For the caps

[Da Shit]

communism doesnt = totalitarism
capitalism doesnt = democracy
ussr doesnt = communism
china doesnt = communism
capitalism doesnt = same opportunities for all

theres no such thing as good countries and evil countries.
capitalists defend their interests, not the interests of others.

stop the childish naive shit and get real.

we do NOT stand for dictatorships
we do NOT stand for dictatorships
we do NOT stand for dictatorships
we do NOT stand for dictatorships
we do NOT stand for dictatorships
we do NOT stand for dictatorships

he who says otherwise should seek professional help, it might be serious
im sick and tired of repeating this over and over, im betting im not the only one

dont want to believe any of this? fine. stick with ur ignorant ideas of the world and live ur lives happily. just dont come out and tell everyone how great the system is because YOU and YOUR FRIENDS live well. you might wake up in a hospital


enough of this crap. this is pointless, its like talking to a brick wall for cryin out loud
im outta here

(Edited by Da Shit at 3:15 am on Feb. 25, 2002)

[Guest]

its funny how you can say that those who say that "communism = totalitarianism" are wrong, despite historical evidence. And in the same breath make the specious claim that capitalism doesn't equal democracy or equal opportunity.

[Forever capitalism]

exactly, you believe in a theory that doesn't work. Mao, Lenin and Castro all were communists before they came to power. They tried to establish a communist regime but succeeded in establishing a despotic one. History attests to that.
Guest sign up immediately!

[Da Shit]

forever cap there we go again...black&white and white&black...im sorry but i refuse to repeat everything again..if u want u can go read some previous posts.

guest history points to a form of authoritarian communism. u cant take 2 or 3 systems who claimed to be communist and limit Communism to them. u c, communism can be liberal and authoritarian, just like capitalism. they are social/economic forms, not government types. as to "capitalism doesnt = equal opportunity", do u think it does? do u really think that a person born into poverty has the same chances for life as a person born into wealth? my point that ive been defending all along is that capitalism as it is today is unjust, oppressive etc. i want a better world, a change. i dont say change to communism, i dont stick with ideologies as one would stick to a religious faith, but i believe in a 'mixture', constituted by the best qualities of them all. that would probably end up being something like socialism, a system focused on people, not just some people, but all of them, because thats the only way it can be just.

(Edited by Da Shit at 1:43 pm on Feb. 25, 2002)

[reagan lives]

Look, here's the problem.

Inductively, history seems to suggest that communist attempts devolve into authoritarianism. Many opponents of communism say that this is (in Humese) a necessary connection, whereas proponents of communism insist that it is only a constant conjunction. The question, then, is whether or not there is something inherent in communism that causes it to always produce dictatorships, or whether that's just the case for the specific examples that we have.

For one thing, communist supporters say that there is nothing in the face value of communist theory that demands dictatorship. True enough. But is there something hidden in communism that naturally leads to dictatorship? The majority of anti-communists insist that "human nature" causes individuals to abuse the system and create a dictatorial regime. I, personally, don't think it's anything quite so abstract.

From whence do dictatorships arise? What kinds of systems demand authoritarianism? Basically, deposts of the non-benevolent variety arise when dissent cannot be afforded. Capitalist democracies are designed to allow dissenters. If you don't want to participate in the capitalist economy, fine, you can sit there and be poor. If you don't want to participate in democracy, fine, don't vote. The world will keep on spinning. Communist systems, whether they be democratic or otherwise, inherently do not provide for such dissent. Those who are not in favor of the system must be expunged from the society, there is no other choice. Those who choose not to produce should not be allowed to consume...and in communism, the only way to prevent this is to get rid of those who don't want to produce. I think that this is where communism inevitable leads to authoritarianism.

[Supermodel]

RL, that made the thinking a lot clearer for me.

I have a problem with the ruling classes under the historical attempts at socialism and communism. Somebody, quite simply, has to be in charge and the power and privelege that come with those roles cause individuals to want to hold on to those roles by any means. These conditions also exist in capitalism but as you say, dissent is permitted and democracy replaces the poorer leaders.

When the countries of the world move to a place in the middel, with features of socialism contained in a capitalist model, what will we argue over?

The black-v-white positions of ultra left and right wing are equally invalid, compared to the moderate welfare system in the middle.

[Moskitto]

I think the original posters gripe was that you claim we support dictatorships when we have repeated on numerous occasions that we don't.

a way around the problem which Reagan suggested would be to have a system of "no work, no food." rather than killing people who choose not to work, they should have part of their food forfited. Similar to the system in Britain for people with job seekers allowence whereby if the people do not look for jobs they don't get paid.

[reagan lives]

Moskitto, what's the difference between that and capitalism with responsible and effective social programs?

[Moskitto]

Capitalism with effective social plans, Yes it would be very similar, But what about rearranging business structures to give workers more say in their conditions?

[reagan lives]

Like labor unions?

[Moskitto]

Yes.

Although I am a council communist so I like the idea of local workers councils, but I don't see much difference between them and what trade unions can do.

[reagan lives]

So your values seem to be pretty consonant with the current American system.

[RedRevolutionary87]

except for the fact that one has to pay to be a member of a certain union or parts of their pay go to the union. secondly communism does require a dictatorship in the begining simply for quick industrialization and national gain of capital. i think alot of people on these forums need to reed marx

[reagan lives]

"secondly communism does require a dictatorship in the begining..."
On the surface. Read my argument on page 1.

[RedRevolutionary87]

ther is another trend you have over looked with communism and that is that a) no communist country has started in the right circumstances, no1 has followed marx B) everytime communism rose up the bourgoisie governments tried very hard to destroy them.

communism is a system that is very weak to outside invaders since an army cost resources and our world has just enough to give everyone a decent living but not enough for an army and a decent living, there fore the dictatorship must remain to keep the country independant, because the communism under dictatorship is much stronger than a communism of the people, which is the type of communism that would follow if other countries let communism take its corse without interfering with a sovreign countries growth!

[El Brujo]

(true) Anarchism is the last stage Marx depicts in the workers revolution, in which case, he actually believes in a 100% democracy once the revolution is finnished. You see, revolutionaries are thinking of the future, not just the present. Besides, there ARE elected communist governments such as in Moldova and Chile (before the Criminals in Action (CIA) ousted him and set up a fascist DICTATORSHIP).

[TovarishAlexandrov]

Quote: from Forever capitalism on 5:51 am on Feb. 25, 2002
exactly, you believe in a theory that doesn't work. Mao, Lenin and Castro all were communists before they came to power. They tried to establish a communist regime but succeeded in establishing a despotic one. History attests to that.
Guest sign up immediately!


And why doesn't it work!? CAPITALISM FUCKS WITH IT!

[Moskitto]

So your values seem to be pretty consonant with the current American system.


no my views are not quite consistant with the current American system eg. no free healthcare. If they are however, it's a coincidence.

Economically, I think the European way is better than the American way where there is far greater public subsidies than in America.

But politically, your way is far better than Britain. Don't listen to all the horror stories about "American flag wavers," British ones are a hell of a lot worse. Britain also has some pretty strict censorship laws. Like this one passed recently. http://www.independent.co.uk/story.jsp?story=120601

There's also a really fucked up system which no one is willing to change. About 18 months ago we had a pretty massive fuel crisis caused by too much stealth tax (direct tax is a no votes area). It was pretty funny watching it, as long as you didn't need a car.

Basically
1. Britain is screwed
2. I'm wondering off topic

[AgustoSandino]

what if those public subsidies, such as the ones which EU nations give to their "small" farmers are responsible for retarding the development of agriculture in third world areas like africa?

[Moskitto]

They may do, but in Europe we have free healthcare which sounds better than America where insurence and healthcare costs are huge because they don't have to compete with a free service.