socialism, property, and the state

[Jon Miller]

yes they do

they cause the death of people by stealing their work from them, there production, screwing up the environment, and so on

Jon Miller

[David Floyd]

so government owned is better

Yeah, OK - government agencies are probably the most inefficient organizations I can think of, not to mention they tend to have lower wages than private corporations.

[David Floyd]

they cause the death of people by stealing their work from them, there production, screwing up the environment, and so on

No one's work is stolen, they freely contract to work a certain amount of time for a certain amount of money. As to pollution, it's interesting to note the Soviet Union was a far bigger polluter than the US.

[Jon Miller]

their work is stolen because they have no other choice

Jon Miller

[chequita guevara]

monkspider, I will use non-violent methods where and when I can, and violent methods if forced to defend the revolution.

David, that the military is conservative is why it will attempt to overthow us. Unless we win over significant sections of the miltary to the side of the American people, we will fall. Personally, I think one of the first orders of a socialist government in the US would be to have the soldiers arrest the officers.

Murder is wrong because we agree that it is wrong. If we thought it was okay, it would be okay (and much more miserable world). At various times and places, we have agreed that murder is not wrong, at least in regards of certain catagories of people.

When I said peasantry, I meant peasantry. Although the serfs were bound to the land, villages often had commons, which were for the use of all the peasants. Via enclosure acts, the various bourgeois parlianments divided up and seized the common property for the bourgeoisie. They stole it, just like everything else.

The Communists didn't get elected because while they had more members of their party, they had less overall support. Consider that the the Democratic and Republican parties today only have about 100,000 members each. All the rest of the people who vote are supporters, not members, not Democrats, not Republicans. The Communist Party had a million members pass through it in the 1930s. Also the whack policies of the CPUSA turned a lot of people off, seeing as it followed every policy turn of the USSR.

[David Floyd]

Sure they do. Start their own business (many people do), lobby en masse for change, exert consumer pressure for change, move to a farm and make their own way, or not work at all.

Thing is, though, most Americans support the wage labor system.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by David Floyd
As to pollution, it's interesting to note the Soviet Union was a far bigger polluter than the US.

The USSR was also in a race for its survival. When your day to day existence is threatened, long term interests got put on the back burner. Perhaps if the West was always threatening to invade, always comitting acts of terrorism, the USSR wouldn't have needed to ignore environmental and worker safety.

As for no one's work being stolen, you're still a kid. You don't know what the working world is like yet.

[Jon Miller]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara
monkspider, I will use non-violent methods where and when I can, and violent methods if forced to defend the revolution.

David, that the military is conservative is why it will attempt to overthow us. Unless we win over significant sections of the miltary to the side of the American people, we will fall. Personally, I think one of the first orders of a socialist government in the US would be to have the soldiers arrest the officers.

Murder is wrong because we agree that it is wrong. If we thought it was okay, it would be okay (and much more miserable world). At various times and places, we have agreed that murder is not wrong, at least in regards of certain catagories of people.

When I said peasantry, I meant peasantry. Although the serfs were bound to the land, villages often had commons, which were for the use of all the peasants. Via enclosure acts, the various bourgeois parlianments divided up and seized the common property for the bourgeoisie. They stole it, just like everything else.

The Communists didn't get elected because while they had more members of their party, they had less overall support. Consider that the the Democratic and Republican parties today only have about 100,000 members each. All the rest of the people who vote are supporters, not members, not Democrats, not Republicans. The Communist Party had a million members pass through it in the 1930s. Also the whack policies of the CPUSA turned a lot of people off, seeing as it followed every policy turn of the USSR.

why should the soldier arrest the officers

the only difference is the officers have a college degree

no other difference

murder is wrong because of right to life

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by David Floyd
Thing is, though, most Americans support the wage labor system.

For now, and only because they see no viable alternative. We aim to show them one.

[chequita guevara]

Jon, don't get me wrong. I think murder is wrong. I don't want to be murdered. I don't want anyone I know to be murdered. I don't even want to hear about people being murdered. But there's no law of nature that says it's wrong. It's just not in our individual or collective interests to permit it. On the other hand, most Americans apparently see nothing wrong with murdering foreign nationals if our government is the one doing the murdering.

And the officers should be arrested because they will be the ones trying to make the coup. It's part of their job. But that's my opinion, not any party line. It's just how I feel, not anything I've clearly thought out. Maybe I'm wrong.

[David Floyd]

David, that the military is conservative is why it will attempt to overthow us. Unless we win over significant sections of the miltary to the side of the American people, we will fall. Personally, I think one of the first orders of a socialist government in the US would be to have the soldiers arrest the officers.

Ah, I thought you meant the military would support you :embarrassed:
But why would the soldiers turn against their own officers? No, they would follow orders to fight the coup and return the proper elected government to power.

Murder is wrong because we agree that it is wrong. If we thought it was okay, it would be okay (and much more miserable world). At various times and places, we have agreed that murder is not wrong, at least in regards of certain catagories of people.

I categorically reject any argument that murder can ever be OK based upon society - I fail to see how society's whims can determine if something is right or wrong.
Look at it like this - in an era before organized society, if someone tries to kill you, would you say he committed a wrong? I certainly would, and I suspect everyone else here would too. Society didn't debate and reach a consensus, but murder is still wrong because it is, by definition, the unjustified taking of a human life.

When I said peasantry, I meant peasantry. Although the serfs were bound to the land, villages often had commons, which were for the use of all the peasants. Via enclosure acts, the various bourgeois parlianments divided up and seized the common property for the bourgeoisie. They stole it, just like everything else.

How is this an indictment of capitalism, seeing as how true capitalism has never existed? This was not even done in the name of capitalism.

The Communists didn't get elected because while they had more members of their party, they had less overall support. Consider that the the Democratic and Republican parties today only have about 100,000 members each. All the rest of the people who vote are supporters, not members, not Democrats, not Republicans. The Communist Party had a million members pass through it in the 1930s. Also the whack policies of the CPUSA turned a lot of people off, seeing as it followed every policy turn of the USSR.

So my original point stands - communists will not be elected because they have almost no support.

[The Vagabond]

Thanks for your answer, Jon Miller.

Originally posted by Jon Miller
government controlled corporations would be beacraticly controlled with importance on the good of the people

I just wonder how you can be sure that a given public-owned corporation will work on the good of the people. What is the underlying mechanism/agent that will make it do so?

[monkspider]

Vagadbond: Thanks for the kind words, I'm rather fond of my avatar as well.
Che: We are in basic agreement on most things Che, but I still think that there is always a better solution than violence in all situations.
Look at Gandhi and Martin Luther King, they both faced situations which could have easily merited violence. However, their alternative means of gaining freedom allowed them considerable victories. So too it will be with the Socialists I believe. The greatest weapon that can be used against the Corporate Axis of power is not any kind of bomb or gun, but the mandate of the people.

[David Floyd]

The USSR was also in a race for its survival. When your day to day existence is threatened, long term interests got put on the back burner. Perhaps if the West was always threatening to invade, always comitting acts of terrorism, the USSR wouldn't have needed to ignore environmental and worker safety.

That's ridiculous - the West never had any intention of invading the USSR, outside of the half-assed attempt to support the White Russians in the civil war.

For now, and only because they see no viable alternative. We aim to show them one.

So you think the average American, who makes $40,000 a year, has a decent house or apartment, wife, 2.5 kids, two cars, three TVs, and a computer is going to risk that to support an ideology in which he could stand to lose all that property? Unrealistic.

[Jon Miller]

the people will vote as such

Jon Miller