no appeasement

[Liberty Lover]

What the fuck is the go with all these precocious poxy pre-rapheliate poonce prancing parasitically point to point, pontificating pieces of pumped up pinko peacenikking pile of pungent pacifist protestors, that have been shouting pro appeasement of Saddam slogans all fucking weekend. Do these fucking donkey- raping shit eaters even know where Iraq is? Probably not!

Saddam's been on a campaign of mass murder, torture and assorted other crimes against humanity ever since he took over the Baath party. What are we supposed to do about his psychotic arse? Pray? Close our fucking eyes and just hope really really fucking hard that every thing will be all right someday in the vague and distant future? FUCK NO!!! We tried that with Hitler remember (okay you dumb-arse protestors probably don’t) and what we got was Word War FUCKING II. If Chamberlain and all his fucked up “Peace in our time” friends had listened to Churchill (god bless him) and went to war against Hitler instead of waiting for him to come to us then that 5 year war in which 55 million people died could have been a one year affair with a couple of thousand deaths. But nooooooo. You pussy pacifist appeasing dumb arses had to try peace with a son of a ***** who obviously had no intension of doing the same.

Ok, maybe (and that’s a big fucking maybe) you pussies can be forgiven the first time around. BUT FUCK. Your actually trying to do it again. Here’s a guy who’s tried to take over his neighbours twice, dropped chemical bombs on his own fucking people, and executed about 200,000 others because they didn’t agree with him and you arseholes think he is a good enough bloke to stop all this because a few fucking UN inspectors are aimlessly wandering around his country? I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again FUCK NO. The only way to end Saddam’s threat to the world is to end his insane regime. War with Iraq is inevitable. But we have a choice on what grounds it will be fought. We can wait until he attacks one of his neighbours again, this time with nukes, and have a long war with millions of lives lost. Or we can attack him now, while his down, his army will fall in about a month and casualties will be kept to a minimum. What the fuck do you pacifists want?

To all you anti-American, anti-liberty fuck wads. READ A FUCKING HISTORY BOOK!!! If it wasn’t for the US, the ‘evil’ (and it was fucking evil) Soviet Empire would have spread across the world, communism would reign supreme and democracy would be a thing of the distant past. If America didn’t intervene in South America, Vietnam and Afghanistan this would have become a reality.

And as for you conspiracy theorists who think that the US want to go to Iraq for oil, or to establish a global empire, or maybe to pave the way for the coming of the illuminati…I will say this “lay off the crack”.
I hope, after heeding my infinite wisdom that has been spawned from an infinite knowledge, you now understand that peace in a world that has Saddam Hussein in it is impossible.

O, and Kim Jong Ill…you’d better watch your commie arse because you’re next.

[Pete]

"Do these fucking donkey- raping shit eaters even know where Iraq is? Probably not!"
Iraq is located in the Middle East at the end of the Persian Gulf. It emcompasses three ethinic groups. Shitte, Sunnie and Kurdish. The ancient Tigris and Euphrates rivers, which where the cradles of ealriest civilization, are found there as well.

"We tried that with Hitler remember (okay you dumb-arse protestors probably don’t) and what we got was Word War FUCKING II."
I see that we could have a replay of World War Two. America = The Fourth Riech. Their governments are generally racsist, amero-centric, hold illegal weapons, and the world has appeased them for too long.

"Here’s a guy who’s tried to take over his neighbours twice, dropped chemical bombs on his own fucking people, and executed about 200,000 others because they didn’t agree with him"
Let me see. Mexico? wasnt Texas and California and a few other states once Mexican? What about Panama? or Peurto Rico? or the American Virgin Islands? Midway Islands? Who has reserved the right to claim Antarica? AMERICA. ahem PINOCHET SAYOTORA (in indonesia) AMONG OTHERS

"To all you anti-American, anti-liberty fuck wads. READ A FUCKING HISTORY BOOK!!! If it wasn’t for the US, the ‘evil’ (and it was fucking evil) Soviet Empire would have spread across the world, communism would reign supreme and democracy would be a thing of the distant past. If America didn’t intervene in South America, Vietnam and Afghanistan this would have become a reality."
1. America has gotten their ass kicked by the Soviet Union ever since they stuck their noses in on the side of the whites. They cannot stop the peoples will. Did you know that in one city (moscow i believe) only 3 people where wounded before America backed the whites and invaded?
2. Communism is the pure form of democracy. America isn't democratic. It is a republic of plutocrats. They have families that control most of the country. Like the Bushes. Both Bush jr and Gore are from the same family. If the people in Latin America and Asia wanted fake democracy they would have had that kind of revolution. Sure China isnt Communist, or North Korea but Cuba, Sandinista Nicurauga and the USSR (in the grass roots) where/are.
3. How many lives has America ruined because other people did not agree with them? More then 200 000 for sure.
4. Get the hell in to your 'Opposing Ideology' section and stay the fuck where you belong.
5. Soviet Empire, you got to be kidding. Read. The Soviets did what the did because they lost trust in the West after they invaded in 1919.

"And as for you conspiracy theorists who think that the US want to go to Iraq for oil, or to establish a global empire, or maybe to pave the way for the coming of the illuminati…I will say this “lay off the crack”. "
Maybe you should read a paper that isn't propaganda driven, or watch I neutral New station. I hear Europe is good for neutrality. I know the CBC in Canada is. Really. Tone down your bull shit and stay in your cage.

"I hope, after heeding my infinite wisdom that has been spawned from an infinite knowledge, you now understand that peace in a world that has Saddam Hussein in it is impossible."
Saddam is not good, but he was an American puppet. Get your government to stay their ass in their own borders and stop fucking with the world and maybe we can have peace. America has manufactured enough consent, trained enough terrorists, in its time to deserve to be burned to the ground.

"O, and Kim Jong Ill…you’d better watch your commie arse because you’re next. "
Kim Jong Ill hiels to a different banner, not communism. A more authoritative stance, like Stalin without the grassroot democracy. Taoism I believe it is called. Read up before you do name calling. Anyways America will not touch any nation that can fight back, that is not the nation of a bully

Liberty Lover change your hypocritical name and get the fuck out of where you do not belong. You read the rules before joining and agreed to them. Do us all a favour and abide by your word fucker.

(Edited by CrazyPete at 1:50 am on Feb. 16, 2003)

[Pacifism first]

You have to admit it CrazyPete, this guy has a few good points

[Pete]

I don't support Hussien or America. But I do oppose this kind of war. It will do nothing except kill innocents. America is Imperialistic, Saddam is not so much, he is more the product of both British and American Imperialism.

Anyways he is out of his section. It is still a rule no? Everyone can speak in Opposing Ideologies except Nazi's. I opposed the fencing of the Stalinits, but I support the fencing of the Capitalists.

[CheViveToday]

Hahaha. CrazyPete is my hero!

[Pete]

How so?

[CheViveToday]

LOL. I was joking, but it was really cool how you basically disproved everyone of that Jackasses points. Good work.

[Pete]

Me laughing. Ahh it was enjoyable. What else to do when you don't really feel like going to work completely awake? 9hrs 10 minutes until I steal a capitalists moeny by doing the bare minimun not to get fired. All in the name of higher education.

[Liberty Lover]

"Communism is the pure form of democracy. America isn't democratic. "

Democracy involves, for the most part, people voting in free democratic elections...absent in 'grassroots' communist society's

"If the people in Latin America and Asia wanted fake democracy they would have had that kind of revolution."

People in the U.S who aren't happy with their political system don't have to start a revolution. They have to vote.

"Maybe you should read a paper that isn't propaganda driven"

I was once a communist...You will be to.

"Kim Jong Ill hiels to a different banner, not communism. A more authoritative stance, like Stalin without the grassroot democracy. Taoism I believe it is called."

Taoism is a Chinese philosophy and system of religion based on the teachings of Lao-Tzu in the 6th century BC

[CheViveToday]

LL, this is what I have to say to you! .....ahh fuck it. I think I'll just ignore you. That's easier and smarter. I advise all of my comrades to do the same.

[Pete]

"Democracy involves, for the most part, people voting in free democratic elections...absent in 'grassroots' communist society's "

Democracy was the name giving to what the Ancient Greeks in Athens had. Individuals voted on legislation. America involves people voting for people to vote for them. It keeps the true power in the hands of the elite away from the people.

"People in the U.S who aren't happy with their political system don't have to start a revolution. They have to vote."

They can choice a)Rebulican b)Democrat or c)Green. Basically if you look at policy the Republicans and Democrats are both right wing parties and the green in left. Americans virtually live in a one party state. As I said in another place, Bush and Gore are related. It takes a Prince to rule America. Aswell, peaceful assemblies are a way to show displeasure. A million in New York City, but of course it was illegal because the American Government does not believe in freedoms. They denied the permit.

"I was once a communist...You will be to. "

I am communist.

"Taoism is a Chinese philosophy and system of religion based on the teachings of Lao-Tzu in the 6th century BC "

What North Korea is sounds liek Taoism...Jaoism...Something like that.

[TheEndOfMan]

America democratic?! If i remember correctly their president wasn't even elected properly! Pre-emptive war anywhere cannot be justified... This is the plain and simple fact... And it is especially true when the country you are waging war against poses absolutely no threat to your country.... Besides aren't all you fascist bastards forgetting that over 1 million men, women and children have died in Iraq since the Gulf war, due to the war itself and the continuing weekly air raids... And another 500 thousand are predicted to die if America attempts invasion once more... Justify that camel fucker!!! This proposed war, like all war, is about as inhumane as our society gets! Anyway your in the wrong forum dikweed... Fuck off!!

[Latin America]

I am with you my friend CheViveToday! What in the fuck is this guy talking about!

[Liberty Lover]

"I am communist."

You won't be for long

"Democracy was the name giving to what the Ancient Greeks in Athens had. Individuals voted on legislation. America involves people voting for people to vote for them. It keeps the true power in the hands of the elite away from the people."

Democracies are governments by the people, exercised either directly or through elected representitives. Communist societies have offered only rule by an unelected few. Just as Marx intented it to be. If you want to start your own communist party then you can, because Democracy permits it.

"Pre-emptive war anywhere cannot be justified"

Does that mean pre-emptive war on Batista and Samoza was unjustfied?

"What in the fuck is this guy talking about!"

I am talking about the 1930's appeasement of Adolf Hitler

[Pacifism first]

Us communists don't beleive in democracy, but in the dictatorship of the proletariat. So can LL stop pointing out that communist socities aren't democratic.

[TheEndOfMan]

So you have no problem with the 1 million dead iraqis?! You don't give a fuck if 500 thousand more die?! You are one cold bastard.... I pity you.

[Larissa]

Heya NoAr-TheEndOfMan, so you are posting again! :smile:

And welcome comrade Liberty Lover.

[Pete]

I'm definite he isn't a comrade Larissa

[Larissa]

Quote: from CrazyPete on 11:41 am on Feb. 16, 2003
I'm definite he isn't a comrade LarissaWe can still convert him :wink:

[Pete]

Conversion ... excellant idea.

[TheEndOfMan]

Yes i'm back.... I couldn't resist the exciting debating... Or perhaps i'm just lonely and depressed and the net is my only haven.... Eh what ever....

[Liberty Lover]

"We can still convert him"

I've already been converted-from communism to free enterprise. I don't think i'll be changing back any time soon.

"So you have no problem with the 1 million dead iraqis?! You don't give a fuck if 500 thousand more die?! You are one cold bastard.... I pity you."

I care about the Iraqi's that will die in this war. But alot more will die if a policy of appeasement or inaction is atopted. Despite what you may think about the U.S. this much is fact.

[Pacifism first]

"So you have no problem with the 1 million dead iraqis?! You don't give a fuck if 500 thousand more die?! You are one cold bastard.... I pity you."

How come TheEndOfMan thinks that about Liberty Lover?

[synthesis]

If America didn’t intervene in South America, Vietnam and Afghanistan this would have become a reality

I pity your ignorance, although I could never envy it and I hope to enlighten you.

South America? You're in no position to be discussing atrocities there, capitalist. You overthrew a democratically-elected president in Chile and replaced him with a totalitarian free-enterpriser by the name of Pinochet who killed over 15,000 innocent civilians.

You funded a repressive right-wing regime in El Salvadore which killed over 75,000 civilians, raped and executed four American nuns, assassinated an archbishop, and executed six Jesuit priests.

You bombed the shit out of one of the smallest countries in the world, Grenada, and killed almost five hundred innocent people, to remove a popular leftist government.

You funded the last remnants of Anastasio Somoza's National (Right-Wing Death Squad) Guard in Nicaragua, which killed over 13,000 innocents. It castrated fathers while forcing children to watch, cut the skin off his face then shoved a grenade down his throat and pulled the pin. It gang-raped mothers under the same conditions, cutting off her breasts, then shooting her. Occasionally, it would force the parents to watch while doing these things to the children.

Don't even fucking talk to me about Afghanistan. The government you waged war on was dedicated to women's rights, education, and health care. The government you replaced it with killed over one million people, disabled three million more and sent a total of five million into other countries under refugee status. Totaled up, about half the population.

Vietnam! LOL! As horrific a genocide as one could ever find was what the U.S. put Indochina through. 3,000,000 innocents in Vietnam, 2,500,000 in Cambodia, 5,000,000 in Laos. In total about six million innocent people were tortured to death or otherwise murdered by U.S. troops. Girls under the age of 8 were raped. One third of the Vietnamese landscape was toxified due to chemical defoliants such as Agent Orange. A form of torture was insertion of a six-inch dowel into the ear until it reached the brain, causing death.


How can you proclaim to be a lover of liberty while wholeheartedly endorsing acts such as these?

[Liberty Lover]

As I have said before I do not abrove of past US conduct in these places. I'm simply saying if nothing was done at all then Totalitarian communism would have spread throghout the world. And more people would have been killed and persecuted than you could possibly imagine.

[Spartaco]

LL, How can you champion the US as a democracy?
It is a country in which
a) a very, very small percentage of people vote (this percentage is even smaller among young people and the lower-classes).
B) social unequalities grew a lot in the past years, especially since the reagan years, in which many anti-trust laws were removed,creating an always smaller and more powerful elite which controls all sections of information. Although, yes there is an appearent democracy, no small alternative info would really ever be able to compete with these big, powerful info colossus.
c) It is only the rich elite which can ever be able to enter politics and finance a campeign.
d) A strong individualism, brought about by the economic system, is championed (starting in the schools) which does not encourage an active participation of all citizens to democratic practices.
e) The triumph of commercial television does not leave almost any space for political and economical discussions and when political or economic messages are there they consist in propagandistic and unilateral slogans. People are as a consequence even less engaged in the political life of the country.
f) Recent data has shown that among most people (especially the youth and the working class) there is the most total disinformation regarding history, sociology, economics and politics.
g) This situation of disinformation is an easy territory for the indoctrination of the media, which since it is owned by a small corporate elite, will report one side of the stories, their side.

The US is yes appearently democratic. If one wants to start a communist party, speak out against the govt, of course theorically they can do it, but will that communist party ever have a chance of getting elected if people have been told since their youth that communism is bad? Will anyone hear that alternative voice when there is a much stronger voice to which people are used to and which says the contrary?
The US is a country that keeps the appearence of democracy but in which also the knowledge of being in an undemocratic country is prohibited by an elitarian society.


I guess i talked to much about the US being undemocratic in a thread which is mainly about the war on Irak, im sorry.

About the war i don't belive the goal of the US administration in to promote democracy in Irak, but anyways a war wouldn't produce this effect. It is almost impossible that democracy can be imposed from the outside, this is even more so in a country such as Irak, and by a country such as the US that has no real intention of doing so. A military intervention won't even help the war on terrorism because a war will only bring more frustraton against the west among the people which means more recruits for Al Quaeda & company. This war is just going to bring mass destruction and a new sphere of influence for the US & allies. The only way the US can move towards weakening terrorism is by ending its support for corrupt and authoritarian regimes, ending its support for ANY form of terrorism, promoting a more just economy, ending its unilateral support for israel and trying to push for an agreement between Israel and Palestine, trying to help truly people that are oppressed instead of only purusing its economic interests and not by taking out this story of "war for democracy" when it is impossible just to gain a new sphere of influence. These measures would end much of the resentment against the US and weaken the appeal of terrorism and the power of dictatorships.

[Larissa]

"South America? You're in no position to be discussing atrocities there, capitalist. You overthrew a democratically-elected president in Chile and replaced him with a totalitarian free-enterpriser by the name of Pinochet who killed over 15,000 innocent civilians. "

The CIA supported a huge anti-communist (anti-everything-leftsit) plan all over Latin America for decades.

Actually, in Argentina only, the last military dictatorship supported by the CIA, torutred, killed and "disappeared" thousands during the period of 1076-1983. Incluidng children and pregnante women, as well as SELLING newborns from women who delivered while they were "detained" in concentration camps.

I agree with those who say that a person who claims to have been a leftist and has turned to the right, has never been a leftist, nor a humanist, noir ever cared about anyone else, nor about injustice and opression.

Liberty Lover, why don't you take a look at:

http://www.yendor.com/vanished/how-many.html

I wonder how can you sleep at night.

[TheDerminator]

Probably the only thing useful that LL can be converted into is catfood! The only thing that should not be appeased is war-mongering. The case for war has not been made. The double standards as regards Israel possessing weapons of mass destruction are obvious. The pre-emptive strike on Iraq is a dangerous precedent and has nothing to do with "humanity" as two-faced Blair disgracefully declared. It is all to do with appeasing the imperialism of a right-wing American government.
derminated

[Liberty Lover]

"I agree with those who say that a person who claims to have been a leftist and has turned to the right, has never been a leftist, nor a humanist, noir ever cared about anyone else, nor about injustice and opression."

I think this would be an appropriate time to quote the great Winston Churchill: "If your under twenty five and aren't a lberal you don't have a heart. If your over twenty five and aren't a conservative you don't have a brain".

"The only thing that should not be appeased is war-mongering"

Saddam is a warmonger.

[Larissa]

The problem with Churchill is that he had it wrong.
"If your under twenty five and aren't a leftist you don't have a heart. If your over twenty five and aren't a leftist you don't have a brain".

[Pete]

""The only thing that should not be appeased is war-mongering"

Saddam is a warmonger. "

Saddam a warmonger eh? Then why is he searching for peace for his people while America is hot to trot for war? If anything Saddam is peacemongering. We must stop appeasing America or a world war will occur killing billions. Think, who has quietly gained power, asking for more and more and more? Not Iraq. America. The friendly Dictator.

"The problem with Churchill is that he had it wrong.
"If your under twenty five and aren't a leftist you don't have a heart. If your over twenty five and aren't a leftist you don't have a brain". "

Larissa I love you. You are truly a smart person :biggrin:

Cappie get the hell out of the politics forum.

[Pete]

Thank you Malte!

[Som]

I've already been converted-from communism to free enterprise. I don't think i'll be changing back any time soon.

Usually we seem to find that most people who make that sort of statement are quite uneducated about the ideology they claim they used to believe.

Thats basically confirmed with statements like
Communist societies have offered only rule by an unelected few. Just as Marx intented it to be.

[Moskitto]

Taoism? North Korea? LOL that comment is so stupid it deserves to be recorded.

[Pete]

"Taoism? North Korea? LOL that comment is so stupid it deserves to be recorded."

Thank you Moskitto :) It sounds like that, I just can't exactly remember what the word is. I remember going to a site on it a while back but my memory is blank.

[Som]

Junche.

Thats the word you're looking for.

[lifetrnal]

I'll take exception to that. When I am a communist, I believe in a dictatorship of the people... that means democracy to me.

[Pete]

Juche!! YES!! How the hell did I get Taoism? I didn't even know what Taoism was until LL told me.

[Liberty Lover]

"Usually we seem to find that most people who make that sort of statement are quite uneducated about the ideology they claim they used to believe. "

Marxism is a theory of human social evolution. Marx believed capitalism would destroy itself through spiralling competition. The owners of the means of production would eventually be swallowed up by the mass of workers. The "dictatorship of the proletariat" would arise and eliminate the last remnants of capitalism. Industry and government would be run entirely by this group of workers. Marx believed that a Communist utopia would arise once the dictatorship was no longer needed and the state had withered away. In his vision of utopia, Marx predicted that each person would give according to their means and receive according to their needs.

The utopia envisioned by Marx has never and will never materialise. But even if Marx’s ideal society did come about it would be far from a Utopia. Taking only what one needs would eliminate happiness in this world entirely, as happiness is not a necessity.

[Som]

Thats a fine simple definition, but you also had previously claimed marx supported a dictatorship.

The dictatorship of the proletariat is nothing more than a poor piece of rhetoric, and signifies democracy.
bring any real evidence of this statement:
Communist societies have offered only rule by an unelected few. Just as Marx intented it to be. (the implications of marx here, not the first part)

The utopia envisioned by Marx has never and will never materialise. But even if Marx’s ideal society did come about it would be far from a Utopia. Taking only what one needs would eliminate happiness in this world entirely, as happiness is not a necessity.

So I take it you signify happiness purely in material concerns? because thats all that odd little bit of rhetoric really implies.

I'll take exception to that. When I am a communist, I believe in a dictatorship of the people... that means democracy to me.

If thats what you believe, I think you might want to change your avatar, into something more accurate.
An anarchist flag is quite unaplicable if you believe in any sort of dictatorship, even one of the majority.

[Liberty Lover]

“Saddam a warmonger eh? Then why is he searching for peace for his people"

Saddam seeks naught but that which benefits himself and himself alone.

“Thats a fine simple definition, but you also had previously claimed marx supported a dictatorship.”

He did: the dictatorship of the proletariat.

“bring any real evidence of this statement: Communist societies have offered only rule by an unelected few.”

The USSR, China, N.Korea, Vietnam, Laos, Cuba…enough said

"So I take it you signify happiness purely in material concerns?"

Not purely, but definitely partially. The lives of people living in communist societies are far from happy. Wake up…Go to government assigned job…Go home, watch state run news…Repeat. I suggest all you so-called-socialists who visit this site throw out your computers and video games as well as deprive your selves of all but the blandest of foods and drinks, just to see what it’s like for people living in communist countries.

Even though it will be nothing like experiencing the real horrible thing.

[Moskitto]

Quote: from CrazyPete on 11:38 pm on Feb. 18, 2003
"Taoism? North Korea? LOL that comment is so stupid it deserves to be recorded."

Thank you Moskitto :) It sounds like that, I just can't exactly remember what the word is. I remember going to a site on it a while back but my memory is blank.


anonymously of course.

and in the most inoffensive way.

i thought north korea is kiminist.

(Edited by Moskitto at 10:45 am on Feb. 19, 2003)

[Som]

“bring any real evidence of this statement: Communist societies have offered only rule by an unelected few.”

The USSR, China, N.Korea, Vietnam, Laos, Cuba…enough said

I did clarify what I meant, and you ignored that, I meant the comment, "just like marx intended it to be"
Marxs works are largely democratic, I find it doubtful he'd support these regimes.

Not purely, but definitely partially. The lives of people living in communist societies are far from happy.

More unsubstantial word games, treating dictatorial socialist or state capitalist states as communist, when previously the defintion you put, showed that communism was when the state has withered away.
Communism is a classless stateless society, there has never been a communist country.

Those countries have been... leninist.
Marxism doesn't entail dictatorship.

As well as that even with the one-party state most of these countries are far better off under socialism than they would be under capitalism, and the people of those countries would rather live under those systems than capitalism.

[Liberty Lover]

"I did clarify what I meant, and you ignored that, I meant the comment, "just like marx intended it to be"
Marxs works are largely democratic, I find it doubtful he'd support these regimes."

Marx never meant to give people a say about whether they desire to live under communism or not.

"Communism is a classless stateless society, there has never been a communist country."

What you see in the USSR, China, N.Korea, Vietnam, Laos and Cuba is as far as communism will ever go. Marx's utopia, like all perfect societies, requires a perfect people...something we are not.

[Old Friend]

If I still had my trademark "Ignorant Statement's Hall of Fame", this next quote would be among one of my many treasures.

"Saddam a warmonger eh? Then why is he searching for peace for his people?"

HaaaaHa! (Courtesy of The Simpson's)

[Liberty Lover]

Stormin Normin,
CP also thinks Cubans can vote in multi-party elections

[Pete]

Liberty Lover. They have opposition Parties. I can't believe we have not broken your socialization yet. Read what we write, read the links and support, and think. USE YOUR FUCKING BRAIN! It might result in your intelligence increasing. You say you value libery more then wealth (ie capitalism), so why do you support capitalism at all? It support neocolonialism which denies other people freedom. In America you have Capitalist 1 or Capitalist 2 and you call them separate parties. In Cuba you have whoever you and your comrades nominate from the masses. Not the party.

[Som]

Marx never meant to give people a say about whether they desire to live under communism or not.

What do you know of what Marx meant? How could you say that somehow under all of his support for freedom and real democracy, that he would deny people choice?
Statements like that are just completly baseless.
He wanted the majority to rise up and set up a democracy for the majority, i'd say thats quite a 'desire'.

What you see in the USSR, China, N.Korea, Vietnam, Laos and Cuba is as far as communism will ever go. Marx's utopia, like all perfect societies, requires a perfect people...something we are not.

So, countries that aren't communist are as far as communism will go? a bit of an irrational statement to make.

[Liberty Lover]

"What do you know of what Marx meant? How could you say that somehow under all of his support for freedom and real democracy, that he would deny people choice?
Statements like that are just completly baseless.
He wanted the majority to rise up and set up a democracy for the majority, i'd say thats quite a 'desire'."

The idea of the dictatorship of the proletariat is that a small group of intellectuals and workers would come to power by violent revolution and, without the consent of the masses, abolish all traces of capitalism before (still without the consent of the masses) paving the way for communism.

"So, countries that aren't communist are as far as communism will go? a bit of an irrational statement to make."

I guess i'll have to rephrase that statement:

What you see in the USSR, China, N.Korea, Vietnam, Laos and Cuba is as far as marxism will ever go. Marx's utopia, like all perfect societies, requires a perfect people...something we are not.

[Pete]

1. Marx was not a Utopian. He diverged from utopian socialism to create Marxism or Scientific Socialism.

2. Cuba is currently under the dictatorship the proletairait, with free elections (NO POLITICAL PARTIES RUNNING CANDIDATE), and people's councils to limit the governments power to reduce the chances of Cuba slipping back into capitalism.

3. One of Che's goal was to condition the New Man where moral inscentives where more important then material ones. He was a memeber of the New Man. The people of this Earth are always evolving. By saying right now Cuba is not marxism because it may not be even halfway their yet is a poor statement. If they are allowed to develop, then they will be a Marxist Utopia (oximoron I know) one day.

4. The dictatorship of the proletariat can take anyform the proletariat wishes. Marx never, in my readings, stated an exact form. If he did provide me with the source of his writings (not someones interpretation of it) so I can educate my self. Under Lenin the CCCP was a dictatorship of the proletairait. Under Castro Cuba is a dictatorship of the proletariat. America is a dictatorship of the bourgeoisie, as is much of the rest ofthe world.

[Xvall]

Libertly Lover; Please englighten me. Just how many million pro-war activists got off their asses to hold a war rally?

[Som]

The idea of the dictatorship of the proletariat is that a small group of intellectuals and workers would come to power by violent revolution and, without the consent of the masses, abolish all traces of capitalism before (still without the consent of the masses) paving the way for communism.

I'd Like to see any evidence supporting that sort of statement.
But of course, I don't think you should bother to look, because you won't find anything, marx never said or implied any of that.
The idea of a small group of intellectuals leading a revolution is lenin's idea, and his alone.
The idea of the dictatorship of the proletariat is that the majority rise up and create a real democracy, which would in effect be the rule of the majority, the proletariat.

I guess i'll have to rephrase that statement:

What you see in the USSR, China, N.Korea, Vietnam, Laos and Cuba is as far as marxism will ever go. Marx's utopia, like all perfect societies, requires a perfect people...something we are not.

Leninism. Of course it seems impossible for alot of you to grasp that leninism is far from the end all of socialism, but leninism is merely one ideological branch of marxism.
Are you expecting them to develop into communist societies tommorow? That really wouldn't quite fit very well with marxist theory and the idea of an evolving global socialism.

Communism is not a utopia, its merely a free society, and for centuries rulers have been trying to tell people that they need to be ruled, and with each step forward they've been proven wrong.