i may be wrong, but didn't it say in the communist maifesto that one revolution would spawn another, and another, and keep going until the whole world was free of the ruling class?
i am almost positive that one of the main goals of (true) communism is to cause a world wide communist revolution
i may be wrong, but didn't it say in the communist maifesto that one revolution would spawn another, and another, and keep going until the whole world was free of the ruling class?
i am almost positive that one of the main goals of (true) communism is to cause a world wide communist revolution
i wouldn't know ... i never read it ... however, even if its true - maybe that isn't a bad thing ... in the sense that if one country went communist and it was successful then others would follow ...
the point is tho whether or not communist countries funded groups to spread communism resulting in the deaths of millions of innocent people ...
i wouldn't know ... i never read it ... however, even if its true - maybe that isn't a bad thing ... in the sense that if one country went communist and it was successful then others would follow ...
the point is tho whether or not communist countries funded groups to spread communism resulting in the deaths of millions of innocent people ...
Better dead than red. I think you guys hold much enthusiasm for communist ideas, if not communism and socialism.
The USSR and China both funded and armed marxist organizations in Korea, Vietnam, Cuba, Nicaragua, Iran, Afghanistan, etc. These were proxy wars between the US and the USSR. Rather than allow the USSR to spread communism across the globe until eventually it was too strong to fight it any longer, the U.S. adopted a policy of containment. This is taught in highschool history classes. This policy of containment is well understood in history as one of the best possible options because it kept the USSR from growing any stronger but didn't result in full-scale war between the two lone superpowers, which would have most certainly resulted in nuclear annihilation.
Containment was the cause for the deaths that many of you speak of. Those people died because the USSR tried to spread a form of governance that abuses human rights, depletes MUCH more resources than capitalism, depresses the economy, and kills the spirit of innovation. The U.S. tried to come in and stop them. If we didn't, then we could've lost the cold war, which I doubt some of you would mind. The people in these countries died because of the USSR and the madmen who ran their countries (Pol Pot et al). If they didn't attempt to spread communism (and all of the vile shit that goes with it), no one would've died.
All I know is that to see, and not to speak, would be the great betrayal.
-Enoch Powell
i wouldn't know ... i never read it ... however, even if its true - maybe that isn't a bad thing ... in the sense that if one country went communist and it was successful then others would follow ...
I read once that Marx's actual belief was that we would naturally evolve to the point of community and cooperation, based on not liking the consequences of what we have now. That it is our natural nature once we resolve our own basic issues, to care for ourselves and others, and be willing to live on the even playing field rather than with huge imbalances of power as we see now.
If that is the case, it would be more like a cultural norm, where it became natural and acceptable by the majority of people to move into a new way. Rather than the "evil" communism has been portrayed as due to history, propaganda and TV. A voluntary, happily-lived communism is not how the majority views communism at this time.
"The opposite of a fact is falsehood, but the opposite of one profound truth may very well be another profound truth." ~ Niels Bohr
Better dead than red. I think you guys hold much enthusiasm for communist ideas, if not communism and socialism.
The problem is, when you say communism you think about the USSR, when I say it I think about an ideology. Though, I don't agree with everything there are quite a few aspects which I do agree with. Dictatorship is not part of communism. You cannot equate communism with the USSR because that would mean you would aslo have to equate the US with democracy, which is absurd.
Better dead than red. I think you guys hold much enthusiasm for communist ideas, if not communism and socialism.
The USSR and China both funded and armed marxist organizations in Korea, Vietnam, Cuba, Nicaragua, Iran, Afghanistan, etc. These were proxy wars between the US and the USSR. Rather than allow the USSR to spread communism across the globe until eventually it was too strong to fight it any longer, the U.S. adopted a policy of containment. This is taught in highschool history classes. This policy of containment is well understood in history as one of the best possible options because it kept the USSR from growing any stronger but didn't result in full-scale war between the two lone superpowers, which would have most certainly resulted in nuclear annihilation.
Containment was the cause for the deaths that many of you speak of. Those people died because the USSR tried to spread a form of governance that abuses human rights, depletes MUCH more resources than capitalism, depresses the economy, and kills the spirit of innovation. The U.S. tried to come in and stop them. If we didn't, then we could've lost the cold war, which I doubt some of you would mind. The people in these countries died because of the USSR and the madmen who ran their countries (Pol Pot et al). If they didn't attempt to spread communism (and all of the vile shit that goes with it), no one would've died.
that is an interesting way of viewing it ...
so ... the fight against communism was sold as a way of preventing nuclear war?? ... i guess there isn't a sole who doesn't fear that!
so ... if there weren't communist leaders throughout the world - there would be no deaths?? ... is that how you absolve US involvement? ... i guess this thinking spreads to any form of socialism as many countries the US has intervened in weren't actually communist but were following a socialist ideal ...
so ... end communism and all socialism otherwise there will be nuclear war!
I read once that Marx's actual belief was that we would naturally evolve to the point of community and cooperation, based on not liking the consequences of what we have now. That it is our natural nature once we resolve our own basic issues, to care for ourselves and others, and be willing to live on the even playing field rather than with huge imbalances of power as we see now.
If that is the case, it would be more like a cultural norm, where it became natural and acceptable by the majority of people to move into a new way. Rather than the "evil" communism has been portrayed as due to history, propaganda and TV. A voluntary, happily-lived communism is not how the majority views communism at this time.
"The meaning of peace is the absence of opposition to socialism."
-Karl Marx
Until I stop opposing socialism, there can be no peace, according to Marx.
Communism is a trash ideology with absolutely no practical value and no theoretical basis for its thought. Economists can prove it wrong with very simple arguments. Milton Friedman did this frequently in his defense of the capitalist system, claiming that individual liberty and capitalism run hand in hand.
The only possible outcome for anyone in a communist society is serfdom. Unless you get to be on the Politboro. Then it's fine.
All I know is that to see, and not to speak, would be the great betrayal.
-Enoch Powell
Do you know what Marx meant by 'socialism' or do you just assume it has the same meaning it has now?
Socialism was the mid-point between democracy and utopian communism.
Either way, it doesn't matter what Marx meant by socialism because his economic theory is based on crap. The successes of capitalism has proven him wrong time and again. Marx's theories are now *moot*.
Additionally, his ideas can only bring about dictatorship and lack of individual liberty. Human beings cannot be trusted to relinquish power, as he expects.
All I know is that to see, and not to speak, would be the great betrayal.
-Enoch Powell
Add in lack of food, water and healthcare for 80% of the population and you have the result of uncontrolled capitalism.
Complete bullshit understanding of reality, but we'll go with it. I have a few questions about the comment. Where does uncontrolled capitalism exist? How has uncontrolled capitalism led to this condition? What would the preferred alternative be? And are there examples demonstrating how the preferred alternative has actually addressed this problem on a large scale over time? Thanks.
"I'll use the magic word - let's just shut the fuck up, please." EV, 04/13/08
I have rationalism as well. I can see the little things can make a difference too. World peace is the dream, something that cannot be reached, but you can make the world a very nice place for the people you can reach.
I read once that Marx's actual belief was that we would naturally evolve to the point of community and cooperation, based on not liking the consequences of what we have now. That it is our natural nature once we resolve our own basic issues, to care for ourselves and others, and be willing to live on the even playing field rather than with huge imbalances of power as we see now.
If that is the case, it would be more like a cultural norm, where it became natural and acceptable by the majority of people to move into a new way. Rather than the "evil" communism has been portrayed as due to history, propaganda and TV. A voluntary, happily-lived communism is not how the majority views communism at this time.
Communism is a trash ideology with absolutely no practical value and no theoretical basis for its thought. Economists can prove it wrong with very simple arguments. Milton Friedman did this frequently in his defense of the capitalist system, claiming that individual liberty and capitalism run hand in hand.
The only possible outcome for anyone in a communist society is serfdom. Unless you get to be on the Politboro. Then it's fine.
I'm guessing you're not at that place of community, connection and cooperation, then.
"The opposite of a fact is falsehood, but the opposite of one profound truth may very well be another profound truth." ~ Niels Bohr
Human beings cannot be trusted to relinquish power, as he expects.
Human beings at this point, maybe. Those who are considered the healthy 2% in our population, the "self-actualizing" individuals show us the actual potential inherent to humans. The traits of a healthy human, in touch with their potential go exactly hand in hand with relinquishing power. And with cooperating. At this level of awareness, individuals are bound by recognizing the causes to their actions, and therefore "do no wrong".
"The SA does not confuse between means and ends and does no wrong. ... A Self-actualizing person focuses on problems and people outside of himself.
He has a mission in life requiring much energy, as it is his sole reason for
existence. He is serene, characterized by a lack of worry, and is devoted to duty." http://www.performance-unlimited.com/samain.htm
"The opposite of a fact is falsehood, but the opposite of one profound truth may very well be another profound truth." ~ Niels Bohr
I always thought Central in CIA didn't make much sense, Criminal is so much more fitting.
I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire
Complete bullshit understanding of reality, but we'll go with it. I have a few questions about the comment. Where does uncontrolled capitalism exist? How has uncontrolled capitalism led to this condition? What would the preferred alternative be? And are there examples demonstrating how the preferred alternative has actually addressed this problem on a large scale over time? Thanks.
Actually I said this regarding the consequences of communism I quoted in my post. But let's go for it :
Uncontrolled capitalism does not exist but worlwide economy is based on free trade and (imo I guess) can be compared to capitalism. And I don't know what you think about it but I'm not to proud with the result (by the way, today, in the world, 80% of the population lives with very little ressources). The preferred alternative... I have no idea. I'm not an economist nor a politician so I can't say. But I do feel an entity such as wto has too much power when it can dictate some government policies.
Finally I have no examples of how this can adress the problem on a large scale, I just know that the economy on a worlwide scale isn't fare and certainly isn't something to be proud of.
edit: Just to be clear I don't believe in communism either, I hope there are better solutions. But saying "capitalism saves" is just as big a pile of crap (again look for less developed countries).
hold up a sec, Does this baked good you speak of involve pot? If so then, "yes" I'd like a cookie and some milk.
Thanks,
I would also like a cookie
I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire
I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire
Where is everyone today? This conversation about a cookie is the best thing going, lame. No offense
I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire
Comments
So what's wrong with that exactly?
naděje umírá poslední
i wouldn't know ... i never read it ... however, even if its true - maybe that isn't a bad thing ... in the sense that if one country went communist and it was successful then others would follow ...
the point is tho whether or not communist countries funded groups to spread communism resulting in the deaths of millions of innocent people ...
Better dead than red. I think you guys hold much enthusiasm for communist ideas, if not communism and socialism.
The USSR and China both funded and armed marxist organizations in Korea, Vietnam, Cuba, Nicaragua, Iran, Afghanistan, etc. These were proxy wars between the US and the USSR. Rather than allow the USSR to spread communism across the globe until eventually it was too strong to fight it any longer, the U.S. adopted a policy of containment. This is taught in highschool history classes. This policy of containment is well understood in history as one of the best possible options because it kept the USSR from growing any stronger but didn't result in full-scale war between the two lone superpowers, which would have most certainly resulted in nuclear annihilation.
Containment was the cause for the deaths that many of you speak of. Those people died because the USSR tried to spread a form of governance that abuses human rights, depletes MUCH more resources than capitalism, depresses the economy, and kills the spirit of innovation. The U.S. tried to come in and stop them. If we didn't, then we could've lost the cold war, which I doubt some of you would mind. The people in these countries died because of the USSR and the madmen who ran their countries (Pol Pot et al). If they didn't attempt to spread communism (and all of the vile shit that goes with it), no one would've died.
-Enoch Powell
I read once that Marx's actual belief was that we would naturally evolve to the point of community and cooperation, based on not liking the consequences of what we have now. That it is our natural nature once we resolve our own basic issues, to care for ourselves and others, and be willing to live on the even playing field rather than with huge imbalances of power as we see now.
If that is the case, it would be more like a cultural norm, where it became natural and acceptable by the majority of people to move into a new way. Rather than the "evil" communism has been portrayed as due to history, propaganda and TV. A voluntary, happily-lived communism is not how the majority views communism at this time.
http://www.myspace.com/illuminatta
Rhinocerous Surprise '08!!!
The problem is, when you say communism you think about the USSR, when I say it I think about an ideology. Though, I don't agree with everything there are quite a few aspects which I do agree with. Dictatorship is not part of communism. You cannot equate communism with the USSR because that would mean you would aslo have to equate the US with democracy, which is absurd.
naděje umírá poslední
that is an interesting way of viewing it ...
so ... the fight against communism was sold as a way of preventing nuclear war?? ... i guess there isn't a sole who doesn't fear that!
so ... if there weren't communist leaders throughout the world - there would be no deaths?? ... is that how you absolve US involvement? ... i guess this thinking spreads to any form of socialism as many countries the US has intervened in weren't actually communist but were following a socialist ideal ...
so ... end communism and all socialism otherwise there will be nuclear war!
"The meaning of peace is the absence of opposition to socialism."
-Karl Marx
Until I stop opposing socialism, there can be no peace, according to Marx.
Communism is a trash ideology with absolutely no practical value and no theoretical basis for its thought. Economists can prove it wrong with very simple arguments. Milton Friedman did this frequently in his defense of the capitalist system, claiming that individual liberty and capitalism run hand in hand.
The only possible outcome for anyone in a communist society is serfdom. Unless you get to be on the Politboro. Then it's fine.
-Enoch Powell
Do you know what Marx meant by 'socialism' or do you just assume it has the same meaning it has now?
naděje umírá poslední
Socialism was the mid-point between democracy and utopian communism.
Either way, it doesn't matter what Marx meant by socialism because his economic theory is based on crap. The successes of capitalism has proven him wrong time and again. Marx's theories are now *moot*.
Additionally, his ideas can only bring about dictatorship and lack of individual liberty. Human beings cannot be trusted to relinquish power, as he expects.
-Enoch Powell
Complete bullshit understanding of reality, but we'll go with it. I have a few questions about the comment. Where does uncontrolled capitalism exist? How has uncontrolled capitalism led to this condition? What would the preferred alternative be? And are there examples demonstrating how the preferred alternative has actually addressed this problem on a large scale over time? Thanks.
This is total crap.
Though, I agree with this, I still think it's a beautiful idea. Like world peace, it will never happen but at least you can try, right.
naděje umírá poslední
The guiding principle of all liberal thought everywhere.
-Enoch Powell
what guides your anti-liberal thinking?
Where does uncontrolled capitalism exist?
Chile, maybe.
How has uncontrolled capitalism led to this condition?
Chile is ranked 43 in the world between Norway and Romania in GDP (purchasing power parity). Their standard of living is shot!!!
What would the preferred alternative be?
Marxism-Leninism of course!
And are there examples demonstrating how the preferred alternative has actually addressed this problem on a large scale over time?
The USSR, The People's Republic of China, and Cuba! Great places to live with high standards of living.
-Enoch Powell
I have no ideology but rationalism.
-Enoch Powell
I have rationalism as well. I can see the little things can make a difference too. World peace is the dream, something that cannot be reached, but you can make the world a very nice place for the people you can reach.
naděje umírá poslední
we all have rationalism ... it is what you choose to rationalize that defines us ...
http://www.myspace.com/illuminatta
Rhinocerous Surprise '08!!!
Human beings at this point, maybe. Those who are considered the healthy 2% in our population, the "self-actualizing" individuals show us the actual potential inherent to humans. The traits of a healthy human, in touch with their potential go exactly hand in hand with relinquishing power. And with cooperating. At this level of awareness, individuals are bound by recognizing the causes to their actions, and therefore "do no wrong".
"The SA does not confuse between means and ends and does no wrong. ... A Self-actualizing person focuses on problems and people outside of himself.
He has a mission in life requiring much energy, as it is his sole reason for
existence. He is serene, characterized by a lack of worry, and is devoted to duty."
http://www.performance-unlimited.com/samain.htm
http://www.myspace.com/illuminatta
Rhinocerous Surprise '08!!!
Actually I said this regarding the consequences of communism I quoted in my post. But let's go for it :
Uncontrolled capitalism does not exist but worlwide economy is based on free trade and (imo I guess) can be compared to capitalism. And I don't know what you think about it but I'm not to proud with the result (by the way, today, in the world, 80% of the population lives with very little ressources). The preferred alternative... I have no idea. I'm not an economist nor a politician so I can't say. But I do feel an entity such as wto has too much power when it can dictate some government policies.
Finally I have no examples of how this can adress the problem on a large scale, I just know that the economy on a worlwide scale isn't fare and certainly isn't something to be proud of.
edit: Just to be clear I don't believe in communism either, I hope there are better solutions. But saying "capitalism saves" is just as big a pile of crap (again look for less developed countries).
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S_ch1Hgvyd0
hold up a sec, Does this baked good you speak of involve pot? If so then, "yes" I'd like a cookie and some milk.
Thanks,
I would also like a cookie
Of course bro! Gotta share the love.
No thanks, I just want a cookie
That's it! No cookie for you!
Where is everyone today? This conversation about a cookie is the best thing going, lame. No offense
They are like police, they are unfeeling and inhumane.
They tried to get King to commit suicide.
They commit tons of crime worldwide. They worked with the mafia.
Sick sick people