The Perfect System

[A_Devious_Mind]

Socialism,Communism,Anarchy etc. etc.
Post Here What You Think Would Be The Perfect System Not Only In Theory But Would Be Likely To Work If Put In Practice.

no system can be flawless but lets see what everyone comes up with.

[RevolverNo9]

:o Biiiiiig question man. Perhaps we can narrow this down into something more discussable. What is a major flaw lying in one of the systems as opposed to the others? Also perhaps clarify your differentation of comunism and socialism- socialism is the transformation between capitalism and communism. Or do you mean a democratic, parlimenatrian socialism as opposed to the communist revolutionary process?

[Non-Sectarian Bastard!]

A better question would have been what's your political affiliation.

[RedAnarchist]

I would consider myself an Anarcho-Communist, with the Communist bit being Marxist.

[redstar2000]

Perfect system?

I'm not sure we'd even want such a thing!

How long would it take before we got bored and started fucking it up just to relieve the monotony?

Something a hell of a lot better than we have now? Sure!

Perfection?

Maybe for statues...not for living humans.

:redstar2000:

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

[komon]

no ,nothing like perfection.never has, never will,so 1 solution is respect......

[Latifa]

Originally posted by redstar[email protected] 26 2004, 01:11 PM

How long would it take before we got bored and started fucking it up just to relieve the monotony?

But if the system were perfect, it's day-to-day affairs would not be monotonous!

And if they were, that not strictly perfect :P

[Invader Zim]

The perfect system, hmm...

Nobody has to work, and everything you want can be grown on a tree, including the following: -

Burgers, Whisky, Computers, Whisky, TV's, Whisky, Books, Chocolate, 8 bedroom houses, Whisky, Dodge Vipers, Whisky. Did I forget anything? Ohh yeah, Whiskey (for you JD guzzlers)!

That is a perfect system, and rather like perfection in general, it isn't going to happen.

[I want to be an anarchist.]

The perfect system is no system at all.

*Lights up big fat cigar*

[The Garbage Disposal Unit]

Perfect system? I don't think such a thing can exist, nor do I believe in any sort of end of history. I believe ultimately, we will achieve something fluid in which "systems" will be scorned in favour of specific situation-based practice, without any grand, overarching narratives or ideology.
I guess I agree with Redstar on some levels . . . only I like the idea of fucking shit up. :D

[Wiesty]

Communism

with higher wages, same pay checks per occupation, people work for the state, but their materials are not fully state owned, the proudcer, (if its like a farmer, not a factory worker) gets to keep a fraction of his material like 15 percent or something,

[NovelGentry]

Communism

with higher wages, same pay checks per occupation, people work for the state, but their materials are not fully state owned, the proudcer, (if its like a farmer, not a factory worker) gets to keep a fraction of his material like 15 percent or something,

This is no where near a valid definition of Communism, which is what I assume you're implying it is by the first word.

[Commie Rat]

we go to figure out how we'er gunnna take the system b4 we need to look at how we are gunna contol it

[NovelGentry]

We're not gonna control the system, taking the system equates to destroying it for anyone revolutionary, you then either replace it with something new, that is, a new state, or as others believe the infrastructure for post-revolutionary society will grow from the organized revolutionary class with no requirement for a state.

[Commie Rat]

but we need control of it to change it

[NovelGentry]

No, we don't need control of it, there is no reason to sustain the previous infrastructure, it can all be wiped away and replaced with something new.

[Subversive Pessimist]

That's not communism, Wiesty.

[Non-Sectarian Bastard!]

Originally posted by [email protected] 4 2004, 03:36 AM
Communism

with higher wages, same pay checks per occupation, people work for the state, but their materials are not fully state owned, the proudcer, (if its like a farmer, not a factory worker) gets to keep a fraction of his material like 15 percent or something,
lol you roel

[Tom Joad]

Personally, I am of the mutualist socialism school of thought. I would love nothing more than to say, "anarchy," but the word has become as slandered as Satanism due to similar methods of propaganda. A slow, steady transition would be the least violent, and guarantee the most support. Bear in mind that for the most part, Marxism and anarchism (as defined by such men as Bakunin and Proudhon) only differ in means, not in ends. At any rate, what would be best is to get the street-level gangs into the movement and have them practice what we preach. Once this is accomplished, we can slowly work to abolish property (both personal AND communal), until ultimately we have no possessions, which is a form of power. Once possessions are gone, there will be no need for a government to regulate or monopolize such.
In the end, we will have a society of mutual aid; one in which we contribute all of our talents to help with each other's shortcomings, instead of focusing on one to exploit them as we have in capitalism. Instead of competition, we would have peace. No one would have power over anyone else. I would have to say that the biggest flaw in our (U.S.A.'s) current judicial system is that all who are fit to judge, do not. Jesus actually said something on this subject matter -- "Let he among you who is without sin cast the first stone...and I will not condemn you, either." Notice that last line, and really think about it. Who is without sin? Jesus! What does he do? He casts aside his stone! If only all those, "I hate gays because that's what the Bible tells me to do" fundamentalist bastards could realize that. Wow...I'm getting off-topic. Well, you get the gist of what I'm saying.

[between]

there will never be a perfect system,this is a myth.
1.nobodys perfect
2.system is structure and therefore full off flimsies and bugs

[Vinny Rafarino]

Is that so Gaf?

Perhaps you would care to elaborate further on the subject.

[APRandolph]

I don't see the point in debating about 'perfect systems', I think we should discuss what is possible.

We have seen that revolutionary socialist states are possible, and have worked quite well. Look no farther than Cuba, which has the highest human development indicators of any state in Latin America meanwhile surviving a ruthless embargo and countless attempts to overthrow it by the American government. Cuba has the highest number of doctors per capita in Latin America and a top rate education system with high levels of gender, racial, and wage equality.

Revolutionary socialist states also worked well elsewhere, the problem has always been they have been attacked by counterrevolutions from within and imperialist forces from outside.

[ComradeRed]

I forget who said it, but perfection is the antithesis to good. We wanta good system.

[Dysfunctional_Literate]

Tito in Yugoslavia made it pretty good for everybody. Most people were middle-class. Almost everyone was employed. No one starved. Everyone had a house. There was not much that much of a bueracrecy. Civil liberties were pretty good, especially in comparison with other countires. Tito bound together several ethnic groups who ordinarily never get along (and don't today) and made a decent and fair nation. The most impressive part was how the workers at the factories were truly in charge as opposed to some government official.

[Citzen Smith]

I agree with the comments above, the fact that many socialist states failed does not mean that we cant look at the examples where it did. Cuba is the greatest example of this, where, even if free speech is not totally present, wage equality is amazing, and in comparison with the rest of latin america its in pretty good shape in terms of employment. as for a perfect system, it does exist, perfect communism, its just unreachable in a totally pure sense thats all.