The porblem with the revolution

[antired]

Somebody will always come and mess the whole revolution up - like in russia...

[Aurora]

lol right...the SU degenerated because of the isolation of the revolution.Somebody didnt 'come and mess it up' individuals dont create history masses do.

btw restrict

edit: where did the report button go? :rolleyes:

[antired]

1. surely there will never be a non-isolated revolution... people nowdays just arent prepared to try to understand communism or are too stuck in their views to change anyway accept it.

2. was it not Stalin who brought the revloution down in a way? how did he get in power?

[The Advent of Anarchy]

Originally posted by [email protected] 21, 2007 10:13 pm
1. surely there will never be a non-isolated revolution... people nowdays just arent prepared to try to understand communism or are too stuck in their views to change anyway accept it.

2. was it not Stalin who brought the revloution down in a way? how did he get in power?
What is your ideology?

[antired]

Originally posted by Ravachol+September 21, 2007 10:17 pm--> (Ravachol @ September 21, 2007 10:17 pm)
[email protected] 21, 2007 10:13 pm
1. surely there will never be a non-isolated revolution... people nowdays just arent prepared to try to understand communism or are too stuck in their views to change anyway accept it.

2. was it not Stalin who brought the revloution down in a way? how did he get in power?
What is your ideology? [/b]
Im a christian capitalist

I think human kind is in the situation it is in due to the fact that we are all selfish inside.

Id love Socialism to be able to work - but personally i dont think it can work

[Whitten]

Originally posted by [email protected] 21, 2007 10:13 pm
1. surely there will never be a non-isolated revolution... people nowdays just arent prepared to try to understand communism or are too stuck in their views to change anyway accept it.
Revolution becomes inevitable when capitalism is no longer capable of ustaining itself. This may start off with isolated revolutions bnut it cannot remain that way forever.


2. was it not Stalin who brought the revloution down in a way? how did he get in power?

Stalin's influence is highly debatable, and even if we assume it was 100% negative that doesn't change the fact that individuals dont break revolutions.

[antired]

Originally posted by Whitten+September 21, 2007 10:39 pm--> (Whitten @ September 21, 2007 10:39 pm)
[email protected] 21, 2007 10:13 pm
1. surely there will never be a non-isolated revolution... people nowdays just arent prepared to try to understand communism or are too stuck in their views to change anyway accept it.
Revolution becomes inevitable when capitalism is no longer capable of ustaining itself. This may start off with isolated revolutions bnut it cannot remain that way forever.


2. was it not Stalin who brought the revloution down in a way? how did he get in power?

Stalin's influence is highly debatable, and even if we assume it was 100% negative that doesn't change the fact that individuals dont break revolutions. [/b]
it hasnt worked up till now - why should it work in the future?

[The Advent of Anarchy]

Originally posted by antired+September 21, 2007 10:25 pm--> (antired @ September 21, 2007 10:25 pm)
Originally posted by [email protected] 21, 2007 10:17 pm

[email protected] 21, 2007 10:13 pm
1. surely there will never be a non-isolated revolution... people nowdays just arent prepared to try to understand communism or are too stuck in their views to change anyway accept it.

2. was it not Stalin who brought the revloution down in a way? how did he get in power?
What is your ideology?
Im a christian capitalist

I think human kind is in the situation it is in due to the fact that we are all selfish inside.

Id love Socialism to be able to work - but personally i dont think it can work [/b]
Well, I'm an anarchist.

If you're a christian, then I suggest the following book: The Kingdom of God is Within You.

And also, humans are not "naturally selfish/greedy". That's capitalism's fault. People want more and more for a reason: if they don't get more, they will lose what they have. So greed isn't human nature; it's people in a semi-survival mode.

[antired]

ok i see your point, however is that necessarily true? is there any evidence of what you say?

could it not just as well be that we are naturally selfish full stop, and thats the reason were in capitalism

I have to go - i should be on this again tomorrow

[RNK]

Originally posted by [email protected] 21, 2007 10:52 pm
ok i see your point, however is that necessarily true? is there any evidence of what you say?

could it not just as well be that we are naturally selfish full stop, and thats the reason were in capitalism

I have to go - i should be on this again tomorrow
Well, according to your bible, no, you're not naturally selfish -- you were created by the hand of god, not through any natural process. Any greed inherent in humanity was placed by him. Why would god make everyone greedy?

And yes, there's evidence. I suggest visiting http://www.marxists.org, go to Marx & Engels section, and read everything in "Selected Works". That'll give you some insight.

[Raúl Duke]

Originally posted by [email protected] 21, 2007 05:52 pm
ok i see your point, however is that necessarily true? is there any evidence of what you say?

could it not just as well be that we are naturally selfish full stop, and thats the reason were in capitalism

I have to go - i should be on this again tomorrow
Both you and him are making assumptions about "human nature"...

What's ironic is that you are asking him to back up what he says while keep stating your assumption without any backup evidence/argument. You both have to back up your claims.

This is my statement:
Human nature is something that should be inherent in our behaviors at all times. Is everyone greedy at all times? No.

People might seem greedy because, possibly, in capitalism there is a need (and also reinforcement, both positive and negative) for this kind of behavior.

True, there is a tendency of people considering their interests first (but it could be possible that at certain times people might not be doing that or that some people don't at all). Sometimes, these interests can be shared collectively among a group of people.

That translates to this in a political sense: Capitalism is in the interests of the capitalists (since they benefit from it immensely) while against the interests of workers.

[Whitten]

Originally posted by [email protected] 21, 2007 10:52 pm
ok i see your point, however is that necessarily true? is there any evidence of what you say?

could it not just as well be that we are naturally selfish full stop, and thats the reason were in capitalism

I have to go - i should be on this again tomorrow
What proof do you have that all people are naturally selfish? There are plenty of counter-examples so isn't this theory flawed? Why did your god make his creations all greedy?


it hasnt worked up till now - why should it work in the future?

Because capitalism hasn't destroyed itself yet. Capitalism is inherently unsustainable, and so will reach a point when the living conditions for the working class will be so low that revolution is unavoidable.

[Schrödinger's Cat]

Originally posted by [email protected] 21, 2007 09:55 pm
Somebody will always come and mess the whole revolution up - like in russia...
That could be said of any revolution. Benedict Arnold comes to mind as being a certain "somebody" who was defeated.

[Dr Mindbender]

Originally posted by antired
1. surely there will never be a non-isolated revolution... people nowdays just arent prepared to try to understand communism or are too stuck in their views to change anyway accept it.

2. was it not Stalin who brought the revloution down in a way? how did he get in power?
What is your ideology? [/b][/quote]
Im a christian capitalist

I think human kind is in the situation it is in due to the fact that we are all selfish inside.

Id love Socialism to be able to work - but personally i dont think it can work [/b][/quote]
Doesnt selfishness go against Jesus's teachings?

[guerilla E]

Originally posted by antired+September 21, 2007 10:25 pm--> (antired @ September 21, 2007 10:25 pm)
Originally posted by [email protected] 21, 2007 10:17 pm

[email protected] 21, 2007 10:13 pm
1. surely there will never be a non-isolated revolution... people nowdays just arent prepared to try to understand communism or are too stuck in their views to change anyway accept it.

2. was it not Stalin who brought the revloution down in a way? how did he get in power?
What is your ideology?
Im a christian capitalist

I think human kind is in the situation it is in due to the fact that we are all selfish inside.

Id love Socialism to be able to work - but personally i dont think it can work [/b]
Contradiction - especially since I don't remember the bible saying 'the poor becometh poorer and the rich becometh richaaaa!'

Also my friend it is not logical for any member of a religion to support capitalist ideals unless;
They don't really believe in the teachings of their prophet,
Money is their god,
or they want to take the moral high ground backed by religion when it suits them but then walk past a bum and think 'get a job and you wont be a bum'.

Why does this person still share the comrade title? ressssttrict the contradiction please.

Religious Capitalist... the embodiement of the true counter-revolutionary.

[Ismail]

Originally posted by [email protected] 21, 2007 04:55 pm
Somebody will always come and mess the whole revolution up - like in russia...
Who messed the revolution up?

[JazzRemington]

JazzRatt, you've been here long enough. Why don't you trash repetitious threads!?!?!?!!??!?411!#$fcheezebergersz

[JazzRemington]

Originally posted by Mrdie+September 25, 2007 06:23 pm--> (Mrdie @ September 25, 2007 06:23 pm)
[email protected] 21, 2007 04:55 pm
Somebody will always come and mess the whole revolution up - like in russia...
Who messed the revolution up? [/b]
I did. I'm sorry, I spilled carrot juice all over it. :(

[Dean]

Originally posted by antired+September 21, 2007 10:25 pm--> (antired @ September 21, 2007 10:25 pm)
Originally posted by [email protected] 21, 2007 10:17 pm

[email protected] 21, 2007 10:13 pm
1. surely there will never be a non-isolated revolution... people nowdays just arent prepared to try to understand communism or are too stuck in their views to change anyway accept it.

2. was it not Stalin who brought the revloution down in a way? how did he get in power?
What is your ideology?
Im a christian capitalist [/b]
Well Jesus hates you. It's good to know that fuckers like you ar erunning around; it is certainly one of you who has fucked my dad in the head to the point that he has spent my Mom's estate on churches instead of charity.


I think human kind is in the situation it is in due to the fact that we are all selfish inside.
Haven't ever cracked the fucking bible, have you, "antired"?


Id love Socialism to be able to work - but personally i dont think it can work
That's because you have a twisted view of humans promoted by greedy priests and soulless bureaucrats.

[Whitten]

Originally posted by Mrdie+September 25, 2007 11:23 pm--> (Mrdie @ September 25, 2007 11:23 pm)
[email protected] 21, 2007 04:55 pm
Somebody will always come and mess the whole revolution up - like in russia...
Who messed the revolution up? [/b]
Stalin, Kruschev or Gorbi depending on your perspective.

[Dr Mindbender]

Originally posted by Whitten+September 26, 2007 10:33 am--> (Whitten @ September 26, 2007 10:33 am)
Originally posted by [email protected] 25, 2007 11:23 pm

[email protected] 21, 2007 04:55 pm
Somebody will always come and mess the whole revolution up - like in russia...
Who messed the revolution up?
Stalin, Kruschev or Gorbi depending on your perspective. [/b]
Its not fair to implicate Kruschev or Gorbi. It was long gone before they had a chance to do anything about it.

[Dr Mindbender]

Originally posted by JazzRemington+September 26, 2007 02:33 am--> (JazzRemington @ September 26, 2007 02:33 am)
Originally posted by [email protected] 25, 2007 06:23 pm

[email protected] 21, 2007 04:55 pm
Somebody will always come and mess the whole revolution up - like in russia...
Who messed the revolution up?
I did. I'm sorry, I spilled carrot juice all over it. :( [/b]
Damn capitalist carrot juice! :lol:

[The-Spark]

Why do people believe that because of the soviet union situation, its destined to happen to every other revolution?

[Forward Union]

Originally posted by [email protected] 21, 2007 09:55 pm
Somebody will always come and mess the whole revolution up - like in russia...
Well. Forgive me for not conceding my political position to this well thought out critique of contemporary Russian history.

No doubt that the Russian revolution was betrayed. But the failure of the revolution began much sooner than Stalin, it began with the founding of the Bolshevik party. They were the party who hijacked the workers revolution, pushing through the crowd, adopting popular anarchist slogans such as "all power to the soviets" (not that the revolution was anarchist) and eventually got to their position of privilege and control, which they then used to destroy workers democracy, and crush any examples of it. Including the democratically run (anarcho-syndicalist) factories in Russia, the Kronstadt sailors, and the free soviet democracy in Ukraine.

But to say this will always be the case is interesting. I mean, how exactly can you predict the future? My crystal ball seems to be broken.

Lessons have been learned. If the Libertarian Communists can build strong enough federations and unions before the revolutionary event, then there's every possibility that they will be able to resis the bolsheviks, and capitalists, and defend the democratic workers councils. Meaning a genuine workers democracy could be achieved.

But we're a little way off that goal at the moment


could it not just as well be that we are naturally selfish full stop, and thats the reason were in capitalism

I am a communist because I am selfish! The ruling class exploits my class, literally robbing it of the wealth it has produced. Not only materially, but it also strips us of any political power, so we have no say in the decissions that effect our lives.

And I dunno about you, but I fucking want that stuff!

However it is pointless fighting for it if it's going to end up in the hands of a new elite, so we need to create an organisation that ensures we all get it. Don't you think?

[Labor Shall Rule]

“The usual explanation of the success of Bolshevism reduced itself to a remark upon "the simplicity of its slogans, " which fell in with the desires of the masses. In this there is a certain element of truth. The wholeness of the Bolshevik policy was due to the fact that, in contrast to the "democratic parties, " the Bolsheviks were free from unexpressed or semi-expressed gospels reducing themselves in the last analysis to a defense of private property. However, that distinction alone does not exhaust the matter. While on the right the "democracy" was competing with the Bolsheviks, on the left too there were the anarchists, the Maximalists, the Left Social Revolutionaries, trying to crowd them out. But these groups too - none of them ever emerged from its impotent state. What distinguished Bolshevism was that it subordinated the subjective goal, the defense of the interests of the popular masses, to the laws of revolution as an objectively conditioned process. The scientific discovery of these laws, and first of all those which govern the movement of popular masses, constituted the basis of the Bolshevik strategy. The toilers are guided their struggle not only by their demands, not only by their needs, but by their life experiences. Bolshevism had absolutely no taint of any aristocratic scorn for the independent experience of the masses. On the contrary, the Bolsheviks took this for their point of departure and built upon it. That was one of their great points of superiority.

Revolutions are always verbose, and the Bolsheviks did not escape from this law. But whereas the agitation of the Mensheviks and Social Revolutionaries was scattered, self-contradictory and oftenest of all evasive, the agitation of the Bolsheviks was distinguished by its concentrated and well thought-out character. The Compromisers talked themselves out of difficulties; the Bolsheviks went to meet them. A continual analysis of the objective situation, a testing of slogans upon facts, a serious attitude to the enemy even when he was none too serious, gave special strength and power of conviction to the Bolshevik agitation.”

The claim that the Bolsheviks "adopted anarchist slogans" is absolutely ridiculous. Unless you can substantiate this claim, there is no room for debate. This ignores the articles and literature published for decades up until the moment that power was transfered to the Soviets, which explained explaining the intimate connection between theory and practice, the development of revolutionary tactics and strategy, and the question of political power. It is not a stale dogma that is bound to the works of it's past theorists, but adaptable to it's material and historical circumstances. The Bolshevik experience was, at best, full of mistakes that Lenin himself acknowledged in the years before he died, but it also lead to the first worker's and peasant's state in human history, whether you like to say "counterrevolution began on the first day" or not.

They were caught in the straight-jacket of their material circumstances, and they couldn't escape from it because they weren't magicians, but realists. In a country where industrial output decreased drastically, where factories and railroads were basically non-productive altogether, where famine and disease stalked the streets, you can't expect worker's democracy to bloom like a flower. A revolution was necessary after the stabilization process started, but if they had buttered Kronstadt and Makhno up, the entire revolution might of been compromised, to suggest otherwise is an insult to intelligence.

[IronLion]

Originally posted by The-[email protected] 29, 2007 11:26 am
Why do people believe that because of the soviet union situation, its destined to happen to every other revolution?
Quite simply because it is the only example they've been exposed to in such a massive scale.

[Dr Mindbender]

Originally posted by IronLion+September 30, 2007 04:03 pm--> (IronLion @ September 30, 2007 04:03 pm)
The-[email protected] 29, 2007 11:26 am
Why do people believe that because of the soviet union situation, its destined to happen to every other revolution?
Quite simply because it is the only example they've been exposed to in such a massive scale. [/b]
What gets me is if you applied the logic the other way around. Look at the amount of countries in which capitalism has been a failure. It's not as if communism has been given a fair trial.

[Tower of Bebel]

Originally posted by [email protected] 21, 2007 11:55 pm
Somebody will always come and mess the whole revolution up - like in russia...
Just like the French and Glorious revolution.

[Karl Marx's Camel]

.the SU degenerated because of the isolation of the revolution.

It had of course nothing to do with the fact that it was not the workers who held power.

[Labor Shall Rule]

Originally posted by Karl Marx's [email protected] 30, 2007 07:47 pm

.the SU degenerated because of the isolation of the revolution.

It had of course nothing to do with the fact that it was not the workers who held power.
The economic and material problems of the revolution are intrinsically tied with it's political obstacles, which is something anyone intelligent would admit.

So, it's 'isolation' basically lead directly to the crumbling of worker's power. If the Soviet governments in Hungary, Bavaria, Finland, and Latvia were able to retain power, if the factory committees in Italy were able to seize control of the state under the flag of genuine revolutionary leadership, if the workers' and sailors' deputies along with other worker associations were able to rally under the banner of a revolutionary party, and if the general strikes in Britain and the United States were able to become apart of a wider struggle with not just economic demands, but political demands, than the bureaucratic stratum would of crumbled, since an international partnership of other socialist republics would been able to freely supply capital and transportation to develop the country's productive forces, as well as cease the military assault that was starving it, which would mean that the legitimacy of the bureaucracy would be under question, to which it would of not survived.

[luxemburg89]

Id love Socialism to be able to work - but personally i dont think it can work


Coming from a 'Christian Capitalist' I find it very hard to believe that you think that way. Your name is even 'anti-red' and you do know that a 'Red' is a name given to anyone of left-wing persuasion - so that includes Socialists too.

Were Socialism to succeed, and I think it can, you can kiss goodbye to Capitalism (one half of your ideology) and Christianity (the other half). Both are symbols of heirarchy and oppression and, in an egalitarian society, will have no place. So kindly stop trolling, fuck off, and take your ideology with you.

P.S. 'Don't' has an apostrophe in it.

[A Suvorov]

Who messed up the revolution? Aside from the fact that was somewhat derailed in its infancy, IMHO it was Stalin's influence that sealed its fate. Granted, he brought the SU together admirably (if not with admirable methods at all times) but it remains that Stalin *could* have reversed the trend and gotten back to the roots of the revolution- but given his personal world-view and lust for power it wasn't destined to happen.

By the same token, I do NOT believe that one can judge communism only in light of the fall of the Soviet Union; without trying to sound *too* cliche, 'true' communism never really got much of a chance. Given the proper conditions and dedicated adherents it's entirely possible it could succeed- one can only wonder what will transpire with the Second American Revolution :)

[antired]

Yes, im ignorant, yes, im contradictory,ok! ok!

No wonder theres not too many of you guys - how will you ever get anyone to conform to you rpoint of view if u tell them to


fuck off all the time?

Im just trying to find out what your ideology is... jeez

However i can see that the name antired was probably a poor choice, as im not against left wingers or communists. Its just most people say its as evil as nazism. :wacko: ( is there any way to change it?)

But anyway...

1. how do you know there will ever be a time when capitalism cant sustain itself?
2. some of you seem to say that mankind is not selfish ( :D ) but there was somebody who siad that he was a communist because he was selfish? which is right
3. The bible does say "those who rule have a divine right to rule." which confuses me as i see your point about selfishness being against Christs teachings. (ya im an idiot)
4. isnt it contradictory - you say that the bible supports communism, and yet if communism was to happen, christianity would die out? Why would it die out in a Communist system?


Im confused :angry:

[Owen-]

is there any way i can attach word documents to this? I have a file called christians should be communists that i think mite b helpful.
Otherwise "antired" go to http://www.revleft.com/index.php?showtopic=63696&hl= and scroll down a bit and you'll c wher you can download it.

hope ive helped :)

[Whitten]

Originally posted by [email protected] 03, 2007 07:40 pm
1. how do you know there will ever be a time when capitalism cant sustain itself?
To oversimplify: Profit decreases over time, in order to continue making profit more and more exploitation is required. Eventually a point is reached when people have really no choice but to rebel.


2. some of you seem to say that mankind is not selfish ( :D ) but there was somebody who siad that he was a communist because he was selfish? which is right

Mankind is not itself inherently selfish, but one can easily be led to communism by selfish motives. If one is poor he will want the greater material gain he will recieve under communism than under capitalism.


3. The bible does say "those who rule have a divine right to rule." which confuses me as i see your point about selfishness being against Christs teachings. (ya im an idiot)

A divine right to rule, a right bestowed on Hitler by God? Frankly its not for me to solve the apparent contradictions of the Bible, but I can give you one piece of advice: Ask yourself what is right and what should be done, not what the Bible says to do. If any text says God supports the evils of the world is that a text you want to follow blindly?


4. isnt it contradictory - you say that the bible supports communism, and yet if communism was to happen, christianity would die out? Why would it die out in a Communist system?

Athiests believe it would because oragnised religion has always been used as a tool of oppression, as justifaction for the most heinous sins. Remember, Jesus had nothing to do with any church.

[antired]

Originally posted by Whitten+October 03, 2007 09:32 pm--> (Whitten @ October 03, 2007 09:32 pm)
[email protected] 03, 2007 07:40 pm
1. how do you know there will ever be a time when capitalism cant sustain itself?
To oversimplify: Profit decreases over time, in order to continue making profit more and more exploitation is required. Eventually a point is reached when people have really no choice but to rebel.


2. some of you seem to say that mankind is not selfish ( :D ) but there was somebody who siad that he was a communist because he was selfish? which is right

Mankind is not itself inherently selfish, but one can easily be led to communism by selfish motives. If one is poor he will want the greater material gain he will recieve under communism than under capitalism.


3. The bible does say "those who rule have a divine right to rule." which confuses me as i see your point about selfishness being against Christs teachings. (ya im an idiot)

A divine right to rule, a right bestowed on Hitler by God? Frankly its not for me to solve the apparent contradictions of the Bible, but I can give you one piece of advice: Ask yourself what is right and what should be done, not what the Bible says to do. If any text says God supports the evils of the world is that a text you want to follow blindly?


4. isnt it contradictory - you say that the bible supports communism, and yet if communism was to happen, christianity would die out? Why would it die out in a Communist system?

Athiests believe it would because oragnised religion has always been used as a tool of oppression, as justifaction for the most heinous sins. Remember, Jesus had nothing to do with any church. [/b]
1. Profit decreases overtime? Is this necessarily true? is there any evidence?
"Eventually a point is reached when people have really no choice but to rebel." Is that point likely to occur anytime soon, in our lifetime?

2. Point taken

3. Point taken, but im still a bit dubious.

4. Im still unsure of why Christianity would die out after a communist state is set up...?

Owen- if i can ill read the essay later on - thanks

[Ismail]

Originally posted by [email protected] 03, 2007 04:54 pm
4. Im still unsure of why Christianity would die out after a communist state is set up...?
Communism is based on materialism. Dialectical materialism, historical materialism, etc. Since science would be encouraged (and the role of humanity in nature as its master) we can expect to see religion, at least organized religion, go downwards in popularity.

[luxemburg89]

Im just trying to find out what your ideology is... jeez

However i can see that the name antired was probably a poor choice, as im not against left wingers or communists. Its just most people say its as evil as nazism. ( is there any way to change it?)

But anyway...

1. how do you know there will ever be a time when capitalism cant sustain itself?
2. some of you seem to say that mankind is not selfish ( ) but there was somebody who siad that he was a communist because he was selfish? which is right
3. The bible does say "those who rule have a divine right to rule." which confuses me as i see your point about selfishness being against Christs teachings. (ya im an idiot)
4. isnt it contradictory - you say that the bible supports communism, and yet if communism was to happen, christianity would die out? Why would it die out in a Communist system?


Im confused

Just trying to find out what our ideologies are? No, you came on this website, a website you must have known that you are not welcome on - with your disgusting ideology - for reasons other than learning. You came to try and prove a point, that the 'revolution will always have someone who will come along and mess it up.'

I don't know who is more stupid for equating Communism with Nazism, the people who think that or you for believing them. If you honestly can't see the difference then you need to go back to school - where you'll learn that Nazism and Capitalism/religion have much more in common, you stupid twat.


1. how do you know there will ever be a time when capitalism cant sustain itself?

Because the working-class cannot put up with being oppressed forever.


2. some of you seem to say that mankind is not selfish ( ) but there was somebody who siad that he was a communist because he was selfish? which is right


Fucking hell! You're going on the word of ONE person?? Yes, you really are stupid. I say that there is no such thing as a rabbit - does that mean that you'll believe me?


3. The bible does say "those who rule have a divine right to rule." which confuses me as i see your point about selfishness being against Christs teachings.

Selfishness does not exist in the bible amongst a lot of people because you're all supposed to serve the priest/bishop/Pope/Monarch/God/Fuhrer etc. Christ claimed to be the son of someone none of us have ever seen - I don't think we're going to take that wanker seriously.


(ya im an idiot)


Well done, you got something right.


4. isnt it contradictory - you say that the bible supports communism, and yet if communism was to happen, christianity would die out? Why would it die out in a Communist system?


The bible does not support communism - it is one of its greatest enemies, as the bible is a book that praises heirarchy, slavery, and the stoning of homosexuals. We are against all of that.

You are clearly a troll, and being a Capitalist (the very people oppressing the working-class) you do not deserve any respect from us whatsoever. *Ehem* FUCK OFF.

[NorthStarRepublicML]

Lux, what the fuck is your problem?


No, you came on this website, a website you must have known that you are not welcome on - with your disgusting ideology - for reasons other than learning.

what are you psychic? why not respond to his questions instead of flame him for asking, damn he's already restricted what more do you want?

i haven't seen him flame anyone here, just ask a couple of questions about why we believe the way we do ...

go back to sucking off Jazzarat or something ...


1. how do you know there will ever be a time when capitalism cant sustain itself?

its called the crisis of overproduction .... ok, (for the sake of simplicity) say for example you own a shoe factory and you have employed workers who make 80,000 shoes ....

you take the 80,000 shoes to market and sell off 60,000 of them ... leaving you with 20,000 left over (surplus) ....

so now you need to sell off your surplus and increase profit to stay competitive with the shoe factory down the street ... meaning that this next production run you decide to only produce 40,000 shoes ...

to bring down your costs you fire workers (because you are only making half as many shoes as before)

this time you produce 40,000 shoes ( so 40,00 + 20,000 = 60,000) and take the 60,000 shoes to market ....

to your surprise you only sell 40,000 shoes .... again leaving you with a surplus of 20,000 shoes ....

turns out that all the workers who you fired can't afford to buy new shoes every time a new shoe comes onto the market ...

to keep your costs down you fire more workers and produce 20,000 shoes to add to your surplus of 20,000 shoes .... you take the 40,000 shoes to the market place and only sell 20,000 shoes ....

leaving you with a surplus once again of 20,000 shoes ... you find that the shoe market in your country no longer profitable thus you move your factory to China ... after all there are a billion feet in china ....

the cycle starts over again .... because the costs are lower in this new market you once again start producing shoes in large numbers ... but again develop a surplus and again are forced to fire workers ....

25 or 50 years from now China ceases to be profitable ... costs of production are too high and you again have a surplus .. you decide to move your factory to a developing African nation (perhaps Malawi or the DNC) ... the cycle starts all over again ....

now granted that this is rather simplistic ... but basically that is how a capitalist market works .... to stay competitive you must find ways to lower your costs one of the best ways to do that is to fire workers or relocate to nations in which workers are cheaper in an attempt to avoid overproduction ...

Lenin put forward that capitalism will one day have exploited all markets to their maximum at which point they will be forced to seize new markets from one another by military force of arms ... bringing them into conflict .... this imperialism is the direct result of capitalist economics...


2. some of you seem to say that mankind is not selfish ( ) but there was somebody who siad that he was a communist because he was selfish? which is right

i'm undecided on the nature of humans in that regard, i won't say that communists are not selfish ... but i will say that communism (in my mind) is really only a good option when the lives of the individual members of the society are improved ... what is good for the whole is not always good for the individuals .... the idea of communism that i always liked was the ability of ts members to work together for the gain of themselves and at the same time improving the lives of their community ...

it might be selfish to want to improve your own life at the expense of others .... but a communist system should seek to make improving your own life not dependent on diminishing the lives of others ....


3. The bible does say "those who rule have a divine right to rule." which confuses me as i see your point about selfishness being against Christs teachings.


we must always remember that the bible itself is a very old text that has gone through numerous translations and revisions .... i know from being a student of history that the church and the feudal system were tied tightly together, each fostering the power of the other ....

similar to the Chinas "Mandate of Heaven" ....

maybe i'm a hypocrite but there are some parts of the bible i like and others that i could care less about ... i look at the bible more in the way a person might read the Aeneid or Nibelungenlied ... an epic work of semi-historical fiction with a good dose of morals ...

sure i might take some of my morals from the bible (i went to catholic school) .. but it is far from the only source i use to judge right and wrong ...

as a suggestion, you should do a little bit of reading on Liberation Theology (just google it).... it will help to tie together the arguments here with certain theological authors ...



4. isnt it contradictory - you say that the bible supports communism, and yet if communism was to happen, christianity would die out? Why would it die out in a Communist system?

there is no agreement on what will happen to various religious institution following a communist revolution .... i personally believe that if enough democracy is inserting into the various churches, such as the election of priests and the barring of certain persons from the organization based upon gender, sexual orientation, or whatnot, then religion would not be that much of a problem ....

i happen to think that religious faith or religious organizations will continue to exist in a communist system although in significantly altered forms ...

in many ways, yes ... the bible does support communism ... but like any poem or song ... the bible can be interpreted in a number of ways .... the words are not good or bad by themselves, they only hold meaning when interpreted by an observer, how that observer chooses to act on those interpretations is what should be judged not the source of his inspiration ...

many followers of the bible did good things (Copernicus) others did horrible things (Urban II)

[luxemburg89]

what are you psychic? why not respond to his questions instead of flame him for asking, damn he's already restricted what more do you want?

i haven't seen him flame anyone here, just ask a couple of questions about why we believe the way we do ...

go back to sucking off Jazzarat or something ...

I can do that and type at the same time fuckwit. Although I don't know of a Jazzaratt - do introduce me though.

I don't need to be psychic to establish that a non-leftist joining an exclusively leftist discussion forum is here to make a point. In this case it is blatantly obvious that his aim was to tell us the revolution will fail. If he had come here to learn he would have asked us 'IF a revolution would fail' but he used the imperative and said 'it WILL'. Therefore, in my humble opinion, I believe he is a worthless troll...which he really is - there are spambots with more intelligence than Christian Capitalist.

I find it interesting that, just to spite me, you are ONCE AGAIN defending a reactionary member.


damn he's already restricted what more do you want?

Didn't the words 'FUCK OFF' make that clear?

[Comrade Rage]

What's a guy with a name like 'antired' (Anti-red) doing on RevLeft anyway? :rolleyes:

[NorthStarRepublicML]

I find it interesting that, just to spite me, you are ONCE AGAIN defending a reactionary member.

i'm not defending him dipshit, i'm simply answering his questions and responding to his arguments in a way that doesn't alienate him ... in case you were unaware there are alot of Christian Capitalists in the world and not so many Communists ... you can't spit on them at every turn you need to be a little less rabid if you want to get your point across ....

just because you don't hate the ignorant does not mean you are not a communist ... it is possible to respond to these people in a civil way ...


What's a guy with a name like 'antired' (Anti-red) doing on RevLeft anyway?

i agree that he should be restricted to the OI forums, he is a capitalist, I would imagine that the reason that capitalists are not outright banned (like fascists) is because arguing with capitalists helps to sharpen our ability to both respond to capitalist arguments and to help us distinguish ourselves from them ....


a non-leftist joining an exclusively leftist discussion forum

honestly i'm not sure how many capitalists there actually are in the OI forums .... only one comes to mind ... Capitalist Lawyer ...

the rest seem to be leftists that have one or two divergent issues which the majority of the CC disagrees with ....

thus your false impression that this site is exclusive to leftists is straight up wrong ....

[antired]

directed towards lux

Why is there a section called opposing ideologies - whats the purpose in it?

do you really hate me for not knowing about communism? do you go on to everyone like this?


This Community is open to all leftists. Right-wingers are not welcome, but tolerated within this and only this forum. Right-wing messages will be ignored or deleted in all other forums and the author will be banned. If you are a right-winger or convinced capitalist and can accept this rule, good. If not, fuck off and never come back!

Does this rule not apply to me?

Cant get onto the second page again to see your replies sorry

[pusher robot]

honestly i'm not sure how many capitalists there actually are in the OI forums .... only one comes to mind ... Capitalist Lawyer ...

:(

[Comrade Rage]

Originally posted by antired
The porblem with the revolution
The 'porblem' with dyslexia!! :lol:

[luxemburg89]

the rest seem to be leftists that have one or two divergent issues which the majority of the CC disagrees with ....


*Sigh* pusher robot is a Capitalist, and he does not hide that. People are banned on the grounds of sexism, homophobia, racism etc etc. It is not POSSIBLE for people to be banned simply because the CC has a minor ideological disagreement for you. The CC does not deviate from the guidelines I can assure you, you won't believe me I know but I'm beyond caring about what you think.


Why is there a section called opposing ideologies - whats the purpose in it?


Actually Northstar. explained that pretty well.


do you really hate me for not knowing about communism?

No, I hate you because you are a Capitalist - YOU oppress the working-class, YOU oppress everything that should be liberated. Why the hell should I be civil to someone who supports an ideology that oppresses the workers of the world?

[hajduk]

political parties are problem not revolution

[NorthStarRepublicML]

No, I hate you because you are a Capitalist - YOU oppress the working-class, YOU oppress everything that should be liberated.

claiming to be a capitalist does not a capitalist make .... unless he owns production capacities is is more then likely a wage earner ...


It is not POSSIBLE for people to be banned simply because the CC has a minor ideological disagreement for you.

of course its POSSIBLE, just look at coggy, whitten, dean, freakazoid, jasmine, these are leftists that diverge (or were accused) on minor points .... these people still uphold class struggle ...


I'm beyond caring about what you think.

then shut your cake hole

[Jazzratt]

Originally posted by [email protected] 16, 2007 04:00 pm

It is not POSSIBLE for people to be banned simply because the CC has a minor ideological disagreement for you.

of course its POSSIBLE, just look at coggy, whitten, dean, freakazoid, jasmine, these are leftists that diverge (or were accused) on minor points .... these people still uphold class struggle ...
All conspicuously not banned, retard.

[NorthStarRepublicML]

read the thread dipshit ...

your butt-boy lux is the one who misused "banned" when he was responding to a post in which i was referring to restrictions.

also it is offensive to use "retard" in a derogatory way, get your act together bigot and knock it off with the one line postings, ya wack ass troll.

[luxemburg89]

Originally posted by [email protected] 16, 2007 04:51 pm
read the thread dipshit ...

your butt-boy lux is the one who misused "banned" when he was responding to a post in which i was referring to restrictions.

also it is offensive to use "retard" in a derogatory way, get your act together bigot and knock it off with the one line postings, ya wack ass troll.
And the use of 'butt-boy' in an offensive way is not derogatory? Or, indeed, the use of 'butt-boy' full stop is not derogatory?

P.S. I often put 'banned' by mistake when I mean restricted, I'm sure you'll forgive me.




I'm beyond caring about what you think.



then shut your cake hole

I don't care what you think, I still think it's necessary to show everyone that you're a bloody idiot.

[Jazzratt]

Originally posted by [email protected] 16, 2007 04:51 pm
ya wack ass troll.
Says he that has simply complained ever since his restriction, says he that throws about homophobic slurs like sweeties ("butt-buddy") simply because he's jealous that two members of this site recognise each other as comrades, says he that has made it his personal mission to irritate the fuck out of the CC since joining the site and says he that got suspended for his trollish posts.

Damn you must belong here because that is really fucking rich.

[jasmine]

says he that throws about homophobic slurs like sweeties ("butt-buddy")

Oh well, you see, little oink-oink, it's all a matter of context. Now in this precise situation, used against you, an obnoxious, misoginyst little "arsewipe" (one of your words), nothing can be considered offensive because you are closer to pig than human.

This, by the way, is the level of debate that your cretinous moderation inspires.

[NorthStarRepublicML]

Oh well, you see, little oink-oink, it's all a matter of context. Now in this precise situation, used against you, an obnoxious, misoginyst little "arsewipe" (one of your words), nothing can be considered offensive because you are closer to pig than human.

ooo burn ... Jazz you got told ...


This, by the way, is the level of debate that your cretinous moderation inspires.

exactly , Jazz you have to be an idiot to suggest that i have used an offensive slur when every other word in your messages is "****" "****" "****" "retard" "****"

look in the fuckin mirror shitheel ...


"butt-buddy"

i noticed that was in quotes, where was that said ... hmm ... i don't see it ... apparently you have once again failed to read the thread ...

better luck next time dipshit


he that got suspended for his trollish posts.

oh the ever changing justifications ....

see:

pro-pig tendencies



right-idealist stance on abortion


You were restricted for a whole plethora of reasons


an oversight on the part of the moderator that suspended you (and I have no idea who that was before you point fingers)

so now its trollish posts?

what exactly am i supposed to change to regain my member status?

[antired]

waow - you guys are a litte bit *****y ...

My first post was met with "fuck off"s

And now this.

You dont exactly send out the right message do ya...

lux - i oppress people? thats funny - im working class, as is my entire family - and i own no buisness, and sell nothing

please guys cant u see how childish this all is?

[Comrade Rage]

This thread has kind of deviated into a 'Unfair Restriction?' clone, but what the hell:

ANTIRED: I don't agree with just telling you to fuck off, that's far too vague. You need specific reasons to fuck off.

BTW what exactly are your politics? When you join the world's largest leftist forum with a name like 'Antired' you probably are going to get yelled at.

[Jazzratt]

Originally posted by [email protected] 18, 2007 10:52 pm
You dont exactly send out the right message do ya...
I quite agree, but I always get sucked into these meaningless point scoring fights.



lux - i oppress people? thats funny - im working class, as is my entire family - and i own no buisness, and sell nothing

It could be argued that your support of the current system makes you complicit in oppression


please guys cant u see how childish this all is?

Probably. I could make it even more childish by pointing out that they started it :P

[luxemburg89]

lux - i oppress people? thats funny - im working class, as is my entire family - and i own no buisness, and sell nothing

You said you were a 'Christian Conservative', in which case yes, you oppress people. By supporting a conservative ideology you believe in oppression.

[antired]

Originally posted by [email protected] 19, 2007 05:23 pm

lux - i oppress people? thats funny - im working class, as is my entire family - and i own no buisness, and sell nothing

You said you were a 'Christian Conservative', in which case yes, you oppress people. By supporting a conservative ideology you believe in oppression.
i did say "Christian Capitalist" You can be left wing and still be capitalist...

[Jazzratt]

Originally posted by antired+October 20, 2007 09:48 pm--> (antired @ October 20, 2007 09:48 pm)
[email protected] 19, 2007 05:23 pm

lux - i oppress people? thats funny - im working class, as is my entire family - and i own no buisness, and sell nothing

You said you were a 'Christian Conservative', in which case yes, you oppress people. By supporting a conservative ideology you believe in oppression.
i did say "Christian Capitalist" You can be left wing and still be capitalist... [/b]
Why are you on the "soft" left rather than the "hard" left?

[Dean]

Originally posted by antired+October 20, 2007 09:48 pm--> (antired @ October 20, 2007 09:48 pm)
[email protected] 19, 2007 05:23 pm

lux - i oppress people? thats funny - im working class, as is my entire family - and i own no buisness, and sell nothing

You said you were a 'Christian Conservative', in which case yes, you oppress people. By supporting a conservative ideology you believe in oppression.
i did say "Christian Capitalist" You can be left wing and still be capitalist... [/b]
Yeah, because the left has been historically about making people objects of capital.

What left are you talking about anyways?

[luxemburg89]

Originally posted by Dean+October 21, 2007 02:14 pm--> (Dean @ October 21, 2007 02:14 pm)
Originally posted by [email protected] 20, 2007 09:48 pm

[email protected] 19, 2007 05:23 pm

lux - i oppress people? thats funny - im working class, as is my entire family - and i own no buisness, and sell nothing

You said you were a 'Christian Conservative', in which case yes, you oppress people. By supporting a conservative ideology you believe in oppression.
i did say "Christian Capitalist" You can be left wing and still be capitalist...
Yeah, because the left has been historically about making people objects of capital.

What left are you talking about anyways? [/b]
Unfortunately Dean, antired has been born without brain cells. They fail to realise that Capitalism is a rightist theory. There's no point asking him questions...don't feed the animals.

[antired]

Originally posted by luxemburg89+October 22, 2007 01:02 am--> (luxemburg89 @ October 22, 2007 01:02 am)
Originally posted by [email protected] 21, 2007 02:14 pm

Originally posted by [email protected] 20, 2007 09:48 pm

[email protected] 19, 2007 05:23 pm

lux - i oppress people? thats funny - im working class, as is my entire family - and i own no buisness, and sell nothing

You said you were a 'Christian Conservative', in which case yes, you oppress people. By supporting a conservative ideology you believe in oppression.
i did say "Christian Capitalist" You can be left wing and still be capitalist...
Yeah, because the left has been historically about making people objects of capital.

What left are you talking about anyways?
Unfortunately Dean, antired has been born without brain cells. They fail to realise that Capitalism is a rightist theory. There's no point asking him questions...don't feed the animals. [/b]
lux why are you so intent on putting me off this forum?

i support stirkes etc. as its unfair on the workers - im left wing in that respect

Im a capitalist in as much as i dont believe communism can work - it just seems a little farfetched - to me there is little chance of a revolution happening anytime soon

Communism sounds excellant - and i would aggree that it would be the way forward, if it was a little more... obtainable

lux - im gonna ignore your posts in future sorry

[Yardstick]

Do you believe the peasents thought that the end of feudalism was feasible?

A big trend in society today is that people don't recognize that society constantly changes.

Why is communism so unfeasible? Because your social studies teacher told you that it's against 'human nature'?


The fact is that Capitalism won't be around for ever, just like feudalism wasn't.

[antired]

Originally posted by [email protected] 22, 2007 08:01 pm
Do you believe the peasents thought that the end of feudalism was feasible?

A big trend in society today is that people don't recognize that society constantly changes.

Why is communism so unfeasible? Because your social studies teacher told you that it's against 'human nature'?


The fact is that Capitalism won't be around for ever, just like feudalism wasn't.
How long did it take for feudalism to end...

Do you really think that you will live to see the downfall of capitalism?

I do believe that humanity is selfish quite a lot of the time.

[Dr Mindbender]

Originally posted by [email protected] 22, 2007 10:37 pm



The fact is that Capitalism won't be around for ever, just like feudalism wasn't.
How long did it take for feudalism to end...

Do you really think that you will live to see the downfall of capitalism?

I do believe that humanity is selfish quite a lot of the time. [/quote]
youre right, the vast majority of people on this board (if any) probably wont be lucky enough to see a communist world, but that doesnt mean that capitalism is any more right (in the sense of correctness) than feudalism.

However, radical change must come sooner than you think, because catastrophe is at our doorstep.

[Dr Mindbender]

Originally posted by [email protected] 16, 2007 04:51 pm
read the thread dipshit ...

your butt-boy lux ...
...homophobia now? And you wonder why you're restricted? :rolleyes: :lol:

[NorthStarRepublicML]

...homophobia now?

if "****" isn't sexist then "butt-boy" isn't homophobic, you shits have some serious issues with semantics ...

go ahead and prove that it was intended to be homophobic, as your resident dickwad jazz always says "its all about context" ....

how you like those apples?

i suppose i could go on to say that you are being authoritative by claiming to defend gays against homophobic slurs when they don't need to be hypocritically defended like children, or how many gays might use "butt-boy" with pride to describe themselves ...

context context context ....

its the same old argument ... get over it ya stupid ****

[Dr Mindbender]

Originally posted by [email protected] 23, 2007 01:19 am

i suppose i could go on to say that you are being authoritative by claiming to defend gays against homophobic slurs when they don't need to be hypocritically defended like children, or how many gays might use "butt-boy" with pride to describe themselves ...


would it be hypocritically defensive against black or asian people to criticise someone who made a racist statement?

Many black people have taken it upon themselves to use the 'n' word with 'pride' yet they fail to see how this is counter-productive and ultimately reactionary.

[NorthStarRepublicML]

perhaps this is a topic for a different discussion, but ....

would you then say that the word "****" is "counter-productive and ultimately reactionary" ?



would it be hypocritically defensive against black or asian people to criticise someone who made a racist statement?

no i personally don't believe it is, i was merely refering to arguments in this vein:

(from TragicClown)

Yes, women are extremely fragile and hearing any negative references to their anatomy that fails to affirm how beautiful and goddess-like they are will cause them to shrivel up into a ball of insecure pity. Remember, even the most mild embarrassment or ridicule can be fatal to girls, who, unlike boys who can take it, need constant affirmation.

Thank goodness we have big strong men like you to protect us from from hearing such bad, offensive, degrading words!

(and from counterblast)

There is absolutely nothing offensive about the words "*****" or "ho".

A "*****" is a strong-willed/independent woman. A "ho" is a woman who makes a living from sex work.

i already posted my feelings on the matter here: http://www.revleft.com/index.php?showtopic...3&hl=****&st=50 (http://www.revleft.com/index.php?showtopic=69473&hl=****&st=50)

in which i said:

perhaps words in themselves don't oppress women or whatever but they do offend people, which is something that the left needs to avoid doing when unnecessary ... disagree?

as a side note, one member also said this:

(from RedHerman)

Sure, it may be 'offensive' as you call it, but women aren't made out of crystal. They're not going to psychologically break if you call them a '****'. It's totally different with nigger.

although that member does not explain how they are "totally" different ... so if RedHerman is still around here perhaps he would care to tell us why he believes them to be diffrent ...

[Yardstick]

Wether I live to see capitalism end or not is irrelevant.

Just because I may not live to see any revolution doesn't mean I should just give up and become a liberal...

[lilo32]

Originally posted by Dean+September 26, 2007 02:41 am--> (Dean @ September 26, 2007 02:41 am)
Originally posted by [email protected] 21, 2007 10:25 pm

Originally posted by [email protected] 21, 2007 10:17 pm

[email protected] 21, 2007 10:13 pm
1. surely there will never be a non-isolated revolution... people nowdays just arent prepared to try to understand communism or are too stuck in their views to change anyway accept it.

2. was it not Stalin who brought the revloution down in a way? how did he get in power?
What is your ideology?
Im a christian capitalist
Well Jesus hates you. It's good to know that fuckers like you ar erunning around; it is certainly one of you who has fucked my dad in the head to the point that he has spent my Mom's estate on churches instead of charity.


I think human kind is in the situation it is in due to the fact that we are all selfish inside.
Haven't ever cracked the fucking bible, have you, "antired"?


Id love Socialism to be able to work - but personally i dont think it can work
That's because you have a twisted view of humans promoted by greedy priests and soulless bureaucrats. [/b]
THE DIFFERENCE FROM CHE AND US IS HE THOUGHT OUT OF THE BOX! WHAT THE FUCK ARE WE DOING..AS I READ THIS OVER AND OVER AGIAN WE JUST KEEP FOLLOWING ALONG WE DOUBT OURSELVES AND WE ONLY THINK ABOUT OURSELVES! ALL WE SAY IS PEOPLE LIKE YOU..REVOLUTION THIS. A QUESTION WHAT IN YOUR OPINION MAKES YOU THINK THAT YOU'RE RIGHT? a revolution is needed but how can we begin one when we still need to be changed?

[NorthStarRepublicML]

if you are looking for some actual action out of these jokers on revleft you will be in for a long wait, most people here just like ideological screaming matches as opposed to actually sacrificing something for the sake of getting something started.

I tried to connect with some people in my area of the world but the Midwest forum is mostly slow going, although i have met some good ones ...

i suggest that you don't look online for action, look online to find people near you so you can connect, form a real life group, and then get something done ...

its no coincidence that the Events and Propaganda forum is one of the most underused sections of the board, not many people here seem to be communists in the real world ...

oh and here is my shameless plug: send me a message if you are in the Midwest USA

[luxemburg89]

Communism sounds excellant - and i would aggree that it would be the way forward, if it was a little more... obtainable


Yet you have done nothing to illustrate that it will not work, except throw out pathetic clichés that have been forced upon you since birth. If you want to be taken seriously, you shouldn't have chosen that name and you shouldn't have stated as a definite fact that 'the problem with the revolution is someone will ALWAYS come and fuck it up.' You understand why I can't take you seriously? You certainly don't seem to be serious yourself, unless you aimed to contradict yourself?


if "****" isn't sexist then "butt-boy" isn't homophobic, you shits have some serious issues with semantics ...


Actually, ironically, the word you're looking for is 'definitions' - semantics is to do with applying meaning to the groupings of words, not their individual meanings, and their connotations. You have displayed many time that you are in no position to criticise anyones grammar or syntax. NorthStar, I'm going to be honest with you, you are not a total idiot so stop wasting your time complaining about revleft and get posting your opinions on issues that matter. Your hatred of the CC has nothing to do with your view of world politics and issues - so why not just stop complaining about it - it only serves to wind us up, which in turn winds you up.


its no coincidence that the Events and Propaganda forum is one of the most underused sections of the board, not many people here seem to be communists in the real world ...


Here we see it again, you're bitter at your restriction so you lash out at the majority of revleft, most of whom are active, in various ways. It is difficult to organise anything on the internet as I'm sure you can guess, and when things are organised I think it is generally done in Practice, Chit-Chat or Politics. Events and Propaganda was very useful towards May Day I seem to remember.

EDIT- Typo

[NorthStarRepublicML]

NorthStar, I'm going to be honest with you, you are not a total idiot so stop wasting your time complaining about revleft and get posting your opinions on issues that matter.

look, my complaint isn't against an immaterial internet discussion board, only people on it that act like morons passing judgment based on petty disagreements and abuse their long standing member status to stifle debate ...

although being restricted makes new members less likely to take me seriously as well as narrows the scope of the conversations that i can participate in ....

i made no complaint against the CC in this thread, i happen to respect a good number of CC members enough to stick around and continue to offer my views on a variety of topics .... and i don't hate them ... i might dislike or casually refer to certain persons as flakes or idiots from time to time but in this case it was to prove a point ...

the only thing that really gets me about being restricted is having to put up with garbage like this:


...homophobia now? And you wonder why you're restricted?

a single one line post attacking me for something that would have been allowed to slide was i not restricted ....

i responded as i usually do to criticism of this sort by making a logical argument

[Dr Mindbender]

Originally posted by [email protected] 24, 2007 04:12 am


a single one line post attacking me for something that would have been allowed to slide was i not restricted ....

i responded as i usually do to criticism of this sort by making a logical argument
actually thats entirely untrue.My understanding is that anyone who makes a comment that can be obviously construed as racist or homophobic gets reprimanded and/or restricted. It doesnt matter if you're in the CC or already restricted.

[NorthStarRepublicML]

actually thats entirely untrue.My understanding is that anyone who makes a comment that can be obviously construed as racist or homophobic gets reprimanded and/or restricted. It doesnt matter if you're in the CC or already restricted.


but comments like this are ok?


All conspicuously not banned, retard.

and you didn't answer my previous question:


would you then say that the word "****" is "counter-productive and ultimately reactionary" ?

[Jazzratt]

Originally posted by [email protected] 25, 2007 03:50 pm

actually thats entirely untrue.My understanding is that anyone who makes a comment that can be obviously construed as racist or homophobic gets reprimanded and/or restricted. It doesnt matter if you're in the CC or already restricted.


but comments like this are ok?


Yes.


and you didn't answer my previous question:


would you then say that the word "****" is "counter-productive and ultimately reactionary" ?

The answer is no, the grand prize is not listening to you whine any more. The consolation prize (for those who guessed "no") is a massive mug of shut the fuck up.

[NorthStarRepublicML]

You have been *****ing about the way the restictions work the entire time you have been a member here.

not whining about restrictions, just defending my words against threats from ulster socialist ... he said that i am homophobic because i used a word, often people here (like Jazz and STJ) use deragatory words and nothing happens ... i pointed this out and i defended myself.

my not argue my points instead of just typing out garbage like this:


Are you and your brother freakazoid going to Bible study together tonight?

are you and your daddy Jazz going to play spin the bottle tonight?


Yes.

why?



The answer is no

i wasn't asking you dipshit ... i was asking Ulster, because after stating this:


Many black people have taken it upon themselves to use the 'n' word with 'pride' yet they fail to see how this is counter-productive and ultimately reactionary.

i would like to know how he stands on other offensive slurs, like ****, retard, or whatever...



My understanding is that anyone who makes a comment that can be obviously construed as racist or homophobic gets reprimanded and/or restricted. It doesnt matter if you're in the CC or already restricted.

well here is what the guidelines actually say about it:


Any use of discriminatory language will result in a warning point.

since i am pretty sure that warning points are non-existent it must fall to the CC to determine punishment, and because certain persons have disproportionate influence on the CC this can result in a wide variety of punishments ... or no punishment at all ...

or am i mistaken?

[Jazzratt]

Originally posted by [email protected] 25, 2007 05:01 pm
not whining about restrictions, just defending my words against threats from ulster socialist ... he said that i am homophobic because i used a word, often people here (like Jazz and STJ) use deragatory words and nothing happens ... i pointed this out and i defended myself.
Derogatory and Discriminatory are different concepts, fuckwit. I'd like to know how you suggest insulting someone without being derogatory about them. You, on the other hand, can't seem to insult people with out being mildly homophobic (you've made similar comments to Luxemburg89 in the past).



my not argue my points instead of just typing out garbage like this:


Yes.

Because they're not against the rules of revleft.


i wasn't asking you dipshit ... i was asking Ulster,

Regardless of who you're asking, the answer is no. I don't care if you directed that question at the fucking Pope the answer is still no.


since i am pretty sure that warning points are non-existent

Well done, you've made a true assumption.


it must fall to the CC to determine punishment, and because certain persons have disproportionate influence on the CC this can result in a wide variety of punishments ... or no punishment at all ...

There is no disproportionate influence in the CC. Each member is entitled to one vote, so everyone has the same influence.


or am i mistaken?

As usual.

[antired]

Lmao - you guys are seriously pathetic.

I suggest an new section for *****ing - coz u guys obviously need it.

I try to initiate an argument. And i get this.

Im gonna set up a new thread. One with no *****ing PLZ?

Although at the moment this seems impossible - and its an act of sheer omptimism to hope this will work.

[Lynx]

The problem with the revolution? Too many pillow fights
Start a new thread.

[antired]

Originally posted by [email protected] 27, 2007 10:50 pm
The problem with the revolution? Too many pillow fights
Start a new thread.
done