Saying Communism Is Good Is Like Saying...

[Anti-Red]

Saying communism is good is a very strange thing indeed. Saying communism is good, even IF you accept what communist regimes have done, and then turning around and saying it wasn't true communism is like excusing national socialism by saying that even though Hitler committed the Holocaust, he wasn't a true national socialist, therefore national socialism is okay. Same with the fascism you deride. Did capitalist regimes kill people? Yes. But you continue to insist that ALL capitalist regimes did. Well so did ALL communist regimes, and in much greater numbers. Saying communism is freedom is the same thing as when the Nazis hung signs out on concentration camps that said, "Arbeit Macht Frei," or "Work Makes Free." The reason I say this is that communism is NOT freedom. It is about taking things for people. Isn't it my freedom not to have my possessions seized? Isn't it freedom to be able to open a business and compete with others? Isn't it a freedom to make a living for myself and spend it as I choose if I give some taxes back to society? It is, but not to you. You think you know what is best for people. Isn't freedom individualism? Not to you, for to you, the individual does not matter. All for the "common good." Well let me tell you this, what is good for you is not what is good for me. I know you will say the same to me, but I am not a crony of the system. I believe in a truly libertarian society where you would be able to have your communes anywhere on Earth if you wanted to, but that is not good enough. You will not be satisfied until everyone lives YOUR way, just like a Christian conservative only from the leftist perspective. Will you ever realize how foolish communism is? I hope. Will you ever admit your hypocrisy? I hope. If many of the communist radicals of the sixties can grow up to be productive citizens, then so can you. I highly doubt every one of you will be communists when you are older. Some will, but my bet is that for most of you it is a passing phase of youth.

P.S. You guys will never win, don't you realize that?

[Dooga Aetrus Blackrazor]

IF you accept what communist regimes have done, and then turning around and saying it wasn't true communism is like excusing national socialism by saying that even though Hitler committed the Holocaust, he wasn't a true national socialist, therefore national socialism is okay.

Few of us advocate the kind of societies modern "communists" have developed. If we want a society based on different criteria, what logical reason to you have to compare us to those who differ? You're arguing that one idea is invalid because another different idea is invalid. That is a logical fallacy.


Did capitalist regimes kill people? Yes. But you continue to insist that ALL capitalist regimes did.

I doubt everyone here argues that, and there is no way you checked. You should not generalize - used words like most instead. However, I will say that communists believe that deaths under capitalism result from fundamental flaws in the system - along with deaths unrelated to the system. Furthermore, the deaths caused by communists who many of us have strong ideological differences with has no relevance when criticizing our views.

---------

The rest of your post is just statements of opinion with no factual or argumentative contexts to support them. Let me give you an example of a leftist version of what you wrote:

Libertarian government will never work. Freedom is not freedom when one person can trample over another with nothing to stop him. What happens when people disagree? Libetarianism is just a society where the rich can make houses from the bones of the poor.

Do you see how illogical and pointless it is to debate when people act like that? Please be more careful and explicit when you try to criticize us in the future. You can start by criticizing communist theory. You won't find many who support what former "communist" countries did or what they stood for ideologically. Consequently, the angle of criticism you choose really only affects some Leninists, Maoists, Stalinists, and Castroists we might have on the board. The whole libertarian section of this forum is being unfairly painted with the same brush.

[Anti-Red]

Originally posted by Dooga Aetrus [email protected] 12 2006, 01:52 AM
Please be more careful and explicit when you try to criticize us in the future.
Please be more right and less wrong when you try to preach against capitalism in the future.

[red team]

Dont' be stupid. You think those who are under entrenched power in this system is any better than the dictators you crow about? They've got their riches from "free" enterprise, but you think they would flinch at putting you into concentration camps should you complain about the unequal opportunities and unequal distribution of wealth that goes along with it? Well, they "earned" their fortune from "libertarian" private business that grew into corporations that's wealthier than whole countries now, but these are the same people who are the government now since many government officials are also big business shareholders. I guess their policies of unprovoked invasions, Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo Bay concentration camps and Latin American death squads are just a honest, but well-meaning mistake. :wacko:

[ahab]

first of all we are not all communist on the left, while i agree with a lot of the ideology of communism, it is not true freedom. I am an anarcho-syndicalist, I believe in the individual, and i believe the communists do too. I am anti-any form of government because all government is evil, it all exploits the worker. I oppose all forms of exploitation and domination. I believe all people are equal and should be able to live their lives the way they want to, any way they want to, as long as their decisions do not inlict on the freedoms of others.

Now I understand you are a libertarian right? So we agree on a lot of the same things as in all people are fundamentaly equal and should be free to make decisions as long as they do not infringe on others rights, am i correct? From what I've read libertarianism isnt far from anarchy, now i could be wrong in this assumption because i have not taken an in depth look into your ideology.

Now in this malicious typing frenzy I have just embarked upon I have forgotten where I am going with this lol.... well how about this, why dont you stop giving my communist comrades a hard time, I'm sure they have given you explaination after explaination of their beliefs. Do not harp on them for standing up for their beliefs.

Another thing please do not call this a 'teen phase', I agree that most the kids you see wearin che shirts or have a hammer and sickle on their hat, in america at least, have no idea what the history or politics of what they represent. On the other hand I have met no such people on this forum, besides i think most of the people in here are out of their teen years from what I can tell, but I dont know for sure so dont quote me on that lol.


EDIT: p.s. as long as we believe we HAVE won in our minds, and although I dont think I will live to see the revolution I believe it is coming, more and more are being aducated. Ignorance is the governments strongest power, to keep the people in the dark and brainwashed. The revolution has come in other nations, but i believe one will come in america. I only hope the left can resolve its problems with itself when it does.

[Anti-Red]

Originally posted by [email protected] 12 2006, 02:05 AM
Now I understand you are a libertarian right? So we agree on a lot of the same things as in all people are fundamentaly equal and should be free to make decisions as long as they do not infringe on others rights, am i correct? From what I've read libertarianism isnt far from anarchy, now i could be wrong in this assumption because i have not taken an in depth look into your ideology.
Actually I'm more in the libertarian center, meaning I believe in free enteprise and free people, not big coporations though. Also, libertarianism is not anarchy in the least. The libertarian ideal is not really as much based on an economic system, because you can call yourself libertarian being left-right-center or what have you. Libertarianism means that you believe in individualism for one, meaning that a collectivist cannot be libertarian. For two, it means that you believe bascially that all victimless crimes like guns, drugs, and prostitutes should be legalized or decriminalized at the least. For three, it means you think society should grow on its own, meaning you don't believe in legislating morality OR social engineering.

[ahab]

Originally posted by Anti-[email protected] 12 2006, 02:23 AM
Actually I'm more in the libertarian center, meaning I believe in free enteprise and free people, not big coporations though. Also, libertarianism is not anarchy in the least. The libertarian ideal is not really as much based on an economic system, because you can call yourself libertarian being left-right-center or what have you. Libertarianism means that you believe in individualism for one, meaning that a collectivist cannot be libertarian. For two, it means that you believe bascially that all victimless crimes like guns, drugs, and prostitutes should be legalized or decriminalized at the least. For three, it means you think society should grow on its own, meaning you don't believe in legislating morality OR social engineering.
well fuck that sounds crazy! So its live and let die? you carry on, but since there is no opressing force you just do whatever? I agree with the drugs guns and prostitutes lol but just expecting society to 'grow' sounds like it wouldnt work, the people need to work together to move ahead. It sounds like a shitty form of capitolism, where your encouraged to out do the other guy and becaome like some powerfull warlord for your own wel being. Libertarianism is fucked!

[Anti-Red]

Originally posted by fysh117+Jul 12 2006, 02:33 AM--> (fysh117 @ Jul 12 2006, 02:33 AM)
Anti-[email protected] 12 2006, 02:23 AM
Actually I'm more in the libertarian center, meaning I believe in free enteprise and free people, not big coporations though. Also, libertarianism is not anarchy in the least. The libertarian ideal is not really as much based on an economic system, because you can call yourself libertarian being left-right-center or what have you. Libertarianism means that you believe in individualism for one, meaning that a collectivist cannot be libertarian. For two, it means that you believe bascially that all victimless crimes like guns, drugs, and prostitutes should be legalized or decriminalized at the least. For three, it means you think society should grow on its own, meaning you don't believe in legislating morality OR social engineering.
well fuck that sounds crazy! So its live and let die? you carry on, but since there is no opressing force you just do whatever? I agree with the drugs guns and prostitutes lol but just expecting society to 'grow' sounds like it wouldnt work, the people need to work together to move ahead. It sounds like a shitty form of capitolism, where your encouraged to out do the other guy and becaome like some powerfull warlord for your own wel being. Libertarianism is fucked! [/b]
No. I just mean this. There is nothing wrong with SOCIETY working together for social or moral change. It just means that government should not do it, and nor should it enforce morality.

[Urban Rubble]

The opposition on this forum has really gone down the shitter. Where's Capitalist Imperial when you need the guy?


Saying communism is good, even IF you accept what communist regimes have done, and then turning around and saying it wasn't true communism is like excusing national socialism by saying that even though Hitler committed the Holocaust, he wasn't a true national socialist, therefore national socialism is okay.

Fascism wasn't bad because Hitler committed the Holocaust, that really has little to do with it.

Let's pretend that Mussolini's Fascism truly was a humane and rational ideology and that Hitler simply misinterpreted that and took it in a less humane direction. If that was the case, the fact that Hitler burned 10 million people would have nothing to do with the fact that Mussolini's ideology was humane and rational. All it would prove is that Hitler used Fascism for his own fucked up ends (again, speaking hypothetically, we all know fascism is horrible and that Hitler was a true fascist.

Your logic is weak, bro.

[violencia.Proletariat]

Saying communism is good, even IF you accept what communist regimes have done, and then turning around and saying it wasn't true communism is like excusing national socialism by saying that even though Hitler committed the Holocaust, he wasn't a true national socialist, therefore national socialism is okay.

National socialism is not ok, by deffinition it's still fascism. Fascism sucks. Communism by deffinition is stateless classless society, so we aren't apologizing for what you call "communist regimes." They have as much to do with actual communism as "national socialism" has to do with socialism.


Well so did ALL communist regimes

That statement is a contradiction in itself.


Isn't it my freedom not to have my possessions seized?

Where on this board have we proposed to seize personal possesions? Property is not a personal possesion. We aren't out to get your coat and watch, where out to destroy class exploitation.


You think you know what is best for people.

People can decide whats best for themselves.


Well let me tell you this, what is good for you is not what is good for me.

Using the means of production to make necessities available to all is not good for you? Ahh I understand, taking the means or production from you is not good for you. Well we don't really give a shit. The funny thing is you guys sit here and defend capital all day yet you don't own any significant ammounts.


I believe in a truly libertarian society where you would be able to have your communes anywhere on Earth if you wanted to, but that is not good enough.

Your lost bud. It isn't about "having a commune." It's ending class exploitation. We do not wish to live outside capitalism, we wish to end it.


Some will, but my bet is that for most of you it is a passing phase of youth.

As capitalism shall become a passing phase of history. Your in a unique situation here in America, but you can't pull that you'll grow out of it shit in Spain. :lol:


P.S. You guys will never win, don't you realize that?

...thats it we give up! :rolleyes: With capitalism its not the threat of having fewer and fewer communists, its the threat of having more and more. ;)

[ack]

Whoever said that Communism was freedom, anyway? Communism is equality.
Anyway, I think Communism sucks. Socialism is the way. Doubtlessly, I'm now going to be restricted or warned and attacked and asked to back up what I say. NO. I'm a stubborn jackass, and you likely won't convince me otherwise.

P.S.
You'll never win either. It's an eternal stalemate. What game is it we're playing anyway?

[Anti-Red]

Originally posted by [email protected] 12 2006, 02:56 AM
P.S.
You'll never win either. It's an eternal stalemate. What game is it we're playing anyway?
You raise a point. None of us will ever win unless we moderate our stances someday, which sadly, will not happen.

[ack]

Originally posted by Anti-Red+Jul 11 2006, 10:59 PM--> (Anti-Red @ Jul 11 2006, 10:59 PM)
[email protected] 12 2006, 02:56 AM
P.S.
You'll never win either. It's an eternal stalemate. What game is it we're playing anyway?
You raise a point. None of us will ever win unless we moderate our stances someday, which sadly, will not happen. [/b]
Damn, I'm good.

[Janus]

None of us will ever win unless we moderate our stances someday, which sadly, will not happen.
That will never occur because you would be called a pinko and we would be called reformists. :lol:

[Zero]

I could go over the whole thing, but I guess I'll leave that for everyone else to do :wacko: .

But probably my favorite is this bit:


Originally posted by "Anti-Red"+--> ("Anti-Red")Did capitalist regimes kill people? Yes. But you continue to insist that ALL capitalist regimes did. Well so did ALL communist regimes, and in much greater numbers.[/b]

In response...


"Anti-Red"
WHO SUFFERS FROM HUNGER?

Several population groups are especially vulnerable to hunger. These are children, rural inhabitants, slum dwellers.

Each year, 15 million children die of hunger-related causes. This means that, every day, throughout the world, 40 000 children die. The loss of human life is as great as if an atomic bomb - similar to the one that destroyed Hiroshima during the Second World War - were to be dropped on a densely populated area every three days.

In the developing countries, it is in the rural areas that the largest masses of the poor are to be found. It may seem paradoxical that a high proportion of those who live in the countryside - and who are actually involved in growing food - are undernourished but in times of shortage or crisis, rural areas are usually the hardest to reach with food and other supplies. Women, who are often active in food production as well as taking care of a family, are more likely than men to suffer from malnutrition.

The numbers of people living in crowded shanty towns and slums are swelling much faster than ever before in large cities throughout the Third World. With at least two-thirds of the population increase of developing countries taking place in towns and cities, this situation is likely to continue. These areas are characterised by poverty, unhealthy living conditions, high unemployment and, often, social upheaval.

[Red Heretic]

Anyone else notice that both Ack and Anti-Red have dead avatars from Tripod (who the fuck uses Tripod?) ? Not to mention that they are having a reformist love affair? They're the same person.

[Janus]

I'm not sure but he would have to be a little out of it to have a conversation with himself. :lol:

[Zero]

If you guys want to check that, look up their IPs. If they are the same, then its the same person.

As for the Tripod bit, the site Tripod doesn't allow hotlinking images from sites hosted by them for people who don't have the image downloaded already. Thats why you get these pictures in people's avatars, but the owner doesn't change it. It's because they have downloaded the picture from the site, and have it in their local cache, but everybody else doesn't.

If you have a picture from a website that is hosted by Tripod, save the image onto your desktop, and then go to www.imageshack.us host it there, and then link it in your profile. Otherwise all we see is a little message saying "Hosted by Tripod!"

[Anti-Red]

Originally posted by Red [email protected] 12 2006, 06:43 AM
Anyone else notice that both Ack and Anti-Red have dead avatars from Tripod (who the fuck uses Tripod?) ? Not to mention that they are having a reformist love affair? They're the same person.
Actually, that is not true. For one thing, Ack is a leftist, I am not. He is on your forum to agree with you, while he may be more moderate. I am not here to agree with you. Looking at his profile, his birthday is June 4, 1991, mine is May 24, 1990. We are about the same age relatively speaking, but not quite. We ain't the same dudes. Also, we don't have the same email. I did not look at his, but mine is AOL so wired through my account. If his is not from a free service like Gmail, that proves it.

[RevMARKSman]

Saying Communism Is Good Is Like Saying...

...the sun is a ball of flaming hydrogen.

[Avtomatov]

Saying national socialism is okay because hitler wasnt a true national socialist is fine. He wasnt, he didnt do all the progressive and socialist things he said he was gonna do. Idiot. I beleive this is a logical fallacy, you are saying something is bad because it is connected with hitler. Thats like saying kahkis and dogs are bad cuz hitler wore/had them.

[The Sloth]

Originally posted by Anti-[email protected] 12 2006, 01:40 AM
...saying it wasn't true communism is like excusing national socialism by saying that even though Hitler committed the Holocaust, he wasn't a true national socialist, therefore national socialism is okay.
do you not see the problems with this argument?

you are assuming that most people would think that, if it weren't for the holocaust, "nationalism socialism [would have been] okay."

let's pretend, for a second, that there is a national socialist movement that has nothing to do with racism.. and, if it's even theoretically possible, not have anything to do with nativism, either.. would national socialism, in that "pure" form, be desirable?

i don't think so. fascism has a lot of negative implications.. racism is usually one of them, but by no means is it the only negative implication. there's plenty to despise there.. it just so happens that bigotry was one of the chief elements of its historical development.

trust me, if a master race and a master country weren't convenient for hitler's fantasies of power and expansion, he would have never played those stupid cards. there's nothing "intellectual" or "ethical" about his movement.. it's simply a flagrant power struggle.

and no one should support that.

[ack]

Originally posted by Red [email protected] 12 2006, 02:43 AM
Anyone else notice that both Ack and Anti-Red have dead avatars from Tripod (who the fuck uses Tripod?) ? Not to mention that they are having a reformist love affair? They're the same person.
Well, you caught me! I am Anti-Red. As well as LSD and Zero and Janus. I basically run this forum by myself.
That thing with the avatars was just a coincidence. I didn't even know I was using an image hosted by Tripod.

[Dean]

"I talk of freedom / you talk of the flag / I talk of revolution / you march around and brag..."

Capitalism is degrading into fascism quickly. Look at what the so called "freedoms" of capitalism have achieved for the russians: starving children and jobless adults. America is the most economically capitalist nation in the world, perhaps with a few exceptions, and among the industrialized nations has the least social mobility. Capitalist - led government has become a shameless money - grabbing and demoralizing machine. To support free trade is to support not only a dying system, but an authoritarian one.

[Dean]

Originally posted by [email protected] 12 2006, 02:05 AM
Now I understand you are a libertarian right? So we agree on a lot of the same things as in all people are fundamentaly equal and should be free to make decisions as long as they do not infringe on others rights, am i correct? From what I've read libertarianism isnt far from anarchy, now i could be wrong in this assumption because i have not taken an in depth look into your ideology.
Capitalist libertarianism supports the economic authority of capitalism and the possessed class. This is hardly anarchy, or libertarianism for that matter.

True, rights not conceived to be economic in nature are supported in capitalist libertarianism, but hs own views on these freedoms stray drastically from the platform of the libertarian party. His political compass result put him on a curve that is symbolic of the fight between freedom and authority: that is, the more economically right - wing you are, the less social freedoms you support and vice - versa. see how he scored by looking at the political compass. (http://www.politicalcompass.org/)

[Janus]

They're the same person.
No, they're not. An IP check has already been done.