Question for communists . . . .

[Giancarlo]

Originally posted by GePap


its BAM! man!

Our hero!

You truly are foolish.. you actually think communism is better than capitalism? You are the BAM man around here..

[chequita guevara]

Re: Re: Re: Question for communists . . . .

Originally posted by MrFun
But as for me being gay in a heterosexist society . . . since my being gay is not a choice, I will always be gay whether I would be hypocritical or not

While I would agree with you whole heartedly, the point is, you can leave and move to gayland. There are also those who claim that homosexuality can be cured. Regardless of whether or not we believe it to be true, because the claim exists, it presents an alternative to trying to be gay in a straight society.

I thought you would have to give up luxuries, but according to the points made, I thought wrong.

There are some things which are forbidden to members of communist organizations. I could not both be a member of Solidarity and own a company which employed more than five people. Neither could I beat my significant other, make creepy sexist comments to comrades, etc., take part in racist activities or even espouse such beliefs (which is why I give Uber crap, despite his being an otherwise good socialist). On the otherhand, I could be a stockbroker or a doctor or a lawyer, so long as I had fewer than five employees (as far as that particular organization is concerned).

Prince Kropotkin helped overthrow the Russian government. Engles family owned the facotry where he was a manager, Lenin was a laywer, Castro came from a ruling class family, one of the three main people who made Apple Computers was a communist (he now funds left organizations), etc.

We are communists because we want everyone to enjoy all the fruits of life. Luxeries are one of those fruits. Now, I may have my particular issues: I won't buy Nikes or anything from Taco Bell or California grapes and strawberries, etc., but those are issues of class solidarity. The various workers have asked us to boycott those goods until their bosses deal fairly with them. I refused to eat seafood for years because I felt that the industry was practicing unsustainable production, but I finally decided that since they aren't gonna stop, I'd like to have some fish and shrimp before they're all gone.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Fez

Fez, I love ya man, don't ever change. Just don't expect me to argue with you. It's like wrestling spaghetti.

[GePap]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara


Fez, I love ya man, don't ever change. Just don't expect me to argue with you. It's like wrestling spaghetti.

Nah, wrestling spaghetti is better: you feel less dirty and frustrated at the end.

I think is more like jumping against a soiled wall. That approximates the with-Fez arguing experience much better.

[MrFun]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Question for communists . . . .

Originally posted by chegitz guevara

Originally posted by MrFun
But as for me being gay in a heterosexist society . . . since my being gay is not a choice, I will always be gay whether I would be hypocritical or not

While I would agree with you whole heartedly, the point is, you can leave and move to gayland. There are also those who claim that homosexuality can be cured. Regardless of whether or not we believe it to be true, because the claim exists, it presents an alternative to trying to be gay in a straight society.

I thought you would have to give up luxuries, but according to the points made, I thought wrong.

There are some things which are forbidden to members of communist organizations. I could not both be a member of Solidarity and own a company which employed more than five people. Neither could I beat my significant other, make creepy sexist comments to comrades, etc., take part in racist activities or even espouse such beliefs (which is why I give Uber crap, despite his being an otherwise good socialist). On the otherhand, I could be a stockbroker or a doctor or a lawyer, so long as I had fewer than five employees (as far as that particular organization is concerned).

Prince Kropotkin helped overthrow the Russian government. Engles family owned the facotry where he was a manager, Lenin was a laywer, Castro came from a ruling class family, one of the three main people who made Apple Computers was a communist (he now funds left organizations), etc.

We are communists because we want everyone to enjoy all the fruits of life. Luxeries are one of those fruits. Now, I may have my particular issues: I won't buy Nikes or anything from Taco Bell or California grapes and strawberries, etc., but those are issues of class solidarity. The various workers have asked us to boycott those goods until their bosses deal fairly with them. I refused to eat seafood for years because I felt that the industry was practicing unsustainable production, but I finally decided that since they aren't gonna stop, I'd like to have some fish and shrimp before they're all gone.

Thanks for your good points -- makes more sense to me now.

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by GePap
That is what marxist speak about worker alienation.

Alienation, as it increases with productivity, is being taken to such extremes that it's resulting in unemployment and less productive employment. In the 90s we say low unemployment rates, but the long run trend is higher unemployment rates. If the trend continues we could see unemployment rates here in the US at 7 or 8% in this decade.

[Nubclear]

Originally posted by Fez
No it isn't.

If a person refuses to even consider another point of view, they are closed minded.

You refuse to consider other points of view.

Therefore you are closed minded

[Mr. President]

Like you?

[Giancarlo]

Originally posted by Tassadar5000


If a person refuses to even consider another point of view, they are closed minded.

You refuse to consider other points of view.

Therefore you are closed minded

I do consider your own view.. but I won't adopt it as my own as it is illogical.

And are you any different than what you describe?

[Imran Siddiqui]

I could not both be a member of Solidarity and own a company which employed more than five people.

Does that mean Engles would not be allowed to join Solidarity if he was alive today?

[Dinner]

Originally posted by Kidicious

Alienation, as it increases with productivity, is being taken to such extremes that it's resulting in unemployment and less productive employment. In the 90s we say low unemployment rates, but the long run trend is higher unemployment rates. If the trend continues we could see unemployment rates here in the US at 7 or 8% in this decade.

Even if you postute correctly, which doesn't seem to take an economic upturn into account, then our {i]high[/i] unemployment rate will still be far lower then most of the more socialist parts of Europe.

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Oerdin
Even if you postute correctly, which doesn't seem to take an economic upturn into account,

I'm refering to permanent employment which is not dependent on the business cycle. Producitivity improvements cut jobs permanently.

Originally posted by Oerdin
then our {i]high[/i] unemployment rate will still be far lower then most of the more socialist parts of Europe.

Maybe so, but technological unemployment is a global problem.

[Whaleboy]

Communism is a weird one, its kind of ambiguous too, I take it to mean the disperate movements that are more libertarian than socialism. As such, I believe that soviet russia was a narrow and poor INTERPRETATION of socialism.

Communism merely means people sharing resources and cooperating as a society, as opposed to competing. It is still possible to have an entirely libertarian system within that framework, indeed it is required in any large society to have a degree of communism!!

There are already working examples, for example, the Kibbutzs' in Israel or the success of Open Source Software which develops along a communist model.

Because the soviet union, china, cuba, La Revolucion etc etc, hasnt worked, doesnt work, is against human nature, and is politically, economically and socially flawed, is no reason to tar the entire movement with the brush of not "working"!

Communism is not anti-capitalism

[Giancarlo]

Communism is anti-capitalism and is evil. It won't work ever.

Communism merely means people sharing resources and cooperating as a society

And capitalism doesn't mean cooperation? And sharing of resources? Look up the facts, in both systems resources are shared. Just more efficiently in capitalism.

This is a quote by Milton Friedman:

Fundamentally, there are only two ways of coordinating the economic activities of millions. One is central direction involving the use of coercion—the technique of the army and of the modern totalitarian state. The other is voluntary cooperation of individuals—the technique of the marketplace. —Milton Friedman

The first he talks about is communism, the second is capitalism.

[Odin]

Originally posted by Fez
Fundamentally, there are only two ways of coordinating the economic activities of millions. One is central direction involving the use of coercion—the technique of the army and of the modern totalitarian state. The other is voluntary cooperation of individuals—the technique of the marketplace. —Milton Friedman

The first he talks about is communism, the second is capitalism.

Have you been listening to me at all, Fezzie? You can have a free market in a communist economy as long as a company is ownned equally by it's emmployees, not by the government. You are right that a command economy doen't work but communism doesn't have to be a command economy.

BTW, Friedman sounds like he was sprouting capitalist propaganda, a true Communist society would be a democracy, not an oligarchy or dictatorship.