DutchJazzer
Banned
AAH REALLY
communism is totalitarian.
totalitarian means i cannot say anything
i cannot have a gun
how about quartering soldiers in your home. wait you don't own your home!
NPR says 10% of Bernie supporters voted Trump
- Thread starter Boris
- Start date
AAH REALLY
communism is totalitarian.
totalitarian means i cannot say anything
i cannot have a gun
how about quartering soldiers in your home. wait you don't own your home!
Communism is an economic system, not a political system.
I suppose technically I can see how communism is an economic system. It is possible, for example, to have a communist country that is also a liberal democracy. It is not possible for a capitalist country to also be communist.
But I can understand the other argument too. Both from the practical angle, since communism can be seen as the Soviet model of Marxism, which is very much political. And also more ideally, since a system where all property is public is fundamentally political (as it relates to the governance of a society).
DutchJazzer
Banned
well anytime it was tried it was forced down by government!
government who also institued laws against speech, expression and gun ownership!
so when is real comunism or socialism gonna be tried!
you have your own economic system with your friends! dont come between me and other people freely exchanging goods and services.
nothing is stopping you from having 1 last capitalist act!
get a large peac eo fland buy it. then make a goddamned communist hippy comune.
ooh noo you cant becuase you would not like to be without the wonderful inventions of capitalism! muh iphone, muh nike, muh utah jazz
Red
Well-Known Member
If scientists think they're going to slip something past Scott Pruitt, scientists don't know Scott!
http://www.iflscience.com/environment/epa-chief-scott-pruitt-science-dictate-policy/
http://www.iflscience.com/environment/epa-chief-scott-pruitt-science-dictate-policy/
Communism essentially requires an authoritarian government because people, as a whole, have never given up their property willingly, therefor the communist government must force communism on it's people.
Also, political parties name themselves "Communists" so yeah. But Communism is an economic system. That system requires a certain type of administration that in all examples so far has been totalitarian in nature.
Well everybody has their own opinions.... and definitions....
my attempt at defining a "Constitutionalist" allows for clueless idealists or piranha capitalists to fit under the tent as long as they actually don't have an agenda or ambition to replace it, that they are conscious or deliberate about.
In my mind, Hillary would not measure up to that standard, and Trump does.
Ted Cruz, with his legal analytical mind, probably has a sincere dedication to his understanding of the US Constitution, as does Mike Lee. Their opinions, no doubt differ significantly from, say, Lyndon LaRouche or his little band of believers in a better world through education and technology.... strike that.... a better biosphere including every other planet in the universe, all destined one day to support life in some form or another. LaRouche would gladly explain to you exactly what those worlds should be, and consider you, if you failed to just roll over and say thanks for that lecture, a beknighted member or supporter of the British pump-and-dump sporting financiers of London. Bubble men, I think, would be the street moniker.
I consider "communism" to be a mere pipe dream, and I would declare every attempt to codify or justify or establish it to be merely fraudulent intellectual exercises in fantasy.
On the street, "communism" is jibe or gutter talk meant to disarm the people and strip them of whatever they have worth taking. "
"Socialism" differs only in some points of refinement that would allow you to smile a bit while being reduced to the same beggardly plight.
"Communism" in some sense is the economy of the native Americans in their hunter/gatherer/warrior clans. The idea of owning land was sorta remote, yet they would still attempt to destroy the other band venturing across their hill to hunt in their valley. We probably owe the notion of "communism" to the Greeks, since their attempt at democracy ultimately failed on the communitarian principles of citizens living off the common resources. I'm not sure what the tax collectors did to collect the resources, but once the idea is established that citizens can support themselves out of a common pot, I think the goose of liberty is cooked.
Early Christians and even the early Mormons were charmed outta their socks by the notion of living in a security net where collective resources could be privately consumed without a price or any social accountability. Many Mormon apostate groups are in some measure "communistic" in their idealized economy, but still led.... as every socialist/communist economic apparition under whatever government has been.... by mere pirates, so far as issues of conscience and accountability are concerned.
all in all, if wishes were fishes everyone could fry and dine to their limit of satiety.
Capitalism, as it idealized, may not actually have an ultimate reality, either. But people being people, buying, selling, sharing, giving, taking under circumstances beyond government or social dictates would be the "natural economy" of reality. We can better our circumstances by establishing or supporting a principle of private property in a free market, and that is about as good at we will ever get.
I did note, in my reading of Marx, the assertion of a future utopia wherein the government would just wither away because, in highly imaginative terms, the people would just "be good" and work together and share everything. The idea of "private property" was viewed as the fundamental error of mankind, or "sin" if we may use that term in pure materialist objective reality. Once we stop thinking stuff belongs, everything will be good. The government, then, would have nothing to do. No re-distribution needed.
A lot of philosophers believe in a sort of inertial progress that will float our boat to the fantasy utopia somehow. Some believe we must paddle our boat, though. And those who "paddle" must, at times, exterminate "enemies" of the dreamed utopia. So, yeah, take the guns and then paddle.
I object, noting that every babe is born clueless, and must somehow learn the same lessons in life that all babes have ever learned, if any babe is ever going to make things somehow "better" for the world. I consider it no sin to be a critic of those who have gone before, and lay in waste all the mistaken dreams of the past. Nor is it a "sin" to honor the few great men who have genuinely advanced the cause of mankind, such as the founders of the United States, by establishing a government that was supposed to be answerable principally to the common man, with no "royalty" or "elite" class recognized as having any superior rights or privileges. I consider there to be no greater good that any of us can do, but uphold the principles of our founders, in their highest conceptual form. "All men are equal", "having equal rights and equal protection under the law."