Some fact for Nyder

[Misodoctakleidist]

Most of you will know Nyder as an ignorant cappie and since he recites the same misinformation constantly no matter how many times he is corrected i though i'd spell it out for him and others new the world of politics.

1. Communism doesn't make people poor.

In capitalist societies the bulk of the wealth is owned by the minority of the populations, under communism it is redistributed meaning that the vast majority of people are infact richer. I wealth was distributed equally then 90-99% would have more money, 1-10% would have less (depending on the country). I happen to know that Nyder lives in australia so unless he's a millionaire he himself would benifit under communism.

2. Stalinism is not the only form of communism

Stalinism is only one of many communist ideologies and is generaly despised by most other communists, capitalists like to pretend that Stalinism is the only form of communism because he killed 25 million people and makes communism look bad.

3. Communism doesn't force people to work in certain occupations

I dont know if Nyder belives this, sorry if you dont, but he seems to. People can choose what they want to do, much like they can in capitalism, the only difference is that they get paid the fair value of their labour.

4. There is no bougoirsie in communism

I thought this was quite obvious but Nyder keeps asking why the factory owners would distribute money amonst workers when they could keep it all and get rich and making such silly comments. There is no bougoirsie, everyone is working class, everyone owns everything so there is no one with a load of money that needs distribuing.

I'm sure there are more, feel free to add other capitalist misconceptions or stupid thing that Nyder keeps saying.

[Hoppe]

1. Communism doesn't make people poor.

With all respect but who says you can keep the same wealth in a communist society as we have now? When a long time ago economist showed that planned economies would result into chaos and irrationality even the pro-planners had to agree that they could only hope to keep the same standard of living as in a capitalist societies.

3. Communism doesn't force people to work in certain occupations

Communism gives people "freedom from necessity". Someone has to produce it. Who is going to become a garbageman? Your communists streets would be infested with dirt and diseases would flourish. A capitalist would simply offer someone money to clean the streets. Wouldn't you agree with me that you have a slight incentive problem here?

[Misodoctakleidist]

Originally posted by Hoppe@Dec 2 2003, 09:18 PM
Communism gives people "freedom from necessity". Someone has to produce it. Who is going to become a garbageman? Your communists streets would be infested with dirt and diseases would flourish. A capitalist would simply offer someone money to clean the streets. Wouldn't you agree with me that you have a slight incentive problem here?

err no, communism would offer garbage men more money than capitalism does.

you talk shit hoppe.

[dancingoutlaw]

1. Communism doesn't make people poor.

In capitalist societies the bulk of the wealth is owned by the minority of the populations, under communism it is redistributed meaning that the vast majority of people are infact richer. I wealth was distributed equally then 90-99% would have more money, 1-10% would have less (depending on the country). I happen to know that Nyder lives in australia so unless he's a millionaire he himself would benifit under communism.

True wealth is created and earned not distributed. When wealth is distributed then who takes on the task of distributing? How is this equality achieved?

2. Stalinism is not the only form of communism

Stalinism is only one of many communist ideologies and is generaly despised by most other communists, capitalists like to pretend that Stalinism is the only form of communism because he killed 25 million people and makes communism look bad.

Yes those like Mao, Kim Jung-il, and all the African experiments have come out better.

3. Communism doesn't force people to work in certain occupations

I dont know if Nyder belives this, sorry if you dont, but he seems to. People can choose what they want to do, much like they can in capitalism, the only difference is that they get paid the fair value of their labour.

What exactly is this fair value? Are you refering to Labor Value theory? That has been considered unworkable for many years now. Without a market how is the value of goods and services set? How does one set the value of intangibles like poems, literature, music and art?

4. There is no bougoirsie in communism

I thought this was quite obvious but Nyder keeps asking why the factory owners would distribute money amonst workers when they could keep it all and get rich and making such silly comments. There is no bougoirsie, everyone is working class, everyone owns everything so there is no one with a load of money that needs distribuing.

I'm sure there are more, feel free to add other capitalist misconceptions or stupid thing that Nyder keeps saying.

You are right there are no bougoirsie in Communism. What exists though are government managers which I consider worse.

peace

[Nyder]

Oh thank you that has cleared it all up for me now I'll become a die-hard communist! :P

There are many flaws in your superficial arguments and luckily I am kind enough to point them out for you:

1. Communism doesn't make people poor.

In capitalist societies the bulk of the wealth is owned by the minority of the populations, under communism it is redistributed meaning that the vast majority of people are infact richer. I wealth was distributed equally then 90-99% would have more money, 1-10% would have less (depending on the country). I happen to know that Nyder lives in australia so unless he's a millionaire he himself would benifit under communism.

If everyone earns the same amount then no one will have the incentive to achieve above everyone else in communism. Why would I want to study 10 years to be doctor when I could just be a street sweeper for the same wage?

I would not benefit under communism, as I know that however hard I try and achieve I will always be at the same level as everyone else I might as well not even bother.

2. Stalinism is not the only form of communism

Stalinism is only one of many communist ideologies and is generaly despised by most other communists, capitalists like to pretend that Stalinism is the only form of communism because he killed 25 million people and makes communism look bad.

The fact that Stalinism IS a form of communism is bad enough. But the reality is that this is what transpired from the misguided attempt to enforce communism upon the masses.

I think that a stateless communist society is unworkable; because you will need a state to stop people from owning private property and engaging in private enterprise.

3. Communism doesn't force people to work in certain occupations

I dont know if Nyder belives this, sorry if you dont, but he seems to. People can choose what they want to do, much like they can in capitalism, the only difference is that they get paid the fair value of their labour.

Communism would make most people work in very basic occupations because there is no incentive to achieve above that level.

Nevertheless, how do you determine what is 'fair value'? I have already mentioned that most employees would prefer wages then bargaining on the profit value of the product they are producing. This is because companies can run at a considerable loss for long periods. Therefore labour is made into a fixed value (that can be determined through supply and demand for labour of a particular skill), which can change through promotion or increase in wages.

Basically what you should realise is that profit is not a fixed amount, it changes all the time - so if managment wants to pay workers according to the value that they produce, the workers will have to take profits and losses also.

4. There is no bougoirsie in communism

I thought this was quite obvious but Nyder keeps asking why the factory owners would distribute money amonst workers when they could keep it all and get rich and making such silly comments. There is no bougoirsie, everyone is working class, everyone owns everything so there is no one with a load of money that needs distribuing.

Why do you make the assumption that anyone else has the right to determine the relationship between an employer and employee? They are the best judge of their agreed upon contract, not anyone else. And again, how are you going to determine this value? Keep in mind that the more expensive you make labour to hire, the less employers will be willing to hire.

If there is no private property then what incentive will people have to invent, innovate and produce goods and services? Personal incentive is more powerful than for 'the good of society'. If I have to sacrifice all of my effort for no reward I am no better than a slave.

[Al Creed]

I have a question for you, Nyder,

If you're SUCH a big fan of Capitalism...what were you doing on a site called "Che-Lives," in the first place? Are you hiding something, deep within, or are you here just to be a royal pain in the ass? Sometimes, I wonder about the Capitalists who post on this board...

[Don't Change Your Name]

Originally posted by Hoppe@Dec 2 2003, 09:18 PM
Communism gives people "freedom from necessity". Someone has to produce it. Who is going to become a garbageman? Your communists streets would be infested with dirt and diseases would flourish. A capitalist would simply offer someone money to clean the streets. Wouldn't you agree with me that you have a slight incentive problem here?

Some people (few unfortunately) will voluntarily do that from time to time. They will have a small benefit for doing so. Others could do that full time, for a bigger income, but I don't like the idea. The other option is making the ones who oppose us do that, but as you will say we are then against freedom of thought and ideas, let's say this will be done by the criminals (thieves, murderers, rapers...) until when they have done it enough. With luck, people will create systems that make this tasks easier, cleaner and quicker.

If everyone earns the same amount then no one will have the incentive to achieve above everyone else in communism. Why would I want to study 10 years to be doctor when I could just be a street sweeper for the same wage?

The idea of commmunism is reaching a society where no one is "above" everyone else. And I'm surprised that a liberal cappie thought about studying! I though they only cared about money. And are you saying that doctors only care about money? Then we have a HUGE problem because if those are the ones who should help our health...
Anyway, the lack of doctors is already a good incentive. Who will take care of you if there arent doctors?

I think that a stateless communist society is unworkable; because you will need a state to stop people from owning private property and engaging in private enterprise.

You will need a state in your libertarian capitalist utopia to proetect private property. Have you ever read about Anarchism? How could people have private property in such a system? If some day we reach Anarchism, I hope you don't live with us, I bet you want to steal things and say they are your private property. You are a menace to an anarchist society.

Personal incentive is more powerful than for 'the good of society'.

In case you haven't noticed, you would be part of the society, so what you do for "the good of society" will also be good for you.

[Hoppe]

Some people (few unfortunately) will voluntarily do that from time to time. They will have a small benefit for doing so. Others could do that full time, for a bigger income, but I don't like the idea. The other option is making the ones who oppose us do that, but as you will say we are then against freedom of thought and ideas, let's say this will be done by the criminals (thieves, murderers, rapers...) until when they have done it enough. With luck, people will create systems that make this tasks easier, cleaner and quicker.

Which income? I thought you'd abolish money. Possibly some people will do it but will they do it for an infinite amount of time. This is a huge assumption. If these people would benefit (in a material, or monetary sense) this would be a clear example of a free market solution. In all the other cases it is merely coercion.

And with luck..........that's wishfull thinking isn't?

In case you haven't noticed, you would be part of the society, so what you do for "the good of society" will also be good for you.

I am part of a society now as well. If I somehow, mentally unstable, decided to do dangerous work that would benefit society, it would not necessarily benefit me. A capitalist society would pay me a riskpremium. Again you have an incentive problem.

[Desert Fox]

I only want to add one thing to this topic, the reason why I didn't bother to read this topic is through. Is because you hit on the man (nyder) and not only the group. Don't direct call anyone on this board, I find this quit stupid and immature.

[Comandante Mashka]

About "who would pick up the garbage. . ."

Did you know that a doctor can't catch up to the amount of money an electrician makes? All those years in university is money, while the electrician is making money especially in Canada, they are paid pretty good).

The bottom line is, it all come downs to personal motivation, vocation, and self-realization. I just wanted to add that volunteering programs in Cuba have been implemented for years. My Cuban friend told me that he had to work in a farm as his volunteer work; it wouldn't surprise me if they picked up garbage too.

[The Feral Underclass]

1. Communism doesn't make people poor.

In capitalist societies the bulk of the wealth is owned by the minority of the populations, under communism it is redistributed meaning that the vast majority of people are infact richer. I wealth was distributed equally then 90-99% would have more money, 1-10% would have less (depending on the country). I happen to know that Nyder lives in australia so unless he's a millionaire he himself would benifit under communism.

This is NOT communism. It's some sort of shit socialism. I say again, it is NOT communism.

2. Stalinism is not the only form of communism

Stalinism is only one of many communist ideologies and is generaly despised by most other communists, capitalists like to pretend that Stalinism is the only form of communism because he killed 25 million people and makes communism look bad.

Stalinism is NOT communism. It is some deranged state-capitalism. It is NOT communism!

Communism

Communism is very much like anarchism by principle. Communism is a society without a state. "Where people work according to their abilities and recieve according to their needs." This means that in return for doing socially necessary work, ie cleaning the garbage. You are provided for with food, shelter, water, electricity etc etc.

In a society like this people would have masses of free time. Lets say you had a different job every week. One week cleraning garbage for 5 hours, the next week making bread for 6 hours. This then means that human beings have the time to do things they want too. Maybe some like to paint, or make sculptures. Maybe some people want to make a film or design a new faster aeroplane. A community may want to hold a huge music fesitval so they do it.

This is what communism is!!! Of couse you can be ignorant and simply take what happened in Russia and China and say "if they called it communism, then it must be." Even "marxists" do this. Nevertheless, it is not communism.

Marx made it clear in his writings that at this point, "the second stage..." the state would wither away and society would be organized the way I described.

Stalinism

Marx talked about stages to communism. Socialism being the first stage. This is what Lenin created when the Bolsheviks took power. In this second stage Marx talked about "the dictatership of the proletariat." This was to defend the revolution and start the process. Of course it never got that far, because it turned into a dictatership of a small elite, who forced workers into collectives and brought all the means of production into their control. After lenin died stalin continued this process and in alot of ways extended this second stage. I do not belive he had any intention of withering away the state. This is why he enforced it with a huge army and secret service.

This is not communism.

[Misodoctakleidist]

1. Communism doesn't make people poor.

In capitalist societies the bulk of the wealth is owned by the minority of the populations, under communism it is redistributed meaning that the vast majority of people are infact richer. I wealth was distributed equally then 90-99% would have more money, 1-10% would have less (depending on the country). I happen to know that Nyder lives in australia so unless he's a millionaire he himself would benifit under communism.

This is NOT communism. It's some sort of shit socialism. I say again, it is NOT communism.

I wasn't proposing the distribution of wealth, i was just attempting to show that communism doesn't make people poor like nyder keeps saying by demonstating how vast wealth inequalities are.

2. Stalinism is not the only form of communism

Stalinism is only one of many communist ideologies and is generaly despised by most other communists, capitalists like to pretend that Stalinism is the only form of communism because he killed 25 million people and makes communism look bad.

Stalinism is NOT communism. It is some deranged state-capitalism. It is NOT communism!

I didn't want to get into a discusion about stalinism by saying that it isn't communism, although that is my opinion, i said this because nyder keeps going on about stalin as if we all support him.

[The Feral Underclass]

I wasn't proposing the distribution of wealth, i was just attempting to show that communism doesn't make people poor like nyder keeps saying by demonstating how vast wealth inequalities are.

It is a problem you will face a lot comrade. People who have never read a book about communism, or have read a bouregois-bias book about communism, based on Stalin, will always claim to have such a deep understanding of what it is. It is common, and something I deal with everyday.

I didn't want to get into a discusion about stalinism by saying that it isn't communism, although that is my opinion, i said this because nyder keeps going on about stalin as if we all support him.

Again it is ignorance. Peoples ability to anaylise and critzise is something you learn nowadays. For people like nyder "what you see is what you get." People who have such a black and white attitude towards communism and anarchism have usually only seen what has been written in the history books.

Stalin is the face of communism, it dosnt matter how obsurd and contradictory it is to people who have a deeper understanding. people will always associate communism with Stalin, because that is what they are told, in to be fair, what they have seen. It is a fact of life i'm afraid, it is our mission to show them they are wrong h34r:

[Hoppe]

Originally posted by The Anarchist Tension@Dec 3 2003, 09:06 PM

I wasn't proposing the distribution of wealth, i was just attempting to show that communism doesn't make people poor like nyder keeps saying by demonstating how vast wealth inequalities are.

It is a problem you will face a lot comrade. People who have never read a book about communism, or have read a bouregois-bias book about communism, based on Stalin, will always claim to have such a deep understanding of what it is. It is common, and something I deal with everyday.

I didn't want to get into a discusion about stalinism by saying that it isn't communism, although that is my opinion, i said this because nyder keeps going on about stalin as if we all support him.

Again it is ignorance. Peoples ability to anaylise and critzise is something you learn nowadays. For people like nyder "what you see is what you get." People who have such a black and white attitude towards communism and anarchism have usually only seen what has been written in the history books.

Stalin is the face of communism, it dosnt matter how obsurd and contradictory it is to people who have a deeper understanding. people will always associate communism with Stalin, because that is what they are told, in to be fair, what they have seen. It is a fact of life i'm afraid, it is our mission to show them they are wrong h34r:

Hmmm, can't I say the same thing about you with respect to capitalism..........

Your deep understanding is clearly biased by Marx.

[The Feral Underclass]

No you can not say the same! What is it about capitalism I need to study and understand? What philosophy is there that requires years of studying? What theories and concepts does it over to explain the existance of humans or the development of history?...none! it is an economic-mangerial system that creates situations which are blaringly obvious!

I am sounding rather religous about Marxism, I apologise. Nonetheless my point still stands.

[Hoppe]

Originally posted by The Anarchist Tension@Dec 3 2003, 09:15 PM
No you can not say the same! What is it about capitalism I need to study and understand? What philosophy is there that requires years of studying? What theories and concepts does it over to explain the existance of humans or the development of history?...none! it is an economic-mangerial system that creates situations which are blaringly obvious!

I am sounding rather religous about Marxism, I apologise. Nonetheless my point still stands.

Yeah, easy answer.

If capitalism is so easy to understand why then is it so that I see so many uninformed answers? Luckily there are some people who are less shortsighed, maybe you want to read something from a compagnion

[The Feral Underclass]

I will read it.

As for being uninformed are you going to deny what capitalism has done and is doing to this small planet. You can not deny the starvation, poverty, unfair destribution of wealth and labour, wars, greed, materialism because they are facts. Just as exploitation is. And you can not be short sighted about the truth!

[The Feral Underclass]

the link didnt work!

[Hoppe]

Originally posted by The Anarchist Tension@Dec 3 2003, 09:47 PM
I will read it.

As for being uninformed are you going to deny what capitalism has done and is doing to this small planet. You can not deny the starvation, poverty, unfair destribution of wealth and labour, wars, greed, materialism because they are facts. Just as exploitation is. And you can not be short sighted about the truth!

I have changed the link, it should work now.

I can say the same things for those who followed the ideas of Marx, so we wouldn't go anywhere.

[The Feral Underclass]

I am not defending marxism. I am saying that I do not need to read capitalism to see what it is...you on the other hand can not understand marxism based on what you have seen....you dont understand marxism. sorry. it's a fact.

If I do not know the ins and outs of capitalist practice I can agree. This does not stop me from seeing what it has done to the world, and what it continues to do to the people. Marx anaylized it well. And I happen to agree with this critzism.