If Communism is so swell…..

[AreYouForReal]

why don’t some of you folks here pack up and go to China, Cuba, Laos, North Korea, or Vietnam. All communist counties, sure it would be great there. You could bust you ass for everyone else’s benefit. How many of you give 25% of you annual income to charity? If not then your not a true communist, your just a wanna be. What is so good about it and so bad about capitalism? It works, get over it, get rid of you Che T-shirts and get with the program.

[Zero]

Why do we attract the same stupid people with the same stupid arguements? Look around before you post something thats been picked over ten thousand times by fifteen billion people. Noob.

[black magick hustla]

he is right tho we should pack up to china and vietnam :unsure:

[AreYouForReal]

It is a simple question. Why can't you give me a simple answer is it is so "stupid".

[bloody_capitalist_sham]

why don’t some of you folks here pack up and go to China, Cuba, Laos, North Korea, or Vietnam. All communist counties, sure it would be great there. You could bust you ass for everyone else’s benefit. How many of you give 25% of you annual income to charity? If not then your not a true communist, your just a wanna be. What is so good about it and so bad about capitalism? It works, get over it, get rid of you Che T-shirts and get with the program.

haha

[AreYouForReal]

I'm sure you are all philanthropists. It really is a simple question. Are you willing to work hard every day and give the majority of it to the poor, or those not willing to work as hard as you? Simple question. In the proper forum I might add. I’m not trying to be combative, I just really don't understand.

[black magick hustla]

Originally posted by [email protected] 11 2006, 05:41 AM
I'm sure you are all philanthropists. It really is a simple question. Are you willing to work hard every day and give the majority of it to the poor, or those not willing to work as hard as you? Simple question. In the proper forum I might add. I’m not trying to be combative, I just really don't understand.

Why do we attract the same stupid people with the same stupid arguements? Look around before you post something thats been picked over ten thousand times by fifteen billion people. Noob.

Why do we attract the same stupid people with the same stupid arguements? Look around before you post something thats been picked over ten thousand times by fifteen billion people. Noob.

Why do we attract the same stupid people with the same stupid arguements? Look around before you post something thats been picked over ten thousand times by fifteen billion people. Noob.

Why do we attract the same stupid people with the same stupid arguements? Look around before you post something thats been picked over ten thousand times by fifteen billion people. Noob.

Why do we attract the same stupid people with the same stupid arguements? Look around before you post something thats been picked over ten thousand times by fifteen billion people. Noob.

Why do we attract the same stupid people with the same stupid arguements? Look around before you post something thats been picked over ten thousand times by fifteen billion people. Noob.
http://www.geocities.com/userid123456/Player/ramirez.jpg


Why do we attract the same stupid people with the same stupid arguements? Look around before you post something thats been picked over ten thousand times by fifteen billion people. Noob.

Why do we attract the same stupid people with the same stupid arguements? Look around before you post something thats been picked over ten thousand times by fifteen billion people. Noob.

Why do we attract the same stupid people with the same stupid arguements? Look around before you post something thats been picked over ten thousand times by fifteen billion people. Noob.

Why do we attract the same stupid people with the same stupid arguements? Look around before you post something thats been picked over ten thousand times by fifteen billion people. Noob.

Why do we attract the same stupid people with the same stupid arguements? Look around before you post something thats been picked over ten thousand times by fifteen billion people. Noob.

[bloody_capitalist_sham]

Well one reason we dont move to, as you put it, "communist countries" is that we want to turn our own countries communist.

We also do not see any of the countries you mentioned as perfect or even good examples of socialism. For Example, Cuba which is about the most democratic, is still a third world country. Not ideal when we want a society which is highly technological.


How many of you give 25% of you annual income to charity?

Urm, the State takes it from us. The capitalist pay us shit wages. Why give more of it away?



and so bad about capitalism?

Workers do all the work, but the capitalist gets all the profit. He gets it because the State protects his property. Paid for by the workers through taxation.

You are forced to work only to make another person richer.


I just really don't understand.

Really?


Are you willing to work hard every day and give the majority of it to the poor, or those not willing to work as hard as you?

People dont mind working and helping others so long as they are not being exploited or cheated out of time and money. In a communist society, the worse the job, the less time you would have to spend at it. Or the more shared around it could be.

[CCCPneubauten]

:lol:

I can tell this will be funny.

[Dooga Aetrus Blackrazor]

If you are trying to learn, you shouldn't post with hostility. You don't know about the topic you are criticizing yet you argue as though you do. That is why people are laughing at you and making fun of you - whether it is justified or not.

For one, the definition of communism most people here (or at least myself) believe in does not include the countries you listed. Communism does not involve money so giving it to charity is a bit of an illogical thing to assume we should do. Giving to charity does nothing to eliminate the conditions that make those people poor in the first place (they are not just lazy). Communism seeks a permanent solution, one which does not waste time throwing money at people so they can have children and perpetuate poverty.

Capitalism is a system of government that involves the people at the top making money from the work of other individuals below them. It is essentially a form of stealing that we refer to as wage slavery. I assume you have a problem with people who are wealthy stealing from people who are not, but maybe you don't see anything wrong with that.

[AreYouForReal]

We also do not see any of the countries you mentioned as perfect or even good examples of socialism. For Example, Cuba which is about the most democratic, is still a third world country. Not ideal when we want a society which is highly technological.


Why do you think that all the counties I listed are not highly technological? I see a pattern there.


Urm, the State takes it from us. The capitalist pay us shit wages. Why give more of it away?


Shit wages? I'm willing to bet that we make (After the taxes) more than most in communist, or socialist countries. A lot more.


Workers do all the work, but the capitalist gets all the profit. He gets it because the State protects his property. Paid for by the workers through taxation.
You are forced to work only to make another person richer.


Exactly, His property. What is wrong with that? Yea you may work to make him richer, but as you make him richer, "He" wants to get even richer and creates more jobs. Hence why we all have jobs and computers and people from Loas aren’t posting here.


Really?

Nope


In a communist society, the worse the job, the less time you would have to spend at it. Or the more shared around it could be.

Are you serious, so everyone would be lining up to be the janitor? And I guess the doctors would get worked to death. Sounds great. WOW!

[Marxist_Fire]

Allow me to systematically flay all of your pitiful 'arguments'.

"why don’t some of you folks here pack up and go to China, Cuba, Laos, North Korea, or Vietnam. All communist counties, sure it would be great there."

Because not a single one of these countries is socialist, let alone communist. These are all corrupt state-capitalist regimes that oppress and exploit workers. May the proletariat of these nations (and every nation) overthrow the bureaucratic ruling class and establish a real workers' state.

"You could bust you ass for everyone else’s benefit."

Busting your ass to make a tiny handful of super-rich capitalist pigs even wealthier is great, isn't it?

"How many of you give 25% of you annual income to charity? If not then your not a true communist, your just a wanna be."

*sniff* *sniff*... I smell bullshit. It is utopian, childish and totally innacurate to think you can bring about communism simply by donating money to a few charities. Donating money won't bring about the revolution. Revolutionary leftists don't pretend to live in a socialist society when we are living under a violent, corrupt, exploitative world capitalist regime.

"What is so good about it and so bad about capitalism? It works, get over it, get rid of you Che T-shirts and get with the program."

Yea, capitalism works great for the 6,000,000 children who starve to death every year. It works even better for the 3,000,000,000 people who live on $1-$2 per day, and for the masses of people who slave in sweatshops everyday in the Third World. If you don't think we can do better than this, you're a dumbass.

[AreYouForReal]

If you are trying to learn, you shouldn't post with hostility. You don't know about the topic you are criticizing yet you argue as though you do.

I’m not trying to be hostile. I may not know as much as you about the topic, but I think I know enough to know it does not work.


Giving to charity does nothing to eliminate the conditions that make those people poor in the first place (they are not just lazy). Communism seeks a permanent solution, one which does not waste time throwing money at people so they can have children and perpetuate poverty.

Most intelligent thing I have read on this site to date. I really think there are better ways to accomplish this than communism. But intelligent anyway.


Capitalism is a system of government that involves the people at the top making money from the work of other individuals below them. It is essentially a form of stealing that we refer to as wage slavery. I assume you have a problem with people who are wealthy stealing from people who are not, but maybe you don't see anything wrong with that.

Stealing? They are providing you with a job, a roof over your head and food on your table. It could be much worse my friend. I think that the term "slavery" is a bit strong. You don’t have to work for them and your not chained to you desk. If you don’t like it don’t do it. SLAVERY!

[AreYouForReal]

Because not a single one of these countries is socialist, let alone communist. These are all corrupt state-capitalist regimes that oppress and exploit workers. May the proletariat of these nations (and every nation) overthrow the bureaucratic ruling class and establish a real workers' state.

Is there such a thing then? Why is that? If it is such a great system I don’t understand why the world is not adopting it.


Busting your ass to make a tiny handful of super-rich capitalist pigs even wealthier is great, isn't it?

If it means me and all my friends have job, and a car, and a house, and are not starving yea, it is great. Again name me a socialist country where the people have it better than we do in America. ONE? I don’t think you can.


Yea, capitalism works great for the 6,000,000 children who starve to death every year. It works even better for the 3,000,000,000 people who live on $1-$2 per day, and for the masses of people who slave in sweatshops everyday in the Third World. If you don't think we can do better than this, you're a dumbass.

Look im not saying it could not be better, but if you think communism is the answer, then you are the "dumbass". It just does not work. If you disagree name me one, just one prospering communist country.

[Streetz]

to AreYouForReal





You know what bothers me? your dumb remarks make you sound like the same azzholes who said martin luther king and malcolm x shouldnt persue equal rights and a revolution. youll learn when you grow up and stop listening to the media that america is the problem.

[Taiga]

Please, all these questions have already been answered million times. Go and read some threads. Why should we waste our time because of your lazyness?

Ask something NEW.

[KC]

I’m not trying to be hostile. I may not know as much as you about the topic, but I think I know enough to know it does not work.

You obviously know absolutely nothing about it if you're calling these countries communist. It actually shows that you know shit-all about communism, aside from the lies they teach you in high school.



Most intelligent thing I have read on this site to date. I really think there are better ways to accomplish this than communism. But intelligent anyway.

Like what?


Stealing?

Yes. Slavery. Don't like the idea that you're a slave? Too bad.


They are providing you with a job, a roof over your head and food on your table.

They're not "providing us" with anything, other than things that they already stole from us.

This is how the capitalist system works. The worker produces something for a wage. Let's say our worker works at a table factory and gets paid $5 an hour. Let's say that he also finishes one table every hour. So he is getting paid $5 per table. Each table is sold at $100. The worker produced something worth $100 yet only got $5 for it. So where did the other $95 go? To the capitalist. The capitalist then takes this $95 and either uses it to further invest in capital, or he pockets it for his own personal use.

I know right now you're asking yourself "But the capitalist did something worth getting paid for! He bought the resources, bought the tools used to produce that table, and shipped it to the store! That must be worth something! Surely he should get paid for not only doing that, but running the risk of running a business!"

Let's get a few things straight. The worker produced the table. What is the table made out of? Wood, nails and glue. Workers produced the wood, nails and glue, which were taken and sold by capitalists in the exact same way that our table was. What tools were used to create the table? Let's say a screwdriver. Workers created that screwdriver. Guess how that screwdriver got on the market (hint: the exact same way).

So we can easily conclude that workers produce everything, while the capitalists take these commodities and sell them, giving a tiny percentage of the profit to the worker. That is stealing.


You don’t have to work for them

Workers don't have to work for business owners? As far as I see it there's only two other options for workers: start a business and become a capitalist, or die. And I think you understand that the majority of workers in the world can't afford to feed their families, let alone start a business.



Is there such a thing then? Why is that? If it is such a great system I don’t understand why the world is not adopting it.

Because the world is developing through a capitalist stage of historical development. Things don't happen just because they're right, or better you know.




If it means me and all my friends have job, and a car, and a house, and are not starving yea, it is great.

Sure, but what happens when all that is taken away from you? Do you really think you own any of this? Of course you don't. It's on loan to you; you're being lended these items by the capitalists. They can easily take it all away from you by firing your ass.


Again name me a socialist country where the people have it better than we do in America.

Cuba. Although, I wouldn't claim that it's socialist, but you would, and since it's on your list I thought I'd mention it.


I don’t think you can.

I just did. Of course, it depends on your definition of "better". If your definition is ability to lead a happier life, then my point stands.


It just does not work.

Why doesn't it work? We've heard this so many times, with reasons that are so easily refuted that they're not even legitimate anymore. Is it because "people are just naturally greedy"? Do you really believe that there's such thing as a greed gene? Or is it because it's inherently authoritarian and bloody? If you believe that then you have some serious reading to do.

[AreYouForReal]

You obviously know absolutely nothing about it if you're calling these countries communist. It actually shows that you know shit-all about communism, aside from the lies they teach you in high school.

Maybe I don't then. What are the communist countries? Oh there aren’t any, that’s right because you just want to claim the ones that are convenient.


Yes. Slavery. Don't like the idea that you're a slave? Too bad.

Slavery is still not a good term, you guys should coin you own term. Your not slaves! Nat Turner, Frederick Douglass, Joshua Glover, Harriet Tubman, they were slaves. Save it.


This is how the capitalist system works. The worker produces something for a wage. Let's say our worker works at a table factory and gets paid $5 an hour. Let's say that he also finishes one table every hour. So he is getting paid $5 per table. Each table is sold at $100. The worker produced something worth $100 yet only got $5 for it. So where did the other $95 go? To the capitalist. The capitalist then takes this $95 and either uses it to further invest in capital, or he pockets it for his own personal use.

Go out and build your own $100 dollar table with $5. The capitalist just provided you with the tools, the material and everything else to make that $100 table. Get over it and be happy you not in North Korea starving.

It has been great talking to you guys and I respect your right to disagree. Something I’m not sure you would find in any of the counties I listed above. Keep that in mind.

[Dominicana_1965]

Originally posted by Khayembii [email protected] 11 2006, 06:51 AM


I’m not trying to be hostile. I may not know as much as you about the topic, but I think I know enough to know it does not work.

You obviously know absolutely nothing about it if you're calling these countries communist. It actually shows that you know shit-all about communism, aside from the lies they teach you in high school.



Most intelligent thing I have read on this site to date. I really think there are better ways to accomplish this than communism. But intelligent anyway.

Like what?


Stealing?

Yes. Slavery. Don't like the idea that you're a slave? Too bad.


They are providing you with a job, a roof over your head and food on your table.

They're not "providing us" with anything, other than things that they already stole from us.

This is how the capitalist system works. The worker produces something for a wage. Let's say our worker works at a table factory and gets paid $5 an hour. Let's say that he also finishes one table every hour. So he is getting paid $5 per table. Each table is sold at $100. The worker produced something worth $100 yet only got $5 for it. So where did the other $95 go? To the capitalist. The capitalist then takes this $95 and either uses it to further invest in capital, or he pockets it for his own personal use.

I know right now you're asking yourself "But the capitalist did something worth getting paid for! He bought the resources, bought the tools used to produce that table, and shipped it to the store! That must be worth something! Surely he should get paid for not only doing that, but running the risk of running a business!"

Let's get a few things straight. The worker produced the table. What is the table made out of? Wood, nails and glue. Workers produced the wood, nails and glue, which were taken and sold by capitalists in the exact same way that our table was. What tools were used to create the table? Let's say a screwdriver. Workers created that screwdriver. Guess how that screwdriver got on the market (hint: the exact same way).

So we can easily conclude that workers produce everything, while the capitalists take these commodities and sell them, giving a tiny percentage of the profit to the worker. That is stealing.


You don’t have to work for them

Workers don't have to work for business owners? As far as I see it there's only two other options for workers: start a business and become a capitalist, or die. And I think you understand that the majority of workers in the world can't afford to feed their families, let alone start a business.



Is there such a thing then? Why is that? If it is such a great system I don’t understand why the world is not adopting it.

Because the world is developing through a capitalist stage of historical development. Things don't happen just because they're right, or better you know.




If it means me and all my friends have job, and a car, and a house, and are not starving yea, it is great.

Sure, but what happens when all that is taken away from you? Do you really think you own any of this? Of course you don't. It's on loan to you; you're being lended these items by the capitalists. They can easily take it all away from you by firing your ass.


Again name me a socialist country where the people have it better than we do in America.

Cuba. Although, I wouldn't claim that it's socialist, but you would, and since it's on your list I thought I'd mention it.


I don’t think you can.

I just did. Of course, it depends on your definition of "better". If your definition is ability to lead a happier life, then my point stands.


It just does not work.

Why doesn't it work? We've heard this so many times, with reasons that are so easily refuted that they're not even legitimate anymore. Is it because "people are just naturally greedy"? Do you really believe that there's such thing as a greed gene? Or is it because it's inherently authoritarian and bloody? If you believe that then you have some serious reading to do.
:D

I like the way you explained thesituation and the truth about this polemic.

Can i copy and paste the bolded part into my myspace blog??(I liked the way you explained it)

[Raisa]

Originally posted by [email protected] 11 2006, 05:23 AM
why don’t some of you folks here pack up and go to China, Cuba, Laos, North Korea, or Vietnam. All communist counties, sure it would be great there. You could bust you ass for everyone else’s benefit. How many of you give 25% of you annual income to charity? If not then your not a true communist, your just a wanna be. What is so good about it and so bad about capitalism? It works, get over it, get rid of you Che T-shirts and get with the program.
If capitalism is so good why dont you invest all your money in my pocket and shut the hell up! :ph34r:

[Rollo]

Here's how capitalism works in the third world.

Man inherits millions of dollars from his father who made his money by forcing black people into slave labour. Now rich man goes into a third world country and kicks thousands of people off the land there ancestors have been living and growing on for hundreds of years. Even richer man profits a lot from the already established farms forcing the native people to work for almost nothing and horrible living conditions. Yet if I walk into a service station and claim a bag of potatoe chips as my own and plan to capitalise the chips I'de be arrested. How fair.

[An archist]

Originally posted by [email protected] 11 2006, 09:45 AM
Here's how capitalism works in the third world.

Man inherits millions of dollars from his father who made his money by forcing black people into slave labour. Now rich man goes into a third world country and kicks thousands of people off the land there ancestors have been living and growing on for hundreds of years. Even richer man profits a lot from the already established farms forcing the native people to work for almost nothing and horrible living conditions. Yet if I walk into a service station and claim a bag of potatoe chips as my own and plan to capitalise the chips I'de be arrested. How fair.
:D I'm going to use that if I get caught stealing.

[Comrade J]

I know this noob is even more dense that most of the Restricted Members (with the possible exception of Ebeneezer©,) but I suppose we should at least explain the main flaw with their argument.

COMMUNISM: A classless, stateless society.

Now, AreYouForReal (great cliché to have as a name btw) you may have noticed that Cuba, China, Vietnam etc. are NOT classless or stateless (you can't have a 'communist country.') Therefore, shock-fucking-horror, they are not Communist/Socialist. :o

Seriously, follow the advice and read some other threads. Get rid of your ridiculous bourgeois-induced illusions as to what Communism is.
Did you really think we hadn't heard all this nonsense before? Did you think by asking us this absurd question we'd all want to move to North Korea and live happily?

I feel genuinely sorry for you with your dangerously high level of stupidity, stop watching Fox news and learn some real ideas and solutions.

[KC]

What are the communist countries? Oh there aren’t any, that’s right because you just want to claim the ones that are convenient.

We're not "claiming" anything. Communism is a classless, stateless society. Since these countries are states, they're not communist. They're attempts at socialism. Now, whether or not they're actually socialist is debated amongst leftists constantly, so you're going to find conflicting opinions on whether or not they're socialist.


Your not slaves!

That is a lie.


The capitalist just provided you with the tools, the material and everything else to make that $100 table.

Yeah, but who made those tools, materials and "everything else"? Workers.


Get over it and be happy you not in North Korea starving.

Yeah, we should be grateful for what we "have" and not try to free ourselves because we're "lucky". :rolleyes:


AreYouForReal, if you want to learn how this system actually works, then I suggest that you read Marx's Kapital for Beginners. You can find it here (http://www.revolutionaryleft.com/index.php?showtopic=45625).



Can i copy and paste the bolded part into my myspace blog??

Go for it.

[Dean]

Personally, I give to Amnesty International and the ACLU. Not all people are able to give a substantial amount of money and accomplish their economic goals in life, and they shouldn't be expected to. Besides, monetarily supporint a family doesnt nedcessarily create a change in social conditions that will allow the oppressed to continue to live well. That's why I give to human rights organizations; change is more effective than charity.

[Rollo]

Originally posted by An archist+Aug 11 2006, 08:53 PM--> (An archist @ Aug 11 2006, 08:53 PM)
[email protected] 11 2006, 09:45 AM
Here's how capitalism works in the third world.

Man inherits millions of dollars from his father who made his money by forcing black people into slave labour. Now rich man goes into a third world country and kicks thousands of people off the land there ancestors have been living and growing on for hundreds of years. Even richer man profits a lot from the already established farms forcing the native people to work for almost nothing and horrible living conditions. Yet if I walk into a service station and claim a bag of potatoe chips as my own and plan to capitalise the chips I'de be arrested. How fair.
:D I'm going to use that if I get caught stealing. [/b]
I tried to explain that once... They told me to shut up.

[The Sloth]

Originally posted by [email protected] 11 2006, 05:23 AM
why don’t some of you folks here pack up and go to China, Cuba, Laos, North Korea, or Vietnam. All communist counties, sure it would be great there. You could bust you ass for everyone else’s benefit. How many of you give 25% of you annual income to charity? If not then your not a true communist, your just a wanna be. What is so good about it and so bad about capitalism? It works, get over it, get rid of you Che T-shirts and get with the program.
areyouforreal,

there is a rather handy "search" option for your kind of queries, as it has been asked a thousand times before, and a thousand times to come. realistically, that's not our fault; it's the fault of those unwilling to do the necessary research in cuban, laotian, korean, and vietnamese market economies.

the short answer is this: those listed countries are not communist by any means. it might take no more than a few minutes to look up the definition of communism defined by its theoreticians, and only a few more minutes to look up the policies of those humorous "communist states" (that, by the way, is an oxymoron.. a communist state is impossible by definition). compare the two, and then come back to us.

the work, of course, is entirely up to you. rest assured, we've looked up the relevant info on our own.. so, how about you indulge yourself in the same? might make for some interesting talk instead of these.. pointless interrogations.

p.s. - you're basically arguing that "if you don't like the system, leave" -- indeed, that seems to end all critical discusison of the matter. i wonder if you really want a challenge, instead of being handed all the re-gurgitated mantras of popular culture.

p.p.s. - charity is not the object of communism. communism seeks to eliminate the present socio-economic relationships that make charity necessary in the first place.

[Capitalist Lawyer]

Ok, you guys claim to be anarchists and communists which advocate a stateless society. Unfortunately, you seem to have not understand mob mentality. Look at your average lawless country in Africa and what happens there daily. Look at LA after the Rodney King verdict. Look at what happened in the New Orleans Superdome. That is what you are in for in your fantasy of a world free of governments. Even the best people do very bad things when they realize there are no repurcussions.

For instance, because there are no repurcussions, you have no problem hurling insults at anyone you don't think your intellectual equal on this board (ie everyone). I strongly suspect that if you were forced from the anonymity of your computer, your courage would be noticeably absent.

[RedCommieBear]

Originally posted by [email protected] 11 2006, 05:23 AM
How many of you give 25% of you annual income to charity? If not then your not a true communist, your just a wanna be.
"True compassion is more than flinging a coin to a beggar; it comes to see that an edifice which produces beggars needs restructuring."

- Martin Luther King Jr.

[KC]

Ok, you guys claim to be anarchists and communists which advocate a stateless society. Unfortunately, you seem to have not understand mob mentality. Look at your average lawless country in Africa and what happens there daily. Look at LA after the Rodney King verdict. Look at what happened in the New Orleans Superdome. That is what you are in for in your fantasy of a world free of governments.

Yeah, look at what happens in a capitalist society when rules aren't enforced! :rolleyes:


Even the best people do very bad things when they realize there are no repurcussions.

1. You're talking about capitalist society.
2. Why wouldn't there be repercussions in a communist society?


I strongly suspect that if you were forced from the anonymity of your computer, your courage would be noticeably absent.

I highly doubt it.

[The Sloth]

Originally posted by Capitalist [email protected] 11 2006, 04:48 PM
Ok, you guys claim to be anarchists and communists which advocate a stateless society. Unfortunately, you seem to have not understand mob mentality. Look at your average lawless country in Africa and what happens there daily. Look at LA after the Rodney King verdict. Look at what happened in the New Orleans Superdome. That is what you are in for in your fantasy of a world free of governments. Even the best people do very bad things when they realize there are no repurcussions.


africa is poor and desperate. the people in the L.A. riots were poor and desperate. new orleans is poor and desperate. the best people might do very bad things under special circumstances.. the point is to eliminate these kinds of circumstances altogether. or, if not eliminate them, to minimize them as far as possible. it's very easy to whip people up into a frenzy, indeed, as long as these people were never taught to think critically about anything. it's even worse when they were never taught sensitivity and gentleness, which are, at bottom, rather easy goals to inculcate.

and, i must speak for myself. i wouldn't rape anyone, or anything similarly horrendous, under "mob mentality" circumstances.. to assume otherwise would be a bit much, if you ask me. yet, the difference between me and someone willing to do such dispicable things is not a difference of physical, neurological constitution, but a qualititive difference of culture, education, and understanding. it's a difference of opportunity.. and that, by definition, is a difference of chance.

but, does it have to be?


For instance, because there are no repurcussions, you have no problem hurling insults at anyone you don't think your intellectual equal on this board (ie everyone). I strongly suspect that if you were forced from the anonymity of your computer, your courage would be noticeably absent.

again, i must speak for myself. i never hurl insults, nor am i ever particularly offensive, towards anyone, except if the other person is adopts kind of arrogant, dismissive, derogatory, and/or generally obnoxious tone. of course, we have some aggressive members on this board that attack everyone indiscriminately.. but, it's a little unfair to consider us institutions instead of people. we're all people, with our own eccentricities, and our own shortcomings. thus, people should be criticized accordingly for whatever bad they do.. but to throw us into the same aggressive and insulting category simply because we have very similar political beliefs that are posted on the same message board is a bit much.

i cannot answer for them, in the same way that you cannot answer for such pointlessly crude and offensive jackasses such as the recently-banned "general patton." from what i saw, you disliked him as much as i did, and for very good reason. he wasn't very pleasant, nor very communicative. whatever malice i dispensed was well-deserved on his part.

[lithium]

A simple idea I use when explaining the difference between right-wing and left-wing economics to people is this:

Capitalism: There is a company that is owned by one person. The company employs many workers to produce goods. Those goods are sold and the profits go into the pockets of the owner, and no further.

Socialism: There is a company that is owned by the public. The company employs many workers to produce goods. Those goods are sold and the profits go into public ownership. Those funds are then distributed back to the workers in the form of higher wages, lower taxes, free health care, etc.

Fall of capitalism: The company owner has made lots of money, so much so, that there is no money or resources left. He/she cannot make more money, and there is nobody to trade goods with. The owner now has the option to redistribute the money back to the workers, or to hold onto the wealth and do nothing with it (effectively worthless). In the latter options, the workers realise they have no resources/money after all the work they put in. They decide to seize the wealth of the owner and redistribute it amongst the workers.

[red team]

Fall of capitalism:

They realize that money is just a psychological confidence game which only has as much value as you pretend it to have. So they use something else to measure wealth like physical costs of production that can be scientifically quantified.

[lithium]

Better :)

[AreYouForReal]

Wow so much to reply to since last night. First of all I'm really not here just to ruffle your feathers. I find you arguments to be intelligent, minus a few. OK lets see if I can catch up.

Comrade J

COMMUNISM: A classless, stateless society.

A system of government in which the state plans and controls the economy to make progress toward a higher social order in which all goods are equally shared by the people.

The STATE. If there is no state who is in charge? Do we just distribute everything among ourselves?

A classless, stateless society is a pipe dream. A stateless society is anarchy, period. I don’t disagree that it sounds wonderful, it just does not work. It has never worked, and it never will.

Khayembii Communique
Your not slaves!


That is a lie.

Again, I say that is a strong word. Slave. I really think it is a bit disrespectful to even say as much with the opportunity that we have in this country. Your not a slave, you are free to go at any point.

Brooklyn-Mecca

those listed countries are not communist by any means. It might take no more than a few minutes to look up the definition of communism defined by its theoreticians, and only a few more minutes to look up the policies of those humorous "communist states" (that, by the way, is an oxymoron. a communist state is impossible by definition).

Impossible by definition? How about just impossible. From what you folks have told me were talking about a stateless, classless society. Its not impossible by definition, it is impossible period. Che Guvara seemed to think that Cuba fit the bill. Did he not?

[Janus]

A system of government in which the state plans and controls the economy to make progress toward a higher social order in which all goods are equally shared by the people.
That is one of the definitions of socialism.


If there is no state who is in charge?
The people themselves, of course.


A classless, stateless society is a pipe dream.
At this point yes but this may change when the material conditions are ripe.

[AreYouForReal]

That is one of the definitions of socialism.

Yes it is, read it again.

A system of government in which the STATE plans and controls the economy to make progress toward a higher social order in which all goods are equally shared by the people.

That does not sound stateless to me.


The people themselves, of course.

Wow that sounds like a republic!

A political order in which the supreme power lies in a body of citizens who are entitled to vote for officers and representatives responsible to them.

[Martin Blank]

Originally posted by AreYouForReal+Aug 11 2006, 11:40 PM--> (AreYouForReal @ Aug 11 2006, 11:40 PM)Yes it is, read it again.

A system of government in which the STATE plans and controls the economy to make progress toward a higher social order in which all goods are equally shared by the people.

That does not sound stateless to me.[/b]

That definition of "socialism" is one of many. That term is so generic that it means different things to different people. Communism, on the other hand, is something more specific -- in spite of your attempts to confuse the two.

As to the definition itself, governing and the state are two different things for communists. The state is the collection of armed groups (police, military, secret services, intelligence agencies, etc.) that enforce the rule of a minority class over the majority of society. When we talk about a stateless society, this is what we aim to eliminate. This is because, in a society where the majority class is the ruling class, and we are able to produce all needed items for society, there is no real need for such permanent professional forces.


[email protected] 11 2006, 11:40 PM
Wow that sounds like a republic!

We start with a republic -- a working people's republic -- and move forward from there, using the period of transition from capitalism to communism to develop the political system from being the rule over people to the administration of things.

Miles

[The Sloth]

Originally posted by [email protected] 12 2006, 04:25 AM
Impossible by definition? How about just impossible. From what you folks have told me were talking about a stateless, classless society. Its not impossible by definition, it is impossible period. Che Guvara seemed to think that Cuba fit the bill. Did he not?
impossible by definition, indeed. a "communist state" is, in other words, an "anarchist state." simply because the words "communist" and "anarchist" have different historical roles doesn't mean that their objectives are any different.

che's opinion on anything is pretty much irrelevant.. unless, of course, we happen to agree with him on a particular point. same goes for marx, or any one else for that matter.

as for che's opinion of cuba's "fidelity" to marxism, that certainly remains to be seen. there's actually a rather informative book coming out soon on the subject.. it's mostly che's economic writings, which will, i'm sure, discuss cuba and the ussr at length. i hear it's mostly criticism rather than praise.

[The Sloth]

Originally posted by [email protected] 12 2006, 04:40 AM
Wow that sounds like a republic!
are the people in charge of everything in america?

there's a difference between a genuine, non-bureaucratic republic and a bourgeois republic.

[AreYouForReal]

As to the definition itself, governing and the state are two different things for communists. The state is the collection of armed groups (police, military, secret services, intelligence agencies, etc.) that enforce the rule of a minority class over the majority of society. When we talk about a stateless society, this is what we aim to eliminate. This is because, in a society where the majority class is the ruling class, and we are able to produce all needed items for society, there is no real need for such permanent professional forces.

I see your point, governing is great, but without the state (police, military, secret services, intelligence agencies, etc.), who keeps order and protects us from forigen threats. Without the state why would gangs not just take control and run the sreets. There is not "state" to stop them. I agree in principal that it sounds great, but practical, I think not.

Now to Brooklyn-Mecca


are the people in charge of everything in America? there's a difference between a genuine, non-bureaucratic republic and a bourgeois republic.

Yea they really are. We all have a vote and that is our control. If you don’t like it vote differently, which im sure you do. But the fact of the matter is that we by majority elect, pick our representatives. We must hold them accountable.

[KC]

Again, I say that is a strong word.

Sorry, but the truth hurts.


I really think it is a bit disrespectful to even say as much with the opportunity that we have in this country.

What opportunity is that? The opportunity to work and be exploited?


Your not a slave, you are free to go at any point.

We're not talking about being slaves to the country. We're talking about one class of people being enslaved by another class of people.

In capitalist society, workers have three choices:
1. Work for the capitalists.
2. Become a capitalist.
3. Die.

We can narrow this down to options 1 and 3 rather easily because of the fact that the majority of workers are too poor to be able to afford to start a business (not to mention the fact that as capitalism develops it becomes harder to compete with big businesses, as the bourgeoisie and petty bourgeoisie becomes proletarianized and the bourgeois class becomes smaller, with wealth concentrated in fewer and fewer hands).

So what are we left with? Workers can work or die.

Now, you might not think that this is really slavery, as look at all the cool stuff you can buy! Well, let's see how much power the capitalists really have over the workers:

1. Who determines wages? Capitalists. Many people think that it is a negotiation between capitalist and worker, but this simply isn't true. Sure, there's some moving room for capitalists, but when the going gets tough you're going to have to accept that pay cut or you'll get canned.
2. What about all this cool stuff I can buy? What about my "freedom"? Sure, you get paid, and sure, you can buy things, but you have to realize that these things are being given to you to keep you in line. They are basically on loan to you. If you get a pay cut, then you can't afford to live how you used to. The capitalist class is effectively taking away some of "your" property in order to remain competitive. What happens if capitalists refuse to hire you? You die.




Impossible by definition? How about just impossible.

He was saying that a communist state is impossible by definition because communism is a classless, stateless society.


Che Guvara seemed to think that Cuba fit the bill. Did he not?

No, he thought it was socialist. And again, that's debated amongst leftists all the time.



A system of government in which the STATE plans and controls the economy to make progress toward a higher social order in which all goods are equally shared by the people.

That does not sound stateless to me.

When marxists refer to the term "socialism" they are referring to the period known as the dictatorship of the proletariat (learn about this here (http://marxists.org/glossary/terms/d/i.htm#dictatorship-proletariat). It is a stage in society in between capitalism and communism, when social classes are being phased out.


I see your point, governing is great, but without the state (police, military, secret services, intelligence agencies, etc.), who keeps order and protects us from forigen threats.

People...


Without the state why would gangs not just take control and run the sreets.

Why would they do it in the first place? When you take away the social conditions which give rise to both gangs and the obsession with money, you eliminate the problem of "gangs tak control". Communism is a classless, stateless society, but it is also [i]moneyless. Gangs are usually a product of poverty, class conflict, and a loss of hope in capitalism. Moreover, people usually turn to gangs for a feeling of belonging; in a communist society the community as a whole would be family.


I agree in principal that it sounds great, but practical, I think not.

I think you're starting to understand some of our arguments, but are still confused about a lot of things. I really think you should read into this subject if it interests you, because I think you'd find that a lot of the positions you're taking in these debates is what many people take, and what is commonly refuted by both leftists and non-leftists.


We all have a vote and that is our control.

Are you saying that the American electoral system is fair? Are you kidding me? You don't think that money kind of has a little influence on who wins?

[Guerrilla22]

[QUOTE]I see your point, governing is great, but without the state (police, military, secret services, intelligence agencies, etc.), who keeps order and protects us from forigen threats. Without the state why would gangs not just take control and run the sreets. There is not "state" to stop them. I agree in principal that it sounds great, but practical, I think not[QUOTE]

Its the us government that is responsible for all those "foreign threats" through its foreign policy, and for crime by its capitalist class system.

[Martin Blank]

Originally posted by [email protected] 12 2006, 01:07 AM
I see your point, governing is great, but without the state (police, military, secret services, intelligence agencies, etc.), who keeps order and protects us from forigen threats. Without the state why would gangs not just take control and run the sreets. There is not "state" to stop them. I agree in principal that it sounds great, but practical, I think not.
OK, one issue at a time.

First, "foreign threats" (aka, the easy one). Communism cannot exist except as an international system. When the world balance of forces is decisively in favor of the transition to communism (i.e., either most of the economic power world has begun the transition, or all the dominating states in the world have begun the transition), then we can start to see people emerge from the transition period into the first phase or real communist society. Until then, there will be a need for some kind of military defense forces to guard against external counterrevolution.

Second, gangs. Why do gangs exist? Virtually all of them exist as a means of defending themselves against the exploitation and oppression of capitalist society. The drug trafficking, violence and other illegal activity associated with gangs are the ways they manifest that defense. Just about any gang member you would talk to will tell you that, without the poverty, scarcity, oppression (racial and national), lack of decent jobs, lack of adequate housing, lack of quality education, etc., they would have no way to recruit and sustain themselves -- they would have no reason to exist. And those problems would be addressed and dealt with during the transition.

Miles

[The Sloth]

Originally posted by [email protected] 12 2006, 06:07 AM
But the fact of the matter is that we by majority elect, pick our representatives. We must hold them accountable.
the problem is that your representatives are interested in pretty similar things, and would never be allowed to dissent too much.

and the idea that someone -- an institutionalized non-person -- has to "speak up" for me is just as absurd.

it's not so much that, in professional debate and in politics, other opinions don't exist, or that other opinions are unimportant. other opinions are simply marginalized, and they're no longer in the scope of the debate. that's why noam chomsky, for example, is almost never brought up on popular talk shows.. although, of course, he probably has more to say than 99% of all public intellectuals.

regardless, even if a "good" politician is elected, s/he shall be powerless. that's just it.

[Sabocat]

Originally posted by Capitalist [email protected] 11 2006, 12:48 PM
Ok, you guys claim to be anarchists and communists which advocate a stateless society. Unfortunately, you seem to have not understand mob mentality. Look at your average lawless country in Africa and what happens there daily. Look at LA after the Rodney King verdict. Look at what happened in the New Orleans Superdome. That is what you are in for in your fantasy of a world free of governments. Even the best people do very bad things when they realize there are no repurcussions.

For instance, because there are no repurcussions, you have no problem hurling insults at anyone you don't think your intellectual equal on this board (ie everyone). I strongly suspect that if you were forced from the anonymity of your computer, your courage would be noticeably absent.
Hey asshole, for the last time:

Anarchism: a political theory holding all forms of governmental authority to be unnecessary and undesirable and advocating a society based on voluntary cooperation and free association of individuals and groups.

Not:

anarchy: a state of lawlessness or political disorder due to the absence of governmental authority.


How many of you give 25% of you annual income to charity?

I give that and more to the worse charity there is every week. A charity that does no good for anybody. The U.S. military. Through my payroll taxes.

[atlas]

Stealing? They are providing you with a job, a roof over your head and food on your table. It could be much worse my friend. I think that the term "slavery" is a bit strong. You don’t have to work for them and your not chained to you desk. If you don’t like it don’t do it. SLAVERY!


:blink: But you must work for somebody with capitalism. I suppose capitalism is just another term for the feudal system.

[Taiga]

Originally posted by [email protected] 13 2006, 02:58 AM

:blink: But you must work for somebody with capitalism. I suppose capitalism is just another term for the feudal system.
Huh, in feudal system serfs knew that they are the master's property.
Under capitalism people have the illusion that they are free.

[Solitary Mind]

the thinking of these capitalists is the thinking of the "House Negro" as opposed to the "Field Negro"...one is content getting what he wants from the master, so he doesn't care for freedom, he thinks he has it already...the other knows he's getting fucked and doesn't get much from the master, and wants freedom...people like AreYouForReal are one of the House Negros who prefers his limited freedom as opposed to full freedom

[Tower of Bebel]

Originally posted by [email protected] 11 2006, 06:09 AM
Why do you think that all the counties I listed are not highly technological? I see a pattern there.
O, o, I see the pattern too: bad treatment by the USA? Like for instance: the vietnam war, many lakes are still poisened :( . Or bullying cuba with some pig deceases, poisenend cigars, crop deceases... <_< .
What a wonderful country Cuba would have been :wub: