The Communists are getting power.. again.. Oh GOD!

You fucking asshole. I take this personally. You don't know shit about communism do you? Do you have any idea... ANY idea at all what kind of hell communism puts people though?

EDIT: Sorry, I completely misread your post.

 

I'd like to see someone respond to this, makes a good point.

 

you say people dont do this.
give to the poor
under capitalist uk the rich are always
giving to the poor,but its for a different reason
tax ....

and you are right
communism was harsh on its people and still is,but its due to the fact that
one political system grows from another..{ under threat
of capitalists views,because the communists
were breed out off a political time
which allowed the rich to get richer and the
poor to die off very slowly,as in a life
time of poverty........}

just like what we still see today on a world wide view.

the only problem i feel the communist party
allowed was to stop growing as a party
and allowing the capitalists and the west
to be greedy and let companies take over
politics....................

so look to the past and today to see
why a capitalist world is bound for war.

no profit means a fair world
up the wages ,give all a standard of
life to begin with for them to grow

this is a growing idea on this planet...


love n peace from saff

dont believe all the lovely things
about the uk or usa....

your poverty is due to thier
greed...not just the religion
they fight but the companies
who run this world
too......

 

You keep saying our poverty, even poor people in the US and UK are richer then a makority of the world's population. And you still diddn't answer the original comment, i you believe in communism, why don't you give every die you don't need to charity or the poor.

 

Sorry, "giving to the poor" isn't good enough under the system you advocate. If you give anything less than 100% of your paycheck and possessions away, you are a greedy pig.

So? Why do you care why people give to charities?

Look to the past and present to see why a communist world would be bound for totalitarianism, corruption, and unbearable poverty.

If by "a fair world," you mean a world where everyone is equally poor...

Give everyone a standard of living? It doesn't work, mainly because communism causes the economy to implode, thus offering the government less money to redistribute.

No it isn't. Most of the world has realized how stupid communism is. The only places where it is a "growing idea" are among American and West European high school kids who think they know how to solve the world's problems.

 

Wait, reading back over this thread, I have no idea what you mean by that.

 

hi there

this world is far to deep in politics to blame one system of
ideas on the next so you see, one system grows to another
and this growing concern for the poverty of the world is
a need we can put right,if you allow yourself again to see
past the world of profit, then you will be believing a idea
of socialism..........

as for the young generation who think they know it all
well sorry to burst your bubble about these humans.
but they are the adults of our world to come and if they
see past the world of profit then the change is coming.

so they do know more than you can think of.

an implode of the economy for one system in one place yes
but world wide, the economy would be in mans hand
not the companies of the mps. or the royals as such
but you seem to press on with the fact that communsim failed
yes it did then ,but the ideas are now....
is this what you are scared of that a system of sharing
could work,if all worked together....what ever their culture.

so until we see a world wide system no system will work...
so this capitalists way can push those who care to
listen to other political views thats life.....to change

well as for poverty ,i see no level all who under a capitalists
government will be poor,if working class.
thats what the communists believe and so do
socialists today.....

so instead of trying to currupt this outlook
see why ,we could end world poverty...
we could end wars,we couuld end the terror
capitalists pigs put in our chidrens heads about
anyone different
to understand a change is better than trying to stop it.

i believe one day,we all will live better.

thank you love n peace from saff

dont be afraid of the future
its already here......

 

It has nothing to dow ith charities, and your logic is really, really wierd. How can we, communists, "just give our paycheck to charities, until every person in the world has the same standard of living as you"?

This is not how things work in the real life.

It won't help. If you want to help people you need to abolish the current system and change it to something better, just like slavery was abolished. It wouldn't help to give some dollars to black slaves in the long run. You need to change the status quo.

Communists organizations are not charity organizations either, but we do want things to improve for the working class, and we have our own beliefs on how society should be organised.

 

It won't help? I think the people who recieve from those charties would speak diferent. You're not exactly practicing your dogma.

 

It doesn't help in the long run, just like it wouldn't help in the long run to give a poor black slave a few dollars. The system is the problem, don't you see it?

 

The system seems to working to me.

 

Does it work in Somalia?

 

the US could do with a little TRUE communism. no govenment interference, just small indy communes poppin up everywhere, operating independantly but working together when needed.... yeah. we could use some of that.

 

Just curious. What do you mean when you say "true communism"?

 

Somalia's system is anarchy.

 

How can it be? I don't see anarchists represented in the country. Do you?

Last time I checked, Somalia had plenty of private newspapers, radio etc.

For example: Radio Banaadir, Radio HornAfrik, HornAfrik TV and so on.


The country is based on either Islamic (Shari'a) law or clan-based arbitration- The president's name is Abdullahi Yusuf Ahmed.

 

Anarchists aren't "represented" in any country. Anarchy is a non-system completely devoid of government. For someone to run for political office under an Anarchy party would be an oxymoron, unless maybe they promised to disband all government once they take power.

Also, a state of anarchy does not mean the absence of private enterprise, in fact private enterprise thrives under anarchy as there are no regulations on business and industry. Somalia isn't total anarchy, as there is a government struggling to keep things under control, but it's damn close, as evidenced by the lack of power the central government has.

I don't know what you think anarchy is, it seems just another word for communism, but it certainly doesn't involve government controlled media and industry, nor a country controlled by one centralised government.

 

According to www.dictionary.com:


an·ar·chism ( P ) Pronunciation Key (nr-kzm)
n.

1. The theory or doctrine that all forms of government are oppressive and undesirable and should be abolished.
2. Active resistance and terrorism against the state, as used by some anarchists.
3. Rejection of all forms of coercive control and authority: “He was inclined to anarchism; he hated system and organization and uniformity” (Bertrand Russell).

com·mu·nism ( P ) Pronunciation Key (kmy-nzm)
n.

1. A theoretical economic system characterized by the collective ownership of property and by the organization of labor for the common advantage of all members.
2. Communism
   1. A system of government in which the state plans and controls the economy and a single, often authoritarian party holds power, claiming to make progress toward a higher social order in which all goods are equally shared by the people.
   2. The Marxist-Leninist version of Communist doctrine that advocates the overthrow of capitalism by the revolution of the proletariat.

Not the same.

 

The dictionary can be very good, but from my experience, they are not good at political ideologies.

1. Communism
2. A system of government in which the state plans and controls the economy and a single, often authoritarian party holds power, claiming to make progress toward a higher social order in which all goods are equally shared by the people. (wrong)
3. The Marxist-Leninist version of Communist doctrine that advocates the overthrow of capitalism by the revolution of the proletariat (the marxists were the first ones to use the idea of "the dictatorship of the proletariat", not marxist-leninists. The dictatorship of the proletariat is socialism, not communism. Communism happens after the socialism according to marxist theory).

Communism is a classless, stateless society without markets or money (I'm not talking about USSR. USSR was socialist, and existed in order to advance to communism). Anarchism is the same thing. We just differ on how to get to anarchism. Go ahead and ask any real anarchist.

 

The comparison is not valid because communism is the ETERNAL giving of charity to whomever has the least (usually against the will of the benefactor). Communism wouldn't "change" this system, it would propagate it.

The belief of communism is that if your standard of living is higher than anyone else's anywhere in the world, it's because you're a greedy pig, and the government should take your property away from you until you reach an equilibrium with everyone else.

Therefore, since your standard of living is higher than other people's (as evidenced by the fact that you have a computer), you need to sell all your possessions and use 100% of the money to improve the quality of life for anyone with less money than you. You must do this for the rest of your life, until everyone has the same standard of living as you. And if you will not, then you're a greedy capitalist pigdog just like the rest of us, with the additional honor of being a hypocrite.