Log in

View Full Version : They say its freedom - They must be joking



peaccenicked
7th June 2002, 07:20
From dear old Lenin.
"Freedom of the press" is another of the principal slogans of "pure democracy". And here, too, the workers know – and socialists everywhere have admitted it millions of times – that this freedom is a deception while the best printing-presses and the biggest stocks of paper are appropriated by the capitalists, and while capitalist rule over the press remains, a rule that is manifested throughout the world all the more strikingly, sharply and cynically the more democracy and the republican system are developed, as in America for example. The first thing to do to win real equality and genuine democracy for the working people, for the workers and peasants, is to deprive capital of the possibility of hiring writers, buying up publishing houses and bribing newspapers. And to do that the capitalists and exploiters have to be overthrown and their resistance suppressed. The capitalists have always used the term "freedom" to mean freedom for the rich to get richer and for the workers to starve to death. In capitalist usage, freedom of the press means freedom of the rich to bribe the press, freedom to use their wealth to shape and fabricate so-called public opinion. In this respect, too, the defenders of "pure democracy" prove to be defenders of an utterly foul and venal system that gives the rich control over the mass media. They prove to be deceivers of the people, who, with the aid of plausible, fine-sounding, but thoroughly false phrases, divert them from the concrete historical task of liberating the press from capitalist enslavement. Genuine freedom and equality will be embodied in the system which the Communists are building, and in which there will be no opportunity for amassing wealth at the expense of others, no objective opportunities for putting the press under the direct or indirect power of money, and no impediments in the way of any workingman (or groups of workingmen, in any numbers) for enjoying and practising equal rights in the use of public printing-presses and public stocks of paper. "

Guest
9th June 2002, 06:48
Under a capitalist system, at least the individual has the opportunity to buy the printing presses. In central planning there is no way to achieve this feat. If you think your ideals are worth preaching why not buy a print shop and distribute your material? The reason is that you know that it would be a failed venture. Today, anyone with any credibility knows the errors of communism. The material simply would not sell. The reason that communist ideals are not discussed in the main stream media is because most people have come to the rightful conclusion that it is a horrible philosophy. Contrary to what you believe it is not the rich controlling information. It is simple, people are not willing to buy the pack of lies that communism offers.

man in the red suit
9th June 2002, 06:54
I would say you are wrong. It IS the rich controling the information. I can't simply get up and buy a printing press if I wanted to. Sure you and all your rich friends can, but not me nor my friends. And that is why you don't see any communism in the papers, because the proletariot can not afford to publish his views.

(Edited by man in the red suit at 6:55 am on June 9, 2002)

peaccenicked
9th June 2002, 07:06
THe guest is defending the system. Right now the System is popular even though it is rotten through and through.
There is a vicious circle in operation. The mass media is very well established. It is hard to compete in the market even for the the rich. This makes it hard for not only socialist but for all minority groups and even large religious groups can hardly acheive a tabloid circulation.
So the guest can afford to be smug but his conclusion is a static one. Only time can indicate whether and when it outlived its usefulness, only time can tell us when we produce a strong left voice capable of breaking down old loyalties to corrupt politicians and media. After all the planet needs a much more caring sytem for it to survive at all.

(Edited by peaccenicked at 7:07 am on June 9, 2002)

man in the red suit
9th June 2002, 07:23
dam, I'm glad we got you on our side. I wish I could make up as good a argument is that one there.

Guest
9th June 2002, 07:25
Peacenicked,

There you go again jumping to conclusions. Don't confuse my disgust with your viewpoints as me defending the status quo.
You claim that there is no free speech. What do you think that you are doing here? Are you one of those types who does not fathom the actual freedoms that you do enjoy, then turns around and abuses them.
Many people have worked their way up to the point that they could own presses. I suggest that instead of trying anything challenging and risky, you would rather sit around and complain.
You are defeating your own argument. If the capitalist press is only interested in the bottom line, and communism is a best seller, they would cover it in greater detail.

peaccenicked
9th June 2002, 07:34
There is free speech but you need a lot of money to get your voice heard. To paraphrase Orwell, all are free but some are more free than others.
I am not complaining about that but the abuses of the rich which you quite frankly are blind to.
Communism is best seller material perhaps you could suggest an imagnitive publisher with good connections to distrubutors. I sell my paper standing at the railway station.

Guest
9th June 2002, 12:28
I am quite sure the reason you are able to sell your paper at the railway station is due to the human nature that you never fail to undermine. People see someone desperately trying to sell a paper at the railway station, and they automatically assume that he is a bum. Since the guy is not begging for change, but seems to have produced something of value, their natural instinct is to help him out.
Again you have provide me with the ammunition. What? A beloved communist selling his paper for a profit? Why would such a man accept the means of exchange the he claims is corrupting man and making the world an evil place? Aren't you just as guilty as the major media? Are you not seeking to profit for your ideas? I suppose you think your cause is nobler. Maybe the pure objective journalist feels the same. I guess it is wrong for someone working for the Wall Street Journal to expect to be paid for his or her hard work, but for you this is okay.

Guest
9th June 2002, 12:36
The crimes committed by anyone should not be ignored. I agree that it is frustrating when money buys the justice system. Those who are bought and paid for are corrupt and should be dealt with. Corporate offenders should be held accountable for their crimes. The individuals involved in decision making as well as the leadership, should be tried as individuals. By law corporations are treated as individuals, therefore there should be some accountability for criminal behavior. This is true in any case, especially when the potential damages are so great.