Regicide

[Comrade Marcel]

I got banned from another forum for expressing my views about the toyal family. I said they deserve to be put in front of a fireing squad. I am from Canada and the Queen was here visiting just last week.

Now, death might be too good of a punishment for these people, maybe they should be forced to work for the rest of their lives after a revolution. I would definately love to see buckingham palace opened to the homeless.

Any thoughts?

[BOZG]

I'll go with idea number. Make them work for the rest of their lives and preferably something that involves them having to get very very dirty. Buckingham Palace as a homeless hostel is a great idea.

[ArgueEverything]

If killing and bloodshed is what you think socialism is about, you are mistaken. Socialists want to destroy the class system, not the people who belong to certain classes. Maybe the Nazi Party is more suitable for you?

The Royal Family is hardly the cause of the world's social problems. They are more or less a paper tiger in the modern world.

[Ian]

I think they are parasites, when I look at it subjectively I think they should be murdered because of their constant leeching and, reputed, anti-semiticism. But when I objectively think about it, I just want to make them work extra hard, perhaps in a place where they would get no preferencial treatment ie. send them to an African country to develop infrastructure in a poor town.

[Comrade Marcel]

Quote: from ArgueEverything on 9:00 am on Oct. 15, 2002
If killing and bloodshed is what you think socialism is about, you are mistaken. Socialists want to destroy the class system, not the people who belong to certain classes. Maybe the Nazi Party is more suitable for you?

The Royal Family is hardly the cause of the world's social problems. They are more or less a paper tiger in the modern world.


Reactionary! I never said that I wanted to kill them, I said that they deserve to be shot!

You do realise that if people like that are left around after a revolution they can form counter-revolutionary movments?

And I do not need you to school me on Socialism, I have been reading Marx long enough.

Perhaps if you think monarchy's are no threat you would fit better in to the "Reactionary Socialist" catogory that Engels spoke about in The Principles of Communism.

And if you think it is possible to destroy the system without violent force and a few killings then you are either completely stupid or a utopian, in which case you would still be stupid!

[anti machine]

Is not the very basis of Marxist theory Utopianism? Correct me if I'm wrong, but Marx and Engels sought to instill a revolution that would bring about a pure human consience and clear the soul of evil- capitalism, religion, classes, etc. Human nature could be finally perfected and rid of selfishness and materialism, and utopia could be achieved.

I think this is the only interpretation. Utopianists arent "stupid". i believe the revolution must and can only be achieved by some form of violence. But to be a marxist, (which you seem to be) and not a utopianist is a bit of a contradiction.

[Comrade Marcel]

...........But to be a marxist, (which you seem to be) and not a utopianist is a bit of a contradiction.

I don't see how any true Marxist can realistically be an utopian.

I believe in dialetical materialism, & I also understand that we are all human beings. Utopia is just as impossible as totalitarianism. What I do believe is that we can create near utopian material conditions, but we can never create an utopia; if you understand what I am are saying. I am pretty sure most Marxists believe the same.

(Edited by Comrade Marcel at 12:51 am on Oct. 16, 2002)


(Edited by Comrade Marcel at 12:52 am on Oct. 16, 2002)

[Iepilei]

a utopia will always just be a grasp away from anything humans are capable of.

[Jaha]

Utopia is just as impossible as totalitarianism.
well, i thought that a totalitarianism was very possible. that is why we should worry about it. in the same respect, a utopia is not impossible. nothing is impossible.

[Comrade Marcel]

OK, if you want to get extremely technical about it, nothing is impossible theoretically, but in the same respect I could theorectically save the world in 2 months by systematically killing all the "bad" people in it, but I think you can understand what I am saying.

Totalitarianism is Sociologically impossible. It has never existed anywhere except in the pages of Orwell's 1984 (Lincoln) & in the same respect, utopia hasn't existed anywhere except in the minds of Jahova witnesses & it never will exist, because it is impossible to create a perfect world. Marx never said anywhere, that I have ever read; that Communism means utopia. It means a lot of things: classless society, equality, international unity, stateless society, "To each according to their needs, from each according to their abilities". etc.

It does not mean that there will never be anything bad that happends, like a killing, arguements, a beating, etc. It's just that the material conditions that make people want to rob, kill, beat, etc. each other would not exist. There is still the possibility of someone killing, raping or whatever simply because they are insane or evil.

Anarchists are the utopians, not we Marxists!

[Jaha]

i have been reading about early america and an interesting thing to note is that the first doctrines of Marx were written after the "discovery" of the native cultures. the societies that Marx speaks of and write about are his interpretation on those original cultures. thus, one should look to pre-columbus america to find the heart of Marx's ideals. the ideals are more important than the specific words. Marx implies a utopia. a society where everything works out fine.

[PunkRawker677]

I agree with you Marcel. There is a huge difference between marxism and utopianism. HUGE difference. Many communists see communism as a long term utopia. Marxism is a practical form of so-called utopia which can actually exist.

[Jaha]

this is a bit off topic. PunkRawker677, i like your sig. im refering to the second one.

[PunkRawker677]

Thanks. I like both your sigs, especially the first.

[anti machine]

"Anarchists are the utopians, not we Marxists!"

In my humble opinion, communism is the gateway to utopian anarchy. I see this underlying theme in the writings of communist authors, especially Trotsky.

The short-term answer is communism. The long-term answer is a reconstruction of human nature and a utopian anarchy.

[Comrade Marcel]

In my humble opinion, communism is the gateway to utopian anarchy. I see this underlying theme in the writings of communist authors, especially Trotsky.

The short-term answer is communism. The long-term answer is a reconstruction of human nature and a utopian anarchy.

Not utopia, and not anarchy, but close to both. :)

Of course Communism would be something like an utopia, and compared to what we have now it would seem like one. But in the truest sense of the word, utopia is impossible. Anarchy means no government whatsoever and total freedom of authority. Under Communism the state would have desolved but I don't think this means there will be no form of collective, i.e. community councils, organizaing, etc. and I think there would still be some sort of authorities it;s just that people would be much more independant and constent bossing and policing would become un-needed.

BTW, the short term answer is Socialism, the final result of global revolution, the abolishment of private property, abolishment of classes, etc. is Communism; the final goal.

(Edited by Comrade Marcel at 4:45 am on Oct. 16, 2002)

[PunkRawker677]

"In my humble opinion, communism is the gateway to utopian anarchy."

Communism is the end result. True communism, not utopian anarchy. Marcel did a good job pointing out that there would still be a minor sense of 'authority', just not what we conceive as authority today.

"The short-term answer is communism. The long-term answer is a reconstruction of human nature and a utopian anarchy. "

Short-term is socialism, long term is true communism.

[Che Entifada]

(ArgueEverything) said " The Royal Family is hardly the cause of the world's social problems. They are more or less a paper tiger in the modern world. "

what about the country i live in (Jordan) ... do you have any idea about the royal family here .. they control everything , they do everything they want .. they are not -just a piece of paper- .

[BOZG]

Let me just point out to back up Marcel, human beings are not perfect therefore a utopia can never exist.

(Edited by BornOfZapatasGuns at 4:59 pm on Oct. 16, 2002)

[Che Entifada]

Thats right .. we cant make an utopia community , but we cant live in this world without even dreaming that one day we can all in this world arrive to the true justice .. and without this -hope- , the revolutions cant be done ..

[Exploited Class]

(Edited by exploitedclass at 6:49 pm on Oct. 16, 2002)

[Jaha]

be little more optimistic. someday, i doubt in our lifetime, and assuming war doesnt kill everyone, a utopia could eventually be reached. its a bit farfetched, but if you ask for something less than utopia, you will get less. if you demand perfection, whatever you get should be acceptable.

[Exploited Class]

Quote: from Jaha on 9:03 pm on Oct. 16, 2002
be little more optimistic. someday, i doubt in our lifetime, and assuming war doesnt kill everyone, a utopia could eventually be reached. its a bit farfetched, but if you ask for something less than utopia, you will get less. if you demand perfection, whatever you get should be acceptable.

I guess I am just curious but what is the definition of "Utopia". I mean it sounds pretty subjective to me. I am sure it is perfection but what is considered perfect?
I know what my idea of perfection is.

I think of how people believe god is 'Perfect'. People who are angry and vengeful see a perfect god being angry and vengeful. Loving, caring and compasionate people see a more forgiving god as being perfect.

Just reading through some of these posts with what I feel are subjective terms like utopian or perfect societies as being a little reckless in thought.

[Jaha]

there is the only problem in finding utopia. everybody wants one, thats not an issue. we all disagree on what a utopia is. i say communism. others say what ever the heck they want.

[PunkRawker677]

Everyone doesn't agree on what "Utopia" would be. We will always have differences of opinions, which is why this "perfect" society will never be possible.

[anti machine]

"Let me just point out to back up Marcel, human beings are not perfect therefore a utopia can never exist."

The very principle of marxist theory is acheiving perfection. Jaha said it best: "its a bit farfetched, but if you ask for something less than utopia, you will get less. if you demand perfection, whatever you get should be acceptable."

I dont believe in an inherently bad or imperfect human nature, and neither did Marx. Human nature is defined by pre-existing social conditions and, to an extent, the government. It is not unlikely that a perfect human could be "engineered", if there was no possibility of corruption (a.k.a. contact with other "imperfect" beings.)

It is presumptious and downright arrogant to claim that utopia is not possible. We make these assumptions based on our view of the world as it exists today. Think bigger.

[BOZG]

To acheive a utopian society, people would have to become complete robots. Human beings are not perfect and that is a good thing. If we were perfect we would not have any emotions and no opinions. A completely utopian society is impossible until we become perfect.

[Jaha]

thats a simple utopia. one where everything fits because nothing has protruding ends.

think of it like a puzzle. your answer that you dont approve of, is to cut off all the nubs and parts that stick out. then they all fit next to each other. the other answer is to find where each peice fits with the others. its a difficult job. humanity has existed for millenia and havent found the linchpin.

[Iepilei]

like said, as long as we are human... we are subject to our flaws. we all make mistakes, we're organic beings.

a utopian society will never exist. conflicts will happen from time to time, people won't always agree - our differences are to be celebrated, not diluted. but I believe that a communist society will be as close as we can get to that perfection, as it is a realist society based upon goals man is capable of obtaining, and building off of.

Capitalism and the old world Feudal systems sets mans limits too high - expecting them to be perfect in creation. It expects man to regulate himself in the face of overwhelming power, it expects him to be perfect - to be noncorruptable. However in reality this is not the case. Power in the hands of man, be it through government or economic, will corrupt his heart. He will think only of himself, and not of the self-regulations to make better his economy.

Socialism is our first step away from the ruins of the old world.