Why has Communism failed everywhere ? A chance for commies to explain

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Whaleboy
Read my posts and then ask.

Your posts make no sense.

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Patroklos


He does not gain anything from it materially, which I suppose is all that matters to commies, but to him personally obviously he considers his own survival less important than his whole unit. It makes him happy/content/whatever he is feeling to do that action.

And that is the most ridiculous thing ever said, even here at poly.

[GePap]

Originally posted by Ned


There is a difference between providing law so that private parties have rules to follow in their private transactions, and providing no law, but instead placing all decisions in the hands of a committee or party member which in former times may have been denoted as a King or a King's legate. One of the more critical advances in civilization is the rule of law. Communism dispenses with that in favor of a more primitive form of government.

Only if Stalinism meant all communism could you statements be correct.

but communism is not just Marxism, leninism, Stalinist, or Maoism.

Maybe you should read a bit more on the topic.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Patroklos
He does not gain anything from it materially, which I suppose is all that matters to commies, but to him personally obviously he considers his own survival less important than his whole unit. It makes him happy/content/whatever he is feeling to do that action.

I doubt that it makes him either happy or content. Even if it did, it's not something he gets to keep, but loses along with his life. There is nothing selfish in sacrificing your own life to save the lives of others. Furthermore, assume that he didn't volunteer, but was instead ordered to do a job which meant death, such as holding the line in the face of unstoppable odds so that other units can be evacuated or reinforced.

I suppose the respose is that the soldier holds some values more dearly than he values his own life. There's nothing wrong with that. It's perfectly respectable and I too have values for which I'd be willing to sacrifice myself. The point is, you lose everything by your sacrifice. It's hardly an act of self-interest.

[chequita guevara]

Please don't feed the Ned troll.

[Ned]

Originally posted by GePap


Only if Stalinism meant all communism could you statements be correct.

but communism is not just Marxism, leninism, Stalinist, or Maoism.

Maybe you should read a bit more on the topic.

GePap, there are certain fundamentals on this topic that are inescapable. The goal of communism is economic equality. In achieving this goal the individual does not have the right to do as he pleases economically. This is fundamental. His choices are made for him either by the party or by committee. If he disagrees with the choice made for him by the party or by the committee, he does not have the right to leave. A right to leave implies a right to choose, which is fundamentally denied to the people in a communist society.

You may say that communism is not Stalinism, but people who observe the fundamental lack of freedom that is communism know that totalitarian dictatorship is the inevitable result and the very essence of communism.

[Kidlicious]

The scary, but amusing thing is that sometimes you aren't sure if he's trolling or not.

[chequita guevara]

Considering he's been a hell of a lot more reasonable in the past in the cap-com debates, I believe he's trolling. I only bother responding to him if I can DinoDoc him.

[Patroklos]

And that is the most ridiculous thing ever said, even here at poly.

Kid's can't understand reflex: "What! Thats Ridiculous!"

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Patroklos
Kid's can't understand reflex: "What! Thats Ridiculous!"

I don't understand how pigs fly, but that doesn't keep me up at night, because they don't fly.

[Kidlicious]

btw, I do understand the theory. The idea is that someone gets pleasure out of charity, and that the pleasure they get is equal to or greater than the pain they feel. That's an instinct that we all have, but intelligent people understand that it's just an instinct, and that there are higher goals other than just benefiting oneself.

[Whaleboy]

If you are to believe that altruism does not exist then you have to bring more to the table than mere speuculation about how another persons mind works, becuase no one in their right 'mind' whould take your word for something that you have no real first hand knowledge about against the only person who really knows the mind - the subject.

And again you completely ignore my earlier points. I do not claim it doesn't "exist", but only exists consciously as a delusion. It is this which you misunderstand, and accordingly your argument is precluded.

Your posts make no sense.

Would you like to play with some shapes?

And that is the most ridiculous thing ever said, even here at poly.

I think not, it is relatively impossible for gain not to occur, even though one form may be categorically unobvious, or even resulting in their death it is perhaps indicative of shallow thinking to not look deeper than that.

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Whaleboy
And again you completely ignore my earlier points. I do not claim it doesn't "exist", but only exists consciously as a delusion. It is this which you misunderstand, and accordingly your argument is precluded.

Irrelevent. What's the significance with the diference in meaning between something that is a delusion and something that does not exist.

[Whaleboy]

Irrelevent. What's the significance with the diference in meaning between something that is a delusion and something that does not exist.

Because rationality is not required for it to exist in your mind. Consider something like a belief in God, which exists in the mind of the believer even though it fails rationally. Similarly with our perceptions of ourselves, hence you can claim until the cows come home that you're not an egoistic being but it wont cut any ice, because you're not escaping the consciousness, whereas it is the unconscious that is being described. Surely it is obvious by now, I'm running out of ways I can articulate it.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Whaleboy
And again you completely ignore my earlier points. I do not claim it doesn't "exist", but only exists consciously as a delusion. It is this which you misunderstand, and accordingly your argument is precluded.

You claim it's a delusion because the person who sacrifices gains some sort of emotional or intellectual gratification? So, sacrificing something real for a temporary chemical reaction, in your mind, negates the concept of doing something for others without real gain. Talk about a delusion.