new capitalism vs communism thread

[The Andy-Man]

Originally posted by yavoon


what issue was slavery? slavery was an economic issue. the north had no overflowing pride for slaves. but they certainly didnt need them(they had the irish). the south needed them.

the #1 difference between the north and south was their economic structures. everything from their culture to their politics was based on this divergence.

That just silly
Slavery, for the north, was not economic. It was a matter of principle. Secondly, I would say it is more the diverging economies grew out of the vastly different cultures of north and south, of which were highly apparant long before independance, when the north still had as many slaves as the south.

[yavoon]

Originally posted by The Andy-Man


That just silly
Slavery, for the north, was not economic. It was a matter of principle. Secondly, I would say it is more the diverging economies grew out of the vastly different cultures of north and south, of which were highly apparant long before independance, when the north still had as many slaves as the south.

thats the point. the north didnt need slavery, the south did. and the economies drove the cultures, not the other way around.

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by joncha


This is true, but it's also the easy answer.

Before there is communism globally, a military would be necessary, if only to defend it from the likes of Ned and his army of zombie trolls.

A communist military must be democratic. Those who are asked by society to fight and die for it must be willing, active participants. Officers are elected to lead on the battlefield. Military plans and strategies are drawn up by officers and voted on by the soldiers.

And before anyone jumps all over me to say how "unrealistic" this is, it's how the Red Army was actually run (and run successfully) under Trotsky.

jon.

So you want a military that is accountable, not to the people, but to itself? Unless you compell people to join the military, why should them having to take orders be a problem? The military exists to serve and defend the people, not its members.

[Kuciwalker]

methinks some people are theadjacking

[yavoon]

Originally posted by skywalker
methinks some people are theadjacking

k I stop

[Ned]

skywalker, the purpose for a military in a police state is obvious.

[Pax]

I agree pure communism works against human nature. Pure Capitalism works against the best interest of humans by promoting the cracking of heads and the selling of unsafe products for profit.
Anything pure is almost definitely bad for you.

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by Ned
skywalker, the purpose for a military in a police state is obvious.

Stop spouting crap - no one here is espousing a police state. If you can't obey the rules, get the hell out of my thread.

[Kuciwalker]

The stuff about "human nature" is all well and good, but unless you can show that the examples Spiffor and Azazel are providing go against it, you aren't going to convince many people. (Note: this is exactly what I'm trying to do, but I'm doing it by actually ADDRESSING their example )

[loinburger]

I'm lazy, so can somebody summarize this thread for me? Who's winning?

[Imran Siddiqui]

The capitalists, of course. I believe it is 3402-3401

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by loinburger
I'm lazy, so can somebody summarize this thread for me? Who's winning?

This thread is actually two threads: Azazel, Spiffor, and I having a nice, pleasant discussion about the mechanics of a communist government (I'm questioning them, hoping to show that their position is untenable ), and a bunch of trolls on both sides feeding each other.

[Pax]

How can you show that their position is untenable when there has never been a true Communist or socialist government.

It's already been shown that Capitalism has decimated South America, the caribbean, and Africa?

[Pax]

China under communism is not the country that could be pushed around at the turn of the century. Vietnamese under communism are also better off than under Capitalistic french rule.

Can you give an example of a thirld country under capitalism that has prospered.

What about a comparison of Cuba vs Puerto Rico or the USVI.

These are reallife examples of Capital Economy failure.

[Kuciwalker]

Pax Africanus - we've agreed already that discussing failures of previous "communist" or "capitalist" systems is pointless.