which in practice resembles more of a medieval fuedal monarchy then a socialist state.

When you say something bad about Cuba, Castro just kicks you out.

When you say something bad about North Korea, Kim Jong-il sends you to a re-education camp.

[RedAnarchist]

Originally posted by [email protected] 17, 2007 09:49 pm


There's nothing I hate more than getting in an argument with a Christian.

Since I haven't been restricted yet, I'll recommend to you 'The God Delusion' by Richard Dawkins for a wealth of anti-religion arguments.

Ian
Why would you be restricted?

[UncleCyril]

Why would you be restricted?

Because I'm not a revolutionary leftist. See my Inmate's Introduction post in Opposing Ideologies.

Ian

[Ligeia]

I've got a problem, what can I answer to those statements?
I think, they haven't been posted in this thread:

-State capitalism never existed and state capitalism is no version of a welfare state.

-if economic laws in a free market would be equally enforced everything would be ok.

-achivement fuels capitalism

- Low-skilled jobs are replaced by mechanics and machinery, as the intellect drives out the necessity for such wasteful positions. And in capitalism, the rich get that way by making others richer. Capitalism does not play zero-sum economics. Money is made. Riches are made. And everybody grows richer. The poorest man in America lives a better life than any king a thousand years ago. Many poor on the bottom? Only by comparison to the rich. By any absolute measurement, there are only the rich, and the richer.

-governments must be forbidden from interfering in economy because otheriwse they make a good target for powerful organizations.

-Socialism is all about human rights violations. There's nothing else to it. Socialism is the use of force to take the products of labour that the able have produced, and giving them in turn to the unable. That is the whole of socialism, that is its code, and there is nothing there except evil.

I hope anyone finds good replies to it. :mellow:

[zdeutsch]

Hallo
sieh mal , um besser deutsch zu lernen
http://www.zdeutsch.com

[Karl Marx's Camel]

Don't know if these arguments have been adressed in this thread:

One of those arguments I've gotten into about society and what needs to be done is that people say that anyone can get rich if they want to. If you work hard at school and get a good education you can become a lawyer earning approximately 600,000 a year. In Norway perhaps this could be true, considering education is up to high school is pretty much free and some is covered by scholarship by the state.

Also another argument is that a lot of rich people are self made and that they have stayed up all night working their asses of, so why shouldn't they have the money that they have earned?

So they pretty much also said that if you want to get rich you have to work hard.

Counter argument: Plenty of people work day in day out and struggle to get food on the table, they work hard and they will never be rich.

Countering the counter-argument: What made them get a job as, for example, a cleaner? They must have not cared about their education.

[Y Chwyldro Comiwnyddol Cymraeg]

Originally posted by Karl Marx's [email protected] 07, 2007 12:44 pm
Don't know if these arguments have been adressed in this thread:

One of those arguments I've gotten into about society and what needs to be done is that people say that anyone can get rich if they want to. If you work hard at school and get a good education you can become a lawyer earning approximately 600,000 a year. In Norway perhaps this could be true, considering education is up to high school is pretty much free and some is covered by scholarship by the state.

Also another argument is that a lot of rich people are self made and that they have stayed up all night working their asses of, so why shouldn't they have the money that they have earned?

So they pretty much also said that if you want to get rich you have to work hard.

Counter argument: Plenty of people work day in day out and struggle to get food on the table, they work hard and they will never be rich.

Countering the counter-argument: What made them get a job as, for example, a cleaner? They must have not cared about their education.
These people may not have been able to afford a university education etc. thus not get a degree to become a lawyer.

Their school may have been of a poor standad because its in a poor area and others (rich) recieve private education just because of chance of birth!

and on the rich being self made, point out how many jsut inherited their fortunes, or inherited enough capital to fund a new bussiness etc.

[Red_Hooligan]

bump

[Killer Enigma]

Originally posted by [email protected] 02, 2007 12:00 am
bump
Why would you bump a sticky thread?

[Marsella]

:mellow: :huh: :o :lol:

[RedAnarchist]

Originally posted by Killer Enigma+November 03, 2007 03:00 am--> (Killer Enigma @ November 03, 2007 03:00 am)
[email protected] 02, 2007 12:00 am
bump
Why would you bump a sticky thread? [/b]
Whilst it might stay at the top of the forum its in, if you do "view new posts" when you come to the forum, then you wont see it unless it had been posted in since your last visit.

[autrefois]

Originally posted by [email protected] 24, 2007 09:00 am
I've got a problem, what can I answer to those statements?
I think, they haven't been posted in this thread:

-State capitalism never existed and state capitalism is no version of a welfare state.

-if economic laws in a free market would be equally enforced everything would be ok.

-achivement fuels capitalism

- Low-skilled jobs are replaced by mechanics and machinery, as the intellect drives out the necessity for such wasteful positions. And in capitalism, the rich get that way by making others richer. Capitalism does not play zero-sum economics. Money is made. Riches are made. And everybody grows richer. The poorest man in America lives a better life than any king a thousand years ago. Many poor on the bottom? Only by comparison to the rich. By any absolute measurement, there are only the rich, and the richer.

-governments must be forbidden from interfering in economy because otheriwse they make a good target for powerful organizations.

-Socialism is all about human rights violations. There's nothing else to it. Socialism is the use of force to take the products of labour that the able have produced, and giving them in turn to the unable. That is the whole of socialism, that is its code, and there is nothing there except evil.

I hope anyone finds good replies to it. :mellow:
Lemme give it a shot



-State capitalism never existed and state capitalism is no version of a welfare state.

uhm... okay



-if economic laws in a free market would be equally enforced everything would be ok.
Isn't that an ideal of communism?


-achivement fuels capitalism
Only for a lucky percentage. To give an idea, only around 50% of the world has ever made or recieved a phone call.

I would say its better that the rich aren't rich than the poor are poor, basically, trading the comfort of many well off to the survival of many not so well off is a good bargain.


- Low-skilled jobs are replaced by mechanics and machinery, as the intellect drives out the necessity for such wasteful positions. And in capitalism, the rich get that way by making others richer. Capitalism does not play zero-sum economics. Money is made. Riches are made. And everybody grows richer. The poorest man in America lives a better life than any king a thousand years ago. Many poor on the bottom? Only by comparison to the rich. By any absolute measurement, there are only the rich, and the richer.



True, the poor may live nicely compared to the richest hundreds of years ago in America. Oh wait. IN AMERICA

Globalization simply takes the poor away from the United States into other countries. For the western world, it might be all fine and dandy, with welfare, and fried chicken at $4.00 for 8 pieces, but its not true for those producing the cheap items in China, India, Indonesia, etc. What do they get in return? A chance to buy the things the Westerners made, like Coca Cola, and watch Hollywood videos.


-governments must be forbidden from interfering in economy because otheriwse they make a good target for powerful organizations.

Yeah good point.

NEvertheless, it is ultimately the people changing the economy, not the government...


-Socialism is all about human rights violations. There's nothing else to it. Socialism is the use of force to take the products of labour that the able have produced, and giving them in turn to the unable. That is the whole of socialism, that is its code, and there is nothing there except evil.


Funny, I was gonna say the same about Capitalism. While the rich may cry foul, everyone else will be able to survive.

Im not gonna lie. Unlike lots of other people here, I know Communism is not perfect, and may not even be the best solution, or even a praticle solution. However, it shouldn't altogether be shunned, since most people dont even know what it is, and hate it.

(I remember my elementary and middle school teachers always seeming to dislike communism. Like my 6th grade teacher once saying, "Yeah, china is communist, but they are getting better". From then on, I always thought communism was a bad, without knowing what it is, till 10th grade AP Euro Civ.)

[Bear MacMillan]

I get stuff like

"Communism is perfect and therefore can never happen"
and
"The only people who want Communism to happen are Communist leaders"

[Faux Real]

I haven't debated for communism in a while, however one thing I'd like to throw out for you all to possibly refute is the basic: "if you want communism so much why don't you live in a communist country?" 'argument'. I'm sure this will come up plenty of times in the future for other comrades.

I know rebutting this has something to do with wanting to change the societal structure in your current place of residence. I just don't know how to word it properly and clearly.

"Communism is perfect and therefore can never happen"
As was said a few pages back, "Perfection is indeed probably out of reach, but why not improve upon society and replace capitalism with a more progressive form of economics just as capitalism itself replaced feudalism? History has to advance."

"The only people who want Communism to happen are Communist leaders"
"The people in these respective countries had no idea of Marxism, communism, or socialist thought because of the lack of inter-party or basic communication with which to properly arm themselves in assuring they could prevent the problem of a new ruling class from rising."

[Issaiah1332]

These are some of the comments I got from my history teacher, who is fairly intelligent, but, more importantly, is a master at using his arrogance to create an illusion of being correct.

"Okay, Issaiah. Let's say the revolution happens and the communist utopia works out. Who decides how much land you get? Who decides how big of a house you deserve? Who distributes everything? If everyone gets what they need, then everyone has only the bare essentials for life and not necessarily a higher quality of living. How do you acquire things? Does someone just come to your house and deliver 5 Lazy boys for your family? What if you want a different kind of chair? Whos place is it to decide how much food you "need" or deserve?"

"Okay Issaiah. Lets say that everything goes grand in this communist utopia and then 50 years later an intelligent teenager comes along, realizes that he can save his ration of rice, acquire a large portion and then trade it for something he finds more valuable. If he doesnt trade it then has more than others and is therefore higher in class...but if he does trade it then he has created capital."

I literally had no response to this.

[mykittyhasaboner]

high school isnt a great place for a leftist, day today conformity, senseless bullshit called "education", and the damn brainwashed dumb kids. some people ask stupid questions like that, some of those people deserve explainations, unless one of them seeks to really learn about leftest views, dont even dignify them with a response, let them be ignorant, and stupid, they dont deserve intelligence.

[Coggeh]

People are free to leave from Cuba. They are just not permitted to enter the U.S., and that's not because Cuba doesn't want their citizens to go to the U.S., it's because the U.S. won't let Cubans in.
Anyone in cuba able to get across to America is granted citizenship , imagine though if that were the same for any other latin american country , their nations would be ghostowns

[eraneo]

Political Elections - Questions, that haven't been asked!

Are our politicians actually qualified to do the job? Or are they getting away with behaving like witch doctors' practicing without really understanding in depth?
Your job demands that you have relevant qualifications. Would you be surprised to learn that most politicians have no qualifications in an area that they need them most?


Should Accountants, Lawyers or Business Tycoon's be making important decisions on;

How to tackle the social factors in world poverty
What can be done to help people take Climate Change seriously..
What priorities should be given to Education & Health Care..
Deciding when it's necessary to wedge war..

One of the most important changes that could take place in the 21st century, would be to see it been made a mandatory requirement, that politicians have to study human and social interactions. Therefore gaining the fundamental qualifications that are most relevant to their vocation, before standing in a major election; for example a qualification in the understanding of social conflict, or at least the study of one or more of the social sciences would be a step in the right direction. Its a shame that a doctor has to study for 7years before becoming qualified, if he makes a mistake killing someone in his carer, he's in big trouble!... Yet a politician who can mess up society, inflame racial hatred' start wars displacing hundreds of thousands of people, needs no qualification in the field of understanding people. He can even be elected upon charismatic ability alone. All too often with little accountability for the scale his mistakes...

What are the consequences? Inadequacies in our very ability to manage the 21st century world we live in! By now the world should be a much better place for everyone to live in. Sadly this is not the case.. Politicians are quick to affiliate themselves with religion, but slow to actually adopt it's universal moral & ethical practices. Is it any wonder they are often resented, lacking the trust & respect needed to be truly great leaders.


If you need the people on your side surely Trust & Respect & can be more powerful than Bombs or Bullets or a Mountain of Legislation...


---------------------------- Detailed Version if needed ! --------------------------------------------------------

For real changes to happen across the world, we need to change the very way our decision makers are selected....
Something that money can't do...

"A hidden flaw in modern Democracy"


Can you do something with this!
A very serious problem that only be addressed with Media exposure!!! We need someone in the media to take the gauntlet & expose what is a serious flaw. That is effecting the continued development of humanity it's self. Read on...


Are our politicians actually qualified to do the job? Or are they getting away with behaving like witch doctors' practicing without really understanding in depth?
Your job demands that you have relevant qualifications. Would you be surprised to learn that most politicians have no qualifications in an area that they need them most?


Should Accountants, Lawyers or Business Tycoon's be making important decisions on;

How to tackel the social factors in world poverty
What can be done to help people take Climate Change seriously..
What priorities should be given to Education & Health Care..
Deciding when it's necessary to wedge war..

In recent decades, Globalisation & Technology have moved "Hand in hand" at a very fast pace; while Politics & it's Ethical routes have drifted further & further apart. We have Politicians that are more Showmen' motivated be fame & power, rather than been the shepherds that the world needs!
What are the consequences? Inadequacies in our very ability to manage the 21st century world we live in! By now the world should be a much better place for everyone to live in. Sadly this is not the case.. Politicians are quick to affiliate themselves with religion, but slow to actually adopt it's universal moral & ethical practices. Is it any wonder they are often resented, lacking the trust & respect needed to be truly great leaders.
What can we do? Read bellow; Action needed sooner father than later..
SOCIAL EVOLUTION; One of the most important changes that could take place in the 21st century, would be to see it been made a mandatory requirement, that politicians have to study human and social interactions. Therefore gaining the fundamental qualifications that are most relevant to their vocation, before standing in a major election; for example a qualification in the understanding of social conflict, or at least the study of one or more of the social sciences would be a step in the right direction. Its a shame that a doctor has to study for 7years before becoming qualified, if he makes a mistake killing someone in his carer, he's in big trouble!... Yet a politician who can mess up society, inflame racial hatred' start wars displacing hundreds of thousands of people, needs no qualification in the field of understanding people. He can even be elected upon charismatic ability alone. All too often with little accountability for the scale his mistakes...

The early Social thinkers gave us the foundations for the positive benefits of democracy. But i'm sure they would turn in their graves if they knew about today's slow moving system, where change is restricted/limited due to a system that is self governed by unqualified politician's, where the valuable ideas of social thinkers are rarely even heard.
Beneficial input, that would socially advance the world we live in, seems to be currently in stalemate.. Just think about the changes that would be possible!!! "A democratic system that would have enough universal respect for other countries to believe in"
What a different world we could live in, if a politician with power could have the courage & strength to help break the mould, making social science an education requirement in his own profession & therefore starting the ball of progress rolling again for humanity...Changes to the very foundation of modern politics are needed' but these are unlikely to come from politicians themselves, due to their unwillingness to upset their colleagues. For this to happen would require intervention from a force more powerful, such as the media... but will anyone take the gauntlet??
Things don't have too be this way. To have efficient change our Politicians need to be smarter' & better qualified in understanding people. This is a key factor that is not given due attention, with today's Global Issue's!
Examples of studies that may help politicians, do a better job for all of us...
Sociology; the study of society and human social action. It generally concerns itself with the social rules and processes that bind and separate people not only as individuals, but as, groups and communities
Development studies; a multidisciplinary branch of social science which addresses issues of concern to developing countries. It has historically placed a particular focus on issues related to social and economic development, and its relevance may therefore extend to communities and regions outside of the developing world.
Development studies is offered as a specialised Master's degree in a number of universities, and, less commonly, as an undergraduate degree
Cultural anthropology; is one of four fields of anthropology (the holistic study of humanity) as it developed in the United States. It is the branch of anthropology that has developed and promoted "culture" as a meaningful scientific concept, studied cultural variation among humans, and examined the impact of global economic and political processes on local cultural realities
Deontological ethics; or deontology meaning 'obligation' or 'duty') is an approach to ethics that focuses on the rightness or wrongness of actions themselves, as opposed to the rightness or wrongness of the consequences of those actions.
Epistemology; theory of knowledge is a branch of philosophy concerned with the nature and scope of knowledge. Much of the debate in this field has focused on analyzing the nature of knowledge and how it relates to similar notions such as truth, belief, and justification. It also deals with the means of production of knowledge, as well as scepticism about different knowledge claims. In other words, epistemology primarily addresses the following questions: "What is knowledge?", "How is knowledge acquired?", and "What do people know?"
Political science; theory and practice of politics and the description and analysis of political systems and political behavior..

Examples of some of those who have made similar points before!!
Confucius
The Chinese philosopher Confucius(551-471 BCE) was one of the first thinkers to adopt a distinct approach to political philosophy. His philosophy was "rooted in his belief that a ruler should learn self-discipline, should govern his subjects by his own example , and should treat them with love and concern. His political beliefs were strongly linked to personal ethics and morality...

Plato
The Greek philosopher Plato(428-328 BC), in his book The Republic, argued that all conventional political systems (democracy, monarchy, oligarchy and timarchy) were inherently corrupt, and that the state ought to be governed by an elite class of educated philosopher-rulers, who would be trained from birth and selected on the basis of aptitude: "those who have the greatest skill in watching over the community..

Aristotle
In his book Politics, the Greek philosopher Aristotle(384–322BC) asserted that man is, by nature, a political animal. He argued that ethics and politics should be closely linked..

John Stuart Mill
In the 19th century, John Stuart Mill pioneered the liberal conception of politics. He saw democracy as the major political development of his era and, in his book On Liberty, advocated stronger protection for individual rights against government and the rule of the majority

Karl Marx
A man in my view often criticised for what he got wrong; & not praised enough for what he got right.. He expressed his staunch rejection of capitalism & was especially criticised for this, as in his day he couldn't see how it also might bring manageable benefits for all. None the less Karl Marx was among the most influential political philosophers of history . His theories, collectively termed Marxism were mostly associated with the Soviet Union for obvious reasons, However many but not all of Marx's ideas such as universal health care, open border and the free movement of people, and less economic inequality may also see in the European Union. Marx also proposed that over time, there would be no need for the state or borders, therefore individuals would be free to move from nation to nation without prosecution. This latter idea of internationalism is the direct opposition to the Nazi utopia of the pure race and national socialism.
Many subsequent political movements have based themselves on Marx's thought, offering widely differing interpretations of communism; these include Marxism-Leninism, Maoism, and libertarian Marxism. Possibly the most influential interpreter of Marxist theory was Lenin, founder of the Soviet Union, who created a revolutionary theory founded on Marxist thinking. However, libertarian Marxist thinkers have challenged Lenin's interpretation of Marx ; Cornelius Castoriadis, for instance, described the Soviet Union's system as a form of "bureaucratic capitalism" rather than true communism..




It's my own belief that democracy is the obviously the best system. But we should not exclude improving things by importing the clever ideas/political structures from other systems that have benefits to offer..
For example; a good idea from communism should not be excluded, especially not due to fear of the Label' or concept as some perceive it!
After all political systems like religious systems, have all evolved by borrowing from one an other throughout history . It's due to the negative sides of group dynamics, that Labels have been the excuse for much conflict & bloodshed...

If you need the people on your side. Trust & Respect & can be more powerful than Bombs or Bullets or a mountain of Legislation...
Things don't have too be this way. To have efficient change our Politicians need to be smarter' & better qualified in understanding people. This is a key factor that is not given due attention, with today's Global Issue's!
I hope my point is clear..
All idea's for improvement welcome!

Next time you get fedup with political showmanship; Watch this interesting alternative; 4 minute Video - (with sound!)
Search you tube for, War hide and seek
If someone has actually taken the time to read this please let me know...

[rcolocho]

this is really interesting facts, I honestly think an ignorant high school student will get it, even though they are just stuborn and believes capitalism is gods law...

[Coffee Mug]

Helpful and interesting thread.

[RedFlagComrade]

Ask them this
Which job would they rather have-a manager or a toilet cleaner.
If they say a manager then it follows that the cleaner should be paid more

Whos more important to society-an accountant or a binman-without the binman our cities would be filthy disease-ridden dumps.

[RedFlagComrade]

If they ask-why anyone would want to work really hard for years to become a doctor when they would only get paid the same amount as someone who does very little work like a binman?

-Point out the everyone isnt motivated by greed like them
-Cuba a communist country(the last true one in the world) where the doctors are paid almost the same as every other worker still has one the best healthcare services in the world-far better than the U.S.-and so many doctors that they are being sent to venezuela in exchange for much needed oil.
-Theres even a film about the massive amount of doctors in communist Cuba-'Salut' i think

[RedFlagComrade]

And if the smart ppl say they wouldnt want to work hard all their life go thru college etc. and end up working on the same wage as the stupider/lazy ppl?

-Tell them that the children of the stupider kids, whether they are clever or dumb, shouldnt have to live in poverty with their prospects denied them because of their parents mistakes-communism is about "equality of opportunity"-everybody gets the same chance when they start off in life.

[Cossack]

Heh, I'm only in Jr high and I'm a communist. I get picked on for it though but, in the end it's worth it. The only friends I have I can rely on. An intellectual friend of mine tries to debate me over communism and I still haven't lost really. Oh yeah, I'm a new member and this is my first post so get to know me well comrades!

[BIG BROTHER]

Heh, I'm only in Jr high and I'm a communist. I get picked on for it though but, in the end it's worth it. The only friends I have I can rely on. An intellectual friend of mine tries to debate me over communism and I still haven't lost really. Oh yeah, I'm a new member and this is my first post so get to know me well comrades!

They probably do that, because they might see you as a "geek" for having a strong political conviction. It's sad to see how the youth in the US(I assume your from the US) is so politically un aware.

[RedFlagComrade]

How would you reply to such stupid comments as illustrated here??People saying stupid things like that 'Its been proven that communism cant work in practise its all very well in theory' and the preconception that 'communism=murderous dictatorship' blahddy blahddy blah?


http://www.kenterprise.ca/images/communism.jpg

Or something along the lines of?

"Capitalism and communism stand at opposite poles. Their essential difference is this: The communist, seeing the rich man and his fine home, says: 'No man should have so much.' The capitalist, seeing the same thing, says: 'All men should have as much.' "
–Phelps Adams (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phelps_Adams)



Any ideas for snappy comebacks, anybody??
Any ideas??

[Kropotesta]

communism is about "equality of opportunity"-everybody gets the same chance when they start off in life.
it's actually equality of outcome. Liberals belief in the equality of opportunity- effectivly a meritocracy.

[quevivafidel]

I'm not sure if RedFlagComrade's question was directed to someone in particular or not, but I'll post anyway. :p

Mr. Adams is obviously extremely right-winged if he believes communism wants all people to live a life of poverty. Of course, communists don't want people to live poorly; they want workers, human, and civil rights for all people. In capitalism, some people will be extremely well-off and others will be miserably poor even though they may work much harder than the richer man does. I have heard idiots on TV like Glenn Beck say, "If rich people are taxed, then they don't have as much to give their workers." Uh, no, the rich person can go without their trips to Malibu or whatever they do with their money and use it to pay their workers better. It's a simplified answer, I know, but it was an idiotic statement.

I'm an American (well, Argentine-American) in high school, as well, by the way; God help us...

[BIG BROTHER]

How would you reply to such stupid comments as illustrated here??People saying stupid things like that its been proven that communism cant work in practise its all very well in theory blahddy blahddy blah?




Or something along the lines of?

"Capitalism and communism stand at opposite poles. Their essential difference is this: The communist, seeing the rich man and his fine home, says: 'No man should have so much.' The capitalist, seeing the same thing, says: 'All men should have as much.' "
–Phelps Adams (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phelps_Adams)



Any ideas??

I would answer what says on the shirt by quoting che guevara: "capitalism is the most respected genocide in the world" and plus millions of people are still dying due to the misery that capitalism has put them in.

and the admas thing. that guy doesn't know a thing about communism. The capitalist would actually want to have a bigger house and he wouldn't care if he crushed his fellow human beings in order to get it. The communist is the one who actually would say "al men should have as much"

[Cossack]

yeah i hate how everybody says we want people to live in poverty. We just want all people to have equal ( or for some communists close to equal ) wealth so that we can all enjoy life, if that means being poor, moderate, or rich so be it.

[RedFlagComrade]

it's actually equality of outcome. Liberals belief in the equality of opportunity- effectivly a meritocracy.

Im not a liberal but whats wrong with a meritocracy-you wouldnt want a guy who failed every exam he did to be doing brain surgery on you just cos he wanted to?Id just like him to be getting as much money as the surgeon and with him and his children living in as much prosperity as the surgeon so that they have as much hope in life as he did starting out-so long they're not stupid or lazy.

[durdenisgod]

comrade, it is the same for me.
and if you just ignore it or make them feel really ignorant and deafeted they will just leave you, and the more you make them feel like the morons they are they will usually leave you alone.
the thing is my books get taken, my notebooks get taken.
its a strange world for those of us that think.
as hunter s thompson said, "In a world of thieves, the only final sin is stupidity."

[Cossack]

They probably do that, because they might see you as a "geek" for having a strong political conviction. It's sad to see how the youth in the US(I assume your from the US) is so politically un aware.

Your not calling me politically unaware are you?

[Nietzsche's Ghost]

hey thanks a bunch for this, i live in a backwards hicktown and this is gonna help me a lot in my arguements with the people in my school and my world history teacher

[The Intransigent Faction]

This was very helpful in converting a Libertarian friend to one who realizes that a controlled market is necessary. The main issue which I've been facing lately is the claim that in Capitalism there is at least opportunity to make economic advances. This and the "equal opportunity" claim are very obviously shaky--the one claim that is getting on my nerves is another claim I've heard--that there are in fact opportunities for the poor you make economic advances but that correlations between poverty and drug abuse show that they somehow could advance but are more interested in using the money they do get as welfare to feed their addictions.

[BIG BROTHER]

This was very helpful in converting a Libertarian friend to one who realizes that a controlled market is necessary. The main issue which I've been facing lately is the claim that in Capitalism there is at least opportunity to make economic advances. This and the "equal opportunity" claim are very obviously shaky--the one claim that is getting on my nerves is another claim I've heard--that there are in fact opportunities for the poor you make economic advances but that correlations between poverty and drug abuse show that they somehow could advance but are more interested in using the money they do get as welfare to feed their addictions.

that would mean, that in countries like Mexico were I come from 50 million people are drug addicts.

[gla22]

How would you reply to such stupid comments as illustrated here??People saying stupid things like that 'Its been proven that communism cant work in practise its all very well in theory' and the preconception that 'communism=murderous dictatorship' blahddy blahddy blah?


http://www.kenterprise.ca/images/communism.jpg

Or something along the lines of?

"Capitalism and communism stand at opposite poles. Their essential difference is this: The communist, seeing the rich man and his fine home, says: 'No man should have so much.' The capitalist, seeing the same thing, says: 'All men should have as much.' "
–Phelps Adams (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phelps_Adams)



Any ideas for snappy comebacks, anybody??
Any ideas??

We need to figure out how many people have been killed by capitalism, in wars of imperialism, starvation, ect. I'm guessing close to a billion at least.

[Dros]

We need to figure out how many people have been killed by capitalism, in wars of imperialism, starvation, ect. I'm guessing close to a billion at least.

No legitimate historian (I'm talking about reactionary bourgeois historian) has managed to claim 100 million dead from Communism. In fact, several of the authors of "the Black Book of Communism" have distanced themselves from the other author who was making that claim and absolutely failing to substantiate it.

[Post-Something]

I was speaking to a friend yesterday. He is doing third year politics at Leeds university, and he calls himself a social democrat.

Yesterday I was making fun of him because of it, and it got into a pretty intense political debate. He couldn't hit me with anything, and he looked like he was actually about to give in and accept communism as being the rational next stage in human advancement. But then he said this, and it confused me a bit:

"I see what you mean, and I agree with everything you say. But I'm sorry, I just can't accept communism because every single lecturer I have had, every textbook I have read has said that there are obvious economic flaws."

He didn't specify anything, but I'm sure he meant stuff like Von Mises etc.

Is communism weaker than capitalism economically speaking? If not, why do even the intelligentsia gloss over it and focus on other things? It seems like he was taught about communism like it has been dead for ages and is not possibly applicable to our world. I've read barely any economics, so I was just wondering if communism is as solid economically as it is sociologically; and since I'll be going to university next year, I was hoping to prepare myself in case of any economics geeks who think otherwise.

Could somebody point out any of these "economic flaws", and show me if any solutions have been given to them? Because I've now heard more than once that Marxist economics are dated.

Thanks in advance!

[BIG BROTHER]

well one of the supposed flaws of communism is that is not good at producing consumer goods. But then again socialism has only been tried in backward countries where there wasn't any industry to begun with.

[gla22]

Here are some economic problems that show up in Marxism, many of the problems are less severe than the problems of capitalism though.
Incentive for Growth: There will not be alot of capital investment because returns can not be expected. Due to this a decline in innovation might be seen.
Lack of skilled workers: Skilled workers will leave the country in favor of high paying jobs oversees.

If there are no markets it will be difficult to judge how much to produce and supply-side problems will be rampant and will lead to shortages and black markets. Note: Not all socialists believe in the removal of markets.

In a decentralized system (anarchism) there is much criticism on how large projects would be completed along with organizational problems.

These problems however have solutions or can be alieveiated. I justs say the capitalism has failed. Economics is the study of dealing with scarcity, allocation of resources. I'd say capitalism has failed when single men are richer than countries and millions starve.

[Post-Something]

If there are no markets it will be difficult to judge how much to produce and supply-side problems will be rampant and will lead to shortages and black markets. Note: Not all socialists believe in the removal of markets.

How do you get round this? And how is it possible to have markets?


In a decentralized system (anarchism) there is much criticism on how large projects would be completed along with organizational problems.

Yeah, wouldn't you need some sort of body looking over it? I mean, really large scale things like CERN, or even things like a census would be far more difficult to do.

[BIG BROTHER]

well anarchist argue that they wouldn't have a goverment, but an organization of some sort in order to do large scale proyects.

[gla22]

How do you get round this? And how is it possible to have markets?

There would have to be other ways of judging demand, polls, surveys, ect. After a while patterns would appear and it would become easier. The internet would help too i assume. This however is only a problem in a centralized state run or mandated economy. Markets could still exist, production would be owned by workers but the cooperatives would compete against each other, however that system is less equal.



Yeah, wouldn't you need some sort of body looking over it? I mean, really large scale things like CERN, or even things like a census would be far more difficult to do.

Ill let the well read Anarchists respond to this one.

No system is completely perfect and it may be necessary to implement parts of other systems to achieve the goals of the people.

[Dros]

well anarchist argue that they wouldn't have a goverment, but an organization of some sort in order to do large scale proyects.

Oh I see. You mean... a government?

:lol::lol::lol:

[BIG BROTHER]

Oh I see. You mean... a government?

:lol::lol::lol:

Hey I'm not an anarchist, so ask them not me. I was just saying what they usually argue.

[High Voltage]

Well what about asking people if they have ever really experienced communism (living in a true socialist/communist country and not pseudo-communism) because if all someone knows is theory then they have not seen it in practice. It's like the struggle of book smarts v. street smarts (practical use). Personally, I think practical use is better because it can be used to determine the future through the past.

[BIG BROTHER]

at least one way to get back at people who see comunism as a totalitarian gov't that promotes famine and mass murders is to ask them if they are christian. If they are then tell them why they are that if the spanish inquisition killed a lot of inocent ppl, and is responsible for starting the cruzades and supporting right wing gov'ts.

[Post-Something]

Markets could still exist, production would be owned by workers but the cooperatives would compete against each other, however that system is less equal.


Wait, I'm guessing all of this is happening during socialism, the transition to communism? What happens in a communist society? how is it possible that "cooperatives would compete against each other"?


Also, yesterday I got into an argument about communism with some friends at a pub, and the waiter walked past and started saying how communism was a load of bullshit. So I stopped him, and I asked him to explain himself. He said that in a communist society, it all works out in theory, but in the end somebody will take power and turn it into a dictatorship. How do I argue against that? Also, the argument that socialism will not lead onto communism necessarily because of people holding onto power?

[CheGuevaraRage]

Well the waiter partially was right.Greed is underscored...greedy man will not be caring on his way to his riches....so what we actually need?I was thinking and the only reasonable thing to do is to have 5 people to run the state....5 people with sense of moral,honesty,sympathy and that they are non-corruptive.They should only be an icon of an state.A reprensetative.But in the end it all comes to the people...they should choose these 5 men and they should run the state...indirect.

P.S. in you dont get the point ,sorry, but my english is not that good.

[Post-Something]

Well the waiter partially was right.Greed is underscored...greedy man will not be caring on his way to his riches....so what we actually need?I was thinking and the only reasonable thing to do is to have 5 people to run the state....5 people with sense of moral,honesty,sympathy and that they are non-corruptive. They should only be an icon of an state.A reprensetative.But in the end it all comes to the people...they should choose these 5 men and they should run the state...indirect.

P.S. in you dont get the point ,sorry, but my english is not that good.


Can't you see how that could quite easily become a dictatorship?

Is there any other way apart from appointing 5 people who "represent" the people? (I was under the impression that we would get rid of representative democracy...)

[KaubanProcs]

I've hit a snag when trying to explain Communism to one of my oh so burgoise friends (No surprise there though).

When I state that it isn't fair for children to inherit fortunes just cause they were popped out their Mother, she'd reply with something like "They can do whatever they want with the cash they earned, and if they want to save it up for their children, they should be allowed to!"

I've been thinking about it and I really can't find a decent rebuttal.

[CheGuevaraRage]

Well what i was trying to say that when one man has power he get greedy and we then have shit.
But i was wrong when i say 5 people...
There should be one man representing the people,and if he or she gets greedy...we have only one solution comrades...The Revolution!!!

[CheGuevaraRage]

I've hit a snag when trying to explain Communism to one of my oh so burgoise friends (No surprise there though).

When I state that it isn't fair for children to inherit fortunes just cause they were popped out their Mother, she'd reply with something like "They can do whatever they want with the cash they earned, and if they want to save it up for their children, they should be allowed to!"

I've been thinking about it and I really can't find a decent rebuttal.

well you are right...but system should be : from each according to their abillity,to each according to their need.so what i am sayin that the rich daddy's boys should pay greather taxes..according to they ablillity (riches) and give more social help to ones who have greather need...until they are again capable to survive without help...

The smartest thing to say is that in Capitalism the rich represent the nation...
but the workers do not live,they survire and they are invisible...

[Dros]

I've hit a snag when trying to explain Communism to one of my oh so burgoise friends (No surprise there though).

When I state that it isn't fair for children to inherit fortunes just cause they were popped out their Mother, she'd reply with something like "They can do whatever they want with the cash they earned, and if they want to save it up for their children, they should be allowed to!"

I've been thinking about it and I really can't find a decent rebuttal.

"Fairness" has nothing to do with it. The point is that owning property necessarily leads to a society where the vast majority of people are brutally exploited. Those people will act in their own self interest and liberate themselves and humanity.

[High Voltage]

Wait, I'm guessing all of this is happening during socialism, the transition to communism? What happens in a communist society? how is it possible that "cooperatives would compete against each other"?


Also, yesterday I got into an argument about communism with some friends at a pub, and the waiter walked past and started saying how communism was a load of bullshit. So I stopped him, and I asked him to explain himself. He said that in a communist society, it all works out in theory, but in the end somebody will take power and turn it into a dictatorship. How do I argue against that? Also, the argument that socialism will not lead onto communism necessarily because of people holding onto power?

Well you could try arguing that there hasn't been a decent chance for communism to rise from socialism because Lenin didn't live long enough to stabalize Russia. That China has been corrupt since the Qin dynasty introduced fear into Chinese society (that still lasts). Cambodia and Laos were psuedo-Communist. Cuba has been under trade embargo to a potential buyer (the US). Therefore limiting the country's ability to advance itself. Any other possible Communist/Socialist transition state has been crushed by the CIA during the Cold War (Mossadeq, Armas, and Salvador Allende).

[Post-Something]

Well you could try arguing that there hasn't been a decent chance for communism to rise from socialism because Lenin didn't live long enough to stabalize Russia. That China has been corrupt since the Qin dynasty introduced fear into Chinese society (that still lasts). Cambodia and Laos were psuedo-Communist. Cuba has been under trade embargo to a potential buyer (the US). Therefore limiting the country's ability to advance itself. Any other possible Communist/Socialist transition state has been crushed by the CIA during the Cold War (Mossadeq, Armas, and Salvador Allende).

So how do we make sure history doesn't repeat itself? Hasn't there been an advance in theory where we can make sure the power stays in the hands of the proletariat and not some minority? Or is the idea that the state conditions the proletariat until they can live in a communist society? I must be missing something.

[CheGuevaraRage]

HighVoltage is right!True communist state never existed(long enough).

[High Voltage]

So how do we make sure history doesn't repeat itself? Hasn't there been an advance in theory where we can make sure the power stays in the hands of the proletariat and not some minority? Or is the idea that the state conditions the proletariat until they can live in a communist society? I must be missing something.

Good question I'll have to mull on it for a while until I come to a more solid answer but for now I'll tell you my current conclusion.

I think that Che Guevara and his new man is the right idea, but that evolution of the human mind will have to come through an uprising in disgust with human atrocities that everyone will have social equality from this disgust. With social equality the rest will follow because noone will think they are born better than someone else. Economic equality will evolve from the atrocity of poverty. So a communist society is only as strong as the people who are part of it.

I do think people have to become conditioned but I hesitate to say through some government means because then if the government has impure means and mis-informs to keep a psuedo-communist hold on the people. The way to stop history from repeating itself is to rise up to our civil duty during the transition state to make sure such facists that try to manipulate the people stay out of power and recognized as false hopes. Then through our civil duty can people become conditioned to a communist society.

[Dros]

HighVoltage is right!True communist state never existed(long enough).

There's no such thing as a "communist state" because Communism is necessarily a stateless society.

[CheGuevaraRage]

There's no such thing as a "communist state" because Communism is necessarily a stateless society.

Well i didnt mean to say state...maybe communist community or communist society...

[aussiestalinist]

Communism is dead!


There are 175 million communist party members around the world. Membership of the SLA has increased by 100% in just one year. Communist and Socialist parties are apart of government in 40 countries around the world. Is Communism dead? NO.

[RoterAnarchie]

There are 175 million communist party members around the world. Membership of the SLA has increased by 100% in just one year. Communist and Socialist parties are apart of government in 40 countries around the world. Is Communism dead? NO.

175 to 6000
I'm glad I'm not a communist... :ohmy:

[aussiestalinist]

There is really 175 million reds around the world. 70 million of them are in Red China.

[Panda Tse Tung]

the SLA grew with 100%, lol. Thats like from 1 to two members right?

[Bright Banana Beard]

the SLA grew with 100%, lol. Thats like from 1 to two members right?

yep :lol:

[Kropotesta]

There is really 175 million reds around the world. 70 million of them are in Red China.
That's ashame.

[aussiestalinist]

the SLA grew with 100%, lol. Thats like from 1 to two members right?


No, the Stalinist League has 8 members. It started off with three members five years ago.

[Post-Something]

How do I answer claims that Weber was more accurate than Marx in his predictions, and claims that in Britain the working class has reduced from 40% to 18% in 25 years?

Also, I've heard that there is dispute between Marxists as to what actually "constitutes as a class" because Marx never finished his chapter on that, so is the answer a definition of class, or what is it?

[Kropotesta]

How do I answer claims that Weber was more accurate than Marx in his predictions, and claims that in Britain the working class has reduced from 40% to 18% in 25 years?
Weber does come up with alot of good points.
Maybe you should ask them whether that 22% all own their own means of production or something now or are self-employed. What about the recent boom in the service industry?- waitresses, cleaners etc and why the wealth gap is the largest it has been in 40 years.

[Post-Something]

I know Marx predicted polarization, but he didn't predict the rise of the service industry as far as I'm aware. I thought that was Weber; when he said that a new class would swell in the middle. Also, didn't Marx say that as time went past, the petit bourgeoisie, who work for themselves would eventually be polarized into the two bigger classes as well? As opposed to getting bigger.

Also, do any of the Neo-Marxists say anything on this issue? I'd be interested to hear if Gramsci gave an explanation or something (or is he frowned upon on here?).

[Kropotesta]

I know Marx predicted polarization, but he didn't predict the rise of the service industry as far as I'm aware.
I was refering to when people say the working class is barel relevant anyone.

[Post-Something]

Ahh, so you're saying that these people fall into the class of the proletariat as well?

[Kropotesta]

Yeah, waitresses, cleaners and so on are members of the proletariat.

[Post-Something]

Ok, thanks, that sort of answers the second question too; "what constitutes as a class". I always thought that the Proletariat were defined by the fact that they are exploited and that they don't own the means of production; whereas the Bourgeoisie are the exploiters, and own the means of production. So to me, it always seemed like "how you earned your money", as opposed to how much of it you had that defined your class. Or have I got it all wrong?

[aussiestalinist]

Neo-Marxists


In the words of Pauline Hanson "please explain".

[Post-Something]

Neo-Marxism is characterized by mainly post WW2 Marxists who wanted to look at Marx in a different approach, or adapt his theories to other ones. It integrated a lot of different things like Weberianism, post modernism, psychoanalysis etc.

Antonio Gramsci is usually put forward as a neo Marxist, and one of his ideas was "cultural hegemony". I think it's an amazing theory, and it's one of the reasons I think the left should think up some way of attacking the ruling class better.

Anyway, a lot of people will probably label it revisionist or something, but I think there's a lot to it.

[Dimentio]

Neo-Marxism is characterized by mainly post WW2 Marxists who wanted to look at Marx in a different approach, or adapt his theories to other ones. It integrated a lot of different things like Weberianism, post modernism, psychoanalysis etc.

Antonio Gramsci is usually put forward as a neo Marxist, and one of his ideas was "cultural hegemony". I think it's an amazing theory, and it's one of the reasons I think the left should think up some way of attacking the ruling class better.

Anyway, a lot of people will probably label it revisionist or something, but I think there's a lot to it.

The academic left has actually done exactly that since the 1960;s. One problem I could see with that approach is that old bourgeoisie family values and conservatism never really was any support base for capitalism, rather a deterrent.

Capitalism is not in itself supportive of sexism, homophobia, racism and other non-economic discrimination. Its apologetes could theoretically support movements or institutions which are characterised by such tenets, but modern liberal capitalism is - while imperialist - yet not hostile to women, homosexuals or minorities in themselves.

[High Voltage]

Ok, thanks, that sort of answers the second question too; "what constitutes as a class". I always thought that the Proletariat were defined by the fact that they are exploited and that they don't own the means of production; whereas the Bourgeoisie are the exploiters, and own the means of production. So to me, it always seemed like "how you earned your money", as opposed to how much of it you had that defined your class. Or have I got it all wrong?

i read a thread on here once about a guy who thought he was bourgeoisie because of how much money he had. But there was no final conclusion that i read but it seemed that how he earned his money and whether or not he invested his money that made him bourgioese but he thought he was bourgiose because of how much money he had...

[Vlad tdf]

good job redstar !
My teacher told me that comunism is something imposible is an utopia and a world of lies :cursing: and comunism should never exist
Teachers(from my school)put capitalist shit in peoples head :cursing:

[BIG BROTHER]

good job redstar !
My teacher told me that comunism is something imposible is an utopia and a world of lies :cursing: and comunism should never exist
Teachers(from my school)put capitalist shit in peoples head :cursing:

If they didn't even bother to come up with a better excuse like that, they don't deserve your time. They are probably just frustrated that their life sucks and that's why they are so bitter.

[Lost In Translation]

I can so relate to that, redstar2000. My teachers ridicule me for being an idealist, and tell me to come back to the real world. My friends are understanding, but that's only because they're clueless (with the exception of a few). The seniors in my school threaten me constantly, and it's really difficult. The only solace I can find is that there are others like me, and that makes me feel better (somewhat).

[Post-Something]

What do you do to get threatened? Surely not just for being a communist?:(

[The Intransigent Faction]

I keep getting hit with this one:
"Okay, so countries like North Korea are not Communist. What's to stop some bad apples like Kim Jong Il from hijacking the revolution and taking wealth for themselves by forming a bureaucratic State?"
Somewhat akin to Orwell's claim from Nineteen Eighty-Four that the "Proles" will be stirred to rebellion by a middle class which will enlist the workers to overthrow thw bourgeoisie and then take power for themselves, leaving the Workers as slaves to a bureaucratic State.
I suppose that if Capitalism continues with the current trend of distribution of wealth, there will be no such middle class. Other than that I'm not sure where to go from here.

[Lost In Translation]

What do you do to get threatened? Surely not just for being a communist?:(

Actually, i get threatened EXACTLY because I'm a communist. They believe that I'm a fan of genocide (Mao) and violence in general. Some believe I'm an anti-Christ (which I'm not, even though I'm Atheist). However, the problem generally stems from the parents, who almost all came from China, and experienced the harsh regimes of Mao.

Not easy being a communist in a heavily capitalist area, but I would say I am better off than the comrades living in America.

[gla22]

I can so relate to that, redstar2000. My teachers ridicule me for being an idealist, and tell me to come back to the real world. My friends are understanding, but that's only because they're clueless (with the exception of a few). The seniors in my school threaten me constantly, and it's really difficult. The only solace I can find is that there are others like me, and that makes me feel better (somewhat).

I only know one other socialist in person. Most people respect my views though.

[Lost In Translation]

I only know one other socialist in person. Most people respect my views though.

That's nice ;). However, I think that all these classmates who do not seem to like socialism, or anything on the left side of politics is because they're afraid...

[Post-Something]

Actually, i get threatened EXACTLY because I'm a communist. They believe that I'm a fan of genocide (Mao) and violence in general. Some believe I'm an anti-Christ (which I'm not, even though I'm Atheist). However, the problem generally stems from the parents, who almost all came from China, and experienced the harsh regimes of Mao.

Not easy being a communist in a heavily capitalist area, but I would say I am better off than the comrades living in America.

Threatened? That's crazy, I just get ridiculed or laughed at, but physically threatened is just disgusting.

[professorchaos]

It's hard to be a communist when you know people who came from harsh conditions in China, Cuba, and the USSR, because you can't reason with them; it's an emotional thing.

[Saorsa]

As a 16 year old high school communist, the best advice I can give to people like me is join a real life communist party. I did when I was 15, and it's the best decision I ever made. For one thing, it means that you can link theory with practice. If you believe in something but don't actually DO something about it, you might as well not believe in it at all.

And secondly, it's just a huge confidence booster. You'll be able to train yourself up, and you'll have the inherent boost in confidence that comes from knowing that ever wednesday you'll meet up with 7 or 8 fellow communists, and every now and again you'll head off to a demo with them or something.

What country (and city, if you're comfortable with posting that) do you live in gla-22? There's bound to be a socialist group active near you.

[BIG BROTHER]

As a 16 year old high school communist, the best advice I can give to people like me is join a real life communist party. I did when I was 15, and it's the best decision I ever made. For one thing, it means that you can link theory with practice. If you believe in something but don't actually DO something about it, you might as well not believe in it at all.


Yep best dammed advice in this whole thread.

Too bad I'm still working on it:blushing:

[gla22]

^^^^
I'm in Sacramento california. It seems pretty dead.

[Segadoway]

I had this debate it was kinda fun hearted though sadly i was really unprepared :P

tell me what you think of my performance


just then i lost all respect for you, how can you participate in anything to do with those capitalist arseholed u$f?

[Post-Something]

just then i lost all respect for you, how can you participate in anything to do with those capitalist arseholed u$f?

...You're quoting something from like, 2004.

[LOUDNOISE]

Well, I'm not sure I can help you debate those rich kids on ALL of those arguments but lemme see what I can do. Now to start off, I'm in pretty much the same situation as you, but I'm only in 8th grade. Now I don't think people should be able to get rich. It's the rich people who think they control the world that make everything worse. If there was no such thing as money and people just got by from being provided for by the government, there wouldn't be any the greed. Now onto the infamous Doctor/Janitor argument. THEY SHOULD MAKE THE SAME WAGES. If the janitor works 20 hours a day in a huge office building he should make the same as a surgeon doing one kidney transplant every 2 months. The janitor is doing as much if not more work.

[Dicktator]

Great thread, some excelent advice. I'm really glad to hear from so many people in high schools and even grammar school.

I remember a long time ago when I was in high school and I was the only Marxist thinker. To talk about politics with any of my classmates was always a gamble: would they be automatically hostile and anti-communist? Would they simply look at me like I was from Mars because they had no clue what I was talking about? Or, would the interested ones recite all of those psuedo-arguements against socialism listed in the OP?

I never knew, and I often felt isolated and shut out socially. It sucked.

But, once I hooked up with activists groups who I'd meet and talk to at mass demostrations, and began hanging out in circles of like-minded people, my life changed for the better immediately. As others in this thread have mentioned, the knowledge and experiences you can get by hanging out and working with other leftists males it easier to deal with the day-to-day high school experience where most students are not questioning the system yet, and many never will.

I suggest joining an activist group who are working on some issue that you find important. Those people will be political on a much higher level than random people at school. I'd also attend public forums or book readings sponsored by leftist political organizations. They will probably try to recruit you but that's what groups do, so nothing strange there. Just don't make a big commitment too hastily. First, check them out---thoroughly. Read all of their literature, see how they conduct themselves in public, find out what other leftist orgs say of them. Then, you will be in a much better position to make a sound decision about joining them. All groups who call themselves Marxist or communist or whatever will have big differences among them. Some absolutely suck and you wouldn't want to waste your time with them. Of course, it's all up to you to decide.

Bottom line is: get active in the real world with real people who think like you do already.

[RHIZOMES]

That's what i've done Dicktator. :) I find myself much more knowledgable than when I started getting into Marxism and communism because of getting involved in activist groups.

Although I just joined Workers Party without much research and consideration since it seemed to be the only one trying to build a movement rather than being another tiny left-wing sect. Luckily I was right. :lol:

[NewWaveCommie]

Oh man, I wish I would of found this place a few months ago! I just graduated back in june.
In my Senior Government class, i sat across, face to face, with the most conservative, 18 yr old female I have ever met (McCain is not a true republican in her eyes :confused: ). We always got into it in class, in front of everyone, and I just couldn't support myself against EVERYONE. Plus she always brought in the irrelevant fact that I'm athiest and at that point no one listened to me.

[Red_Dialectics]

I'm not sure if anyone has done this yet, but I just spent the last few hours putting together the question/responses from the first 7 pages into a PDF file. 17 pages (with index), easily printable and readable as a booklet. It's too big to attach, but if anyone wants the file, or the editable word document, send me a message (or post how I can distribute it here)

[Hackjob Jonny]

I'm not sure if anyone has done this yet, but I just spent the last few hours putting together the question/responses from the first 7 pages into a PDF file. 17 pages (with index), easily printable and readable as a booklet. It's too big to attach, but if anyone wants the file, or the editable word document, send me a message (or post how I can distribute it here)

I'd love to have that PDF.

[Valeofruin]

Did I fall into a coma and miss something? Since when did socialism start supporting the concept of equal wages?

[Gleb]

In my personal opinion, concept of equal wages is rather silly in socialism. "To each according to his contribution" is better slogan for the socialist phase of society, as people still have to be rewarded for harder work to actually make them work harder. From same amount of labour, same kind of wage; a society where mason earns more than a Paris Hilton!

Personally, I don't find it to be a major problem when Joe the Janitor is making clearly smaller amount of money than Daniel the Doctor. It's a simple fact that job of a doctor is more demanding and important, needs a decent education and has lots of responsibility. Work hours can be really awful. In case like this, I don't see anything wrong in the fact that Daniel earns more than Joe; the problem of the capitalist society is the fact that ruling class is not made up of people who get millions of billions of dollars by going to work every day, doing their job and getting their wage: no, they earn their millions or billions of dollars by making other people go to work every day, do their job for them and get their rather small wage when compared to salaries of the businessman running this all. Some of them may work very hard, some of them just made lots of money from their mammies and daddies and don't have to work for a single day during their life.

THAT's what wrong with our world, not the fact that wage workers, people doing their jobs and earning their livings with work of their own hands, with different contribution to society are gaining different kind of benefits. Nothing major, no one will be living like some motherfucking god of Life, Universe and Everything, nothing that would clearly leave certain social groups behind other social groups in terms of income, but something concrete nonetheless. Incentives, incentives, precious incentives!

[Dóchas]

i got into a big and almost heated debate in school about communism and i nailed every one of their questions but the only one i couldnt answer was 'if someone works more hours than someone else why should they get paid the same?' now i heard that they would get paid in proportion to the amount of work they did (i dont know if this is true) but could anyone give me a quick snappy answer to throw back in their faces when they ask it again?

[Y Chwyldro Comiwnyddol Cymraeg]

People would'nt have to work such long hours in a classless society.

[Dóchas]

People would'nt have to work such long hours in a classless society.

why?

[Valeofruin]

why?

Why would they need to?

[Dóchas]

Why would they need to?

so to futher their countrys economy

[Bronsky]

i get 'Stalin was a communist' most times.

Always argue that Stalin has to be the number one hated person of the Left.
:blushing:

[Bronsky]

People would'nt have to work such long hours in a classless society.


why?

The surplus value (profit) would be placed back into production enabling society to either produce more, retool, shorten the working day, or part of all three.

[Bronsky]

Did I fall into a coma and miss something? Since when did socialism start supporting the concept of equal wages?


But wouldn't your theory produce divisions in society, those with more money than others, and what would that extra money be spent on?

[dmcauliffe09]

Haha! I'm a senior and I get the same b.s. Usually I have facts to back up my arguments but when you confront people with fact their arguments get even more ignorant because they don't know what to say back.

[Bronsky]

russian communism didnt work beacuse they were at war and got fuked up and after the war amreica fuked them over with their fukin cia bullshit


A lot more to it than that, the CIA were not around in 1917 but the counter revolutionists of the Whites Army was backed by the Western Powers. The new born workers states Red Army fought and defeated 14 Interventionist armies from Europe and the USA on a war front spanning thousands of miles.

The best elements from the revolutionary workers went to the front and many died there. This weakened the socialist element within the workers and after a famine and a blockade by Britain, understandably the resolve of the people began to slip.

Due to the lack of Bolsheviks or advanced workers many of the old regime were given jobs in the government and after Lenin’s death they began to influence the likes of Stalin

He became the centre of a group of old Bolsheviks who thought the international working class were finished and could not help the Soviets. They held to the believe the best the workers state could hope for was to save their own revolution at all costs.

[Dóchas]

The surplus value (profit) would be placed back into production enabling society to either produce more, retool, shorten the working day, or part of all three.

ok thanks alot clearer now

[JorgeLobo]

You are incorrect. the powers were interested in WWI not in the soviet bunch as such and all withdrew of their own volition when it was no longer relevant to the war. The soviets were poor soldiers and compelled no withdrawals.

[Bronsky]

You are incorrect. the powers were interested in WWI not in the soviet bunch as such and all withdrew of their own volition when it was no longer relevant to the war. The soviets were poor soldiers and compelled no withdrawals.


Why would 14 nations invade Russia to keep the war going? Even given that they were successful how would they expect this strategy to be achieved, by forcing the Russian army to fight on against the Germans? Hadn’t they overthrown the Tsar and the Kerensky government so as not to fight the war.


Wasn't it Winston Churchill who demanded "this child must be strangled in its crib" or words to that effect. You belittle the work done by Trotsky in organising the Red Army from as Lenin said “out of nothing” His use of the old imperialist military officers as specialists was a master stroke It would be a good idea if you would read any of his works on the Civil War, they are not a bang bang history, they outline the Marxist principles that enabled the Red Army to be brought together and by being victorious save the revolution.. Do you know over a millions Red Army soldiers died during the civil war and wars of intervention.

In 1919 The British occupied Murmansk. The British and the United States occupied Arkhangel and the Japenese, occupied Vladivostok. Did these imperial powers just decide to give up, hand back these important conquests to the Bolsheviks who had finished capitalism in Russia for good and whose leader Lenin was talking openly about the World Socialist Order on the very day that took place.?

[AlfonsAberg]

What is our goal? Take over Europe and make it to an place were everyone on this planet can live in. All is allowed. I am new in left side of the force. So beffor I shall deside if i shall go left or right. I need to know if the left side whants to bow for muslims and there religion. To me they are the real facists. Taking over and anexing lands that isent theres.

I whode be glad if i could get some guidence in this matters.

[pilch]

communism pretty much rules out all religion because then you end up with the idea about a more powerfull god or what ever so and thats inequality

[Labor Shall Rule]

What is our goal? Take over Europe and make it to an place were everyone on this planet can live in. All is allowed. I am new in left side of the force. So beffor I shall deside if i shall go left or right. I need to know if the left side whants to bow for muslims and there religion. To me they are the real facists. Taking over and anexing lands that isent theres.

I whode be glad if i could get some guidence in this matters.

Well, if you believe they are the 'real fascists', then you have a distorted view of the Islamic faith, and of fascism in general.

The anti-Muslim racism is a special idea used by the ruling class to show to everyone that immigrants of color are less than human simply because of their faith. It discourages discussion on human need and justice for all, and shifts everyone to focusing on how Arabs are a 'threat' since they are most likely 'terrorists'. The 'real fascists' (BNP in Britain, for example) have called for deporting all Muslims from the British isles.

[redwinter]

As Bob Avakian has remarked on this question of the contention between US imperialism and Islamic fundamentalism:



"What we see in contention here with Jihad on the one hand and McWorld/McCrusade on the other hand, are historically outmoded strata among colonized and oppressed humanity up against historically outmoded ruling strata of the imperialist system. These two reactionary poles reinforce each other, even while opposing each other. If you side with either of these ‘outmodeds,’ you end up strengthening both."

Bob Avakian,
Chairman of the RCP,USA
From the talk, “Why We’re in the Situation We’re in Today… And What to Do About It: A Thoroughly Rotten System and the Need for Revolution” (http://rwor.org/avakian/Avakian-audio.html)



Now more than ever, we need to raise the alternative of communist revolution to the choices presenting themselves in the world right now.

[ev]

I'm in year 12 (last year of schooling next year I would like to go to university) and had an assignment to do on utopias and Dystopia's I could choose to do one or the other, i chose to do utopias. What each student had to to was put forth their version of a utopia and explain how it would help society etc. (it is a speech)

I decided to do communism and how it is the closest thing to a utopia (you didn't have to pick what you wanted to do from a list or anything, you just had to think of what could make society a utopia, various students focused on different issues such as welfare, immigration, you were free to do whatever you wanted as long as it was your version of a Utopian society.) So I chose to do communism and how it could develop within today's society, It was due the next day btw, the next day i handed a script in to my English teacher, i need to present it on Thursday.

He read it and said that it was propaganda and theory and that i couldn't be applied to today's society in Australia and that we don't have economic problems along with a lot of other bullshit. Then he ridiculed me for being an idealist and not having mainstream political views and that because his political views conformed with the normality (majority, capitalist advocate) that his was superior, this in his mind gave him the right to speak to me in a condescending tone. He said that i should have put this by him and he said that he did political science in university so he knew what he was talking about along with the 'it's all just theory you can't apply it today in australia' etc. etc. with other crude statements. I was offended that he as a teacher didn't nuture any type of 'out-of-the-box' thinking, he actually treated me like i had some sort of neo-nazi or pro-racist views, somewhat like i was a lesser person for advocating communism.

Anyway, I know everything I wrote was sound, all i did was re-iterate Marx's works in a way that could be understood by my peers & i outlined how communism would be a Utopian society in comparison to today's capitalist one, talked about imperialism, globalization and other products of capitalism. But now I'm worried that I'm going to fail for advocating a view other than the mainstream and that teachers who have no understanding of communism (other than what they have heard from the mainstream media e.g. CNN, FoxNews, ABC News) will fail me, my speech matches all the criteria that would make me eligable for an A (mark point). I made sure of this.

I need to present my speech on Thursday and the teacher said he would ask questions so I need to find a lot of replies because as he said he would ask things like: How could this be applied in Australia in the immediate future? etc. (I'm sure he will add in trivial statements and speak with me in the same condescending manner again, It will be recorded by camera btw & it is accompanied by a power-point presentation)

If i fail (which will fuck me up, I won't be able to get into university next year and I will have to re-do the English equivalent subject at tafe. (I'm prety about this)) it will only further my convictions. I also hope I don't get ridiculed by my peers, I don't think I will because most are decent people but some may ask stupid questions too.

I think maybe we should have a "High School Communist Rebuttal Book" PDF or something like that, heh.. It would come handy in situations like this.

[Vendetta]

Taking over and anexing lands that isent theres.

Who's land are they annexing?

[atheist_anarchist]

this just makes me think of my uncle, "If you get 100% on a test and your friend gets a 50% do you want to give up 25% so that you can both pass?" and i said "Yeah, why would i want my friend to fail? besides my average in classes is at like 70%"

[DreamWeaver]

About the undesirable jobs and education bit; I go to a school that is based on anarchism, we don't have a principal and we don't have janitors for example. Descisions are made by a student council wich everyone is part of, and even the hiring of teachers is done by students combined with staff. There is no such thing as punishment, simply because there are no rules. If you are late or don't show up, fine, we don't care, it's you who needs a diploma, not the teachers. Aside from normal lessons we have projects every week that involve acquiring skills like welding and cooking, but also social things like animal rights projects and art courses. Because there are no janitors, everyone helps to clean school every day and on fridays we have a communal lunch after everyone helps clean the school properly. If someone does something totally out of line, like stealing for example, a student body is formed to decide what should happen. Classes are small enough to give proper attention to every student (3 to 6 students per class mostly) and it's all a big loving hippie community. We harbor a lot of activists and are thus on a few lists of government agencies, but we don't care. I think every school should be like this (even though it only works for a certain type of child- much like the schoolsystems that are in effect right now). It would provide the world with a much less individualistic attitude and would make the next generation great revolutionairies. If I ever squad a farm somewhere I'm starting a fucking commune :D


Edit; and to you Ivan, don't give in, it will make your teacher think he is right. Instead, make sure you are prepared, and don't use too many words that will turn away the mainstream. Use everyday words, and make it easy to digest. Think about what he might ask and be confident. Also, talk of revolution scares peolpe, try some newspeak and use their cappie wordplay against them :) Good luck my comrade!:D

[Shadowed Intent]

I have a few questions, I am new here by the way. first, I have a fairly elitist attitude (I will be the first to admit it), and you say that people should be equals, and I can put up with stupid people, so long as they do not bother me, but it is the stupid people who discriminate and taunt anything different from them that I feel truly superior to, and I ask, why are they equally deserving as people who are intelligent enough not to discriminate?
My second question is, in a Communist Society, would artists be able to make a decent living?

[iloveche]

<----- my name

[NerdVincent]

why are they equally deserving as people who are intelligent enough not to discriminate?
Communism is rewarding work, not any kind of superiority. Why would we give extra money to people who had been blessed with intelligence? Isn't it enough to be more intelligent in the begining?


My second question is, in a Communist Society, would artists be able to make a decent living?
Picasso was communist. I'm not sure that under a communist society, we could make a living out of art. Art would be a kind of after-work hobby more than a job.
What does that mean? That only artists with a real passion will continue to do art. It will be the end of Britney Spears monopolizing the artistic scene, the end of the music industry killing art.

By the way, I'm a semi-pro free jazz guitarist.

[FlamingChainsaws]

Communism is rewarding work, not any kind of superiority. Why would we give extra money to people who had been blessed with intelligence? Isn't it enough to be more intelligent in the begining?

Picasso was communist. I'm not sure that under a communist society, we could make a living out of art. Art would be a kind of after-work hobby more than a job.
What does that mean? That only artists with a real passion will continue to do art. It will be the end of Britney Spears monopolizing the artistic scene, the end of the music industry killing art.

By the way, I'm a semi-pro free jazz guitarist.
If I led "the revolution", I would ration my band's music. :cool: Just a bit of a joke...but in all semi-seriousness, the thought of no more corporate pop makes me feel sexy.

[NerdVincent]

the thought of no more corporate pop makes me feel sexy.
Oh you too?:P

[PostAnarchy]

Sigh, if only there were a real high school commie club in the school I went to :(

[DreamWeaver]

My high school IS a commie club. How about we switch sides PostAnarchy? I'm craving for mis-informed kids to debate with.

[wigsa]

If i fail (which will fuck me up, I won't be able to get into university next year and I will have to re-do the English equivalent subject at tafe. (I'm prety about this)) it will only further my convictions. I also hope I don't get ridiculed by my peers, I don't think I will because most are decent people but some may ask stupid questions too.

I think maybe we should have a "High School Communist Rebuttal Book" PDF or something like that, heh.. It would come handy in situations like this.


Do you not sit the state exams of Australia,the HSC isn't it?How could a class assignment which involves a presentation to the class and questions from the teacher go towards your final English grade and stop you getting into university?

Sounds like you're bullshitting to me??

[bawbag]

I haven't had time to look at many replies so i don't know if this has been said but I get questions very similar to:

"Do you think it's fair for a doctor to be paid the same as a janitor?"

and my response isn't bases on communism but rather humanity, I was talking to my physics teacher about this (bout time we did something in physics that interested me) and she said that no one would put in 7years + to become a doctor when they get paid the same as a janitor, and i replied that doesn't come down to communism, but rather people, in an ideal world people wouldn't become doctors for the large salary but instead they would want to help other people, both jobs must be done, so people would put in the 7+ years training to become a doctor because they want to help people that are sick and make the world better, because in my opinion people shouldn't be driven by money or materials but instead by morals (I think Che Guevara had that idea?) and that is why they would want to become doctors, (im obviously not the best at explaining my ideas thats why I can't win arguements, although that was the last thing said in the conversation, trust me they sound good in my head). I just think people would want these jobs because they are good people and they want to make a difference, not for money.

Typical capitalist overpaid teacher puting a price tag on everything


just want to get your ideas on this, I'm not the smartest guy so this is probably the most developed opinion I have, so if you agree disagree or have anything to add please do

and if anyone has any techniques i can use to get my opinions into words as they sound alot smarter in my head but i just cant get them across the way i want them to when i give them voice thank you

[Dóchas]

Funnily enough i was just talikng about this today and that is the same thing i say to people. a realitive of mine is a high ranking doctor and for the amount of time and effort they put into their job they get paid shit so they musnt be in it for the money, so they obviuolsy do it to help their fellow human beings. and another example iv heard is that what would happen if their were no janotors? rubbish/shit will pile up and disease be everywhere so society needs doctors and janitors alike to prevent sickness and if somone does get sick to cure them. i dont know how your friends will react to that but its worth a try.

[Invincible Summer]

I highly doubt you'll FAIL - you seem like a very literate person who probably does reasonably well in school. You may not do well on the assignment, but unless it's worth more than 50% of your mark (which is highly unlikely) then I think you're just exaggerating.

[ev]

Do you not sit the state exams of Australia,the HSC isn't it?How could a class assignment which involves a presentation to the class and questions from the teacher go towards your final English grade and stop you getting into university?

Sounds like you're bullshitting to me??

Thats how fucked up the education system is, the HSC does contribute to ones OP but to get an OP you have to pass year 12 English and to pass that you need to pass 2 oral assignments and 2 written ones as well as other shit, anyway the point is, i failed my first one because it was regarding david hicks and his incarceration. I didn't really try to do the assignment because i saw it as stupid. Anyway that was ages ago, like 2 months. Oh and to get into UNI you need an OP or a rank with distinctions in certain subjects, the bureaucrats who implemented this system didn't know what the fuck they were doing. Right now I'm joining the defence force, working in intelligence. So it didn't really affect me. I can go back to UNI later because I'm awesome and all. ;)

[BIG BROTHER]

I haven't had time to look at many replies so i don't know if this has been said but I get questions very similar to:

"Do you think it's fair for a doctor to be paid the same as a janitor?"

and my response isn't bases on communism but rather humanity, I was talking to my physics teacher about this (bout time we did something in physics that interested me) and she said that no one would put in 7years + to become a doctor when they get paid the same as a janitor, and i replied that doesn't come down to communism, but rather people, in an ideal world people wouldn't become doctors for the large salary but instead they would want to help other people, both jobs must be done, so people would put in the 7+ years training to become a doctor because they want to help people that are sick and make the world better, because in my opinion people shouldn't be driven by money or materials but instead by morals (I think Che Guevara had that idea?) and that is why they would want to become doctors, (im obviously not the best at explaining my ideas thats why I can't win arguements, although that was the last thing said in the conversation, trust me they sound good in my head). I just think people would want these jobs because they are good people and they want to make a difference, not for money.

Typical capitalist overpaid teacher puting a price tag on everything


just want to get your ideas on this, I'm not the smartest guy so this is probably the most developed opinion I have, so if you agree disagree or have anything to add please do

and if anyone has any techniques i can use to get my opinions into words as they sound alot smarter in my head but i just cant get them across the way i want them to when i give them voice thank you


Regarding that question, there's two things that I gotta say. First of all in capitalism the only thing that makes a doctors wage higher than a janitors is the fact that there's less doctors than janitors. If they were 1000 doctors in a town, and only 1 janitor, the janitor would get paid higher even though the didn't study for 7 years.

And another thing, its that you technically don't even have to pay a janitor and a doctor the same, you could really raise both their wages(although keep in mind that we're trying to abolish wages all together I'm just saying this to make a point) a whole lot, while keeping the doctors still higher because the capitalists have so much capital amassed for themselves that just by taking it away from them you could i don't know pay 50 per hour to a janitor and i don't know 150 to a doctor.

[Dóchas]

Regarding that question, there's two things that I gotta say. First of all in capitalism the only thing that makes a doctors wage higher than a janitors is the fact that there's less doctors than janitors. If they were 1000 doctors in a town, and only 1 janitor, the janitor would get paid higher even though the didn't study for 7 years.


i thought the reason that doctors got paid more is because their job requires more skill?

[BIG BROTHER]

i thought the reason that doctors got paid more is because their job requires more skill?

Not really, its just the skill that makes them more rare and hence they get paid more.

I don't remember very well anymore, but there was some European country were the number of people with college degrees was so high that plumbers actually got paid better.

So yea in the capitalist system, you will probably want to kill your fellow classmates if you want your major to give you money:lol:

[Pogue]

Defence force? As in the army? You sure thats right for a revolutionary socialist?

[BIG BROTHER]

defense force? what are you talking about?

[Dóchas]

Not really, its just the skill that makes them more rare and hence they get paid more.

what do you mean their skill makes them more rare?

[BIG BROTHER]

what do you mean their skill makes them more rare?

Yes, less people are doctors(for obvious reasons), there is high demand for their skill, hence they get paid more.

But like I said they could resurrect people for all I know and would still get paid shit under capitalism if it was the other way around, and they were lots of doctors and few janitors.

[Dóchas]

Yes, less people are doctors(for obvious reasons), there is high demand for their skill, hence they get paid more.

But like I said they could resurrect people for all I know and would still get paid shit under capitalism if it was the other way around, and they were lots of doctors and few janitors.

so you are saying that in a communist society there will be few janitors and loads of doctors?

[BIG BROTHER]

so you are saying that in a communist society there will be few janitors and loads of doctors?

sigh....no....I'm just saying why in capitalism some workers, get paid higher than others. It doesn't have to do anything with the job they perform really. It just has to do with how much demand is there for that job, and how many people are available to do it.

In communism, everybody will just take part in activities that they enjoy, it won't even be called "work" because wage-slavery will be abolished.

[Dóchas]

sigh....no....I'm just saying why in capitalism some people get paid higher than others. It doesn't have to do anything with how useful or useless they are. It just has to do with how much demand is there for that job, and how many people are available.

In communism, everybody will just take part in activities that they enjoy, it won't even be called "work" because wage-slavery will be abolished.

ok sorry... i was a bit slow there :blushing:. thanks for explaining that

[BIG BROTHER]

Its ok...sorry if I seem a little impatient.

[Dóchas]

Its ok...sorry if I seem a little impatient.

na i was just being slow...it happens alot!! :)

[robbo203]

Communism is rewarding work, not any kind of superiority. Why would we give extra money to people who had been blessed with intelligence? .

Communism is not about rewarding people with money. Communism is a moneyless stateless, wageless society in which individuals voluntarily give according to their ability and freely take according to their self-determined needs.

Money implies a system in which the means of production are privately owned - either by the state (or those who control the state) as in state capitalist Russia et al or by private individual capitalists. It is a form of economic exchange and economic exchange is logically incompatible with common ownership of the means of production.

Robin

[Wolfman]

Hello Comrades,

I also went to a school full of conformist bullshitters, blind slaves of the Irish Fascist school system.

"Communism doesn't work" is a classic quote from many of these imbaciles who think they know how the world works...Communism has never been properly put into practice, China or North Korea are as Capitalist as the United States or Germany !

"People should have the chance to get rich" - Why ?? It's as simple as that ! What does it do for anyone. I firmly believe that if all the money and resources in the world were divided evenly there would be enough for everyone to have more than enough !

"Janitors should not earn more than doctors" - They are both important components of a machine, they are just as important as each other. A doctor should become a doctor because he wants to help people not because he wants a 6 figure annual salary !

The time for change is now, we have to all start organizing and becoming more alert and prepared. Communism can only work if there is a Global Revolution whether it be by peace or by gun !

Solidarity !

W

[Communist Theory]

Hello Comrades,

I also went to a school full of conformist bullshitters, blind slaves of the Irish Fascist school system.

"Communism doesn't work" is a classic quote from many of these imbaciles who think they know how the world works...Communism has never been properly put into practice, China or North Korea are as Capitalist as the United States or Germany !

"People should have the chance to get rich" - Why ?? It's as simple as that ! What does it do for anyone. I firmly believe that if all the money and resources in the world were divided evenly there would be enough for everyone to have more than enough !

"Janitors should not earn more than doctors" - They are both important components of a machine, they are just as important as each other. A doctor should become a doctor because he wants to help people not because he wants a 6 figure annual salary !

The time for change is now, we have to all start organizing and becoming more alert and prepared. Communism can only work if there is a Global Revolution whether it be by peace or by gun !

Solidarity !

W
Blasphemy!!!

[Emily]

I was pretty much raised in a working-class, leftie-family, but only recently have I begun studying Communism and Marxism in-depth. There is a question I'd like to ask, though. Forgive me if it seems rather naive, or ignorant.

I was reading a book on Sociology, which had Karl Marx and his theories in it. It explained that in a Communist society, the more effort you put into your job, you will recieve the same ammount of effort back? As in, if you spend so much time and so much energy in the fields harvesting a crop, you get the same ammount of time and effort back in the form of clothes, or a tractor,or something?

Is this true? And if so, how will 'effort' be determined? Sorry if its a basic question :blushing:

[Bright Banana Beard]

I was reading a book on Sociology, which had Karl Marx and his theories in it. It explained that in a Communist society, the more effort you put into your job, you will recieve the same ammount of effort back? That is not true, the more effort you made, the more goods you will receive. Lazyiness will not have anything.


As in, if you spend so much time and so much energy in the fields harvesting a crop, you get the same ammount of time and effort back in the form of clothes, or a tractor,or something? I suggest ignoring the sociology book you are reading right now, it doesn't understand our economic system. Someone else will explain it better.


Is this true?No


And if so, how will 'effort' be determined?By how much effort you made into the society. Welcome to the forum, please create a new thread as this is about high school commie guide. :) (Will admin splits it please?)

[Emily]

Oh, sorry. I got a bit confused. Thank you for answering my questions, though.
I hate being new. :(

[Bright Banana Beard]

Oh, sorry. I got a bit confused. Thank you for answering my questions, though.
I hate being new. :(
There is nothing wrong being new. The link, which is below this paragraph, should help you understanding more about the economy. Simplicity is very confusing and will leaves you plenty of question, so I suggest get deep reading at comfortable level.
http://dwardmac.pitzer.edu/anarchist_archives/kropotkin/conquest/toc.html

[Coggeh]

IN a way your right , anyway , doctors and janitors don not get paid the same and it has nothing to do with the amount of them in one town .

Firstly janitors will get a decent wage , one they can live quite well on , housing , health care , free education including college for their kids etc . It is their right .

But a doctor will still get paid more (not in the hundreds of thousands ) but relatively good wage .people do not get paid the same in socialism , its a capitalist myth .A doctors labour is more valuable to system (you can argue against it ) but the fact of the matter is that it is and yes does take more skill .

[Rise Against]

What the fuck?

Surely thats wrong, surely each should get a wage in proportion to the labour they put in, and the value of their work.

The doctors work is clearly more valuable, therefore should receive a higher wage.
ITs a bullshit capitalist myth that says everyone gets a same wage

A janitors work is just as valuable to The Republic, then a doctors work to society. Both exist solely to further the good of the people, to nurture and raise the land people into a stable and efficient society in which its inhabitants can prosper under their basic principle rights of Life, Liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

Doctors, as the same as Janitors, are not working for the good of themselves; but for the prosperity of the community around them. They are, in essence, working the same labour: The labour that of nurturing their family; who are in fact, everyone.

It isn't a "Bullshit capitalist myth" that everyone should get the same wage, It's simply "True Democracy".

[F9]

Basically Kez is right, but not in the way he meant it.None everyone will get the same wages(wages mean products, houses etc etc there arent any "money" or something similar) as a person might need more than another to live, someone may need more food than other, so s/he would get more, he will get what s/he need.Another "example" is that a 6 member family wont get a same house like 2 member family, that would be idiotic.The principle of Communism isnt the same "wages" to all, but "From each according his/her abilities, to each according his/her needs".

Fuserg9:star:

[Coggeh]

Basically Kez is right, but not in the way he meant it.None everyone will get the same wages(wages mean products, houses etc etc there arent any "money" or something similar) as a person might need more than another to live, someone may need more food than other, so s/he would get more, he will get what s/he need.Another "example" is that a 6 member family wont get a same house like 2 member family, that would be idiotic.The principle of Communism isnt the same "wages" to all, but "From each according his/her abilities, to each according his/her needs".

Fuserg9:star:
Wouldn't people get paid according to the value (not product value) of their labour , in the sense that a doctor is more valuable than someone who stocks shelfs . But outside of the wage everything in given in accordance with need . Such as you stated housing etc etc

[jbaez]

I'm in high school and one of my teachers is die-hard Christian conservative. He happens to teach my U.S. History class so most of the lectures/discussions often turn into him spewing his cappie bullshit to a handful of students that could care less about anything we learn. He constantly praises Friedman (milton) and has us watch his videos on greed and such. On top of that, one of my classmates is a conservative, and always sides with him everything. I haven't had the courage to speak up yet, because I am still learning, reading as much as I can.

Some of the claims they make are things like:
- Communism will never work because utopian societies simply don't, and never will, exist.
- Greed is one of the best things in the world, it drives the world forward and without it we would be a mess.

They have also made more specific claims like:
- France is a socialist's paradise, but it's far from it. There are tons of race riots all of the time, something we don't have here in the U.S.
- If capitalism didn't give jobs to people in 3rd world countries working in sweatshops, they would starve to death.

I'm sorry if things like this have been asked before, but I really want to start refuting some of their claims before the school year ends. I have sat through months of this crap and I really can't stand it anymore. How can I argue some of their claims?

[Hoxhaist]

the USSR after Stalin was taken over by revisionists who put out the revolutionary flame of socialism on the road to communism. Communism is the final stage of humanity, not what was created in the USSR, that was socialism preparing for communism when the world would abolish the state. Greed is what created the crisis that the US is in now. Wall Street greed was perfectly willing to gamble with the life savings of the nation and that is what is bad about greed. It is focued on the individual and is willing to sacrifice the wellbeing of everyone else in order to make headway in an artificially constructed casino, the stock market and money. France isnt socialist, they are social democrat reformists. For socialism point them to Stalin;s USSR or Hoxha's Albania. The US has race-based protests like the Jena Six business. There arent riots because the police will crush anything like that with an avenging fury like in the Civil Rights Movement. People in "the 3rd world" got on just fine before capitalism came and built sweatshops. This need to expand capitalism into "the 3rd world" is just imperialism and colonialism under a new guise instead of "civilizing" or "converting" the "heathens." Good luck, comrade!!

[CHEtheLIBERATOR]

I get the same at my school.But I ignore those questions.You have to understand that they will never understand.What I do is act so out Marxist it just pisses them off.

[Dr.Claw]

Short answers to dumb questions:
If communism and socialism are so great, then why are all socialist countries living in dire poverty?

They were even worse off before they had socialism. Places like Russia and China were shitholes still living in the middle ages before their revolutions; socialism created their modern economies out of nothing.

There's really only one semi-socialist country left -- Cuba -- and if you want to compare it with some place, compare it to Jamaica or the Dominican Republic or even Costa Rica...places where many (most?) people still live like it was 1850!


I would also like to add that these countries' problems of poverty,came from a major lack of resources.

[Post-Something]

I get the same at my school.But I ignore those questions.You have to understand that they will never understand.What I do is act so out Marxist it just pisses them off.

Certainly don't ignore their questions!

[Post-Something]

I'm in high school and one of my teachers is die-hard Christian conservative. He happens to teach my U.S. History class so most of the lectures/discussions often turn into him spewing his cappie bullshit to a handful of students that could care less about anything we learn. He constantly praises Friedman (milton) and has us watch his videos on greed and such. On top of that, one of my classmates is a conservative, and always sides with him everything. I haven't had the courage to speak up yet, because I am still learning, reading as much as I can.

Some of the claims they make are things like:
- Communism will never work because utopian societies simply don't, and never will, exist.
- Greed is one of the best things in the world, it drives the world forward and without it we would be a mess.

They have also made more specific claims like:
- France is a socialist's paradise, but it's far from it. There are tons of race riots all of the time, something we don't have here in the U.S.
- If capitalism didn't give jobs to people in 3rd world countries working in sweatshops, they would starve to death.

I'm sorry if things like this have been asked before, but I really want to start refuting some of their claims before the school year ends. I have sat through months of this crap and I really can't stand it anymore. How can I argue some of their claims?

Good questions! I'll try to answer these claims and hopefully you'll be able to refute them yourself :)

1. Communism, a system where classes don't exist, where antagonisms are nulified, is a logical conclusion to come to when you look at the past. All throughout history, you've had class struggle. Classes of people who have by default been pitted against each other because of their placement in a hierarchical system.

The fact of the matter is that it is an irrational position to take to think that capitalism can exist forever. Capitalism is too unstable. It leads to crises every couple of years, creates poverty, and is based on the idea that there are infinite resources within a finite world. The system has to collapse one day, because it can't sustain itself.

2. Greed is not one of the best things in the world. I don't see an argument here.

3. France is not a socialist paradise. The workers don't own the means of production for example.

4. This claim is funny considering most sweatshop workers don't even get enough money to buy back the products they are making. The fact of the matter is that free trade agreements do not truly promote free trade at all but instead seek to protect multinational corporations from competition by local industries, which are sometimes unionized, by ensuring a high level of profit from the cheap labour of other countries.

[Marx22]

I'm in high school and one of my teachers is die-hard Christian conservative. He happens to teach my U.S. History class so most of the lectures/discussions often turn into him spewing his cappie bullshit to a handful of students that could care less about anything we learn.......

Some of the claims they make are things like
- Greed is one of the best things in the world, it drives the world forward and without it we would be a mess......

Is it me or does it seem all high school US History teachers are far-right wingers and conservatives? I had only two liberal history teachers and the rest were these moral, christian conservatives like your teacher who'd like to take time out of class to talk about "facts" and morals etc, how liberals like to change things (oh my!) and all the usual jingoist BS (how we're all Americans first, we're the best, we're never wrong etc etc etc). One of the reasons why I decided to turn/learn about communism and socialism was because of these conservative history teachers who'd piss me off with their made up facts about American history. Liberal teachers I had never spoke a word of politics and barely mentioned modern era events but when you can tell they were liberal on slow days where you just talk about things; they teach, not lecture.

I remember once we were learning about the Russian Revolution, Communism, the Soviet Union, North Korea etc when the teacher was going on this rant about how Reagan killed communism, how we had to defend capitalism by spending billions in covert operations, and how communism is doomed to fail etc. Right after class I skipped lunch, went to the library, and grabbed all the books I could find on communism, Karl Marx, and Soviet Society; this guy was completely wrong on everything he said. Got into a huge debate with him the next day, It was awesome though he never talked to me again after that.

He sounds like he watches "Wall Street" too much with regards to that greed thing he said.

[Dóchas]

I get the same at my school.But I ignore those questions.You have to understand that they will never understand.What I do is act so out Marxist it just pisses them off.

dont ignore their questions!!! that means that they are willing to learn or what to know a bit more about communism. do your best to answer their questions you never know they may come around to your ideas

[Our Enemy Is Cynicism]

Sorry if this has been asked before, but how does one respond to "Socialists are just being jealous". I reeled off a list of theorists *cough*Kropotkin*cough* who gave up a lot or were socialist despite being well off *cough*Engels*cough*, but they respond with "Yes, but those are just the bourgeoisie leading it, the majority of people supporting it will be just jealous." I said something about the fact that the CNT effectively educated their supporters prior to the revolution and thus replaced those jealous notions with true socialist ideals, but I'm not sure they're convinced.

[Sean]

Sorry if this has been asked before, but how does one respond to "Socialists are just being jealous". I reeled off a list of theorists *cough*Kropotkin*cough* who gave up a lot or were socialist despite being well off *cough*Engels*cough*, but they respond with "Yes, but those are just the bourgeoisie leading it, the majority of people supporting it will be just jealous." I said something about the fact that the CNT effectively educated their supporters prior to the revolution and thus replaced those jealous notions with true socialist ideals, but I'm not sure they're convinced.

Aaah the intellectuals are just jealous argument. For anyone unfamiliar, please read this (http://www.gwiep.net/books/doi13.htm).

The basic premise is that people who see that capitalism is failing only do so because they think they can somehow get a good job once all those jocks are undercontrol.

Essentially its a long winded way of calling leftists nerds that need a good wedgie.

In fact, if you dont mind OEIC, I'd like to split this thread because its a very, very interesting fallacy that you've just touched upon, and one that a lot of objectivists and libertarians spit, from my own experience.

[Our Enemy Is Cynicism]

Feel free :)

[perky596]

i feel this is the most necessary post imaginable to outline the kind of ignorance i face at college everyday. I always come up against people who attack my socialist beliefs, despite them not having a clue, but the worst part is, THEY DONT WANT TO LEARN, they seem to believe they already have the answers, but they have no substance at all and it makes me hurl. So i got into quite a heated argument the other day in which the who shall not be named said the words:
"Britain is veering to communism" that in itself is a hilarious statement but it gets better i then simply ask HOW THE HELL DID YOU WORK THAT OUT to which he responds
"because in the budget their taxing anyone earning over 150,000 more" so i simply stated "well sir, you do realise that the amount of people earning over 150,000 in britain is probably 2 percent, maximum" and then here it is, HOLD ON TO YOUR HATS, because this ones a SCREAMER he then tells me
"yer but the class divide is over" JESUS CHRIST, if there ever needed to be an example of absolute capitalist moronity, elect that

[Dóchas]

i feel this is the most necessary post imaginable to outline the kind of ignorance i face at college everyday. I always come up against people who attack my socialist beliefs, despite them not having a clue, but the worst part is, THEY DONT WANT TO LEARN, they seem to believe they already have the answers, but they have no substance at all and it makes me hurl. So i got into quite a heated argument the other day in which the who shall not be named said the words:
"Britain is veering to communism" that in itself is a hilarious statement but it gets better i then simply ask HOW THE HELL DID YOU WORK THAT OUT to which he responds
"because in the budget their taxing anyone earning over 150,000 more" so i simply stated "well sir, you do realise that the amount of people earning over 150,000 in britain is probably 2 percent, maximum" and then here it is, HOLD ON TO YOUR HATS, because this ones a SCREAMER he then tells me
"yer but the class divide is over" JESUS CHRIST, if there ever needed to be an example of absolute capitalist moronity, elect that

yep i get that a lot. they dont ask questions they just ridicule what they think communism is

[pauljpoposky]

good thought, redstar. I very much wish that in my highschool years I had access to some sort of quick answer "cheatsheet" to help me in my endless debates with righty peers. In absence of that resource, you might consider Paul D'Amato's "The Meaning of Marxism", which explains much in very plain and easy to understand layman's terms. it is available on amazon.com

the only other thing I could tell you, from experience, is read read read and make sure you aren't working alone, link up with other socialists and make sure you're agitating and organizing in working class communities and workplaces all around you. practice really does make perfect when it comes to this.

[kbjami]

Some of these answers are really going to help me out.

[perky596]

good thought, redstar. I very much wish that in my highschool years I had access to some sort of quick answer "cheatsheet" to help me in my endless debates with righty peers. In absence of that resource, you might consider Paul D'Amato's "The Meaning of Marxism", which explains much in very plain and easy to understand layman's terms. it is available on amazon.com

the only other thing I could tell you, from experience, is read read read and make sure you aren't working alone, link up with other socialists and make sure you're agitating and organizing in working class communities and workplaces all around you. practice really does make perfect when it comes to this.

and probably most importantly not just read read read but read opposing ideologies as much as you can not only does it allow you to spend every second reading cappie ideologies disputing and counter-arguing every possible syllable, but it also puts you above those disgusting ignorant cappies who dont do their homework and replace knowledge with stubborness

[Nulono]

A true zero-sum economy would be frozen in space-time; as a "snapshot" of things as they are in any given moment, it seems adequate.

Over time, wealth is created; economies grow (or sometimes shrink). As wealth is created, it is distributed disproportionately.

Thus, if you "freeze-frame" any given moment, it looks just like a zero-sum economy.

Banks have the power under capitalism to just pull money out of their asses!

[Nulono]

Another "example" is that a 6 member family wont get a same house like 2 member family, that would be idiotic.
Another "example" is that a 6-member family won't get the same house as a 2-member family; that would be idiotic.

Sorry, I forgot to warn you that I abhor comma splices. The other errors don't really bug me, but comma splices, for some reason, really twist my bacon.

[F9]

Another "example" is that a 6-member family won't get the same house as a 2-member family; that would be idiotic.

Sorry, I forgot to warn you that I abhor comma splices. The other errors don't really bug me, but comma splices, for some reason, really twist my bacon.

Ehmmmm:rolleyes:I have posted around 2000 posts and more, if you gonna correct them all you gonna need a month!:rolleyes:

[Dóchas]

Another "example" is that a 6-member family won't get the same house as a 2-member family; that would be idiotic.

Sorry, I forgot to warn you that I abhor comma splices. The other errors don't really bug me, but comma splices, for some reason, really twist my bacon.

how un necessery!!!! i dont even think english is his first language so i think he is doing well

[rosie]

"I am in the equivalent of high school in the UK and I find that whenever people come out with anti communist stuff I just ask them if they know who Karl Marx was and what he wrote about.
No-one knows so I say how can they put down communism if they have no idea about the basics of it."

Haha! I love it! I'm gonna have to keep that in mind!!! I get a lot of crap from my immediate family and friends (more like old drinking buddies, but whatever).

[Dóchas]

"I am in the equivalent of high school in the UK and I find that whenever people come out with anti communist stuff I just ask them if they know who Karl Marx was and what he wrote about.
No-one knows so I say how can they put down communism if they have no idea about the basics of it."

Haha! I love it! I'm gonna have to keep that in mind!!! I get a lot of crap from my immediate family and friends (more like old drinking buddies, but whatever).

thats pretty good actually i might use it myself ;)

[Marx22]

they dont ask questions they just ridicule what they think communism is

Right on the mark.

[Il Medico]

All this is true. However, I know as a high school student myself, whenever you bring up that dirty little "C" word they freak. They make the same dull arguments and refuse to listen to reason. The only way to change their fascist minds is to make them live like the people the look down on. As long as the "middle class" lives well off America's capitalist war plunder, they will see no reason for change. The don't realize that they live comfortably because ten other people don't. It's not because they don't work hard, it is because those who don't have stole their money! Until my working class brothers realizes this, along with those brainwashed morons the middle class, there can never be a revolution to get rid of the capitalist leech! We must show our brothers what is going on behind their backs! We must show them the path to freedom, and then encourage them to take it. We must liberate ourselves. Viva Revolution!
Your brother in humanity,
Capt'n Jack

[Velkas]

However, I know as a high school student myself, whenever you bring up that dirty little "C" word they freak. They make the same dull arguments and refuse to listen to reason.
Agreed, it's the same for me. They've been brainwashed so completely by capitalism...
The only reason Capitalism works is because the people think it's best for them. Teach them how terrible a system it truly is, and it will be overthrown almost overnight.

[Rusty Shackleford]

That little "C" word came up in class the other day, pretty much equating it to fascism. it was regarding a graduation rehearsal and restrictions. some kid said "doesn't that seem a bit communistic?" i nearly exploded.

ive also treid talking to my economics teacher about such things, he said "do you want to live in Nork Korea?" and pulled that "youre still young" shit. i dont mean to be arrogant, but i probably could make the best argument for communism if i thought it out, out of half of my school at LEAST.

and seeing this capitalist shit being shoveled into my friends and classmates minds is utterly sickening sometimes.

the american education system is clearly biased. when class began, there was not a SINGLE explanation of a communist system, as if capitalism is the ONLY one that works... :glare:

apart form "Communism, where the workers control the means of production" not helping to explain that at all...

[LOLseph Stalin]

Never believe anything you've told in high school about Communism. That's all you really need to know. I happen to be a high school student myself.

[Rusty Shackleford]

its horrible. i once took a U.S. Military history class (before i became a leftist) and felt like i was surrounded by a bunch of jingoistic monsters.
history classes are the same. dont believe what they say! i totally agree.

i dont know how common it is in other schools (im sure it is) but the restrooms are full of swastikas. i was contemplating counter-vandalism via S&H's and Anarchy A's but i felt that was a bit childish. any thoughts?

[LOLseph Stalin]

i dont know how common it is in other schools (im sure it is) but the restrooms are full of swastikas.

Your school has serious issues then. Only political vandalism I've ever seen in my school is an Anarchist "A" and a Hammer and Sickle I drew. :p

[Rusty Shackleford]

well, im in a very conservative area, i could count 3 in one stall, along withvarious gang signs. with some ridiculous kids.
theres atleast 10-15 churches in the area. ugh...

im trying my best to bring it up in class though ^_^

i did a project on Marx for english on the subject of "Great People"(i feel i could have done FAR better though) and also, im doing a DDR project for German class :D

[LOLseph Stalin]

Don't worry. I'm in a Conservative area too, but luckily my Civics teacher is somewhat open-minded and doesn't think Communism is completely evil. He just says that attempts at putting it into practice get corrupted. Also, for English class last semester I wrote an Anti-Capitalist essay and got an "A".

[Rusty Shackleford]

Don't worry. I'm in a Conservative area too, but luckily my Civics teacher is somewhat open-minded and doesn't think Communism is completely evil. He just says that attempts at putting it into practice get corrupted. Also, for English class last semester I wrote an Anti-Capitalist essay and got an "A".

very nice! my last english teacher had us write things about quotes, and i quote that he said you could say anything even "if its a viscious communist statement" :laugh:

[jbaez]

You guys are lucky to have such open-minded teachers. A recent assignment I did was a paper on Ronald Reagan, where I had to explain the details of supply side economics and how his policies "benefited" the American people and so on... I can't write a paper idolizing Reagan. So I wrote a paper explaining the details of supply side economics (just like the prompt asked me to) and went further to explain how the policies were detrimental to the working and middle classes. My teacher and his essay grader, being the fucking arrogant conservatives they are, gave me a C on my paper (I am an A student, and my paper deserved at least a B IMHO). There were no explanations on my paper as to how I earned a C, but at the end of the paper was a comment. "Too dramatic," in big red writing. Sorry if I'm rambling on now, but it just pisses me off sometimes when teachers think they know so much more than you just because they're older and "more educated." To me, they're just more indoctrinated.

Also I was having a discussion with a couple of friends after school yesterday that got me really frustrated. We were talking about imperialism and its effects on a population. Let me say that the two people I was talking to are pretty much ignoramuses when it comes to anything outside of the city we live in, so when I tried to explain why I'm against imperialism, they came at me with things like:
-If it weren't for European imperialism (I live in the U.S.) you wouldn't be here
-It's human nature

How can I refute arguments such as these in further discussions on imperialism?

[Sprocket Hole]

Also I was having a discussion with a couple of friends after school yesterday that got me really frustrated. We were talking about imperialism and its effects on a population. Let me say that the two people I was talking to are pretty much ignoramuses when it comes to anything outside of the city we live in, so when I tried to explain why I'm against imperialism, they came at me with things like:
-If it weren't for European imperialism (I live in the U.S.) you wouldn't be here
-It's human nature

How can I refute arguments such as these in further discussions on imperialism?

To the first comment, I would reply with the accounts of the sort of ethnic cleansing that happened against the Native American population, to show that of course imperialism may benefit imperialists, but not humans as a whole. Also, I don't see why it should matter that you are living in the US. What is their point by stating you wouldn't be in the US if it weren't for imperialism, that you somehow benefit from living in the US?

And to the second, there is no such thing as human nature. General human behaviour will mimic the values set in place by institutions of society. We live in a capitalist society, where greed, exploitation, and individualism are encouraged, so general human behaviour acts accordingly.

If what was described above "human nature", how would your freind explain hunter gatherers that where not living under capitalism? Band societies? Certian indiginous communities? and so on...

[jbaez]

And to the second, there is no such thing as human nature. General human behaviour will mimic the values set in place by institutions of society. We live in a capitalist society, where greed, exploitation, and individualism are encouraged, so general human behaviour acts accordingly.

If what was described above "human nature", how would your freind explain hunter gatherers that where not living under capitalism? Band societies? Certian indiginous communities? and so on...

I explained to them that there was no such thing as human nature and that humans act according to their surrounding and environment, not some alleged "force" within them, but they refused to believe this. One of them began rambling on about how it is natural to take over another's property and land, using early African tribes as an example. I explained to them that most early aggression of one tribe on another was prompted by one tribe being promised goods by European imperialists in exchange for a number of slaves captured by the tribe.

[Sprocket Hole]

I explained to them that there was no such thing as human nature and that humans act according to their surrounding and environment, not some alleged "force" within them, but they refused to believe this. One of them began rambling on about how it is natural to take over another's property and land, using early African tribes as an example. I explained to them that most early aggression of one tribe on another was prompted by one tribe being promised goods by European imperialists in exchange for a number of slaves captured by the tribe.
How did they respond to your point? I hope they didn't deny Apartheid..

[InquisitiveBeing]

Do you think it's fair for a doctor to be paid the same as a janitor?

Why not? If there were no janitors, housekeepers, sanitation workers, what would happen? You'd either have to do all that clean-up yourself or things would get filthy, germs would breed, you'd get sick and die.

As a matter of fact, death rates started to decline in the second half of the 19th century...when medicine was still mostly quackery. Why? Because major European cities started building sewer systems and people stopped living in their own shit.

Every person who makes a genuine contribution to society deserves a living wage...an income sufficient to live with dignity.

I am new at this website...to be quite frank i am here to learn about your views. Now i agree with many of the things that were said in the original post, Except the bit that i have Quoted above. Now, the problem i have with this piece is...Human beings in general expect to "get out what they put in" What incentive is their for someone to go to school for 8+ years to be a doctor, when they can get a basic Elementary school education and be a janitor for the same wages?

The people of the modern world are lazy, 90% of the people who don't work, do not do so because the government will pay more than, say, a janitor, would make. I do agree that something needs to be done in this regard. Lower the amount of welfare handed out to those who are not mentally or physically disabled, thus forcing them to work, OR raise the amount paid of these jobs (slightly). However, if a janitor and doctor were to make the same wages there would be no desire for current doctors to discover new cures, new treatments or new diagnoses, and there would be no desire for the next generation to become doctors because, well, they could get the same benefits for something they put MUCH LESS into. I am not attempting to be distasteful here, but i am truly wanting to gain an insight on the way the "far-left" would handle these issues. Thanks in advance.

[Dóchas]

I am new at this website...to be quite frank i am here to learn about your views. Now i agree with many of the things that were said in the original post, Except the bit that i have Quoted above. Now, the problem i have with this piece is...Human beings in general expect to "get out what they put in" What incentive is their for someone to go to school for 8+ years to be a doctor, when they can get a basic Elementary school education and be a janitor for the same wages?



basically they wouldnt become a doctor to get a nice cushy job with a big fat salary. they would become a doctor to help others when they are sick. i know it sounds absurd but when revolution occurs people will be more open to looking after eachother rather than earning a big wage



I do agree that something needs to be done in this regard. Lower the amount of welfare handed out to those who are not mentally or physically disabled, thus forcing them to work, OR raise the amount paid of these jobs (slightly).


this wont happen. im guessing it will go on "from each according to his ability to each according to his need" this basically means that if you work you will get whatever you need to survive. i made a thread about disabled and elderly in a communist society a while ago and the answers i got back were that it is very hard to find someone who cant contribute to the society in some way. if someone cant work at all, their comrades will help them out in every way possible, not abandon them like they are in todays world.



However, if a janitor and doctor were to make the same wages there would be no desire for current doctors to discover new cures, new treatments or new diagnoses, and there would be no desire for the next generation to become doctors because, well, they could get the same benefits for something they put MUCH LESS into.


every job is important so with it comes responsibility. you cant be a doctor and not help someone. they are not in it for the money so they should do everything to try and find more cures etc. im guessing its more of a community feeling in a communist society so the doctors are there to help out their comrades in any way they can.



I am not attempting to be distasteful here, but i am truly wanting to gain an insight on the way the "far-left" would handle these issues. Thanks in advance.


dont worry thats what this thread is for, to help people new to left wing ideas get to grips with the basics. i might add some more on to my answers if i think of any. if you still dont understand im sure myself and other will do their best to help you out :)

sorry if these answers are kinda rushed im pretty tired at the moment

btw welcome to revleft!! :)