Anarchism vs. Communism: Ramo's Opportunity

[Ned]

Kid, the workers who take advantage are capitalists in disguise and will soon take over unless restrained.

It is therefore best to deal with them like in the "normal" fashion.

[Shi Huangdi]

Originally posted by Azazel
Shi, Dude, do you know what a constitution is? It's to protect the form of government against random swings of opinion. You have one that protects captialism. Why can't we have one that protects socialism?

(and our is more ethical than yours. )

Actually, our constitution would allow for Socialists to take over the government were they ever to be elected. We currently even have one congressmen (Bernie Sanders I-VT) who is a self-declared socialist. Our current constitution allows for the likes of chegitz to hold his views, speak freely of them, publish them, etc. Which is alot more then you would be able to say for anyone who believed in liberal capitalist democracy under the old USSR.

Amongst, the Eastern Bloc, Czechoslovakia tried to allow this, and allowed non-communist to speak freely and form political clubs. They were met with quick and brutal force when the USSR invaded and restored totaltarianism.

[Az]

Actually, our constitution would allow for Socialists to take over the government were they ever to be elected. We currently even have one congressmen (Bernie Sanders I-VT) who is a self-declared socialist. Our current constitution allows for the likes of chegitz to hold his views, speak freely of them, publish them, etc. Which is alot more then you would be able to say for anyone who believed in liberal capitalist democracy under the old USSR.

You don't understand. The constitution includes rights to property, for example, that would prevent the socialist government to confiscate property, and such. Same goes for the most european countries, even the ones that have sizeable socialist parties.

What you said about the USSR is correct to a large extent, but there aren't many communists that claim that the USSR was the way they wanted a country to be, and for each one of those who will, I can show you Fez a capitalist that thinks that McCarthy was right.

A socialist constitution will protect communal property much like a capitalist one protects private property. the political part of it will allow for free speech, and as well.

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara
Anarchists frequently eschew workers struggles for better wages, job saftey, etc., decalring that we should not be struggling to gild our cages, but rather for the end of cages. They tend to oppose practicale political struggles, such as civil rights, labor rights etc. Working within the system is perpetuating the system. Individual anarchists may vary, however, and calling one's self an anarchist is no guarantee the person knows that much about anarchism (or anything else for that matter --of course, the same is frequently true of revolutionary socialists/communists)

I believe that working within the system is perpetuating the system. I don't see how that seperates anarchists from communists. I thought working withing the system was a socialist thing, not communist.

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by The Mad Viking

kidicious-

Okay, so you want Anarchy and no banks, so freedom does not include the freedom of individuals to pool their money collectively.

I'm a communist. Does that explain it?

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Ned
Kid, the workers who take advantage are capitalists in disguise and will soon take over unless restrained.

It is therefore best to deal with them like in the "normal" fashion.

Capitalism is unethical. I compare it to greasing, because you have to pay someone for the right to work just like you have to pay officials to get things done in places where that act is considered acceptable. Lukily greasing is not considered ethical in the US. If you try it someone will probably report you, you will lose the respect of respectable people, and your future will not be so good.

In a properly funtioning communist society capitalism will be illegal and considered unethical. There will be no motivation for people to try to become capitalists, because they wont find anyone to work for them and they wont be able to sell their produce. If ( and this isn't likely) they find a way to profit they will face the law and the disrespect of society, and their future will be crap.

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara
The child of millionaires who got his interview with IBM because his mother sat on the board of an institution with the head of IBM and who made his OS ubiquitous through illegal business deals. This is meritorious how?

Hmmm... I was of the impression that he was a relatively normal person growing-up-wise, and he just happened to make some VERY smart decisions (plus he designed some of the stuff, QBasic, didn't he?)... if I'm wrong, well, there are plenty of other examples of smart people getting rich because they're smart.

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by Urban Ranger
This cannot explain why an excutive makes several magnitudes more than an engineer.

The executives labor - his abilities with management and stuff - is more valuable than the engineer's labor. If it isn't, the company is wasting money, so it is less competitive.

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by Azazel
Shi, Dude, do you know what a constitution is? It's to protect the form of government against random swings of opinion. You have one that protects captialism. Why can't we have one that protects socialism?

(and our is more ethical than yours. )

Yes, and even the Constitution can be changed.

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by Kidicious
Capitalism is unethical. I compare it to greasing, because you have to pay someone for the right to work just like you have to pay officials to get things done in places where that act is considered acceptable. Lukily greasing is not considered ethical in the US. If you try it someone will probably report you, you will lose the respect of respectable people, and your future will not be so good.

You don't have to pay anyone for your "right to work" (which doesn't exist anyways) - you just have to pay them to USE THEIR STUFF.

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Kucinich

Originally posted by Kidicious
Capitalism is unethical. I compare it to greasing, because you have to pay someone for the right to work just like you have to pay officials to get things done in places where that act is considered acceptable. Lukily greasing is not considered ethical in the US. If you try it someone will probably report you, you will lose the respect of respectable people, and your future will not be so good.

You don't have to pay anyone for your "right to work" (which doesn't exist anyways) - you just have to pay them to USE THEIR STUFF.

True. One doesn't have the 'right' to work unless they own capital, but then it's a priviledge. I wasn't refering to legal rights though.

[Kuciwalker]

By the "right" to work, I assumed you meant the "right" to employment. They are different things! You can sell your labor (or the products of it) without being employed by someone else or USING THEIR STUFF. You may sell more, better stuff if they let you use their stuff, but they are under no OBLIGATION to let you use it, because it's THEIRS.

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Kucinich

I wouldn't normally suggest doing this, but you might want to do it a few more times. It might help.

Originally posted by Kucinich
You may sell more, better stuff if they let you use their stuff, but they are under no OBLIGATION to let you use it, because it's THEIRS.

This is what makes capitalism unethical, and we plan to make necessary changes.

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by Kucinich

Originally posted by Urban Ranger
This cannot explain why an excutive makes several magnitudes more than an engineer.

The executives labor - his abilities with management and stuff - is more valuable than the engineer's labor. If it isn't, the company is wasting money, so it is less competitive.

You have not shown that his abilities is more valuable, you are merely asserting it. Without the engineers, the company will not be able to design and build new products, so it will go kaput in no time at all. Thus, engineers are more valuable than executives.

[Kidlicious]

People who work hard are of equal value to society.