I have a question about Communism

Under a Communist system the goverment gives you everything you need, food, housing, education and medical services all without you having to invest in yourself. Does that mean the Communist system treats it's subjects like pets or children? Doesn't that mean the goverment owns them and can do has they wish with the people that are ruled by the Communist system?

 

Answer

No.

 

communism is stateless society. and no the communist system doesnt treat people as pets, but rather humans treat themselves and others like humans.

 

You are talking about hypothetical communism. In hypothetical communism everything is great.

 

I was discussing Communism recently and how it's the leaders, not the idea of Communist itself that get in the way of there being freedom in a Communist system.

 

well first of all where is their not freedom in socialist states? be specific please. also, questioning the presence of "freedom" as you state, often alleviates people from seeing what 20th century socialist states did accomplish.

how is me stating that in a communist system, people treat each other like human beings, hypothetical?

 

Yes, under a communist system the state provides you the bare minimum of what you need to survive. The people live like peasants while serving the state, as the ruling elite live like kings and have anyone murdered that gets in their way. Freedom of expression and all individualism is eliminated. That has always been the goal of communism -- to enslave the masses so the few at the top can live in immense luxury. Communism has always claimed to shun capitalism, though the ones controlling it are always supercapitalists and want it all for themselves with just the remaining crumbs doled out to the enslaved public.

 

Normal, freedom loving people who believe in individualism and personal liberties and responsibility do not accept communism. Most people want to own their own property and have the ability to make their own decisions and have their own unique beliefs without the state lording over them and dictating how they must live and think. There is no ideal communism, nor was there ever or ever will be. The entire philosophy of communism and socialism was crafted by wealthy elitists, because it's nothing more than monopoly capitalism in the hands of the rich and powerful. This stuff all originates out of places like London and Frankfurt, Germany, where all the big banks are located. I mean, just look at the people who funded the rise of communism. It was the internationalist, "capitalist" bankers.

So communism depends on the state because you can only bring about such a collectivist system through force and oppression, where you murder or imprision anyone who's not willing to play along. I am not saying I embrace capitalism, either, which too is an unnatural and inhumane system on the other end of the dialectic, though it's surely preferable to communism.

 

The illusion of freedom exists in socialist "democratic" states. But what exactly is democracy, which translates to mob rule in Greek? Again, what we have today in the West is fabian socalism, which works incrementally to bring about a collectivist system where individuality and personal freedoms are eventually relinquished for the "greater good" of the state. It doesn't matter where you go today, people are losing freedoms. That's what happens when you place such responsibility in the hands of the state in the name of the state being your daddy. You are really paying to have your own shackles built. Governments have never existed to help people, only to control people. That is the number one purpose of government. The bigger government gets under the guise of "helping" you and "eliminating poverty," the more out of control it becomes and totally unaccountable to the people who supposedly put these "elected officials" into power. Before you know it everyone is a serf.

Name me one communist system in recent history where people were treated like human beings? Over 100 million people were killed under communism. How do you consider that humane, or are just going to say the thing that most people say when they say "that's not true communism" (as if there is such a thing)??

 

i do not advocate a state. don't accuse me about me paying for my own shackles. and for fucks sake the definition of socialism meas all the members of society hold political power, and have ownership of the means of production. i dont give a fuck what "fabian socialism" is! thats bourgeois reformism. not revolutionary politics.

Spanish Catalonia 1936 to 1939, was an Anarchist-Communist society. the entire society was run along "each according to their ability, to each according to their need". the labour vouchers that replaced money reduced the cost of food, clothing, and health supplies more than halfway. according to Orwell, the amount of freedom in Catalonia was unprecedented anywhere else in the world. all of this was done in the midst of a very bloody war mind you. all agriculture was collectivized, public transportation was collectivized, and labor hours were reduced, and telecommunications were collectivized. (collectivized means the workers managed labor through councils, and popular vote)

all advanced socialist states (even deformed workers states such as the Soviet Union, and China) have free health care which increases life expectancy. the Soviet Union almost eradicated tuberculosis too. they also provide free education which accompanies the rise in literacy rates. they also pulled a large portion of their population out of poverty. 90 percent of China is below the poverty line. i am not arguing that mistakes weren't made, that would be ignoring the facts. im arguing against the notion that 20th century socialist states have done nothing progressive for their people.

 

That is the most gullible, naive thinking. That's why socialism never works like that. That is the utopian ideology sold to the public. It is impossible for any system like that to work without one person (or group of people ) becoming tyrannical and enslaving everyone else. That's why any attempt at what you're describing has resulted in the death and suffering of countless numbers of people. What you're describing only works at a tribal level. It would never would at a national level in today's world.

So now you're praising communist China and the Soviet Union (both creations of the West)? Even if that was true, who would want to live under an oppressed system where all freedom of expression is sqaushed and the people are ruled like cattle under an iron fist? I frankly would not want to live like that. Do you think the people living under the Soviet Union or communist China have a say in anything? No, they're expected to keep their mouths shut and let the state take care of them... or else.

 

oh come on, your hollow accusations are getting really boring. according to you karl marx was funded by the Illuminati. where the fuck is your proof of Engels, Kropotkin, Proudhon, Bakunin, Luxemburg, Kautsky, Tito, Bordiga, shit even Castro and Guevara being funded by some elite secret organization!? just curious have you even read any of this stuff? have you even read Marx?!

if socialism is so bad then what would be your perfect socio-economic model?

did you read my entire post? i said that im not arguing against the fact that there are faults in 20th century socialist attempts. you said name one communist system that treated people like human beings. i gave you one. then i went on to describe how the faults of oppressive regimes, distract people from the advantages. you made it sound like socialism has done nothing good, and everything bad. i disproved that by showing what GOOD things socialism has done.

also, you have only "proved" the bolshevik revolution was funded by the west. (if you could call one document that from what ive seen completely ignores the actual situation in Russia, 'proof') give me your incriminating document about Mao and how the chinese revolution was funded by the west.

 

Yes, people like Bakunin and Proudhon came up with all this before Marx. Marx was simply promoted by the bankers to promote this theory, which Marx saw as a spiritual force. The bankers saw it as the dialectical antithesis to capitalism. Marx didn't even write the Manifesto, as it was merely a rehashing of what Adam Weishaupt proposed in the 1780's. Keep in mind that people like Marx, Bukunin and others were all Freemasons. Communism at its roots is an occultic-masonic-kabbalistic ideology to bring about a world totalitarian state. The average person who embraces the theories of such people really have no clue what any of it is really about. This is an ideology that grew out of the masonic lodges in Europe to overthrow civilization and install what has long been called a NEW WORLD ORDER. All symbolism pertaining to communism and socialism is MASONIC, yet the average follower of these movements has no clue about what the symbolism means.

 

im not continuing this discussion. because all you present for an argument are conspiracy theories. and even if there all true, but i surely believe that they arent, communism, anarchism, socialism, whatever you want to call it, doesnt have to keep its "totalitarian world state grassroots". and karl marx wasnt a freemason. ive never read this, heard this, anywhere. and ive studied critiques of marx as well. and whatever evidence you provide that he was, doesnt really concern me, because hes just one guy. sure bakunin was, but im not a big fan of bakunin anyway, plus he recanted most of his views when compiling his anarchist theory! i mean come on, how can you base your entire argument on elaborate conspiracy theories. im sure there have been millions of conspiracies, all across the political spectrum. but do you really think if there was an elaborate conspiracy to bring about a new world order, do you really think that there would be any shred of evidence about it? even if their was, what happened cant be changed, and doesnt apply to what happens in the real world now because they would have to be dealt with in the present.

 

But it's not a conspiracy theory. It's a conspiracy fact. And yes, it's well known that Karl Marx was a high-ranking 32 degree Freemason of the Grand Orient Lodge.

What do you mean? There is TONS of evidence to support it as it's openly been admitted. What was written in books 70 years ago (and before that) is happening today, and these people (many of them) have talked openly about a New World Order. George Bush senior used the phrase twice, once during the State of the Union address in 1991.

The stuff I talk about is proven. Just because you haven't learned about it in school or heard it on TV, doesn't mean it's a conspiracy theory.

Also, read the thread I made in this forum titled 'Communism and Socialism'.

 

ok first of all, why the fuck do you insinuate that i learn everything from school or on tv. thats the second time youve said that. im the type of person who doesnt take anything on tv or school seriously. and i know reagan and the like have talked about New World Order. but thats just business as usual, the capitalist ruling class will do whatever it can to remain in power. its silly to think just because you have some evidence that you know whats really going on. of course the united states and the Eu are going to turn into fascist police states, thats capitalism! but there never going to get the whole world under a new world order where they control everything. you say communism is just the anti thesis to capitalism, and that its impossible to unite the whole world under communism, well what makes you think the NWO is going to work? and why dont you focus on how to fight it rather than find out every little detail about their conspiracy?

edit: ugh, im not talking about elaborate conspiracy theories anymore

 

What are you talking about? They already do own everything, including YOU! That's why you are nothing more than a HUMAN RESOURCE to them. Your body is bought and sold on the stock market. 99% of the public does not even have a clue about this.

They have maintained the illusion of Democracy to make you think you are free and that you have a choice under their system.

However, under the up and coming system, the public will be openly ruled with an iron fist, and we're already beginning to see that with the police state and legislation being put forward that makes simply criticising the government worthy of being deemed an "enemy conbatant," and thus subject to imprisonment and torture.

Well, communism does not unite -- it enslaves. That's what happens when you centralize all power into the hands of the all-powerful state. The New World Order has been sold as being about world unity, but it's not about uniting people as free individuals, but rather as peasants on the global plantation.

You can call it communism, neo-feudalism, fascism... it doesn't matter because all have the same exact outcome, which is enslavement of the majority for the benefit of the dominant minority in control.

Instead of simply criticising "capitalism," maybe you should realize that what we have today isn't even true free-market capitalism, which is non-existent. What we have today is crony, cartel capitalism, which is centered around a monopoly and serves only to benefit the corporations which control the state. The state is now nothing more than the military arm of the transnational corporations.

 

you dont think i know that the government doesnt care about me and only seeks to exploit me?

thats a given.

again obvious, thats capitalism advancing into direct fascism.

communism does unite. maybe some attempts at socialism have failed at doing this, but some havent. look at yugoslavia, they went through a monarchy, and fascist puppet states in like 8 years, and half their population was murdered. and who liberated the people from the fascists, and quelled ethnic tensions for 50 years? the Leninists did. in catalonia, there was a social revolution. that short lived anarchist communist society was composed of catalans, aragonians, and basques. and they flourished using marxist and anarchist principles.

and fyi, not all communists advocate a powerful state. your thinking of Leninists.

i never said we have a "free market". that is the biggest oxymoron ever by the way.

if you can critique socio-economic systems so well, then what do you suppose we do about the NWO?

 

http://www.wisconsinhistory.org/turningpoints/tp-043/?action=more_essay

The so-called sewer socialists in Milwaukee were able to reform sanitation, decrease corruption, and improve the quality of life for their city, while pissing off the 'elite' establishment at the time.

EDIT: I will concede that the most of the works of Marx (the ones i could understand at least) were mostly an attempt to stir up class struggles in order to advance his own agenda, a realpolitik if you will. Communism as an excuse to kill people is up there with religion in my book, but it's unfair to lump together the Stalinist slave states with every attempt at government regulation and workers rights.

 

true communism is a balance