Log in

View Full Version : The Socialist Myth - This is why Marxism has failed----and a



MaxB
27th September 2002, 23:17
http://members.tripod.com/~GOPcapitalist/s...ialistmyth.html (http://members.tripod.com/~GOPcapitalist/socialistmyth.html)

Communism in Practice: Disaster after Disaster

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

What is Socialism? Many will tell you that socialism is a moderate form of Communism. Others claim them to be two distinctly different and opposite theories, communism being a cruel and harsh failure and socialism being an enlightened and successful theory. Both of these notions are false though. A recent popular distinction defines one as government controlling the means of production and the other as "the people" controlling the means of production. This too is false considering that the pursuit of either such definition is prone to developing government management of human activity. Though theory may claim distinctions between the two, in practice they become one in the same. The idea of the sharing of incomes and government management of resources exists with little distinction from communism and its euphemistic partner socialism. In practice though the same problems plague both as freedom becomes necessarily usurped and trampled on due to abuse of power, economic impossibility, and unforeseen and unintended variables among other things. Because of socialism's inherent failures, it tends to resort to extreme measures. Communism is essentially Marx's name for socialist like systems. The only reason communism is equated with more extreme is mostly due to its acquaintance to the Soviet Union.
What is Communism? Again to many this definition is often a matter of great confusion. Some think it means socialism with force, others think it is socialism gone bad. A better definition is a utopian plan to enforce complete economic equality and achieve this by means of forced income redistribution and economic management. In short it is the same idea of socialism operating most often under a smaller branch of the socialist following known strictly as the communists. The ideas are practically the same only the name "communists" tend to attract more ideologues due mostly to a desire among them for alienation from a dissenting opposition, the capitalists, and for a hope of haste in implementing their utopian schemes. As displayed below, communism is in essence and in practice the same thing as its euphemized sister socialism.

The Differences Between the Two: The Six Shared Truths: It is hard to fully explain the idea of communism compared to socialism (due much to the fact that communists and socialists have never been able to agree upon and solidly establish exactly what distinguishes one from the other) but a few truths are undeniable:

(1) Both communism and socialism have an end utopian goal of complete equality in their ideal state.

(2) Both communism and socialism employ the practice of centralized economic managing and income redistribution as their primary means of working toward this so called "equality."

(3) Both communism and socialism experience the same types of problems in accomplishing this economic managing - the unintended side effect.

(4) Both socialism and communism are structured in such a way that an inherent inequality develops from the administrative top of the power structure for such is necessary to enforce compliance. Such compliance must be mandated in a socialist system due to the fact that human nature creates skepticism, opposition to the control of others, and a desire for free will.

(5) In both systems when this unequal elite inevitably emerges, the concentration of widespread power in a single space must intensify. This naturally attracts individuals seeking widespread power, or it corrupts individuals already in power with the lure of the same widespread power.

(6) As a result of the government structures found in both systems, the intensification of power and control on the upper level necessarily translates into the usurpation of remaining personal freedoms during its expansion.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Communism's failures in practice: Communism's main failure in practice comes from the failure of a centralized economy to function. Though socialists often attribute it to problems elsewhere, the simple reason behind this occurrence is the mathematic and physical impossibility of managing an economy from a centralized form. One of communism's main ideals is complete control over industries. In order to efficiently plan industries, communism must simultaneously account for all industries (there are billions of different industries) and their relationship with each other at the same time. Within each specific industry certain goods are internally consumed to produce more of a certain product. An example of this occurrence, which is true in any economic system, is the market for oil. For instance, to drill more oil requires the use of gasoline for transportation, generators, machinery operation, refinery operation, and a dozen other things. Therefore to get more gasoline and drill more oil wells, some existing gasoline must be used up in the process, or internally consumed. This occurrence exists in every industry to varying extents resulting in a massive structure of interlining and constantly changing relationships between all industries. Further, if production in one industry changes, this change effects all other industries in one way or another due to inter linking relationships and internal consumption. On top of these complex internal relations exists a tendency of change relating to substitute and complementary goods effecting related markets and further entangling the complex relationship between industries of a large economy.

This great complexity provides the root of the problem that inherently dooms communism and socialism from the start. To efficiently manage a centralized economy, all variables of that economy must be accounted for mathematically. This means that internal consumption must be fully compensated for and tightly controlled at optimal level by the government. In that case a centralized government would have to develop methods to accurately calculate the internal consumption rate of all other goods by any one particular industry. The only non free market way to do this is through the form of Leontief input-output equationing where detraction rate relations for one particular industry to all other goods are calculated. Taken that an economy can often have several hundred thousand distinct industries, businesses, and goods, a great deal of information must be accumulated to form an equation for one single industry. This would then have to be repeated for every other industry in the economy. Your result: a million distinct equations with a million distinct internal consumption relationship figures within each of these equations (in other words a million large polynomial equations each with a million variables to be solved for i.e.. 0.3x+2y+0.6z+.....=X, large X being the optimal level of production for that particular industry X as desired by the centralized government). Therefore at any given time the centralized economy could require 1 million squared pieces of information, or 1,000,000,000,000 distinct relationships between specified goods in an economy.
The greater problem arises as things are complicated more. Not only must these trillion figures of information be researches and related, but this must be done simultaneously. In other words, the established input-output equations for each industry must be solved in a simultaneous multiplication of matrices incorporating the equations of each and every distinct industry at once (remember solving 3 equations together with 3 variables, x y z, in high school algebra? Imagine that only with 1 million equations and 1 million variables). On top of that, this process must be repeated constantly as relationships change due to external conditions (i.e.. a bad crop or striking a new oil well). Since all markets are tied together in varying degrees of relationships, a change in the corn market due to a bad crop necessarily changes each and every other market on varying degrees. Therefore when one market changes in even the slightest form, the entire process of equationing must be repeated and adjusted.
Taken that such massively complex mathematical relationships are far beyond the capabilities of even the strongest and most modern super computers, it is practically impossible to manage an economy through a centralized government and succeed in doing so (for as has always and will always happen, a non accounted for variable destroys any attempt to manage an economy).
Fortunately there is a system where all factors are accounted for by natural forces and are adjusted for by the forces of self interest working in check to each other requiring no mathematical relationships to be established. The capitalist free market automatically does what socialist managing attempts and fails at doing mathematically. Natural forces of self interest drive a natural and efficient use of resources and natural compensatory adjustment when a change in one industry spreads through all others. The Soviet Union and other socialist countries failed due to the physical impossibility of managing the complex relationships of industry and resources yet capitalism has survived and thrived by naturally carrying out these tasks for they form the very root of the capitalist system. 1.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Communism's Theoretical Failures: Communism strives for the complete equality of all incomes, and therefore, everything. As income approaches complete equality, productivity disappears. For example: people work so they can make money to support themselves. They work driven by the incentive of making more money and succeeding. In capitalist systems, he who chooses not to work suffers the consequences while he who works receives the incentives, money, which he is working for. Human nature includes a desire to "do better" and, therefore, make more money or advance in a job. In an attempt to make more money, people are driven naturally work harder and longer, seek further education for themselves, and develop skills which distinguish them as rare talents among that labor which is available as supply. Under true communism, income is completely equal. When there is nothing to achieve by working harder or longer, people begin to become idle. People begin to work less or not work at all because there is no longer the incentive of making more money or advancing in job. When there are no workers, production drops to nothing. It will then be true that all incomes are equal but this equal income will be zero.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Marx misjudged the middle class!
Communism's original and most basic principles deal with the rich owners and the workers or proletariats. Unfortunately for Marx's cause, a third order was coming to power and it would prove to be the larger and more powerful than either the proletariat or the capitalist aristocracy. This third middle grounds was completely misjudged by Marx and incorrectly lumped in with the bourgeois rich. Marx's entire theory was based on class struggle and a difference in these classes forcing a revolution to be followed by an "equality" of all classes (the irony: Marx and Engels were factory owners when they published the Communist Manifesto and Das Kapital!). The petit-bourgeois, Marx's term for the middle class, was only to further divide the upper and working classes by an irreconcilable rift. In reality, the opposite happened and the middle class actually bridged any "rift," that is to say if there was one in the first place! The arrival of the middle class practically ruins any chance for this revolution as well as any need for it. Further it presents a variable unaccounted for simply because it fits incorrectly into the communist and socialist theory. Strange that people put faith in a theory that completely misjudges the majority of the population! 2.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Free will cannot be suppressed: Communism attempts the impossible: to control human individualism by making a society of inherently individual people uniform. Thought is free and independent and, no matter how hard anyone tries, can never be fully controlled. Communism and socialism depend upon ideological compliance with their theories, yet human nature prompts inevitable dissention from such theories. As a result, communism and socialism may achieve full compliance only through coercion, which in turn translates into communism and socialism's great failure. This failure led to the disastrous massacres of communism which were often attempts to combat opinions different from the communist governments. Try as it may, socialism and communism has never been able to destroy dissenting free thought and form a universal thought: one accepting of the communist/socialist theory necessary for such a theory to be implemented and succeed. It is simply human nature to ask questions and to look for the new and the alternative!

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Bad Always End Up on Top: Due to the fact that free will exists even under the strictest attempts to oppress it simply due to human nature, compliance with socialism and communism becomes a major problem in a communist or socialist state. In order to combat this free will, noncompliance, disagreement, and dissension it often becomes necessary for an inherently unequal elite to assume authority and power in a communist state in effort to combat this problem. A concentration of widespread power arises at the top among those elite as a natural result of there existing a superior few. Just as Lord Acton noticed "absolute power corrupts absolutely," large amounts of power intensified in a small area tend to attract those hungry for power while corrupting those in power. 3
Examples of "the bad" on top in control economies:
Josef Stalin, Soviet Union
Pol Pot, Kmehr Rouge
Adolph Hitler, Germany under the National Socialist German Workers Party (nazi in short)
Leonid Brezhnev, Soviet Union
Fidel Castro, Cuba
Mao Zedong, China
Kim Il Sung, North Korea
Tito, Yugoslavia
Ho Chi Minh, Vietnam
Huey P. Long, communist leaning governor of Louisiana in the 30's famous for 'removing' opposition



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Communism's Death Toll: Communists and socialists will often tell you that capitalism "kills" the poor. Statistically, though, it is communism that is the cause of the greatest massacre in the history of the world. This results from starvation due to failed central economies, political killings of those defiant of the system, and killings due to the abuse of power and tyranny inherent and encouraged by an unchecked system. Approximately 100 MILLION deaths by direct murder worldwide can be traced to communism.
Communism's massacres:
- Soviet Union: between 20 and 50 million were put to death at the hands of this evil empire. (some estimates exceed upward of 50 million. As people were sent to camps, the Soviets often deleted all records of that persons existence making exact totals hard to find) Intentional starvings and man made famines were a major killer in the USSR. Worse were the gulag concentration camps (the Soviet equal to Hitler's concentration camps). At one point in 1940 Stalin held over 10 million people in the gulag camps. Enemies of the government were enslaved here then worked and tortured to death. Others were lined up in forests, shot, and buried in unmarked graves. In one Polish site from Stalin's occupation of Poland after treaty with Hitler in 1940, almost 5 thousand captured Polish POW's were lined up and shot at one time. Other cases involved 10 to 15 thousand being lined up and shot. The majority of these killings took place under Stalin's regime, often referred to as a "reign of terror." Stalin is estimated to have put 20% of Russia's population to death.
- Cambodia: Under the Kmehr Rouge and regime of Pol Pot in the 1970's, one of the most extreme forms of communism ever was attempted. 2 million were massacred in killing fields in attempts to move toward this "equal form of communism." The reason behind these massacres came from an attempt to build an "equal" society though the only equality which resulted was death. Those who had distinguishing differences from the government's planned economy of farmers were murdered. Scientists, doctors, laborers, and teachers with non-agricultural professions were targeted and murdered because they differed from the agricultural profession and created inequalities in jobs. Pol Pot murdered an estimated one fourth of the population of Cambodia.
- China: Mao Tse-Tung's "Great Step Forward" is widely known as the greatest disaster in attempt of a centralized economy. Countless millions were murdered and starved to death in China during this period. China also established a series of gulag concentration camps under Mao, complete with slave labor employing over 10 million people on numerous occasions. In fact, China still employs widespread forced labor today. Estimates on China suggest the total to be about 40 million dead.
- Vietnam: Though the totals on Vietnam are unknown due to poor record keeping and the fact that Vietnam remains communist today, several hundred thousands were murdered in Stalinist fashion of execution and slave labor camps.
- Others: other death tolls caused by communism by failed schemes in communist China and other communist countries add to the count as do the political prisoners of communism: many who only dared to think freely and differently from the government. Tito's Yugoslavia has estimates of around 1 million deaths to its credit. Mass murders occurred under the communist/socialist regimes of Fidel Castro in Cuba, Kim Il Sung's North Korea, Sandinista's in Nicaragua, Laos, and Ethiopia. In many of these places we will never know the extent of death caused as a DIRECT result of communism and socialism. 4

Suggested Link:
Museum of Communism



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Every attempt at Communism has either failed or is failing:
Failed Communist and Socialist Societies: Went down with the Berlin Wall, failed due to overthrow by other forces, abandoned by inhabitants.
-Brook Farm and other Utopian Communities
-Soviet Union
-Eastern Bloc
-Yugoslavia
-Sandinista's Nicaragua
-Cambodia
Failing Communist and Socialist Societies: Forced to abandon their theories for moderation, pushed to the brink of failure.
-Cuba: all but abandoned socialism due to poverty, has become a dictatorship
-China: seeking capitalist-like reform with an expanded free trade ever since Mao's failures
-North Korea: on the brink of starvation due to disastrous failure



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Modern Communists and Socialists: A Movement of Fraud

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This list explains some of the psychological motives behind the neo-socialist/communist motives as well as identifies some major sub movements within the socialist/communist movements as well as the thinking, and fallacies, behind these movements.
The Poser Commie Movement:
Possibly accounting for over 90% of the people who claim to be socialists or communists, the poser commie movement is typically followed by those of younger age groups. Most who follow this movement tend to adopt socialism for the sole purpose of social deviance and protest of society's values. In other words, they hear that communism conflicts with freedom, morality, and other mainstream societal values so they claim to be communists to protest exactly such. Poser commie followers rarely demonstrate any actual knowledge themselves of the communist and socialist philosophy, though openly claiming to endorse the philosophy. The poser commie movement is not one of true socialism as it adopts only a title of "socialism" with limited and extremely shallow substance behind it. This movement's motives tend to be limited to a mentality that communism and socialism are against what America stands for and what society teaches one to stand for and therefore must "cool." Based almost entirely on a desire to find a method to "defy" and "protest" freedom and democracy with a seemingly obvious opposition to it, poser communism is little more than a following of fraudulent foolishness.

Socialist and Communist Ideologue Movement:
Typically comprised of those who have extensively studied Marx, Lenin, and Trotsky's writings (and often little more), this movement rarely acknowledges the dismal failures of the communist and socialist philosophies when instituted in practice. Often claiming "True communism has never really been instituted" and insisting that if it were, it would work, the ideologue movement often follows utopian dreams rather than recognizing the flaws of reality. Numerous ideologue web sites promising a better society while claiming to sympathize with the workers in an effort to make everything fair and just have sprung up recently with links to this movement. This ideologue movement is often too deluded to realize flaws exist in the socialist and communist theory and therefore it speaks of a utopia physically unattainable due to inherent flaws and simple impossibility. This highly dogmatic ideologue movement often propagandizes communism and socialism with the writings of Upton Sinclair, John Steinbeck, and Leon Trotsky while trying to force this type of thought on others.

Demagogue Movement:
This small movement is mostly limited to those who seek to use communism and socialism as a facade for achieving power. Many of histories great communist dictators such as Stalin and Castro are perfect examples of demagogues. Quoting communist theories while working their way to power behind the scenes, demagogues often prove extremely tyrannical when finally on top. The demagogue movement is in its own right an uninvited and unwanted branch of communism/socialism that draws to the theory inevitably for communism and socialism often entail wide, unchecked power consolidated in a very defined few plus a resulting need to encroach upon freedom and liberty, as is inherently necessary for implementation of communist and socialist systems.

Old Guard Communist Movement:
The Old Guard Communist Movement is typically a reactionary one comprised of Soviet Union leftovers. Endorsing a return to old Soviet way, though in reality that way was a disastrous failure, as a solution to transition problems in the economies of former Soviet states has become a rallying cry for the Old Guard Movement.

Anonymous
28th September 2002, 00:43
Nice article, MaxB

peaccenicked
28th September 2002, 00:45
A defender of the elitism of capitalism scoffing at anti elitists for their lack of success. This is the epitome of the slave mentality.
MaxB........you are so funny it is not true!

Xvall
28th September 2002, 02:44
Too bad he posted this about 5 ***king times already! All he does is post crap he rips off other webpages!

MaxB
28th September 2002, 15:56
I may cut and paste, but it's reality and facts. You, on the other hand, post original posts---full of fantasies and unrealistic goals.

MaxB
28th September 2002, 16:29
Dracoli, once again, although it's cut and paste----it's facts.
You, despite the reality and facts of history, still think "Socialism" and the rest of you neo-Fascist Marxists can succeed. When are you gonna get it thru your thick skull that your ideology is a miserable failure.
What, are you an "idealist" young man that still has to grow up. Or are you an old man that never grew up and never opened his eyes.
Everything around you is CAPITALIST----EVERYTHING. All your commodities, all you wear, drive, etc. Even the internet is a Capitalistic concept derived from the department of Defense.
There isn't one thing you idiotic collectivists can call your own because you people never do anything positive for mankind. All you do is spill your ridiculous rant and diatribe about your failed system. Most advances in business, computers, agriculture, mechanics, cars, air-planes, ships, submarines, television, radio, vcr, cds, dvds, movie technology, dentistry, medicine, pharmaceuticals, tele-communications, engineering, biology, etc. comes from the West. It will always be an imperfect world and you Fascists/Marxists are never going to make it any better. You Commies are at worst a bunch of liars, nihilists, and demagogues. At best, you're naive and dreamers.
While you can spill your hate and foolishness, facts and not cheap rant have proven through ot history that Marxism (like Lenin and Che) is best left DEAD; that this filthy and urealistic ideology is useless, worthless, and a failure. It burns you inside to see the Iron Curtain go down the way it did. One more thing, guess who's feedind the filthy N. Koreans?: The West and the U. S. I'm not that altruistic. If it was up to me, I wouldn't give those parasites shit. I would let "Socialism" take care of them.
So Dracoli, you can go back noe to revising history and reclassifying your "ideology" after each failure. What now? Another form of "Socialism" that will "work". Wait, no, I'm wrong. I should know better "Real Communism" has yet to be implemented. Haha, you morons really crack me up. It brings back memory of my college years when I used to believe this bull shit and wanted to "fix the world". HAHA

Frosty
28th September 2002, 16:56
Quote: from MaxB on 4:56 pm on Sep. 28, 2002
I may cut and paste, but it's reality and facts. You, on the other hand, post original posts---full of fantasies and unrealistic goals.

Shut up. You don't paste in facts, you paste in other people's "original posts---full of fantasies and unrealistic goals"

Frosty
28th September 2002, 17:07
MaxB:
"You, despite the reality and facts of history, still think "Socialism" and the rest of you neo-Fascist Marxists can succeed. When are you gonna get it thru your thick skull that your ideology is a miserable failure. "
"facts and not cheap rant have proven through ot history that Marxism (like Lenin and Che) is best left DEAD; that this filthy and urealistic ideology is useless, worthless, and a failure. It burns you inside to see the Iron Curtain go down the way it did"
"Wait, no, I'm wrong. I should know better "Real Communism" has yet to be implemented. Haha, you morons really crack me up"
NO, REAL COMMUNISM HAS NOT YET BEEN IMPLEMENTED.
There. I said it :biggrin:

"What, are you an "idealist" young man that still has to grow up."
OK, you think all ideals are crap. And you call us morons...
"Everything around you is CAPITALIST----EVERYTHING. All your commodities, all you wear, drive, etc."
Hey, we know that. What's your point?
That we should just give in to the comforts the system has provided us? Never think for ourselves, just accept everything like it is and just live on like sheep? Never ever think the thought "we want a better world. not only for us, but also for those who are exploited day in and day out"?

peaccenicked
29th September 2002, 03:05
MaxB says he used to be one of us...Now he is just a cynical bastard coming here to rant and download his guilt with all the worthless propaganda, that he used to challenge. Sad really.

Xvall
29th September 2002, 03:07
Dracoli, once again, although it's cut and paste----it's facts.

No; it's an opinion. You're stating your opinions on the communist movement. You're not part of it; how can you possibly know what it consists of?

You, despite the reality and facts of history, still think "Socialism" and the rest of you neo-Fascist Marxists can succeed.

Once again; making things up. Few, if any of us are 'neo-fascists'. Have you read the manifesto? If you did; you would realize that Karl Marx supports democracy.

What, are you an "idealist" young man that still has to grow up. Or are you an old man that never grew up and never opened his eyes.

I'm a young idealist; that will grow up, and hopefully realize that arguing with people like you is a waste of my time. You on the other hand are probably an old anti-idealist that wants to put people in line.

Everything around you is CAPITALIST----EVERYTHING. All your commodities, all you wear, drive, etc. Even the internet is a Capitalistic concept derived from the department of Defense.

Even though many of these 'items' are made through slave labor, or made by countries that you consider 'communist' such as China? I don't care who invented the internet, that doesn't make me a nazi. If a person drives a volkswagen does that make them a Nazi? If a person drives a Mitsubishi does that make them Japanese?

There isn't one thing you idiotic collectivists can call your own because you people never do anything positive for mankind.

Yeah. Let's look over the whole 'civil rights' thing.

I'm wrong. I should know better "Real Communism" has yet to be implemented.

It hasn't. Provet hat it has. Name a Clasless, Moneyless, society in which the state has 'withered away'. Go on, do it. Prove your point! Can you?

It brings back memory of my college years when I used to believe this bull shit and wanted to "fix the world". HAHA

Oh, but now you're so much older and more mature! That's why you waste your time here trying to crush the hopes of 'younguns'. A true patriot, you are!

Guest
29th September 2002, 08:51
MaxB, i am thinking about using your own tactic. take someone else arguments and then say it is facts(and if i say it is facts, it is got to be facts). you almost never used your own words only copy and paste shit(and some arguments that were not copy and paste shit were just a reminder of the copy and paste shit). when it come to true original words it is something like "marxists are retarded" "marxism the religion of the failed" and shit like this.
"Everything around you is CAPITALIST----EVERYTHING. All your commodities, all you wear, drive, etc. Even the internet is a Capitalistic concept derived from the department of Defense."
oh, so i need to starve with no water and nothing in the street?

GUTB
29th September 2002, 09:26
===
You, despite the reality and facts of history, still think "Socialism" and the rest of you neo-Fascist Marxists can succeed. When are you gonna get it thru your thick skull that your ideology is a miserable failure.
===

Sometimes, I think it should be a requirment for all children to be schooled in formal logic and argument.

First, let's begin with a simple rule of logical argument:

Absence of a thing does not prove that it is impossible.

Socialism has not been implimented in society in the last century, period. The only tennous, frail, superficial link Stalinist Bonapartist regimes had with socialism was the planned economy, which, depending on the regime, was managed with various degrees of competency. To understand the difference between socialism and Bonapartism, one must understand that the central, defining feature of socialism is the class strugle. The central, defining feature of Bonapartism is creation of the ruling class. As we can see -- or, as can be seen by those with a developed sense of logic -- these two fundimental features are in drastic contradition to one another. It is impossible to argue otherwise, unless you can prove that either socialism or Bonapartism is different than already defined.

Also, "neo-Fascist Marxists" makes no sense, I'm not quite sure I know what you mean. Reading a phrase like that makes me think I've been asked for a glass of "solid fire".

===
Everything around you is CAPITALIST----EVERYTHING. All your commodities, all you wear, drive, etc. Even the internet is a Capitalistic concept derived from the department of Defense.
===

Correction: all around me is the product of capital. Capital is the gathering of productive forces of society -- usualy, this translates into meaning "money". I don't know from where you've learned -- if anything -- of socialism, but socialism does not have a problem with capital, just who gets to control the capital. it is the class strugle between the proletariat and the bourgeois -- that is, the strugle between the creators of wealth, the working class, against the takers of wealth, the mercentile owning class.

Since you have displayed a profound misunderstanding of what lays at the heart of socialism, I will attempt to explain it further, in laymen terms:

The worker takes a peice of wood, and applies his skill and time to the wood, fashioning a table out of it. Thus, the worker has created value from the wood that can be used to produce wealth that did not exist before.

However, the owner comes along and takes one fourth of the wealth created by the worker, which he keeps as profits. How can the owner do this? Because the worker didn't own the tools he used to make the table, so therefore, had to rent himself out to the owner in order to live. The owner hasn't worked a single day in his life; "work" to the owner is chatting with other owners dealing with each other to get an advantage in profit-taking. The worker creates wealth, and the owner takes it way. Thus, a tiny minority exploits the vast majority.

===
There isn't one thing you idiotic collectivists can call your own because you people never do anything positive for mankind. All you do is spill your ridiculous rant and diatribe about your failed system. Most advances in business, computers, agriculture, mechanics, cars, air-planes, ships, submarines, television, radio, vcr, cds, dvds, movie technology, dentistry, medicine, pharmaceuticals, tele-communications, engineering, biology, etc. comes from the West.
===

The class strugle has no geographic location.

These advancments in industry and technology were achieved by the proletariat, from which all of mankind benifited -- but the bourgeoisie benifited more. It's actually quite discusting to listen to the mind-numbed, slack-jawed adulation heaped upon the shoulders of the owning class, those who were privliaged to be born to do nothing else with their lives but play with the wealth created by the mass of humanity, as if it were their right to do so.

===
It will always be an imperfect world and you Fascists/Marxists are never going to make it any better.
===

Typical cynisism of those who have grown to love the bars in the cage you were born. I'm sure if George Bush Jr, a privliaged upper-class who has had leadership positions and even entire companies given to him, whom jet-setting in the Leer with his golf pals in the corporate elite were as common as going out for a drink with your friends at a bar, and who was slotted for the highest ranks of national goverment for no other reason than that he was born into the power and connection -- I'm sure this man, as far detached from the real world of paying bills, rent, and making a common-man's living can possibly be, would give you a pat on the head if he knew you were defending his right not only take the nation's wealth as if it were a divine right of birth granted by God, but to also take credit for the advances of science and technology achieved by the awesome brainpower and skill of the proletariat.

There is no such a thing as a perfect world. Human civilization will continue to advance; it is not static, and it cannot be assiagned a simple value, contrary to the desperate desire of the underdeveloped mind. The future is not known for sure. However, the ideas of socialist revolution have not gone away. And they will not go away as long as the contradition of the class strugle exists.

The Revolution will always win. The only question is how long do we have to suffer before it can occur in earnest.

Now go back to sleep you slack-jawed, simple-minded peasant. You have no ideas, no conception of reality outside of the bars of you fetid little cage. You have no thoughts of you own; rather, you are not "conservative" or "liberal" per se, but a worshiper of power that only parrots the pablum spooned out to the masses to ease the pains of the supercifial and weak-minded.

Goldfinger
29th September 2002, 10:10
(2) Both communism and socialism employ the practice of centralized economic managing and income redistribution as their primary means of working toward this so called "equality."

Excuse me, but isn't that true equality?

Or would you rather say that equality is when someone's born in a rich family, and don't have to worry about anything economically, while kids in Sudan starve to death because they "deserve it for being born in such a fucked up place?"


(Edited by Apocalypse When at 12:06 pm on Sep. 29, 2002)

Lardlad95
29th September 2002, 16:33
All I got to say about the failure thing is.

The ROman Empire Lasted THousands of Years

THe Egyptian Empire Lasted thousands of years

THe US has been around for a little over two centuries and you guys are clappin?

Man you guys got a couple of meleniums before you can say shit

ejik
29th September 2002, 22:14
hy u guys! i'm from moldova, an excomunistcountry, now a democratic one, and one of the poorest in europe, and this is all because of comies, u all cry for comunism, but have u lived under it? do u know how is when someone tells u what to say and to wear, even what to thing, when all the newspapers are the same, and on tv and radio only comunist propaganda, all the money went to moscow, and now russia is reach (the reachest from the poorest, but other republics are full in shit :-(
i personaly do'nt like the comunists, now in moldova comunist party rulles, and they did a lot of mistakes!!!!!!!
the socialist idea was not a bad one, but only as a idea, the same asa a anarchic one, in practise it showd it's impotence

Lardlad95
29th September 2002, 22:24
Quote: from ejik on 10:14 pm on Sep. 29, 2002
hy u guys! i'm from moldova, an excomunistcountry, now a democratic one, and one of the poorest in europe, and this is all because of comies, u all cry for comunism, but have u lived under it? do u know how is when someone tells u what to say and to wear, even what to thing, when all the newspapers are the same, and on tv and radio only comunist propaganda, all the money went to moscow, and now russia is reach (the reachest from the poorest, but other republics are full in shit :-(
i personaly do'nt like the comunists, now in moldova comunist party rulles, and they did a lot of mistakes!!!!!!!
the socialist idea was not a bad one, but only as a idea, the same asa a anarchic one, in practise it showd it's impotence

Well I'm a Democratic Socialist and we don't like communism either.

i'm still a socialsit but i don't agree with communism