Communist Education?

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by HongHu
This is really fun. Yes that's right. In true communism resources are supposed to be unlimited. People do not have to work. However they WANT to work. Some people want to be teachers. Other people want to learn. There is your education. I understand though lots of you have a very hard time to understand this concept.

Oh and I also agree that no country in the earth is in true communism. Perhaps it is a dream after all. But it is a good dream, isn't it?

Resources are unlimited exactly how?

[MrFun]

Just because a communist state has not succeeded yet, does not mean it is not possible.

[Kuciwalker]

qp

[Kuciwalker]

dammit, qp

[Kuciwalker]

qp

and don't laugh, it's not MY fault it takes ~4 minutes for Poly to process my post

[Kuciwalker]

*sigh* qp

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by MrFun
Following your logic Patroklos, then that means because there have been oppressive capitalist countries, then this means ALL capitalist countries are oppressive.

Wrong. His logic is that the current trend of 100% of Communist countries being oppressive will continue. Only SOME capitalist countries to date have been oppressive, whereas ALL communist countries to date have been oppressive.

Just because a communist state has not succeeded yet, does not mean it is not possible.

True. However, just because my experiment has not managed to prove my hypothesis yet (indeed, it seems to have DISPROVED it) does not mean it is not possible.

Just exceedingly unlikely.

[GePap]

The same sad drivel against communism that always comes up.

HELLO! How many of you geniuses have read any of the communist thinkers? Do you guys know the theories? The actual theories, not the charicaritures you have built in your own minds? I have never heard the above posters show any real understanding of how communism is supposed to work theoretically, or be able to tell the difference between a bolshevik and a menshivik, a trotskyite vs a Stalinist v a Leninist v a Maoist vs. the Khmer Rougue.

There are in depth, serious cirticism of Marx's work- a lot of it I disagree with- but the level of counter-arguement here is freshman HS, and ignorant freshman HS at that.

[Ned]

GePaP, perhaps we exhibit caution due to the prior examples to create communism in this world.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by skywalker
Wrong. His logic is that the current trend of 100% of Communist countries being oppressive will continue. Only SOME capitalist countries to date have been oppressive, whereas ALL communist countries to date have been oppressive.

Nicaragua was not oppressive, and the early Russian Revolution was not oppressive. I could list a few more, but the rest of them collapsed quickly due to outside interference. The trend has historically been, those workers revolts that are non-repressive either are quickly crushed by the capitalists or must become repressive in order to survive. Those that start out repressive survive.

Just because a communist state has not succeeded yet, does not mean it is not possible.

True. However, just because my experiment has not managed to prove my hypothesis yet (indeed, it seems to have DISPROVED it) does not mean it is not possible.

Just exceedingly unlikely.

It does depend on your inital conditions, though, doesn't it. After all, there have been no control version of Communism, i.e., how will communism succeed when half the world isn't trying to destroy it? If I stood behind you whacking you in the head every few minutes while you were doing your SATs, how well do you think you'd do?

[Agathon]

Originally posted by GePap
The same sad drivel against communism that always comes up..

I second that.

[GePap]

Originally posted by Ned
GePaP, perhaps we exhibit caution due to the prior examples to create communism in this world.

Yes, but do you know which forms of communism came to power?

An orthodox Marxist state never came into being- simply becuase none of the communist states that came into being were formed by true proleteriat revolutions-perhaps becuase we have not yet gotten to the final stages of the capitalist, and becuase perhaps the capitalist have hobbled themselves by incorporating socialist ideas to cut of the revolution.

The forms of communism that came to power were based on the additional ideas of Lenin and the other Bolsheviks, who added a political dimension- specifically the power of a vanguard political movement that would as it where take charge of history and guide the system to the revolution without having to go through advanced capitalism like Marx said. This was the nature of the menshevik, bolshevik split in Russia before the revolution. All forms of communism that took power were based on the "political vanguard" model, even if Mao modified the ideology to make it more applicable to peasants. This is the form of communism that failed, the "political vanaguard" model. We have seen Leninism fail, Maoism fail. Marxism though, still has legs.

[MrFun]

Originally posted by Ned
GePaP, perhaps we exhibit caution due to the prior examples to create communism in this world.

Some of the "achievements" of capitalist countries:

colonialism

genocide

slavery

repressive distribution of wealth within each country

violent suppression of laborers and workers

anti-communist, puppet dictatorships forced on Third World countries



You see how by only listing the bad things about capitalist countries, that we can distort their histories? Well, that's the same thing many anti-communist Apolytoners have done on here when discussing communist ideology's potential by only focusing on the atrocities committed by past communist countries.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Ned
GePaP, perhaps we exhibit caution due to the prior examples to create communism in this world.

Then why did your co-thinkers excercise due caution before there were any examples in the world? Why was the Paris Commune drowned in blood? Why was the Russian Revolution invaded by 14 different countries? Why were Red Hungary and Finland by outsiders? If you beat puppy from birth, it will become a cruel beast.

BTW, Ned, when most people go off about Communism, they generally are referring to the USSR. So even if I don't accept the USSR as actual communism (and they never claimed to be anything more than socialist, btw), I can still defend the USSR ion certain areas. Just because it was monstrous in some capacities doesn't make it monstrous in all. Otherwise the U.S. would be nothing but a genocidal land grabbing country, England would be no more than African and Indian butchering pirates, etc.

It is the nature of all things to have multiple facets, so good, some bad, some irrelevent to your point. Recognition of this does not mean universal approval or condemnation.

[Chris Wilkinson]

Originally posted by curtsibling
Communism = History's biggest con.

If the people had been properly educated, they would have overthrown such a sick form of government.

Sick form of government?

Just because a communist state has not succeeded yet, does not mean it is not possible.

Exactly. We're yet to see a Marxist state, so the theory cannot be disproved.