The Forum Site - Join the conversation
Forums:
Politics

Venezuelan Presidential election

Reply to Topic
AuthorMessage
Pages: << · 1 2
ThePainefulTruth On May 06, 2013
Verum est Deus


Deleted



Peoria, Arizona
#16New Post! Oct 10, 2012 @ 01:22:17
@MAW Said

From wikipedia :

Communism (from Latin communis - common, universal) is a revolutionary >>>>>socialist<<<<< movement


Uhhhhhhhh........thanks for the backup.
MAW On October 31, 2012

Deleted



Stockport, United Kingdom
#17New Post! Oct 10, 2012 @ 08:04:06
@ThePainefulTruth Said

Uhhhhhhhh........thanks for the backup.



Yep, they both mean the same thing.
ThePainefulTruth On May 06, 2013
Verum est Deus


Deleted



Peoria, Arizona
#18New Post! Oct 10, 2012 @ 11:33:51
@MAW Said

Yep, they both mean the same thing.


Nooooooo. Communism is a socialist movement, meaning it's a type of socialism, like Nazism and Fascism are also forms of socialism. If you're gonna be a good commie you gotta know that and have it in for the fascists, a la Hitler vs. Stalin etc.

And if you pay attention, you'll notice that street riots and the like usually have commies and anarchists throwing bricks side by side, and Nazis are usually found in bed with Jihadists. Iran's Ackkkkkkkkmadinijad (whatever) is about the only idiot left still saying the Holocaust didn't happen.

_____________________________________________________________________

MAW On October 31, 2012

Deleted



Stockport, United Kingdom
#19New Post! Oct 10, 2012 @ 11:37:33
@ThePainefulTruth Said

Nooooooo. Communism is a socialist movement, meaning it's a type of socialism, like Nazism and Fascism are also forms of socialism. If you're gonna be a good commie you gotta know that and have it in for the fascists, a la Hitler vs. Stalin etc.

And if you pay attention, you'll notice that street riots and the like usually have commies and anarchists throwing bricks side by side, and Nazis are usually found in bed with Jihadists. Iran's Ackkkkkkkkmadinijad (whatever) is about the only idiot left still saying the Holocaust didn't happen.

_____________________________________________________________________



I thought I was a good commie, Iíve never been on a street riot as they are counter-productive and donít support anyone else bar other commies.
I donít support Stalin as he was a state capitalist. As communism/socialism is the absence of the state. Plus in the USSR they had the rouble. You canít have money under communism, why would you need it in a world of free access.
ThePainefulTruth On May 06, 2013
Verum est Deus


Deleted



Peoria, Arizona
#20New Post! Oct 10, 2012 @ 12:50:39
@MAW Said

I thought I was a good commie, Iíve never been on a street riot as they are counter-productive and donít support anyone else bar other commies.
I donít support Stalin as he was a state capitalist. As communism/socialism is the absence of the state. Plus in the USSR they had the rouble. You canít have money under communism, why would you need it in a world of free access.


Well see there, you're just a run-of-the-mill, generic, nanny-state socialist, which is a cop out. You've got to choose between Hitler and Stalin. (Actually, you don't have to choose, just stick the teat in your mouth and they'll do the choosing.) The only other options are libertarian-capitalism, or the commie's friend, anarchy, which is unsustainable for any period of time beyond a few seconds, except at the family level.

_____________________________________________________________________

MAW On October 31, 2012

Deleted



Stockport, United Kingdom
#21New Post! Oct 10, 2012 @ 13:18:37
@ThePainefulTruth Said

Well see there, you're just a run-of-the-mill, generic, nanny-state socialist, which is a cop out. You've got to choose between Hitler and Stalin. (Actually, you don't have to choose, just stick the teat in your mouth and they'll do the choosing.) The only other options are libertarian-capitalism, or the commie's friend, anarchy, which is unsustainable for any period of time beyond a few seconds, except at the family level.

_____________________________________________________________________




The nanny state is the invention of the conservatives, it first appeared under the Iron Chancellor, Count Otto Von Bismark and was/is nothing to do with socialism.
Iíll stick to being a Marxist socialist and believing that you canít have socialism if you keep the state.
ThePainefulTruth On May 06, 2013
Verum est Deus


Deleted



Peoria, Arizona
#22New Post! Oct 10, 2012 @ 14:38:01
@MAW Said

The nanny state is the invention of the conservatives, it first appeared under the Iron Chancellor, Count Otto Von Bismark and was/is nothing to do with socialism.


Not familiar with him, but if so, then he was nothing but another fascist socialist. ALL dictators are fascists, controlling a country's economy through regulation and force, or outright confiscating the means of production. Little difference in effect.

Quote:
Iíll stick to being a Marxist socialist and believing that you canít have socialism if you keep the state.


But that's (just one of) socialism's flaws, you give the power to the state, and the state will NEVER give it up. And stateless "communism", besides being a social impossibility given the temptations of power and the inevitable people who will exploit it, is nothing but anarchy, which is just another word for power vacuum. That vacuum WILL be filled.

I submit that you've never considered any of this because all you really want is the nanny-state without having to say that you want it, whoever thought up the term.
_____________________________________________________________________

nooneinparticular On May 16, 2021




, Hawaii
#23New Post! Oct 10, 2012 @ 22:13:44
@ThePainefulTruth Said

Not familiar with him, but if so, then he was nothing but another fascist socialist. ALL dictators are fascists, controlling a country's economy through regulation and force, or outright confiscating the means of production. Little difference in effect.


Except that's not at all what Bismark did. He created welfare programs and other programs to help workers, but so that workers would be less concerned with their welfare and more concerned with and productive in their jobs. He was not, for example, in favor of taking over Germany's industrialized sectors, and was instead trying to promote such sectors of the economy through support programs for the workers, who were at the time leaving Germany to go to America because it had higher pay, but no social security. By offering social security, he hoped to keep German workers within Germany.
nooneinparticular On May 16, 2021




, Hawaii
#24New Post! Oct 10, 2012 @ 22:57:39
@ThePainefulTruth Said

Well see there, you're just a run-of-the-mill, generic, nanny-state socialist, which is a cop out. You've got to choose between Hitler and Stalin. (Actually, you don't have to choose, just stick the teat in your mouth and they'll do the choosing.) The only other options are libertarian-capitalism, or the commie's friend, anarchy, which is unsustainable for any period of time beyond a few seconds, except at the family level.

_____________________________________________________________________


Actually communists and anarchists do not fall along the same principles precisely. In particular relevance to the above statement, while the goal of both communists and anarchists is to create a society without government, anarchists believe in private ownership, while communism puts emphasis on communal ownership.

Likewise, anarchists value the individual more than the state or community, while communism puts heavy emphasis on the community over the individual.

There are also societal experiments that tested out anarchists principles and they managed to last for several years before being brought down by outside influences.

Free terriotry
ThePainefulTruth On May 06, 2013
Verum est Deus


Deleted



Peoria, Arizona
#25New Post! Oct 12, 2012 @ 18:43:04
@nooneinparticular Said

Except that's not at all what Bismark did. He created welfare programs and other programs to help workers, but so that workers would be less concerned with their welfare and more concerned with and productive in their jobs. He was not, for example, in favor of taking over Germany's industrialized sectors, and was instead trying to promote such sectors of the economy through support programs for the workers, who were at the time leaving Germany to go to America because it had higher pay, but no social security. By offering social security, he hoped to keep German workers within Germany.


(my bold)
i.e. fascist socialist and precursor to Hitler.


@nooneinparticular Said

Actually communists and anarchists do not fall along the same principles precisely. In particular relevance to the above statement, while the goal of both communists and anarchists is to create a society without government, anarchists believe in private ownership, while communism puts emphasis on communal ownership.


Not precisely no. Anarchists want to go straight for the anarchy, while communists want to detour via the Politburo. Either way, power is the inevitable corrupter there being nothing to restrain it.

Quote:
Likewise, anarchists value the individual more than the state or community, while communism puts heavy emphasis on the community over the individual.


Yes, many libertarians equate themselves with anarchy, even though 98% of libertarians acknowledge the need for a permanent government. But pure freedom, like pure democracy, doesn't work.

Quote:
There are also societal experiments that tested out anarchists principles and they managed to last for several years before being brought down by outside influences.

Free terriotry


Yes, on a small scale it and communism (e.g. Israeli Kibbutzim) can work, but they still need a defense against outside force.
Even then you'll find a crude informal government in play, as you find in isolated family groups.
nooneinparticular On May 16, 2021




, Hawaii
#26New Post! Oct 15, 2012 @ 19:19:44
@ThePainefulTruth Said

(my bold)
i.e. fascist socialist and precursor to Hitler.


You outline what a fascist socialist does, then when I give you counter points, you use those points to say that is what a fascist socialist does. You do not gain control of the means of production by giving companies autonomy within your country.

Quote:

Not precisely no. Anarchists want to go straight for the anarchy, while communists want to detour via the Politburo. Either way, power is the inevitable corrupter there being nothing to restrain it.



Yes, many libertarians equate themselves with anarchy, even though 98% of libertarians acknowledge the need for a permanent government. But pure freedom, like pure democracy, doesn't work.



Yes, on a small scale it and communism (e.g. Israeli Kibbutzim) can work, but they still need a defense against outside force.
Even then you'll find a crude informal government in play, as you find in isolated family groups.


I was simply stating that communism and anarchy were not the same or even that similar, since you implied they were very similar with the quoted comment.
ThePainefulTruth On May 06, 2013
Verum est Deus


Deleted



Peoria, Arizona
#27New Post! Oct 16, 2012 @ 11:06:12
@nooneinparticular Said

You outline what a fascist socialist does, then when I give you counter points, you use those points to say that is what a fascist socialist does. You do not gain control of the means of production by giving companies autonomy within your country.


If they have autonomy yes. If they do, then the government isn't fascist or socialist. Of course any government is going to have regulations for business, so when is autonomy lost? The same as with individuals, when the law is more than just about protecting our individual, group or corporate rights--from each other or the government itself.

Quote:
I was simply stating that communism and anarchy were not the same or even that similar, since you implied they were very similar with the quoted comment.


No, they aren't the same, or we wouldn't need different words for them. But the goal is the same, and the methods for starting out in achieving those goals in opposition to capitalism, are the same. Thus the anarchist and the communist are often side by side in street riots or Occupy demonstrations.
nooneinparticular On May 16, 2021




, Hawaii
#28New Post! Oct 16, 2012 @ 22:14:39
@ThePainefulTruth Said

If they have autonomy yes. If they do, then the government isn't fascist or socialist. Of course any government is going to have regulations for business, so when is autonomy lost? The same as with individuals, when the law is more than just about protecting our individual, group or corporate rights--from each other or the government itself.


Which would make Bismark not a fascist socialist.

Quote:

No, they aren't the same, or we wouldn't need different words for them. But the goal is the same, and the methods for starting out in achieving those goals in opposition to capitalism, are the same. Thus the anarchist and the communist are often side by side in street riots or Occupy demonstrations.


The goal is not at all the same, and pretty much the only step they have in common is the removal of the current system, which happens to be capitalism.

The enemy of my enemy is my friend does not mean, nor does it imply, they are the same entity, or even similar in nature.

The goal of communism is a state of communal welfare, while the goal of anarchy is individual freedom. One is conformist in nature while the other is individualistic in nature.
ThePainefulTruth On May 06, 2013
Verum est Deus


Deleted



Peoria, Arizona
#29New Post! Oct 17, 2012 @ 10:45:10
@nooneinparticular Said

Which would make Bismark not a fascist socialist.


I'm not going down that rabbit hole. Why don't we just admit that Hitler was a fascist socialist and leave it at that.



Quote:
The goal is not at all the same, and pretty much the only step they have in common is the removal of the current system, which happens to be capitalism.

The enemy of my enemy is my friend does not mean, nor does it imply, they are the same entity, or even similar in nature.

The goal of communism is a state of communal welfare, while the goal of anarchy is individual freedom. One is conformist in nature while the other is individualistic in nature.


Read your Marx. The ultimate goal of communism is a governmentless utopia. Of course they've never made it past the dictator/elitist oligarchy stage, and due to human nature, never will.

And anarchy is impossible for the same reason, a power vacuum WILL be filled. Even the family is run like a government. The only time you won't have to worry about a power structure or power vacuum, is if you're by yourself on an island--leaving your left hemisphere to duke it out with your right.
Reply to Topic<< Previous Topic | Next Topic >>
Pages: << · 1 2

1 browsing (0 members - 1 guest)

Quick Reply
Politics Forum - Some Rudeness Allowed

      
Subscribe to topic prefs

Similar Topics
    Forum Topic Last Post Replies Views
New posts   US Election 2012
Thu Aug 23, 2012 @ 02:59
15 1433
New posts   US Election 2012
Mon Jul 16, 2012 @ 04:42
97 5903
New posts   Politics
Mon Jul 06, 2009 @ 04:14
1 577
New posts   US Elections
Sat Oct 25, 2008 @ 01:00
30 2136
New posts   Jokes & Humor
Wed Jun 14, 2006 @ 10:35
8 474