Communist China Collapsing?

[IlluminusPrime]

Attention Communists!
The CCP, The Chinese Communist Party, is in my opinion the most evil, tyrannical empire on Earth. Since it's conception in 1949 over 80 million innocent lives have been put to an end. And the brutality continues to this very day. While you so called communist supporters are playing on your X-Box the real communist scum are slaughtering people over there, right now. Communist atrocities are still very much alive today.

However, it seems as if the CCP's days are numbered. Below I have posted a link to what is known as 'The Nine Commentaries on the Communist Party.' Since it's publication in November 2004, it alarmed and shocked the Chinese people, who have been deceived by the communist lies and propaganda. In a steadily rising number, members of the CCP (numbering around 60 million) have begun to withdraw their memberships. 20,000 people withdraw from the CCP every day! That number has now risen to 1 million people in about 6 months.

1 million people have withdrawn from communism. Communism is dying. Time is up, decide which boat you stand in! You all should read the 9 Commentaries and make a decision about what the CCP really is!

The 9 Commentaries (http://english.epochtimes.com/jiuping.asp)

1,000,000 Withdrawals (http://english.epochtimes.com/news/5-4-21/28070.html)

An accurate portrail of Karl Marx (http://www.fancydressuk.co.uk/Images/caveman.jpg)

[Jersey Devil]

China hasn't been "Communist" since the market reforms came into place by Xiaoping.

[The Garbage Disposal Unit]

a) You'll find very few supporters of the CCP on this board. While many members reject the entire Leninist paradigm, and the methods of the CCP from the start, even "hardliners" reject the post-Mao CCP as revisionist. In particular, with the enshrinement of private property in the most recent version of the constitution, China has become an unashamed capitalizt police-state (though it arguably has been for some time).

b) Many Chinese people have begun to withdraw from the Communist Party since the much-more newsworthy crack-down on Leftist dissenters, criticizing the gov'ts distinctly anti-socialist orientation.

c) The arguments that "The Chinese Communist Party Is an Evil Cult," and "An Anti-Universe Force" are so hillarious that one might wonder how even the most diehard anti-communists can take them seriously. There are extremely important criticisms to be made of the CCP, and I won't cry if it is destroyed . . . but this is sensationalistic bullshit that fails to dig in and meaningfully attack the CCP in a rational way.

[RedAnarchist]

This is good news. Finally, that creaking old dinosaur which has given Communism a bad name for so many decades may now be starting to fall. :D

[t_wolves_fan]

Where's that moron who actually does support China? RedStarOverChina, or something like that?

[IlluminusPrime]

Good, I'm glad to see everyone here is well aware of what the CCP actually is. Though I've run into a bunch of communist supporters who actually support the CCP.


China hasn't been "Communist" since the market reforms came into place by Xiaoping

Strands of communsm still remain, but you are pretty much accurate. China is the most capitilist country in the world. Although communist atrocities were common place well before 'Dungheap' Xiaoping came along. In fact, it was that hardline communism which made Xiaoping bring capitilism to China. China is a mix of communist brutality and capitilist greed.


Many Chinese people have begun to withdraw from the Communist Party since the much-more newsworthy crack-down on Leftist dissenters, criticizing the gov'ts distinctly anti-socialist orientation.

That's hardly "more newsworthy." Unless you were being biasedly humourous.
As a China analyst I can tell you this is not the reason for withdrawals from the CCP. The Chinese public have not had the chance to learn about their own governments history, mannerism and crimes until recently with the publishing of the 9 commentaries, and this is the key reason behind the withdrawals. Manyof the CCP's horriffic atrocities are beginning to be uncovered now, and rather than dismiss them as 'anti-China sentiments' that the CCP lead the Chinese people to believe, they are now considering them carefully. And the CCP will crackdown on any criticism it recieves, or any whisper of criticism it hears of, or anybody who it thinks may criticize them in the future. And their dogs, too.


The arguments that "The Chinese Communist Party Is an Evil Cult," and "An Anti-Universe Force" are so hillarious that one might wonder how even the most diehard anti-communists can take them seriously.

They probably are a bit much to western audiences. However, the Chinese lap this stuff up. The CCP have for so long bred into the population's heads that their enemies are "evil cults" and "anti China forces" that this is the type of language they are used to. And I actually think that the term 'evil cult' fits the CCP absolutely perfectly.

Interesting fact - Recently, about 1 person every 5 seconds withdraws from the CCP.

[Invader Zim]

While, I am not going to necessarily argue with your death statistics, I think its prudent to point out that the reason the statistics are so high, is not necessarily that Mao, or any other candidate was necessarily a genocidal maniac (though a case can certainly be put forward), but because moronic economic plans were implemented. More died from famine than anything else such as purges, and they were the result of stupidity.

[Zingu]

Originally posted by [email protected] 23 2005, 10:48 AM

Strands of communsm still remain, but you are pretty much accurate. China is the most capitilist country in the world. Although communist atrocities were common place well before 'Dungheap' Xiaoping came along. In fact, it was that hardline communism which made Xiaoping bring capitilism to China. China is a mix of communist brutality and capitilist greed.

Strands of Communism? Explain? Communism has never been in actual existance; did China ever have no state, no classes, and no borders?

[Zingu]

1 million people have withdrawn from communism. Communism is dying. Time is up, decide which boat you stand in! You all should read the 9 Commentaries and make a decision about what the CCP really is!

The 9 Commentaries

1,000,000 Withdrawals

An accurate portrail of Karl Marx


They did not withdraw from Communism; they withdrew from state capitalism's government appartus.

Communism is not "dying", since it never has become, but if you mean as a Socialist movement, it is growing, and rapidly, take example of South and Central America or in Europe, anti-globalization movements. We are everywhere.


1. I've never supported the Communist Party of China, and never admired it at any point of time. Its Maoist, an extreme form of Leninism.

2. There have been many Communists who have oppossed the Soviet Union and China from the start, and many who lost their lives because of it. Rosa Luxemburg, Leon Trotsky, the Shangahi Commune to name a few.

3. I can't wait to see the Chinese Communist Party fall in China; do you remember what the students at the Tiamenn Square were singing before they were massacured?

'The Internationale', the anthem of the International Socialist Movement.

You sir, are an idiot.

[Aryan theme]

Originally posted by [email protected] 22 2005, 08:37 AM
Attention Communists!
The CCP, The Chinese Communist Party, is in my opinion the most evil, tyrannical empire on Earth. Since it's conception in 1949 over 80 million innocent lives have been put to an end. And the brutality continues to this very day. While you so called communist supporters are playing on your X-Box the real communist scum are slaughtering people over there, right now. Communist atrocities are still very much alive today.

However, it seems as if the CCP's days are numbered. Below I have posted a link to what is known as 'The Nine Commentaries on the Communist Party.' Since it's publication in November 2004, it alarmed and shocked the Chinese people, who have been deceived by the communist lies and propaganda. In a steadily rising number, members of the CCP (numbering around 60 million) have begun to withdraw their memberships. 20,000 people withdraw from the CCP every day! That number has now risen to 1 million people in about 6 months.

1 million people have withdrawn from communism. Communism is dying. Time is up, decide which boat you stand in! You all should read the 9 Commentaries and make a decision about what the CCP really is!

The 9 Commentaries (http://english.epochtimes.com/jiuping.asp)

1,000,000 Withdrawals (http://english.epochtimes.com/news/5-4-21/28070.html)

An accurate portrail of Karl Marx (http://www.fancydressuk.co.uk/Images/caveman.jpg)
What do you expect from those yellow mongrels? Utopia? Quite the opposite.

[1936]

The Chinese government is about as communist as mcdonalds.

Plus 1,000,000 people withdrawing in china is about insugnifacant as the views and opinions of the jackass that posted before me.

[Severian]

Originally posted by [email protected] 22 2005, 02:37 AM
In a steadily rising number, members of the CCP (numbering around 60 million) have begun to withdraw their memberships. 20,000 people withdraw from the CCP every day! That number has now risen to 1 million people in about 6 months.
Y'know that might be an interesting bit of news, though certainly not supporting the interpretation you attempt to give it....if it was verifiably true. But it ain't. I clicked on this thread hoping to get a bit of useful info on what's happening in China, and was disappointed.

Your link on this subject is to some propaganda outfit who base their claim on...messages on a website. Totally meaningless.

Lemme suggest that people will resign from the CCP....when membership no longer advances their careers, probably only when it loses power. That's why people join it now, for their careers, it has nothing to do with political beliefs. It is not even a political party in the normal sense of the word.

[IlluminusPrime]

Strands of Communism? Explain? Communism has never been in actual existance

Not this tired old bullshit again. 'Communism has never existed.' So why do dimwitted clowns like yourself advocate it? If, for over 100 hundred years, communism has never existed, or been able to establish itself then it's a joke, and you're a joke being a particle of it. You dipshits can't even agree on what communism is, every one of you has some different trumped up idealistic bullshit that you call communism, but your buddy disagrees. So now communism is the state of utopia which is achieved by socialism. What a crock of dogshit, you can't separate the two like that saying communism is the heavenly utopia while socialism is the hellish road to it! They're two parts of the same process. You think the ends justify the means? Yeah, so do evil pricks like Stalin and Hitler.
So you think that the remaining communist ideals in the CCP doesn't qualify as communism? What about the commie clown next door? Or some other commie clown's ideas of communism? Can't you idiots decide what actually is communism?! Communist strands that remain are state control of all levels of society, from kindergartens to corporatations; centralized credit, transport and communications; state owned production; and let's not forget violent revolution, opression, killing, torture, genocide... "Oh wait! That's not communism! Thats socialism! Thats Leninism-Maoism-Fruitcakeism!" Your communism, his communism, buddy. Communism is violent, the mannerism is violent, it's intolerant, it's uncompassionate, it's crap.


They did not withdraw from Communism; they withdrew from state capitalism's government appartus.

So when the communist party goes bad, just disown it. "It's not communism anymore." Do you apply that same reasoning to capitalism? To religion?
It's a particle of communism. Might not be your version of communisim. It's the new CCPism if you like. How many chinese people do you know? The majority seem to want democracy for China. And don't go on about "communism is the ultimate democracy." What a mother-fathern' joke.


There have been many Communists who have oppossed the Soviet Union and China from the start, and many who lost their lives because of it.

Again, another example of "what is communsim." The only communism that has made itself felt is the evil communism - "step outta' line and get a bullet."


I can't wait to see the Chinese Communist Party fall in China

Me too. I can't wait to see all communist bozos fall everywhere.

You, Zingu the clown, are an idiot.
Click Here to book Zingu the Clown for your kid's next birthday!!! (http://www.robotfactory.com/Characters/images/clown.jpg)

[1936]

Not this tired old bullshit again. 'Communism has never existed.' So why do dimwitted clowns like yourself advocate it? If, for over 100 hundred years, communism has never existed, or been able to establish itself then it's a joke, and you're a joke being a particle of it. You dipshits can't even agree on what communism is, every one of you has some different trumped up idealistic bullshit that you call communism, but your buddy disagrees. So now communism is the state of utopia which is achieved by socialism. What a crock of dogshit, you can't separate the two like that saying communism is the heavenly utopia while socialism is the hellish road to it! They're two parts of the same process. You think the ends justify the means? Yeah, so do evil pricks like Stalin and Hitler.

Ok, lets start with taking a BIG deep breath, and are we calm?...goood boy.

Just because communism hasnt yet come to be, dosent mean its bullshit. Marx write a book defining a incredible utopia, and he told of how we must reach it. Everytime its been attempted some dude has fucked it to manipulate it to hes own benefit......but the proletarians learn from the mistakes and if some dude with a big fuzzy moustache comes along and starts puting ukranians in holes, well be sure raise an eyebrow.



So when the communist party goes bad, just disown it. "It's not communism anymore." Do you apply that same reasoning to capitalism? To religion?

No serious left wing revolutionary that isnt in it for themself has called china/russia/cuba communist.



"communism is the ultimate democracy." What a mother-fathern' joke.

How can there be democracy when the bourgese have the power to manipulate and corrupt the system so they can have a merc. Without the bourgese, the people are free.




Again, another example of "what is communsim." The only communism that has made itself felt is the evil communism - "step outta' line and get a bullet."

THERE HASNT BEEN EVIL COMMUNISM! BECAUSE THERE HASNT BEEN COMMUNISM!



Me too. I can't wait to see all communist bozos fall everywhere.

Awww arnt you lovely.


Dude, your owner is ringin the bell so youd better run of home and dance for the puppet master....

[Zingu]

Not this tired old bullshit again. 'Communism has never existed.' So why do dimwitted clowns like yourself advocate it?

Because we see it as the outcome of the moving forces of society, which we came to conclusion after analyzing history with Dialectical Materialism. Due to class antagonism; a Socialist stage must be established until such social contradictions dissaper; and the state being a tool of class oppression will also wither away once class antagonism dissaper.
The reason why it never dissapered in Russia or China is because there was a new ruling class; the Communist Party, that ruled the state, not the proletariat; therefore, such countries weren't even Socialist, but entered a form of state capitalism where the Communist Party ruled over the proletariat as the new burgeoisie; which is called State Capitalism.



You dipshits can't even agree on what communism is, every one of you has some different trumped up idealistic bullshit that you call communism, but your buddy disagrees.

We have differences on what the Dictatorship of the Proletariat is; Marx never laid out a blueprint of what the revolution actually is, just an analysis. We all agree that Communism is a stateless, classless and borderless society though.


What a crock of dogshit, you can't separate the two like that saying communism is the heavenly utopia while socialism is the hellish road to it! They're two parts of the same process. You think the ends justify the means?

Under that logic; Capitalism is Communism! :lol:

Feudalism, Capitalism, and Socialism are all three stages of human development towards its final stage of society; Communism. That is the beauty of Marx, he proved that history is on a course towards Communism since material reality is what infulences the moving forces of society.


So you think that the remaining communist ideals in the CCP doesn't qualify as communism?

The CCP are revisionist. Here is a better protrayal of them;

http://www.soviet-empire.com/images/humour/capitalist_cpc.gif



Communist strands that remain are state control of all levels of society, from kindergartens to corporatations; centralized credit, transport and communications; state owned production; and let's not forget violent revolution, opression, killing, torture, genocide... "Oh wait! That's not communism! Thats socialism!

Wrong, "Socialism" does not always equal statism. Socialism is the domination of the working class over the state and the means of production, not the domination of the state over the working class and the means of production (Fascism).


Thats Leninism-Maoism-Fruitcakeism!" Your communism, his communism, buddy. Communism is violent, the mannerism is violent, it's intolerant, it's uncompassionate, it's crap.

What? And Capitalism isn't violent? Grow up!
:lol:


So when the communist party goes bad, just disown it. "It's not communism anymore."

I don't believe in the authority of the Communist Party, I'm a Luxemburgist- an Council Communist.

[Zingu]

You learned all you think you know about Communism from this site, correct?

http://www.niagara.com/~freedom/anticom/first.htm


I shouldn't say sir, I should say, You kid, are an idiot.

[Paradox]

So when the communist party goes bad, just disown it. "It's not communism anymore."

Screw "communist" parties. The workers don't need a vanguard, just dedication and courage.


'Communism has never existed.' So why do dimwitted clowns like yourself advocate it?

Why did people advocate democracy back when they lived under kings and emperors? Why do we advocate Communism? CUZ WE WANT IT TO EXIST, DUH. :rolleyes:


The only communism that has made itself felt is the evil communism

*Yawn* Same old misinformed bullshit cappie argument against Communism.

China was never Communist, Soviet Union was never Communist and didn't claim to be (remember, they were the Union of Soviet SOCIALIST Republics, not Communist republics. And even that isn't true, unless you talk to a Leninist.) Cuba ain't Communist, Vietnam ain't Communist, NO ONE IS COMMUNIST OR EVER HAS BEEN. Countries have claimed to be SOCIALIST, but NONE have claimed to be Communist. NO GOVERNMENT in Communism, let alone a totalitarian one like in China or North Korea. NO MONEY in Communism. Nike has factories in Vietnam and China. I think that shows how "socialist" those countries are.

[Paradox]

EDIT: Posted twice on accident. Sorry.

[Encrypted Soldier]

China hasn't been Communist since Mao Tsetung died and since market reforms took place.

[IlluminusPrime]

Nothing new here, get a new arguement. And get a new philosophy while you're at it.



Just because communism hasnt yet come to be, dosent mean its bullshit

Sure it does. Communism just plain doesn't work. It's a complete waste of time supporting it. Communism has never existed? Why not? Why is it so easily interferred with and brought down? Because it's weak as a philosophy. Bringing about heaven on earth?! Humans aren't capable of it. The key to improving society is nothing to do with communism or capitalism. It has nothing to do with politics, it has to do with morality. Delude yourself with 'communism is the answer' if you want to waste your life away.


How can there be democracy when the bourgese have the power to manipulate and corrupt the system so they can have a merc. Without the bourgese, the people are free

'Class' will always exist even when you abolish it. There will always be a natural pecking order. Even animals have social status. Do you aim to reduce humans to animals? To ants? Anyway, eliminating 'class' will not eliminate corruption. Corruption will just move into the proletariat status. And they'll be a heck of a lot more in-fighting. Like I said before, if you clowns can't even decide what communism is, how can you make important political decisions that affect the outcome of millions of human lives? So how are people free without the bourgeoise? Most of the working class I know live much happier lives than most middle-upper class I know. 'Communist utopia' is not freedom, unless you mean the freedom to dream.


THERE HASNT BEEN EVIL COMMUNISM! BECAUSE THERE HASNT BEEN COMMUNISM!

Ok, lets start with taking a BIG deep breath, and are we calm?...goood boy.
Of course there's been communism, didn't you read the post properly? Socialism is part of the communist process. They are not totally separate, it's a joke to consider it. Idiots like Lenin, Stalin, and Mao sought to build a communist society through the means they saw fit. But apparently communists don't believe in evil, so they consider evil a great way to get things done. Then when they're exposed the rest of the commie clowns turn around and shake their head at them. You're all communist particles, take some responsibility for past wrongs. Make things right. Oh, wait communist arguement #3- "That wasn't our fault, it wasn't communism." Read the post again - Do you apply that same reasoning to capitalism? To religion?


Awww arnt you lovely.

Yes I am. But sorry, I am not gay, perhaps you and Zingu the Clown should get together. A clown and a guy who idolises a muppet. You fools are made for each other! Bwahahahaaa!

By the way, your quotes in your sig are hilarious. One portrays you are a thinker, the other portrays you as a violent communist dimwit. You are in fact a dimwit, because you can't spell for beans.


Because we see it as the outcome of the moving forces of society, which we came to conclusion after analyzing history with Dialectical Materialism.

Dialectical Materialism: Bwaaaaahahahahaaaa!


The reason why it never dissapered in Russia or China is because there was a new ruling class; the Communist Party, that ruled the state, not the proletariat;

Wait a sec, so you actually think society will evolve without the guidance of leadership?! Bwaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaahahahhahaaa! Too many cooks spoil the broth, bozo.Leadership is necessary. You put a whole host of proletariat dimwits like yourself in charge and watch the chaos take over. Everyone wants to have their input, everyone wants to be heard, everyone is a dumbass (seeing as you've already executed the liberals and intellectuals), how far are things gonna go before you flop over on your face? Proletariats are proletariats because they are not suited to making major important decisions, they are work horses, that is their place, and they should be proud of that. If they want to aspire to leadership, fine, let them give it try and see how far they get.


We all agree that Communism is a stateless, classless and borderless society though.

Like I said: Even animals have these qualities. Leaders, status, and turf. How will borders cease to exist with so many different races and credes? How will class cease to exist with human emotion? How will leaders cease to exist with dipshits like Zingu the Clown and his wife Elmoist bumbling along and making a mess of things? Can't you see the simple picture before you see the big picture?


Under that logic; Capitalism is Communism!

I am not a capitalist supporter, but capitalism doesn't seek to build an impossible utopian society.


That is the beauty of Marx, he proved that history is on a course towards Communism since material reality is what infulences the moving forces of society.

Dialectical materialism: Bwaaaahahahaha! Mad-Marx never proved anything! He was a dreamer! In fact he was waaaaay off. You've been brainwashed by his mumbo-jumbo, listen to you! "History is on a course towards communsim!" Where's the evidence of that?! Did it collapse with the USSR? Or was it swallowed by state capitalism?! Where is it?! Society is now full of sin. That's what is shaping it into a mess. Communism says nothing about removing the evil from men's hearts. So communism would propagate a mess too.


Wrong, "Socialism" does not always equal statism. Socialism is the domination of the working class over the state and the means of production, not the domination of the state over the working class and the means of production (Fascism).

I was mocking you dimwit. So you think that leaders equals fascism? You'd rather put the horse in charge of the rider? How on earth is that going to get things done?! What a thickit.


What? And Capitalism isn't violent? Grow up!

Capitalism is all about greed. Communism is just plain moronic. It's so anti human thinking it leads to violence, death, destruction. That's what communism (or socialism if you prefer) leads to, not heaven. Also, take a look at your favourite communist heroes writings and quotes, and tell me what manner they convey. The peace and tranquility of a utopian world? Yeah right.


You learned all you think you know about Communism from this site, correct?

Incorrect. I learnt about communism from communists.

As for Paradox, you just repeated the clown and the muppet's points. At least your name is cooler than their's. But you're just as dopey.

[ahhh_money_is_comfort]

Originally posted by Encrypted [email protected] 24 2005, 09:23 PM
China hasn't been Communist since Mao Tsetung died and since market reforms took place.
OK so China tried to conform to the philosophy and it wasn't able to? And that is NOT a communist failure? It certainly was not a successful experiment.

[IlluminusPrime]

Hahahahaaa. Communism always ends in failure. It is a failure in theory, and an even bigger failure in practice. Which makes communists themselves failures. Modern day communists are all idiots, actually. Rebelious teenagers angry at their life, since they can't get a girl, don't have car, are angry at their folks, have a small dick, or whatever. They blame it on the government, blame it on society, blame it on God. Bottom line is, communists are losers.

[Non-Sectarian Bastard!]

What makes that you, for wanting to debate us?

[IlluminusPrime]

What makes that you, for wanting to debate us?

A winner. Shall I list the ways in which I'm a winner? Maybe tomorrow, I've got some winning to do. Oh yeah.

[OleMarxco]

Shut up. China is not Communistic. It has money, borders, classes and only thing it has alike SOCIALISM, is planned economics. It's most DEFINATELY state capitalistic. You're wasting your keyboard fighting an illusion of a nation tricking itself to believe it is Communistic, and so do you. That goes for Soviet aswell. Defence of this is only to ignore the stunning proof that you can't say Communism has failed before someone has really tried to make it. The Paris Commune of 1817 was applauded as a real communistic society but it was only temporarily, but worked swell while it lasted as a "buffer"-model before going back to a softer feudalism.

The failures of STATE CAPITALISM, on the other hand, abusing the word Communism is like blaming Marx for the nukes of Soviet, the genocide of Pol Pot. Has there ever been a country withouth money and classes since Capitalism emerged? No. Has there been a Communism then? No. Has there been wannabe revolutionaries going from feudalism to "communism" claiming it and and their country failing (after decades)? YES! It's all a fuckin' shame.

The evils lie in the leaders, not the workers. Hell, it's not even supposed to be a leader and a party either, but direct democracy. I refuse to see Stalin, Lenin, Mao and Castro as genuine communists. Their collectivization and pseudo-Communism ruins it all. Bloody idiots. Petty burgeouis farmer semi-rightfully resisted the Bolsheviks who, against the whim of the people, had seized powers albeit better than the feudalistic rule before, was slowly falling. However, this does not make capitalism BETTER. They forced the hand of the one-party state and a real Communism is not possible to combine with despots. People's rule. You're attacking Despotism, not the direct people's democracy of a socialistic land. Get some grip on reality and stop spouting odious bile.

[Totalitarian Militant]

Originally posted by [email protected] 22 2005, 08:37 AM
Attention Communists!
The CCP, The Chinese Communist Party, is in my opinion the most evil, tyrannical empire on Earth. Since it's conception in 1949 over 80 million innocent lives have been put to an end. And the brutality continues to this very day. While you so called communist supporters are playing on your X-Box the real communist scum are slaughtering people over there, right now. Communist atrocities are still very much alive today.

However, it seems as if the CCP's days are numbered. Below I have posted a link to what is known as 'The Nine Commentaries on the Communist Party.' Since it's publication in November 2004, it alarmed and shocked the Chinese people, who have been deceived by the communist lies and propaganda. In a steadily rising number, members of the CCP (numbering around 60 million) have begun to withdraw their memberships. 20,000 people withdraw from the CCP every day! That number has now risen to 1 million people in about 6 months.

1 million people have withdrawn from communism. Communism is dying. Time is up, decide which boat you stand in! You all should read the 9 Commentaries and make a decision about what the CCP really is!

The 9 Commentaries (http://english.epochtimes.com/jiuping.asp)

1,000,000 Withdrawals (http://english.epochtimes.com/news/5-4-21/28070.html)

An accurate portrail of Karl Marx (http://www.fancydressuk.co.uk/Images/caveman.jpg)
Thanks! I finally saw what Karl Marx looks like. Cool.

[IlluminusPrime]

Thanks! I finally saw what Karl Marx looks like. Cool.

You're welcome. This is indeed Marx. The spitting image.

As for OldMarxballs, I mean, OleMarxco, your post = commie comeback #2: "That wasn't communism." Communism, or what you like to call socialism, is erroneous because it always ends in failure, it is so easily turned into something else as soon as it's realised its not realistic. Noone ever even came close to achieving it. Communism is full of holes, hence it's easily being toppled, sidetracked, taken advantage of, or collapsing every time somebody farts.
These 'internet communists' are the ones who have no idea about communism. You're completely wasting your time. Refer to my earlier post as to why you suck.

[Zingu]

Originally posted by [email protected] 29 2005, 11:34 AM

As for OldMarxballs, I mean, OleMarxco, your post = commie comeback #2: "That wasn't communism." Communism, or what you like to call socialism, is erroneous because it always ends in failure, it is so easily turned into something else as soon as it's realised its not realistic. Noone ever even came close to achieving it. Communism is full of holes, hence it's easily being toppled, sidetracked, taken advantage of, or collapsing every time somebody farts.
These 'internet communists' are the ones who have no idea about communism. You're completely wasting your time. Refer to my earlier post as to why you suck.
You are an idiot..or maybe just a troll.


Did you just hear what OleMarxco said? Russia and China where feudalist to begin with; IF YOU have ever read Marx (which you haven't), you will hear him state that the proletarian revolution rests on the INDUSTRIAL PROLETARIAT! China and Russia never had such things, they tried to skip Capitalism all together and go right towards Socialism..it didn't work.


So, you said you don't support Capitalism? Do you favor Nationalist/Fascist economics then?

Stop spewing your ignorant shit and read some Marx, then get back here.

[Zingu]

Incorrect. I learnt about communism from communists.


Then what is with that link in your signature? You lie. Those forums link right to that link I gave earlier. :lol:

[Domingo]

Listen Prime:

You are a contradicting dick head.

You say that a person contradict himself for a sig?

You contradicted yourself by saying we "internet commies" dont know what we are talking about.

Your sorry son of a ***** ass cant get your own ass straight. You said on the first page that "[you] were glad that we knew what [we] were talking about."

Now you just have a baby-boomer, anti-communism dick stuck in your ass. This is a Hell for you, you will find no support from anyone here, turn no heads to your idealism, and most of all, you preech that which you prob. dont even enforce.

Get the hell out'a here. This is your Waterloo.

[1936]

Prime dude

1- not everyone on this site is communist, communism isnt the only ideologie in left wing politics. Maybe if you wernt such a twat youd realise that and wouldnt have made the post about the failings of communism in china when clearly china isnt communist

2- to refer to people as INTERNET communists, is implieng that we dont have lives outside this computer, or that were not communist outside it. Both are wrong, this is simply a place to further knowledge on what we belive in, and practice outside of the computer.

3-
have a small dick considering my arrogance and pride in how well endowed i am i will happily photo my meat and send it to you so you can laminate it and do whatever it is you want with it.....but im not implieng anything

4-
Noone ever even came close to achieving it how contradictive

[Forward Union]

Originally posted by [email protected] 29 2005, 11:34 AM







it always ends in failure, it is so easily turned into something else as soon as it's realised its not realistic.

And what unworldly force gave you the power to predict the future?


Noone ever even came close to achieving it. Communism is full of holes, hence it's easily being toppled, sidetracked, taken advantage of, or collapsing every time somebody farts.

That's a very poor analysis, why don't you try and use something other than your skewed personal vision of the world. At least we don't have to worry about your "Farts" destroying socialism, since your ass is splendidly plugged by your head.


These 'internet communists' are the ones who have no idea about communism. You're completely wasting your time. Refer to my earlier post as to why you suck.

I'd love to see you back up these brilliant claims. So far you've almost openly confessed that you don't understand by definition; Communism, Socialism, Marxist-Leninism etc. Let alone your "Special" interpretations of social history.

I presume this is a case where your mother forgot to keep the computer out of your reach. Your a serious embarrassment to the other capitalists on this board, and that's saying something. So just fuck off and read, before you try and debate with the big boys.

[ahhh_money_is_comfort]

Originally posted by [email protected] 25 2005, 11:27 AM
Shut up. China is not Communistic. It has money, borders, classes and only thing it has alike SOCIALISM, is planned economics. It's most DEFINATELY state capitalistic. You're wasting your keyboard fighting an illusion of a nation tricking itself to believe it is Communistic, and so do you. That goes for Soviet aswell. Defence of this is only to ignore the stunning proof that you can't say Communism has failed before someone has really tried to make it. The Paris Commune of 1817 was applauded as a real communistic society but it was only temporarily, but worked swell while it lasted as a "buffer"-model before going back to a softer feudalism.

The failures of STATE CAPITALISM, on the other hand, abusing the word Communism is like blaming Marx for the nukes of Soviet, the genocide of Pol Pot. Has there ever been a country withouth money and classes since Capitalism emerged? No. Has there been a Communism then? No. Has there been wannabe revolutionaries going from feudalism to "communism" claiming it and and their country failing (after decades)? YES! It's all a fuckin' shame.

The evils lie in the leaders, not the workers. Hell, it's not even supposed to be a leader and a party either, but direct democracy. I refuse to see Stalin, Lenin, Mao and Castro as genuine communists. Their collectivization and pseudo-Communism ruins it all. Bloody idiots. Petty burgeouis farmer semi-rightfully resisted the Bolsheviks who, against the whim of the people, had seized powers albeit better than the feudalistic rule before, was slowly falling. However, this does not make capitalism BETTER. They forced the hand of the one-party state and a real Communism is not possible to combine with despots. People's rule. You're attacking Despotism, not the direct people's democracy of a socialistic land. Get some grip on reality and stop spouting odious bile.
Ok China not communist. What you fail to accept that the Revolution in China was communist, then somewhere it went 'not communist'. What you fail to accept that that universal outcome of a communist revolution is to become 'not communist'. Then all the evil, the killings, the oppression is conviently labeled 'not communist'. What you fail to accept is that communist revolutions have almost universally always produced these 'non communist' killings and oppression. It basically is a cop out. Anywhere in the world today, there is not a single communist that can look at me straight and say they figured out a way to start a revolution in that part of the world and promise is won't be 'not communist'. That is a problem for communis, eh? How to keep the revolution going so in the end it does not become 'not communist' like almost every single other revolution that has come before it.

[Forward Union]

Originally posted by [email protected] 30 2005, 07:30 AM


What you fail to accept that the Revolution in China was communist, then somewhere it went 'not communist'. What you fail to accept that that universal outcome of a communist revolution is to become 'not communist'.

That's debatable, the revolution was doomed to fail before it started, because its goals fell short after the PLA took power over China. The fact that Mao wanted to install a hierarchy, as well, as to end the revolution in China suggests that this so called "Communist Revolution" was in fact quite distorted.


Then all the evil, the killings, the oppression is conviently labeled 'not communist'. What you fail to accept is that communist revolutions have almost universally always produced these 'non communist' killings and oppression.

This statement is misleading, since it seems your suggesting that we claim, everything is communist apart from all the bad parts of the society. Rubbish, we reject that the USSR, China etc were communist, because they don't fit the description of communist. It's like calling a Cat, a Dog, its not a matter of disassociation, they're simply not the same.


It basically is a cop out. Anywhere in the world today, there is not a single communist that can look at me straight and say they figured out a way to start a revolution in that part of the world and promise is won't be 'not communist'. That is a problem for communis, eh? How to keep the revolution going so in the end it does not become 'not communist' like almost every single other revolution that has come before it.

There are many different theories on how to achieve a successful revolution, but to give you some sort of general understanding of why many communists believe all previous revolutions have not worked look at the original theory. It was originally (and still is) believed that to install a successful aftermath, the revolution must take place in a 1st world country rather than a 2nd world country. 3rd world can be victimised by the global economy, but if a nation like the USA or UK were to fall to the people, then the global Capitalist economy would suffer.

[red_orchestra]

China is far from Communism...since Maos time the Chinese have gone fully into Capitalism. Mao had a REAL point in controlling the Chinese people. Mao believed without strict rule the Chinese people would fall into oblivion---

Freedom and democracy is a weak slogan to be waving around IlluminusPrime and the truth is that most counties can NOT be run in such a way. China has over 1 Billion people...it has to have strict rules and a socialist government in order to survive.

...further thought... "Freedom and Democracy" is truely a bullshit ploy used in the US to mask the stripping of rights under the "homeland security act". Nice try, I ain't buyin' it.

[Forward Union]

Originally posted by [email protected] 30 2005, 09:57 AM



Freedom and democracy is a weak slogan to be waving around

It's a slogan I use, a cause I would fight for, maybe if necessary, die for. Without Freedom and Democracy, we are left with nothing short of a dictatorship, fascist rule that is tough to contend.


...further thought... "Freedom and Democracy" is truely a bullshit ploy used in the US to mask the stripping of rights under the "homeland security act". Nice try, I ain't buyin' it.

Freedom and Democracy is not a western cause. Its an Anarchist cause, a communist cause, and in some cases a Socialist cause.

[IlluminusPrime]

Oooh, did I offend the poor lil' communists? Bwaaahahahaaa! You keyboard commies crack me up. Let me explain why.

The Clown

IF YOU have ever read Marx (which you haven't)

Wrong. Mad Marx is whom I learnt about communism from. He is also an idealsitic git who had no real idea about life, morals, and nature. His philosophy is more destructive than any other policy or ideological system in the world today, from conception to downfall (because it has never succeeded).


So, you said you don't support Capitalism? Do you favor Nationalist/Fascist economics then?

No. I support morality, which the world had very little of, and which communism lacks the most, despite what you may think. There is no compassion and harmony within communist philosophy. Please educate me, if you can, as to where these qualities lie within your cult doctrines.

Dodomongo



Incorrect. I learnt about communism from communists.

Then what is with that link in your signature? You lie. Those forums link right to that link I gave earlier.

You are again wrong. Because I joined the Anticom Action forums does not mean I learnt anything about communism there. In fact, I learnt very little there, because it is a very quiet forum as communist posers like you Revleft lot are too cowardly to step foot in enemy turf. That is the purpose of my sig, to challenge you to "bring the ruckus - *****!' In fact, it's fools like Revleft keyboard commies that I learn the most about modern day communism from.


You contradicted yourself by saying we "internet commies" dont know what we are talking about.

Your sorry son of a ***** ass cant get your own ass straight. You said on the first page that "[you] were glad that we knew what [we] were talking about."


Wrong. Can you read? Read the post you refer to again. It says I'm glad you know what the CCP is all about, in the sense they are a tyrannical, twisted regime. You in fact don't know what you are talking about when it comes to life, goodwill, and human rights though. How old are you? I bet you're a rebellious 16 year old loser with pasty skin and chronic acne, sitting in his dimly lit room all day in a Megadeath t-shirt. And you have a small dick.


This is a Hell for you, you will find no support from anyone here

I don't want support from small cocked keyboard commies. I came here to bring the ruckus, *****. So far I have quite enjoyed annoying you communist geeks.


Get the hell out'a here.

Na

The Muppet

...is implieng that we dont have lives outside this computer

You call your sorry existance a life? You all sound way too angry to have a decent life. Relax and enjoy it, stop letting Mad Marx breed his madness in your minds.


considering my arrogance and pride in how well endowed i am i will happily photo my meat and send it to you so you can laminate it and do whatever it is you want with it.....

Omigosh, you actually are gay. First you think I'm lovely, and now you want to send me pornographic pictures of yourself?! Man thats disgusting. I'm NOT gay you pasty, little, little man.

Analcho Rabble

And what unworldly force gave you the power to predict the future?

This is history. Learn from it.


That's a very poor analysis

You clowns say it yourself - communism has never existed. Yet how many have tried? Communism always ends in failure, always have, always will. Especially with it's aggressive attitude, the best it can do is breed war. Prove us wrong, bring about utopia. Hahahahaaaa!


So far you've almost openly confessed that you don't understand by definition; Communism, Socialism, Marxist-Leninism etc.

Communist argument #1 - "You don't know what communism is." You idiots can't even agree with each other as to what it is. If the communist revolution ever topples society (Bwwaaaaaahahahaha!) you'd all be warring among yourselves. Only anti communists truly understand what communism actually is. You lot are brainwashed by it.


...before you try and debate with the big boys.

Are you serious?! You think you're the big boys??!! Bwaaaaaaaaaaahahahahahaaaaaa!!!!
This is a joke. So far on this site, all I've seen is bickering, angry teenage losers who slag insults around. If I can hold my own against the professionals then this group of ruffians is nothing more than a plaything. Something to amuse me.
Quite the opposite, you're all very little, little boys. In more ways than one. Hahahahahahaaaa!


It's like calling a Cat, a Dog, its not a matter of disassociation, they're simply not the same.

That cat wanted to be a dog, and for a while it was a dog, until the cat realised being a dog would mean it had to sleep outside in the cold. Then it opted for the cosier lifestyle of the cat. Those societies started out wanting to be communist. After a while something clicked - this ain't gonna work. Hence communism's failure to ever become a reality.


There are many different theories on how to achieve a successful revolution

And thats why they are just theories. Such widespread violence cannot be so easily bred out of the minds of the masses. And it's very likely the violence would become a long drawn out process so the communist scum could attempt to eliminate all dissention and counter revolutionaries. If this ever happened in a 1st world country, it wouldn't be revolution, it'd be war. You'd never get past that stage. Building a utopia based on bloodshed? Doubt it. Hence communism's failure to ever become a reality.


Its an Anarchist cause, a communist cause, and in some cases a Socialist cause.

Democracy and freedom under communism? I've heard this weak argument, and it's totally ridiculous. Under a fully communist state there'd be less freedom and democracy than there is today. "Do what you're told."Do ants get to have any say about what food to gather, what leaders to elect, what location to build a nest? Communism is for ants, not people. Hence communism's failure to EVER become a reality!

Hail the heroes of the counter-revolution!

[marxist_socialist_aussie]

Actaully IlluminusPrime, maybe if you trully knew as much as you said you knew, you would know that socialism/socialist on its own, is more correctly classed as an ECONOMIC THEORY while communism is a political ideology. They are different things with differing beliefs.

Also, that argument you gave that since we can't all agree on one form of communism it is idiotic etc. is just so small minded and completely misinformed. Think about it, does everybody who believes in a liberalism view point agree completely...no, does everybody who believes in a 'conservative' or 'corporalist' view point agree completely...no. Dude, why don't you try learning a bit instead of simply pushing your propaganda and name calling here. Ohh, and those stupid little pictures you post links to, grow up.

[1936]

Omigosh, you actually are gay. First you think I'm lovely, and now you want to send me pornographic pictures of yourself?! Man thats disgusting. I'm NOT gay you pasty, little, little man.

Dude, you seem to be very quick to defend yourself....you found any flares yet?

And my genitalia is not pornographic as much as it is art.



No. I support morality, which the world had very little of, and which communism lacks the most

My good friend your what we call a "p-r-i-c-k". How is a ideology in which no man would go cold or hungry NOT morale?...compared to a world of starvation and suffering due so that Bush can have a new mercedes? which you believe is morale?

It is the production of the working class that humanity survives, and it is these people that are of poor quality of life?....fair?

The world NEEDS workers yet the bourgois are somewhat of a ....variable.


The worker bees can fly away, the queen is there slave

-Fight club


Communism is the only direction for the future dear chap because a system in which The ruling class get fat of the lower class's production is not atall morale.

Your a moron.

Loves and kisses "the muppet"

P.S whats wrong with homosexuality? Not that my sexual orientation has anything to do with this debate, but it sounds like the little capitalst is also a homophobe!

GASP!

capatilsm victimising people because of there beliefs!?!?! say it aint so!!!! i dont believe it!!!!

[Paradox]

Communist argument #1 - "You don't know what communism is." You idiots can't even agree with each other as to what it is.

We AGREE on what communism is. It is a stateless, classless, moneyless society based on common ownership. What the various "Marxist" ideologies disagree on is how to get there. Every major revolution since the Soviet Union was created was based on Leninism; China, Vietnam, Cuba, etc. Lenin advocated a vanguard to "lead" the proletariat, and believed in a more centralized state. Others, such as myself, are in total rejection of the idea of vanguards or centralization. If the workers, the people themselves are not taking control themselves, if they are not deciding for themselves, then it is not a people's movement.


communism has never existed. Yet how many have tried? Communism always ends in failure, always have, always will. Especially with it's aggressive attitude, the best it can do is breed war.

Strange, how can Communism "always end in failure" when it has never existed?

Workers have to defend themselves from attack. We're not crazy blood thirsty murderers. When a revolution occurs, logically the reactionaries will try to defend the status quo. It follows therefore, that we must be prepared to defend ourselves against their attacks. Many of us hope that as little blood will be shed as possible; that the movement will be as peaceful as possible. But unfortunately, violence is most likely inevitable.


Under a fully communist state there'd be less freedom and democracy than there is today.

Contradiction. No state in Communism.


don't want support from small cocked keyboard commies.

Your insecurity and arrogance is rather amusing, but please, try to keep this discussion an intelligent one, in other words, less senseless insults and more focus on the topic at hand.


You call your sorry existance a life? You all sound way too angry to have a decent life. Relax and enjoy it, stop letting Mad Marx breed his madness in your minds.

I was angrier, apathetic, and depressed BEFORE I BECAME A COMMUNIST. Now I am no longer apathetic. And the only thing I'm angry about is capitalism and its imperialistic grip on the world. Now I know that there is something important to live for- helping others. Communism isn't impossible, it isn't irrational, and though it probably will not happen during my life-time, I'm sure it will be realized.

Though the EZLN isn't Communist, at least I haven't heard them claim to be, their autonomous network in southern Mexico is the best example I know of right now that is decentralized and where there is democracy and freedom. The system they've set up still needs some tweaking, but they're working on it, and I think it's a glimpse as to how things could be set up successfully. If you want I will look for some good links and provide you with more information. But please, be more mature and less insulting.

[IlluminusPrime]

Did I offend you again? Poor little, little didums.

Communist ideology - "We will provide equal distribution of poverty to each member of society, so instead of being cold and hungry, they'll only be a not-so cold and a not-so hungry. Until they are made slaves, and then they'll be lucky to get a taste of whip now and again. And to achieve this, we will murder, torture, and rampage across those who say otherwise in an all out effort to destroy any opposistion. All who dare to oppose us shall be destroyed! Mua-ah-ha-haaa!"

Communism is moral? So tell that to the families of the 100,000,000 million lives crushed by communist-persuing states. Tell that to the survivors of horrific atrocities committed by communsit-persuing states. Tell that to God at the time of your death. Because I don't believe a single syllable of it. By the way, it's spelt 'moral,' not 'morale.' They are two different things.

Poor living conditions do not exist for no reason. They exist due to irresponsibility and neglect, and exist because of communist-advocated traits such as violence, revolution, and war. There are plenty of capitalists who do there best to help these people, haven't you heard of charity organisations? Communism only seeks to take advantage of the weak in order to put them to work, in order to make the state stronger. Don't gimme that crap about 'no state' either, you'd soon realsie it would be necessary for global co-ordination. How many times must it be said? You can't create a utopian society based on violence and blood shed. Human nature does not fit into a mechanical society. And centralised credit does make people starve and suffer seeing as each is only given the basic survival needs. If you work harder, or are a better person, you should not be treated the same as a slacker punk who would rather wack off all day. Every person has there own individual traits. Everyone is not the same.




Loves and kisses "the muppet"

P.S whats wrong with homosexuality? Not that my sexual orientation has anything to do with this debate, but it sounds like the little capitalst is also a homophobe!

So you are gay then. I'm not capitalist, but if you want to be gay, then go ahead. Just keep your poo-stinking pipsqueak of an art piece away from me. And tell God it's moral at the time of your death.

[Zingu]

No. I support morality, which the world had very little of, and which communism lacks the most, despite what you may think. There is no compassion and harmony within communist philosophy. Please educate me, if you can, as to where these qualities lie within your cult doctrine

What the hell are "morality based economics"?! :lol:

By the way, since of your homophobic remarks, we have started a vote in the CC to have you banned.

[Domingo]

Originally posted by [email protected] 1 2005, 01:44 AM
I'm not capitalist
So what are you that is so great in this world to come in here, insult my comrades, and talk as if you knew me.

I am old enough to know that you are an American who has no friends and racks up his put-down by having them installed in your mind by some stupid show like South Park.

You can choose to fight for your true freedom through our cause or you can ignore it. You underestimate the people behind the keyboard. just children, aye?

Most of the people on here are adults with strong beliefs. Wake up, dude. You come here just to cast down us? That is all I figure from this so far. Everything you have posted is a little bit from a copy-and-paste of "research" that you did.

You make no sense, do you even know what you are talking about or how you sound? Do you even know what you stand for?

[ZeroPain]

Hahahahaaa. Communism always ends in failure. It is a failure in theory, and an even bigger failure in practice. Which makes communists themselves failures. Modern day communists are all idiots, actually. Rebelious teenagers angry at their life, since they can't get a girl, don't have car, are angry at their folks, have a small dick, or whatever. They blame it on the government, blame it on society, blame it on God. Bottom line is, communists are losers.

:lol: Ah i had to skip past all that bullshit argueing to coment on this..

When i saw this i hit the floor really, now im not going to call the mature and respectfull respectfull person who posted this a dipshit but i have to thank him, because of this my iq went up 60 points,Got a job,Joined the R.O.T.C,Bought a Hummer H2,Bought a Asian farm girl,Hugged my mother,AND! My dick grew 4 inches. He also somehow included an insightfull analisis on the superoity of the capitalist man who gets a large penis and, dosent blame the goverment EVER, Dosent blame socioty EVER,and NEVER blames GOD ..the holy spirit...or the holy ghoast..and jesus christ,lord and saviour hallaouha!.


Most people will notice that when you love money your dick gets bigger :P .

[13Commnists]

And tell God it's moral at the time of your death.
Why would he tell something it's moral to be gay if that thing doesn't even exist.
What's wrong with being gay? It's because they're diffrent isn't it.


Hahahahaaa. Communism always ends in failure. It is a failure in theory, and an even bigger failure in practice. Which makes communists themselves failures. Modern day communists are all idiots, actually. Rebelious teenagers angry at their life, since they can't get a girl, don't have car, are angry at their folks, have a small dick, or whatever. They blame it on the government, blame it on society, blame it on God. Bottom line is, communists are losers.

"can't get a girl" Either they alienate me or they like me and keep annoying me about it I just refuse to go out plain and simple."don't have a car" Don't care about cars. "are angry at their folks"
Hugged my mother that pretty much explains things, "have a small dick" I don't care how big my groin is! "Blame it on god" How can I blame something that doesn't exist? "Modern Day Communists are idiots" it's amazing it takes some education to understand quite an amount of Communist ideas. "Blame it on the Government, Blame it on society" I don't blame either.




Wrong. Mad Marx is whom I learnt about communism from. He is also an idealsitic git who had no real idea about life, morals, and nature. His philosophy is more destructive than any other policy or ideological system in the world today, from conception to downfall (because it has never succeeded).

Have you read any books besides the Communist Manifesto? Have you read anything by Engels? Obviously not.

[1936]

Illuminousprime, if your not capatilst and your not socialist....what are you?

[Black Dagger]

Originally posted by The World's 1st [email protected] 1 2005, 04:23 PM
Illuminousprime, if your not capatilst and your not socialist....what are you?
religious? :lol:

[1936]

I think we have found ourselves a third positionist....

[Illuminus-Prime]

So, got me banned, eh? Well, you won't get rid of me that easily! From what I've ascertained from your drivel since I was banned, is this:

1.) Revleft communists don't debate, they simply slag insults about. Except for Paradox, so far he's the only guy who I don't consider to be insane. Apart from believing in communism... Ok, he's insane too.
2.) Revleft communists are a bunch of anrgy and rebellious teens and, apparently, angry adults with the mentality of an angry and rebellious teen. And all are apparently insane.
3.) Revleft communists have no idea what communism is. And are insane.
4.) Revleft communists are violent minded, and also dimwitted if they think communism may ever come to be. And are definitley insane.
5.) Revleft communists are proud to have small dicks, if they have something which can pass for a dick. As I don't think I've spoken to any females, I can only guess that commie females look like men and have balls. And they're insane too.
6.) Revleft communists are all apparently gay. Insane and gay (same thing?).
7.) Revleft communists refuse to accept the failure of communism even though it has never been achieved while many have tried. Communism is insane.
8.) Revleft communists are really fun to insult, as you get a reaction out of them. Insane, angry reactions.
9.) Revleft communists are almost illiterate. They can't spell for beans, have no idea about grammar, and can't structure a proper sentence, even though are (apparently) grown adults and intellectual "big-boys." And are also insane.
10.) Revleft communists are insane.

So that about sums up revleft, a hole in which violent communist faggots with small, smelly dingers and no life crawl into to voice their fustration and swap recipies. As I'm sure you will be banning me again, you can keep your horehouse while I continue to go on winning with my winner life. Don't be jealous, that's just life. You lose, I win. So see ya' on Judgement day, losers, when you're all sent to hell for advocating anti-human nature, violence and terror, and herpes.

I give you permission to react....




Now.

[RedAnarchist]

You like to call people insane dont you? <_<

[1936]

This guy makes me laugh&#33;

I wish horrible cancer upon you and your family&#33;

[NykylaiHellray]

:huh:

that cancer comment was kinda sad. I mean wish it on his family. Your proving your just as bad as him

Nah I am not communist, pure right winger, and not here to start a fight, just to watch the fireworks.

<_< now you to groups could both have an interlectual discussion on your opposing ideals if ya want. Which in your convos there is the odd gem of wisdom.

But if you cannot stop making lewd and vulger comments at yourself, which in turn proves all of you even prime. Are nothing but petty bateria, who never in the right mind deserve to lead a country.

If any of the members posting on this post lead the world in this generation, I am moving to a dessert island and stay there.

:) But come on guys that begin the convo anew and post in a compleaty rational sense.

<_< like you are even going to listen to me that is.

[RedStarOverChina]

just to clearify The 9 Commentaries and 1,000,000 Withdrawals are complete lies made up by Falunkong members. i think the story was clearified a year ago or something.

[RedStarOverChina]

Originally posted by [email protected] 22 2005, 08:05 AM
Where&#39;s that moron who actually does support China? RedStarOverChina, or something like that?
yes, t_wolves_fan, i do support China and whether u like it or not is none of my concern. U can hate as much as u want and frankly i dont mind <_<

[t_wolves_fan]

Originally posted by RedStarOverChina+May 3 2005, 07:23 AM--> (RedStarOverChina &#064; May 3 2005, 07:23 AM)
[email protected] 22 2005, 08:05 AM
Where&#39;s that moron who actually does support China? RedStarOverChina, or something like that?
yes, t_wolves_fan, i do support China and whether u like it or not is none of my concern. U can hate as much as u want and frankly i dont mind <_< [/b]
If it wasn&#39;t your concern, you wouldn&#39;t have responded. :ph34r:

Speaking of that, starved a few million while making a great leap forward lately?

[RedStarOverChina]

Originally posted by t_wolves_fan+May 3 2005, 06:47 AM--> (t_wolves_fan @ May 3 2005, 06:47 AM)
Originally posted by [email protected] 3 2005, 07:23 AM

[email protected] 22 2005, 08:05 AM
Where&#39;s that moron who actually does support China? RedStarOverChina, or something like that?
yes, t_wolves_fan, i do support China and whether u like it or not is none of my concern. U can hate as much as u want and frankly i dont mind <_<
If it wasn&#39;t your concern, you wouldn&#39;t have responded. :ph34r:

Speaking of that, starved a few million while making a great leap forward lately? [/b]
u dont have alot of creativity, do u? tsk tsk tsk. its not funny anymore the second time u say it.

[t_wolves_fan]

Originally posted by [email protected] 3 2005, 07:12 AM
just to clearify The 9 Commentaries and 1,000,000 Withdrawals are complete lies made up by Falunkong members. i think the story was clearified a year ago or something.
It sure helps when things are "clearified".



:D

[Forward Union]

Originally posted by RedStarOverChina+May 3 2005, 07:23 AM--> (RedStarOverChina @ May 3 2005, 07:23 AM)
[email protected] 22 2005, 08:05 AM
Where&#39;s that moron who actually does support China? RedStarOverChina, or something like that?
yes, t_wolves_fan, i do support China and whether u like it or not is none of my concern. U can hate as much as u want and frankly i dont mind <_< [/b]
Since this thread has become fairly "Low-Intellect" I thought i&#39;d join in

China sux and a maoism sux, and mao sux&#33;

[Socialist_Guy]

IlluminusPrime, I&#39;m new here but i have to say. You were not banned because you had an opposing position. You were banned because you were rude, insulting and offensive to everyone here.

As for your arguement on Morality. What about the evils of religion? What about the people killed in the crusades? The oppressiveness of the catholic church? What about the Jesuit priests destroying Native american culture and religion. Or do the ends justify the means in this case only?

[Domingo]

Originally posted by Illuminus&#045;[email protected] 2 2005, 07:59 AM
As I&#39;m sure you will be banning me again, you can keep your horehouse while I continue to go on winning with my winner life.




Keep on dreaming.

I really hope you grow up so we can have this conversation over again.

Even though it is against our ideals (for some), I always like a good debate.

[The Garbage Disposal Unit]

A quick note about the idea the "some guy has always" fucked up communism - it&#39;s an analysis that is lacking - profoundly. Rather than buying into the notion that history is made by great, or, in this case, particularly lousy men, we&#39;ve got to look for deeper material reasons.
In pre-capitalist societies, it should be obvious why socialism failed - the means for creating socialism were simply lacking. To expect a backward nation to build socialism without revolutions in advanced, capitalist, nations is akin to trying to boil a pot of water with a match. From whence came Lenin? Mao? Certainly, revolutions in China and Russia were necessary to throw of despotic and imperial yokes. From whence came the totalitarian Stalins and the red-drapped capitalist Deng Xiaopings? Look at the underlying conditions&#33; Dig deeper&#33;

[RedStarOverChina]

China sux and a maoism sux, and mao sux&#33;


Since this thread has become fairly "Low-Intellect" I thought i&#39;d join in

I gotta hand it to u, Anarcho Rebel. that beats us all.

[KrazyRabidSheep]

???China is Communist?

When did that happen?

When the U.S. became a Democracy, perhaps?

[lostsoul]

Many people in china don&#39;t even like or feel safe in their system right now. prostitution has showned its face again in china, few chinese and many foreginers have become incredibly rich while exploiting the poor.

The reason you don&#39;t hear too much about the discontent is what will happen to the people if they protest? Currently the chinese goverment is keeping the people&#39;s minds busy by getting them to protest japan, etc..but i believe soon(maybe not too soon, but perhapes within 10, 20 years) the focus will become inwards.

I love reading about the chinese civil war, and if you read books on the generals and soliders, they basically said they joined because of the widespread curruption, which is almost exactly within current china.

I recently saw North china, and the people there are pretty much still communist. I heard a farmer got hit by some rich person driving a bmw, and the whole community united and the people were going to get revenge (not the farmers family but the whole community and other villages), the goverment had to step in and protect the rich fucker while they left. According to what I heard(which may be rumors) there was no trial or arrests.

[ahhh_money_is_comfort]

Originally posted by Virgin Molotov [email protected] 5 2005, 03:58 AM
A quick note about the idea the "some guy has always" fucked up communism - it&#39;s an analysis that is lacking - profoundly. Rather than buying into the notion that history is made by great, or, in this case, particularly lousy men, we&#39;ve got to look for deeper material reasons.
In pre-capitalist societies, it should be obvious why socialism failed - the means for creating socialism were simply lacking. To expect a backward nation to build socialism without revolutions in advanced, capitalist, nations is akin to trying to boil a pot of water with a match. From whence came Lenin? Mao? Certainly, revolutions in China and Russia were necessary to throw of despotic and imperial yokes. From whence came the totalitarian Stalins and the red-drapped capitalist Deng Xiaopings? Look at the underlying conditions&#33; Dig deeper&#33;
Finally someone who understands. I agree. That is why I can not be a communist. It is always &#39;some guy&#39;. &#39;Some guy&#39; always seems to do well under a communist revolution to rise to power quickly. Then the result is another brutal despot. &#39;Some guy&#39; seems to be a very common result of a communist revolution. So common that I wager no matter what time, country, or place the next revolution happens, there is going be another &#39;some guy&#39;.

[encephalon]

Finally someone who understands. I agree. That is why I can not be a communist. It is always &#39;some guy&#39;. &#39;Some guy&#39; always seems to do well under a communist revolution to rise to power quickly. Then the result is another brutal despot. &#39;Some guy&#39; seems to be a very common result of a communist revolution. So common that I wager no matter what time, country, or place the next revolution happens, there is going be another &#39;some guy&#39;.

Wow, you&#39;ve a rather shallow understanding of the basic materialist philosophy that communism is founded upon; you&#39;ve also tried to distorts VMC&#39;s statement to suit your own needs. How cute.

He&#39;s stating that the material conditions created the necessary failure of said revolutions, not all revolutions. In fact, in the short run, all revolutions have failed: bourgeois, communist, fascist. The material conditions did not exist by which socialism can be effectively built. This is not only the argument against said revolutions from today&#39;s perspective, but was a great concern and area of conflict when said revolutions occurred.

Trying to found socialism in places like pre-revolutionary Russia is like trying to found capitalism within a detatched tribe in the amazon. Not only are they unable to effectively run a market economy in their respective social context, they are unable to fully understand the system itself. In order to run Windows Longhorn (if it ever gets released..), you must have the processing power to support its execution. In the same vein, you must have the material conditions appropriate to a structure (economic, social or both) before it can work well and proper.

[ahhh_money_is_comfort]

Originally posted by [email protected] 7 2005, 08:26 AM

Finally someone who understands. I agree. That is why I can not be a communist. It is always &#39;some guy&#39;. &#39;Some guy&#39; always seems to do well under a communist revolution to rise to power quickly. Then the result is another brutal despot. &#39;Some guy&#39; seems to be a very common result of a communist revolution. So common that I wager no matter what time, country, or place the next revolution happens, there is going be another &#39;some guy&#39;.

Wow, you&#39;ve a rather shallow understanding of the basic materialist philosophy that communism is founded upon; you&#39;ve also tried to distorts VMC&#39;s statement to suit your own needs. How cute.

He&#39;s stating that the material conditions created the necessary failure of said revolutions, not all revolutions. In fact, in the short run, all revolutions have failed: bourgeois, communist, fascist. The material conditions did not exist by which socialism can be effectively built. This is not only the argument against said revolutions from today&#39;s perspective, but was a great concern and area of conflict when said revolutions occurred.

Trying to found socialism in places like pre-revolutionary Russia is like trying to found capitalism within a detatched tribe in the amazon. Not only are they unable to effectively run a market economy in their respective social context, they are unable to fully understand the system itself. In order to run Windows Longhorn (if it ever gets released..), you must have the processing power to support its execution. In the same vein, you must have the material conditions appropriate to a structure (economic, social or both) before it can work well and proper.
Ok I did get that part. Then the question I ask you, in the &#39;revolution material proper&#39; places around the world, they are just getting more capitialist, right? The communist revolutions are surviving in places like &#39;non material proper&#39; places like the Philipinnes, Latin America, and Africa.

Is something wrong here? I think it is time to rework the theory. To fit real world observations.

[encephalon]

Ok I did get that part. Then the question I ask you, in the &#39;revolution material proper&#39; places around the world, they are just getting more capitialist, right? The communist revolutions are surviving in places like &#39;non material proper&#39; places like the Philipinnes, Latin America, and Africa.

Is something wrong here? I think it is time to rework the theory. To fit real world observations.

Efficient socialism comes after capitalism; (most.. I&#39;m not going to speak on behalf of all communists) communusts see capitalism as a necessary, inevitable step to socialism. It can&#39;t work without the necessary material conditions born in the previous age; for socialism, that would be capitalism. Those countries that are "most suitable" are getting more capitalist by nature. It is the drive towards the heights of capitalist production that feeds socialism.

As for improper places, someone already did rework the theory: VI Ulyanov. He claimed that the communist movement would first take hold in pre-industrial societies, and that socialism can be achieved without capitalism reaching its highest point first. Although to a small extent I believe this to be accurate, it is also a self-fulfilling prophecy. Those places do not have the resources to survive on their own, especially when capitalists will do everything in their power to destroy the system the socialists have in place. These weaker places, as well, are more sensitive to mass unrest.. during the period in which the ruling class changes.. such as societies going through an industrial revolution. This instability feuls violence even further.

Most classical marxists have concluded that the only successful revolution is one in which the material conditions are conducive to socialism. Although the movement itself may first take hold in the "third world", it cannot be successful until it happens in an area that provides the necessary infrastructure.

[ahhh_money_is_comfort]

Originally posted by [email protected] 7 2005, 09:52 AM

Ok I did get that part. Then the question I ask you, in the &#39;revolution material proper&#39; places around the world, they are just getting more capitialist, right? The communist revolutions are surviving in places like &#39;non material proper&#39; places like the Philipinnes, Latin America, and Africa.

Is something wrong here? I think it is time to rework the theory. To fit real world observations.

Efficient socialism comes after capitalism; (most.. I&#39;m not going to speak on behalf of all communists) communusts see capitalism as a necessary, inevitable step to socialism. It can&#39;t work without the necessary material conditions born in the previous age; for socialism, that would be capitalism. Those countries that are "most suitable" are getting more capitalist by nature. It is the drive towards the heights of capitalist production that feeds socialism.

As for improper places, someone already did rework the theory: VI Ulyanov. He claimed that the communist movement would first take hold in pre-industrial societies, and that socialism can be achieved without capitalism reaching its highest point first. Although to a small extent I believe this to be accurate, it is also a self-fulfilling prophecy. Those places do not have the resources to survive on their own, especially when capitalists will do everything in their power to destroy the system the socialists have in place. These weaker places, as well, are more sensitive to mass unrest.. during the period in which the ruling class changes.. such as societies going through an industrial revolution. This instability feuls violence even further.

Most classical marxists have concluded that the only successful revolution is one in which the material conditions are conducive to socialism. Although the movement itself may first take hold in the "third world", it cannot be successful until it happens in an area that provides the necessary infrastructure.
Hey can you give me a list of key words to research this issue?

I want to know who is Ulyanov. Is there anyone else you recommend? Please send along who you think is the best resources.

[KrazyRabidSheep]

Originally posted by ahhh_money_is_comfort+May 8 2005, 02:40 AM--> (ahhh_money_is_comfort &#064; May 8 2005, 02:40 AM)
[email protected] 7 2005, 09:52 AM

Ok I did get that part. Then the question I ask you, in the &#39;revolution material proper&#39; places around the world, they are just getting more capitialist, right? The communist revolutions are surviving in places like &#39;non material proper&#39; places like the Philipinnes, Latin America, and Africa.

Is something wrong here? I think it is time to rework the theory. To fit real world observations.

Efficient socialism comes after capitalism; (most.. I&#39;m not going to speak on behalf of all communists) communusts see capitalism as a necessary, inevitable step to socialism. It can&#39;t work without the necessary material conditions born in the previous age; for socialism, that would be capitalism. Those countries that are "most suitable" are getting more capitalist by nature. It is the drive towards the heights of capitalist production that feeds socialism.

As for improper places, someone already did rework the theory: VI Ulyanov. He claimed that the communist movement would first take hold in pre-industrial societies, and that socialism can be achieved without capitalism reaching its highest point first. Although to a small extent I believe this to be accurate, it is also a self-fulfilling prophecy. Those places do not have the resources to survive on their own, especially when capitalists will do everything in their power to destroy the system the socialists have in place. These weaker places, as well, are more sensitive to mass unrest.. during the period in which the ruling class changes.. such as societies going through an industrial revolution. This instability feuls violence even further.

Most classical marxists have concluded that the only successful revolution is one in which the material conditions are conducive to socialism. Although the movement itself may first take hold in the "third world", it cannot be successful until it happens in an area that provides the necessary infrastructure.
Hey can you give me a list of key words to research this issue?

I want to know who is Ulyanov. Is there anyone else you recommend? Please send along who you think is the best resources. [/b]

Ulyanov. . .the name seems stangely familiar. . .let&#39;s see, who do we know named Ulyanov? I&#39;ve got it&#33; Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov&#33; (later changed his name to Lenin).

For more info I&#39;d have to google it, I&#39;ll save myself the time and yourself the referal and let you do it yourself. (I lie, I can tell you much, but I&#39;d go crazy without writing to back it up)

[ahhh_money_is_comfort]

Originally posted by krazyrabidsheep+May 8 2005, 03:25 AM--> (krazyrabidsheep &#064; May 8 2005, 03:25 AM)
Originally posted by [email protected] 8 2005, 02:40 AM

[email protected] 7 2005, 09:52 AM

Ok I did get that part. Then the question I ask you, in the &#39;revolution material proper&#39; places around the world, they are just getting more capitialist, right? The communist revolutions are surviving in places like &#39;non material proper&#39; places like the Philipinnes, Latin America, and Africa.

Is something wrong here? I think it is time to rework the theory. To fit real world observations.

Efficient socialism comes after capitalism; (most.. I&#39;m not going to speak on behalf of all communists) communusts see capitalism as a necessary, inevitable step to socialism. It can&#39;t work without the necessary material conditions born in the previous age; for socialism, that would be capitalism. Those countries that are "most suitable" are getting more capitalist by nature. It is the drive towards the heights of capitalist production that feeds socialism.

As for improper places, someone already did rework the theory: VI Ulyanov. He claimed that the communist movement would first take hold in pre-industrial societies, and that socialism can be achieved without capitalism reaching its highest point first. Although to a small extent I believe this to be accurate, it is also a self-fulfilling prophecy. Those places do not have the resources to survive on their own, especially when capitalists will do everything in their power to destroy the system the socialists have in place. These weaker places, as well, are more sensitive to mass unrest.. during the period in which the ruling class changes.. such as societies going through an industrial revolution. This instability feuls violence even further.

Most classical marxists have concluded that the only successful revolution is one in which the material conditions are conducive to socialism. Although the movement itself may first take hold in the "third world", it cannot be successful until it happens in an area that provides the necessary infrastructure.
Hey can you give me a list of key words to research this issue?

I want to know who is Ulyanov. Is there anyone else you recommend? Please send along who you think is the best resources.

Ulyanov. . .the name seems stangely familiar. . .let&#39;s see, who do we know named Ulyanov? I&#39;ve got it&#33; Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov&#33; (later changed his name to Lenin).

For more info I&#39;d have to google it, I&#39;ll save myself the time and yourself the referal and let you do it yourself. (I lie, I can tell you much, but I&#39;d go crazy without writing to back it up) [/b]
Did his theory jive well with reality?

Did his modified theories work well with classical theories to jive well with reality?

Looks to me like his theory did not hold up well to the &#39;some guy&#39; reality.

[Fair_Female_Tribe]

Heard of the following of Falung Gong? People are thrown in jail and sent to labor camps as punishment for meditating and doing simple exercises. Jiang call it a cult, it&#39;s not. Women and young girls are dragged after their hair along the streets, Falun Gong supporters are tortured and killed. Torture methods: Burning, Electric Shock, Sexual abuse, psychiatric-abuse/injections with unknown drugs, Forcefeeding, Savage beating, Exporsure to extreme conditions, Water dungeons, Forced abortion and persecution of children. For that, i hate the Communist Party in China. I exercise myself, and i know these people. It&#39;s so heartbreaking. I met some chinese and norwegians in Oslo this weekend. The huge ugly Propaganda filled with lies about Falun Gong is created to demonize them.

The Falun Dafa movement is one tradition within Xulian -- ancient Chinese methods to cultivate mind and body as a means of keeping fit and healing oneself. They appear to have pre-historic roots that may date back many millennia.

As head of the Chinese Communist Party, Chinese Army, and the Chinese Government in a nation of more than 1.3 billion people, Jiang Zemin is perhaps one of the world’s most powerful leaders. However, most know very little about Jiang, his rise to power and his policies as chief of the Communist regime in China.

Jiang can be said to be the biggest beneficiary of the June 4th student massacre in Tiananmen Square. Following the massacre, Secretary General Zhao Ziyang was ousted and Jiang was appointed to the top position.

“Originally, many China watchers believed the number of people practicing Falun Gong – 70-100 million by the Chinese government’s own estimate in 1998 – was viewed as a threat by Communist Party leader, Jiang Zemin. Over the last three years, however, much information has been brought to light suggesting that Jiang’s obsession with “eradicating” Falun Gong is more deeply rooted in the personal fears and ambitions of Jiang himself. For Jiang, it is a personal crusade, and one upon which he has banked his entire political career.”

-- Dr. Yingnian Wu, UCLA


Persecuted for doing this:


http://www.faluninfo.net/newhome/falundafa_over.jpg

FALUN GONG NEWS BULLETIN (http://www.faluninfo.net/)

[t_wolves_fan]

Originally posted by [email protected] 10 2005, 04:43 PM
Heard of the following of Falung Gong? People are thrown in jail and sent to labor camps as punishment for meditating and doing simple exercises. Jiang call it a cult, it&#39;s not. Women and young girls are dragged after their hair along the streets, Falun Gong supporters are tortured and killed. Torture methods: Burning, Electric Shock, Sexual abuse, psychiatric-abuse/injections with unknown drugs, Forcefeeding, Savage beating, Exporsure to extreme conditions, Water dungeons, Forced abortion and persecution of children. For that, i hate the Communist Party in China. I exercise myself, and i know these people. It&#39;s so heartbreaking. I met some chinese and norwegians in Oslo this weekend. The huge ugly Propaganda filled with lies about Falun Gong is created to demonize them.

The Falun Dafa movement is one tradition within Xulian -- ancient Chinese methods to cultivate mind and body as a means of keeping fit and healing oneself. They appear to have pre-historic roots that may date back many millennia.

As head of the Chinese Communist Party, Chinese Army, and the Chinese Government in a nation of more than 1.3 billion people, Jiang Zemin is perhaps one of the world’s most powerful leaders. However, most know very little about Jiang, his rise to power and his policies as chief of the Communist regime in China.

Jiang can be said to be the biggest beneficiary of the June 4th student massacre in Tiananmen Square. Following the massacre, Secretary General Zhao Ziyang was ousted and Jiang was appointed to the top position.

“Originally, many China watchers believed the number of people practicing Falun Gong – 70-100 million by the Chinese government’s own estimate in 1998 – was viewed as a threat by Communist Party leader, Jiang Zemin. Over the last three years, however, much information has been brought to light suggesting that Jiang’s obsession with “eradicating” Falun Gong is more deeply rooted in the personal fears and ambitions of Jiang himself. For Jiang, it is a personal crusade, and one upon which he has banked his entire political career.”

-- Dr. Yingnian Wu, UCLA


Persecuted for doing this:


http://www.faluninfo.net/newhome/falundafa_over.jpg

FALUN GONG NEWS BULLETIN (http://www.faluninfo.net/)
All you&#39;ve done is provide a manual for RedStar and NoXion to follow once their glorious revolution is complete.

[Karl Marx's Camel]

In a steadily rising number, members of the CCP (numbering around 60 million) have begun to withdraw their memberships. 20,000 people withdraw from the CCP every day&#33; That number has now risen to 1 million people in about 6 months.

And how many are joining each day?

[Monky]

20,000 people withdraw from the CCP every day&#33; That number has now risen to 1 million people in about 6 months.

6 * 30 = 180
180 * 20000 = 3,600,000

math is win&#33;

[synthesis]

Originally posted by ahhh_money_is_comfort+May 7 2005, 10:01 PM--> (ahhh_money_is_comfort @ May 7 2005, 10:01 PM)
Originally posted by [email protected] 8 2005, 03:25 AM

Originally posted by [email protected] 8 2005, 02:40 AM

[email protected] 7 2005, 09:52 AM

Ok I did get that part. Then the question I ask you, in the &#39;revolution material proper&#39; places around the world, they are just getting more capitialist, right? The communist revolutions are surviving in places like &#39;non material proper&#39; places like the Philipinnes, Latin America, and Africa.

Is something wrong here? I think it is time to rework the theory. To fit real world observations.

Efficient socialism comes after capitalism; (most.. I&#39;m not going to speak on behalf of all communists) communusts see capitalism as a necessary, inevitable step to socialism. It can&#39;t work without the necessary material conditions born in the previous age; for socialism, that would be capitalism. Those countries that are "most suitable" are getting more capitalist by nature. It is the drive towards the heights of capitalist production that feeds socialism.

As for improper places, someone already did rework the theory: VI Ulyanov. He claimed that the communist movement would first take hold in pre-industrial societies, and that socialism can be achieved without capitalism reaching its highest point first. Although to a small extent I believe this to be accurate, it is also a self-fulfilling prophecy. Those places do not have the resources to survive on their own, especially when capitalists will do everything in their power to destroy the system the socialists have in place. These weaker places, as well, are more sensitive to mass unrest.. during the period in which the ruling class changes.. such as societies going through an industrial revolution. This instability feuls violence even further.

Most classical marxists have concluded that the only successful revolution is one in which the material conditions are conducive to socialism. Although the movement itself may first take hold in the "third world", it cannot be successful until it happens in an area that provides the necessary infrastructure.
Hey can you give me a list of key words to research this issue?

I want to know who is Ulyanov. Is there anyone else you recommend? Please send along who you think is the best resources.

Ulyanov. . .the name seems stangely familiar. . .let&#39;s see, who do we know named Ulyanov? I&#39;ve got it&#33; Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov&#33; (later changed his name to Lenin).

For more info I&#39;d have to google it, I&#39;ll save myself the time and yourself the referal and let you do it yourself. (I lie, I can tell you much, but I&#39;d go crazy without writing to back it up)
Did his theory jive well with reality?

Did his modified theories work well with classical theories to jive well with reality?

Looks to me like his theory did not hold up well to the &#39;some guy&#39; reality. [/b]
No, they did not apply to reality. You cannot arrange the means of production into a socialist dynamic unless you have the forces of industry to back your system.

A little insight into how us &#39;classical&#39; theorists think:

Socialism is created when the means of production have been advanced to the point where labor is superfluous; laborers without work then revolt and replace capitalism with socialism.

However, when the conditions for a socialist revolution are not present, the revolution of the workers must be replaced by a revolution of intellectuals whose consciousness has been created through theory rather than reality, and as the masses become observers rather than participants, this intellectual vanguard assumes all the totalitarian trappings of the Socialist State which we know and revile today.

This is &#39;Leninism.&#39; One variant of Leninism is &#39;Maoism&#39; in which the intellectuals are replaced with agrarian peasants and the revolution becomes majoritarian, but the ultimate effect is the same: a state whose means of production are too primitive to support socialism and which must eventually regress to a capitalist system politically in response to the industrialized means of production.

Classical Marxism is very different. In advanced capitalist countries, the conditions will eventually be present for a sustainable communist system. This revolution, led by a class rather than a Party, has no State in the sense that one exists separately from the population as a whole. The People, in effect, are the state in classical Marxism.

[ahhh_money_is_comfort]

Originally posted by DyerMaker+May 10 2005, 10:34 PM--> (DyerMaker @ May 10 2005, 10:34 PM)
Originally posted by [email protected] 7 2005, 10:01 PM

Originally posted by [email protected] 8 2005, 03:25 AM

Originally posted by [email protected] 8 2005, 02:40 AM

[email protected] 7 2005, 09:52 AM

Ok I did get that part. Then the question I ask you, in the &#39;revolution material proper&#39; places around the world, they are just getting more capitialist, right? The communist revolutions are surviving in places like &#39;non material proper&#39; places like the Philipinnes, Latin America, and Africa.

Is something wrong here? I think it is time to rework the theory. To fit real world observations.

Efficient socialism comes after capitalism; (most.. I&#39;m not going to speak on behalf of all communists) communusts see capitalism as a necessary, inevitable step to socialism. It can&#39;t work without the necessary material conditions born in the previous age; for socialism, that would be capitalism. Those countries that are "most suitable" are getting more capitalist by nature. It is the drive towards the heights of capitalist production that feeds socialism.

As for improper places, someone already did rework the theory: VI Ulyanov. He claimed that the communist movement would first take hold in pre-industrial societies, and that socialism can be achieved without capitalism reaching its highest point first. Although to a small extent I believe this to be accurate, it is also a self-fulfilling prophecy. Those places do not have the resources to survive on their own, especially when capitalists will do everything in their power to destroy the system the socialists have in place. These weaker places, as well, are more sensitive to mass unrest.. during the period in which the ruling class changes.. such as societies going through an industrial revolution. This instability feuls violence even further.

Most classical marxists have concluded that the only successful revolution is one in which the material conditions are conducive to socialism. Although the movement itself may first take hold in the "third world", it cannot be successful until it happens in an area that provides the necessary infrastructure.
Hey can you give me a list of key words to research this issue?

I want to know who is Ulyanov. Is there anyone else you recommend? Please send along who you think is the best resources.

Ulyanov. . .the name seems stangely familiar. . .let&#39;s see, who do we know named Ulyanov? I&#39;ve got it&#33; Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov&#33; (later changed his name to Lenin).

For more info I&#39;d have to google it, I&#39;ll save myself the time and yourself the referal and let you do it yourself. (I lie, I can tell you much, but I&#39;d go crazy without writing to back it up)
Did his theory jive well with reality?

Did his modified theories work well with classical theories to jive well with reality?

Looks to me like his theory did not hold up well to the &#39;some guy&#39; reality.
No, they did not apply to reality. You cannot arrange the means of production into a socialist dynamic unless you have the forces of industry to back your system.

A little insight into how us &#39;classical&#39; theorists think:

Socialism is created when the means of production have been advanced to the point where labor is superfluous; laborers without work then revolt and replace capitalism with socialism.

However, when the conditions for a socialist revolution are not present, the revolution of the workers must be replaced by a revolution of intellectuals whose consciousness has been created through theory rather than reality, and as the masses become observers rather than participants, this intellectual vanguard assumes all the totalitarian trappings of the Socialist State which we know and revile today.

This is &#39;Leninism.&#39; One variant of Leninism is &#39;Maoism&#39; in which the intellectuals are replaced with agrarian peasants and the revolution becomes majoritarian, but the ultimate effect is the same: a state whose means of production are too primitive to support socialism and which must eventually regress to a capitalist system politically in response to the industrialized means of production.

Classical Marxism is very different. In advanced capitalist countries, the conditions will eventually be present for a sustainable communist system. This revolution, led by a class rather than a Party, has no State in the sense that one exists separately from the population as a whole. The People, in effect, are the state in classical Marxism. [/b]
What you just basically explained is communism is always really doomed?

Did I get that right? Did I read you right?

If intellectuals rule, then that is not a classless society. That is not communism.

If the revolution is a majority and agrarian, it must revert to capatialism. That is not communism.

And.....

The most suitable socialist birth places are just getting better and better at capitialism.

[synthesis]

What you just basically explained is communism is always really doomed?


In advanced capitalist countries, the conditions will eventually be present for a sustainable communist system.

Would you like fries with that?

[RedStarOverChina]

the Falungong cult is a threat to everything us conscious people stand for. Do not be blinded by its cover for within it the worst form of zealotry and bigotry breeds. I have experienced its wrath myself as my best friend&#39;s father was harrassed and threatened merely because he spoke out against this ridiculous cult. In 1997, he died of cancer and his death was celebrated by Falunkong members around the world. Cult leader Li Hongzhi&#39;s worshippers claim that he was punished by Li&#39;s supernatural powers. Last time a Falunkong member handed me a pamphlet in Toronto that saids "the evil professor XXX of Qingdao university died merely 2 years after his criticism of Falun Da Fa".
I lost it and made sure that idoit who handed me the pamphlet remembered me.

[RedStarOverChina]

The number of CCP members is on a steady rise. The current number of members is something like 67 million if I remeber correctly.

[t_wolves_fan]

Originally posted by [email protected] 12 2005, 03:46 AM
The number of CCP members is on a steady rise. The current number of members is something like 67 million if I remeber correctly.
Wow that&#39;s a great percentage of the 1.2 billion people in China.

I bet there are more wiccans there than that.

:lol:

[1936]

As far as im concerned. Any action of the communist china party ATALL&#33; does not represent the communist community or the left wing community of that.

Communist China can suck my balls

[RedStarOverChina]

Wow that&#39;s a great percentage of the 1.2 billion people in China.

I bet there are more wiccans there than that.

It&#39;s a good 5% of the population. It always ranged from 4-5% as far as I remember. Keep in mind it IS still the largest political organization on earth.



ommunist China can suck my balls

Thanx for the offer. But we&#39;ll pass.

[Soviet sally]

Dude....you live in canada&#33;

Edit - this is 1936

[RedStarOverChina]

yeah...but Im going to go back once I finish my education. I want to effect a change in China. Joining the CCP would give me an better chance of succeeding so there is no doubt in my mind that I will join the party as soon as I can. Maybe even this summer. CCP was built by passionate and determined revolutionaries such as my grandparents(much like many people on this forum). I do wish to do everything in my part to change the Party---or at least to serve the people with the help of this powerful instrument.

[Soviet sally]

Nice...very nice....i cried a teensey winsey bit....beautiful....

But the fact of the matter is the CCP uses our name to but rape the workers

[bunk]

i despise anyone who goes to private school. I did but then i dropped out so i&#39;m exempt.

[RedStarOverChina]

I have reasons to believe that the ordeal for workers in China is taking a turn. The current leadership is much moren progressive than the one before. The Party&#39;s Secretary(the leader of China) openly proclaimed himself to be a Marxist(something never claimed nor deserved by the previous guy) and spent much of his time in impoverished rural areas to investigate.

The worst of China&#39;s industrialization process is over. (That process, as I begin to see it, is an essential stage of development that would lead to socialism. )

Currently there is a massive shortage of labor in China(believe it or not...), which I believe would automatically lead to better worker conditions and higher wages. It&#39;s happening already.

[RedStarOverChina]

i despise anyone who goes to private school.

lol...was that directed towards me? I feel bad enough already, u know. By the way, how did u know I am in a private school?

[bunk]

i don&#39;t know i was just a bit crazy

[t_wolves_fan]

Originally posted by [email protected] 12 2005, 01:44 PM

Wow that&#39;s a great percentage of the 1.2 billion people in China.

I bet there are more wiccans there than that.

It&#39;s a good 5% of the population. It always ranged from 4-5% as far as I remember. Keep in mind it IS still the largest political organization on earth.



ommunist China can suck my balls

Thanx for the offer. But we&#39;ll pass.
It&#39;s interesting that a mere 5% of the population rules over the other 95%.

Privileged class, anyone?

:lol:

[1936]

YEP&#33;&#33;&#33;

I agree with the stinky lil capitalst on this one

[OleMarxco]

That&#39;s also why you can&#39;t blame China for the "impossibility" of Communism: Since it has classes, and a class minority with the majority of the resources, of that. You can&#39;t take that into account as an "example" to frame Communism with if the example you&#39;re using, China, hasn&#39;t rid of classes yet and made a classless society to instead of pursing Communism decieves the people with making a State-Capitalism meanwhile telling the people with Propaganda that they are, yet there is classes. That&#39;s also why people are leaving the party, in anger of not having a real Communism, they&#39;re very pissed, and they have all reason to should be :D

[RedStarOverChina]

actually they arent leaving the party. I told u the "news" was made up by cult loonies.

[Redmau5]

Originally posted by [email protected] 12 2005, 04:20 PM
It&#39;s interesting that a mere 5% of the population rules over the other 95%.

Privileged class, anyone?

:lol:
What percentage of the US population does the Republican party make up ? I bet it&#39;s less than 5% and they rule over the American people.

Hypocrite, anyone ?

[t_wolves_fan]

Originally posted by Makaveli_05+May 12 2005, 06:49 PM--> (Makaveli_05 @ May 12 2005, 06:49 PM)
[email protected] 12 2005, 04:20 PM
It&#39;s interesting that a mere 5% of the population rules over the other 95%.

Privileged class, anyone?

:lol:
What percentage of the US population does the Republican party make up ? I bet it&#39;s less than 5% and they rule over the American people.

Hypocrite, anyone ? [/b]
The difference is, dumbass, that Americans have another choice.

[t_wolves_fan]

Originally posted by [email protected] 12 2005, 06:39 PM
actually they arent leaving the party. I told u the "news" was made up by cult loonies.
After you piss them off once, I hope you&#39;ll come back to recount your experiences of having your testicles hooked up to car batteries.

And other torture, of course.

[RedStarOverChina]

After you piss them off once, I hope you&#39;ll come back to recount your experiences of having your testicles hooked up to car batteries.


Obviously mr. t_wolves_fan is the authority on this issue as he himself probably had been victim of such practice under the brutal oppression of his mother in his youth.

[ahhh_money_is_comfort]

Originally posted by t_wolves_fan+May 12 2005, 07:12 PM--> (t_wolves_fan @ May 12 2005, 07:12 PM)
[email protected] 12 2005, 06:39 PM
actually they arent leaving the party. I told u the "news" was made up by cult loonies.
After you piss them off once, I hope you&#39;ll come back to recount your experiences of having your testicles hooked up to car batteries.

And other torture, of course. [/b]
Get with the program. The people in China who did that were not communist. They were something, what ever it is, I don&#39;t know what it is, but they were not communist.

[13Commnists]

6 * 30 = 180
180 * 20000 = 3,600,000 The capitalists don&#39;t even use math to see if what was said is true.

The difference is, dumbass, that Americans have another choice.
Another choice with the same goals that is.

[RedStarOverChina]

Isnt it nice to have the choice between Hitler and Mussolini.

[Guerrilla22]

China hasn&#39;t ever been communist, and these days its not even socialist.