Printable View
let's set up a scenario. in country x 100% of the population is christain. and beyond that they are all god fearing christians who are terrified of the thought of hell and are so scared that from an early age it is hammered in so hard not to sin they are very rarely tempted.
in country x there is no police or courts or laws or prisons. there is only the 10 commandments, the bible and people's own fear of breaking them that keeps the law intact.
is that a good thing?
No. It is an invasion of force. Even if the current generation is completely and totally for the idea, the moment a freak (i.e. a rational person) is born and dislikes it, it becomes involuntary and criminal.
It's never good when 100% of any population believe in something stupid.
Religion is good if taken with intelligence, if not taken just as a set of rules to follow under the threatening of some nightmarish fairy tale. This which you are describing is far away from intelligence.
Ouch, that is immediatley harsh niko, and Hachi. The use of the word freak being explained as rational, is ineed a little overboard. I would like the idea, if we were inside that little box; but we are not, and never will be on this world. With that I would agree with the concensus, that it just would not work.
What we are relying on here is Family Justice, policing, and other essential needs for a community. Like Hachi said, the moment a defiant child was born, how exactly could they punish him? All the other families would have to rely on the one unit rearing totally obidiant kids.
What would control the forign policies of this community? The community would have to work with the rest of the world as well. It would prolly be prone to so much ridicule that would eventually lead to violant attacks, etc. If there ever is such a community, I would be very suprised.
Bipper
it was just an idea on the role of fear when it came to crime and punishment. and an all seeing god capable of sending you to the fiery belly of hell seems like something that would keep people being happy and sin free.
the child thing brings up an intersting point. are disobediant children born? or raised?
If the country is run exactly like C#9 described, then I think it would be an ideal peaceful utopia. If all the people in said country agreed on the same principles, and they devoutly followed the Ten Commandments (i.e., Thou shalt not kill), then I don't see how it would be a bad thing.
Although, as in any utopia, individuality would be suppressed. So, no, it wouldn't work for human beings. Maybe for an anthill, though.
I don't mean to imply that it is religion that is stupid. It is the way that they believe, not that they believe, that strikes me as stupid.Quote:
Ouch, that is immediatley harsh niko, and Hachi.
Can't argue that.Quote:
No. It is an invasion of force. Even if the current generation is completely and totally for the idea, the moment a freak (i.e. a rational person) is born and dislikes it, it becomes involuntary and criminal.
Which is why theese kinds of things tend to crash and burn. It could work with small groups, though.Quote:
If the country is run exactly like C#9 described, then I think it would be an ideal peaceful utopia. If all the people in said country agreed on the same principles, and they devoutly followed the Ten Commandments (i.e., Thou shalt not kill), then I don't see how it would be a bad thing.
Although, as in any utopia, individuality would be suppressed. So, no, it wouldn't work for human beings. Maybe for an anthill, though.
If people were predictable enough to form the aforementioned society, I don't quite think I could stand living.
It's Totalitarianship, the goverment control's the people with religion and fear. But here's a question what would happen if someone broke some of the rules? Would he be killed? Would he be forgiven? Would everyone who broke a rule be hanged or burned? So no its not good it's a form of Fascism.
What you're describing isn't a dictatorship, though - it's a dreaded utopia, where people are enslaved to their own beliefs.
I think people should agree on certain basic rules and live by them... but also welcome those who choose not to live by these rules. When breaking these rules harms society (i.e, murder, theft, etc), society has a right to act against those threats.
ffguevera. well if someone broke on of the 10 commandments then the society does not act on it. if everyone had been indoctrinated to the required level then the sinner would be fearing god and on his hands and knees praying forgiveness. the idea is that they are so fearful of hell and god that they do not sin and if they do they beg for forgiveness.
there would be no court or system of punishment. it would be left between the sinner and god.
Utopia is identified with the ideal world. In the ideal world, individuality is not supressed. Well, at least not in my idea of utopia.Quote:
Originally Posted by DocFrance
now is being bound by indoctrination an invasion on individuality? they would not be forced to be christain. they would be brought up christain. and from then on bound by their own beliefs. is that slavery of the mind or just religion?
This is an interesting question. But what do you mean by this being a "good" thing? Do you mean good as in "Is it ethical for an outside country to let this stand?" or do you mean "is this a good way to operate a society?"
i meant is it a good society?
You mean does it work? Yes, probably. People would get on with life, do everything within the law, and nothing untoward would happen. Would it be productive? Yes, absolutely. With everyone so afraid of various sins you've got a complete lack of things such as unwanted pregnancies, extended families, drug use, drunk behaviour, and other things that seem to take up a lot of society's time. Would it be healthy? Probably not. There'd be little expression, and therefore a lot of repression. You'd have many neuroses pilling up on top of each other, which would most likely be passed down to future generations.Quote:
Originally Posted by Cloud No.9
Would it last? Again, probably not. As with all society structures, there comes a time when the general populace will become tired of the shackles they bare and anarchy will ensure. What emerges from that is anybody's guess. Rest assured that even the most stable of civilisations will eventually crumble from within.
Like all "ideal" ways of life there's good points and bad points. In theory, Communism is a "good thing". It makes sure that everyone cares for their own. In practise, it's rubbish, because the underlying principal of shared wealth doesn't fit well in a world where people are unequal. Monarchy is a "good thing". It maintains a stable form of government. In practise, it has problems of proving birth-rights, usurping, etc etc. Really you could look at any type of social structure and say "Well it would work, but it wouldn't work either". We've yet to find a type of governing that's stood the test of time (that is hasn't been overthrown/changed).
How can you say that if Communism has never actually been attempted. Not only that but you must first go through Socailism for a period of time before going towards communism. Oh and dont forget the condition's the USSR and Cuba went through such as Lenin dieing before instaling the Democracy he was planing to put in.Quote:
Originally Posted by Maxx Power
Because any sane person could think about what communism entails for about five minutes and realize its one of the most perverted political systems known to man.
I'm ashamed of you, Marx. ;___;
And why is it perverted?
We've had so many discussions on this in the past, so please go on and look it up - but simply put, it sacrifices the individual to the majority (i.e. mob). Since the only valid form of government is that which protects its individual citizens, communism (i.e. mob rule) is not even technically "legal".
It places the concept of the whole, the society, over the reality of the individual. There is no more flawed a philosophy than this.Quote:
Originally Posted by FFGuevara
And how is that Perverted? Communism is worker self goverment. You can do what you want as long as you can do it. Which in the end you'll recieve what you need. Anyways shall we get back on topic?Quote:
Originally Posted by I'm my own MILF
It's perverted because it assumes the rest of the community has any right to anything I create or earn, and that by extension they have a right to my time and how I use it. If they decide there's a need of plumbers, it doesn't matter if I want to be a journalist and it doesn't matter if I'm the best journalist the world has ever seen, I'm to be a plumber. Anyone who has any other idea of the practical results of Communism is naive.Quote:
Originally Posted by FFGuevara
At any rate, the ultimate problem is that it doesn't matter WHAT society you live in, you will still be required to work. And for most people, getting an enjoyable and satisfying job is out of the question. Capitalism is morally preferable, but ultimately more productive (Which brings about the end result of an automated worker society that much quicker.) but also allows at least some people to rise up to a position of wealth where they can give the next couple of generations of their family an easy ride. Which is better than the none which Communism would allow.
Not really if you dont know how to be a plumber then you wont become a plumber. You can choose what you want to be in a Communist society as long as you know how to do that kind of work. It's not like they'll force a dentist to become a Heart doctor or something. And it's not that easy to just suddentlly get rich especially if your at a working class were you wouldent even need such luxuries. Communism in other words is the ultimate Democracy, minus corporations , states , currency and goverment. Communism also erases lazyness since when someone is a doctor their a doctor because they wanted to become a doctor , not because of the money.Quote:
Originally Posted by I'm my own MILF
So what about the people who don't want to do anything productive at all? Do they do nothing and just sponge off the people who are being productive?
They wont recieve the benefit's of Society then. You have to do at least something that is considered work and productive.
That's a nice way of saying 'they'll be exiled and\or killed'.Quote:
They wont recieve the benefit's of Society then.
Communism sucks, because it eliminates freedom. Living with fear and hatred for a system that controls every aspect of your life sucks, too. Not to mention Communism is open to abuse from whomever's at the top... like has happened every single time Communism has been attempted.
No i said they wont recieve the benefits of Society. Which meant no house, food , gas and anything else you need.Quote:
Originally Posted by War Angel
There's would be no one on top and if there is he would have little power. And in reality communism has never been really attempted. You need a period of time under Socailism for Communism to work. And not to mention the condition's those countries went under (USSR Lenin dieing before instaling democracy) (Cuba suffering from the Cuban blockade) And Nobody under communism "controls" you. You are free to do what you like, you'd be alot more "free" under communism then under Capitailism in which you need money to enjoy freedom. Under Communism all you need to do is work. And you can enjoy a good life.Quote:
Communism sucks, because it eliminates freedom. Living with fear and hatred for a system that controls every aspect of your life sucks, too. Not to mention Communism is open to abuse from whomever's at the top... like has happened every single time Communism has been attempted.
At the expense of other people. It sucks for people with as much ability as me. I don't need much, so instead of being able to save it myself and invest the money to live more comfortably, I'd have a gun pointed at my head by the proletarian demanding my wealth. No different than a criminal, really.
Like Capitailism? Where at the expense of many countries only a handful are luxurious.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hachifusa
Your are of the working class correct? The only people communism doesnt benefit are the rich and upper class. During the Socailist period everything gets evened out. So everyone can live a good life.Quote:
It sucks for people with as much ability as me. I don't need much, so instead of being able to save it myself and invest the money to live more comfortably, I'd have a gun pointed at my head by the proletarian demanding my wealth. No different than a criminal, really.
Again, naivity. A complete disregard for the concept of supply and demand; also an unabashed and unreasonable faith that, given the choice between working and not working, people will choose working(And that there will be people who will actively choose to clean sewers.).Quote:
Originally Posted by FFGuevara
Communism does have some potential. It won't work well in a large country, but in small communities, it might.Quote:
And how is that Perverted? Communism is worker self goverment. You can do what you want as long as you can do it. Which in the end you'll recieve what you need. Anyways shall we get back on topic?
People do choose to clean sewers. People also choose to work. why do you think unemployment is such a hot-button issue? Ideally, under communism, people would be able to work and make a living based on their own choices.Quote:
Again, naivity. A complete disregard for the concept of supply and demand; also an unabashed and unreasonable faith that, given the choice between working and not working, people will choose working(And that there will be people who will actively choose to clean sewers.).
It did, at least here. The Kibbutzim did pretty well for a while... then, as the country developed, and people strived for more money, possesions and liberty, they got shut down, and turned into normal places to live in.Quote:
Communism does have some potential. It won't work well in a large country, but in small communities, it might.
Also, in Communism, it doesn't matter WHAT you work in - everyone gets paid the same, or don't get paid at all. The government takes care of everyone equally.
Erm, they choose it through necessity. Because if they didn't do it, they would starve to death.Quote:
Originally Posted by DarkLadyNyara
Communism is a stateless society and a Govermentless society. So a Communist goverment is a oximoron, there's only a Goverment (Weak on top of that) under Socailism. And whats so wrong with getting paid the same? Everyone will be paid a decent ammount of money and will recieve what they need.Quote:
Originally Posted by War Angel
Like under Capitailism? They have to look for work and whatever they find they have to settle for it along with the low pay that is included to it. Under communism you can choose what you want to do as long as you can do it. Even if they need more of something else.Quote:
Erm, they choose it through necessity. Because if they didn't do it, they would starve to death.
Well, yeah. Your point? It's still a choice. Some people choose to steal, some sell drugs, some clean sewers.Quote:
Erm, they choose it through necessity. Because if they didn't do it, they would starve to death.
Exactly.Quote:
Also, in Communism, it doesn't matter WHAT you work in - everyone gets paid the same, or don't get paid at all.
Yeah, exactly why it's the most corrupt, vile system of economics ever conceived. A scientist who has put in years of their life to learn his trade deserves more money for it than the guy who works at the local Wendy's, because he's worked a lot harder in so doing. I can't see how anyone could ever advocate communism.Quote:
Originally Posted by DarkLadyNyara
Their wont be Wendy's in a Communist society. And why is Communism so corrupt and "evil". Just want a explanation thats all.Quote:
Originally Posted by ?????
Why wouldn't there be fast food in a communist society?
Oh wait, that's right, because people are only supposed to take what they need. There's this little thing that goes against that idea; it's called human nature.
Ah, yes, the downfall of many an ideal.Quote:
Oh wait, that's right, because people are only supposed to take what they need. There's this little thing that goes against that idea; it's called human nature.
Actually because in a communist society there's no corporations. And exactlly how does human nature goes against communism? The truth is that if your raised in a Capitailist society your greedier then someone who wasnt. What do you think the socialist transaction is for? It's to lessen the greed that they've developed.Quote:
Originally Posted by ?????
Quote:
Originally Posted by DarkLadyNyara
Hesus Chist and Monkeynuts, I've started a battle over communism!
You say that there is no such thing as a communist regime (heh), but just to question: do you compare capitalism to fascism? I mean, I've read that a lot, and as an advocate of lassiez-faire capitalism, which necessarily requires a small, focused government that does not infringe on the rights of the people, it makes me laugh. Capitalism's pure opposite would be fascism. Communism is much more similar to fascism, because it denies individual liberty.
I've read The Communist Manifesto, and Marx makes some serious errors in his appraisal of the way society is run. What's sad is that there is a case to be said - most societies in the world at that time were in need of change, because they practiced capitalism with a class system based on inheritence (which is wrong, and destroys the virtues of capitalism). However, rather than explaining the importance of the workers as well, he goes on to denounce the "burgeoise", which is basically a hard-working individual who works for his own profit by trading his highest abilities with others. Yeah, really evil, Marx. Since the burgeoise didn't have to answer to the proletarian, he rallied the people to destroy ability for the sake of need. In other words, take over a factory, becuase somehow, a group of uneducated people know how to operate a factory without their managers. All right.
He created a morality that made it evil to be rich. Whereas you are paid for your virture in the lassiez-faire capitalist society, and you were rewarded for the amount you offered the world, communism states that to own money is an evil notion, and that the better you are the more reason you should sacrifice it. Then, he made the honest working man into a greedy moocher who sought to destroy achievement. Basically, he smurfed up the concept of both the rich and the poor and made them both villians.
There is a girl here, who was alive during the Soviet Union. She told me about her great-grandmother. In order to make enough to support her children, she set up a private enterprise, under the table, offering her services to the world in exchange for her children's lives. She was sent to Siberia, and when she came back, she was never the same. Her great-granddaughter, my friend, told me sadly, "She just wanted to be able to live. But it was said that those who wanted to really live wanted to do so at the expense of others." The idea was chilling.
But communism is motivated for a love of man, after all.
It has been proven over and over and over again that humans act primarily in their own selfish interests by the virtue of their being sentient. No matter how much communist brainwashing you give someone, you're never going to fully destroy this instinct; it is as natural as gravity or the changing of the seasons.Quote:
Originally Posted by FFGuevara
Thank you! You've just entirely proven my point - people don't choose to clean sewers, they are forcde into it through necessity. Luckily, while they're cleaning sewers they can also go to nightschool or save up for a computer/typewriter and start writing so they at least have a chance of bettering themselves. In Communism, the poor bastards who get theQuote:
Originally Posted by FFGuevara
end of the stick are, if you'll pardon the pun, stuck.
Little late on this one:
Actually, that's capitalism. Communism is: "do what's best for the collective society, and you'll get what we feel like you need."Quote:
And how is that Perverted? Communism is worker self goverment. You can do what you want as long as you can do it.
Human nature is a good thing. I consider the individual aspect of human nature to be a very good thing.Quote:
Ah, yes, the downfall of many an ideal.
A truth!Quote:
It has been proven over and over and over again that humans act primarily in their own selfish interests by the virtue of their being sentient. No matter how much communist brainwashing you give someone, you're never going to fully destroy this instinct; it is as natural as gravity or the changing of the seasons.
Silly pinkos. Is it "pinkos" or "pinkoes?" Pinkoes looks silly, so I'll go with pinkos.
There hasnt, no country has ever been really communist. Like i said you must go through Socialism before establishing communism.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hachifusa
Fascism is Racial supremacy and total control.Quote:
but just to question: do you compare capitalism to fascism?
Capitailism is Privatizing, profiting and control.
Capitalism involves explotiation , Profiting and Religion. And so does Fascism but in a much more Extreme scale. Do you even know what Fascism is? Dont forget Blacks were slaves under capitalism for profit.Quote:
I mean, I've read that a lot, and as an advocate of lassiez-faire capitalism, which necessarily requires a small, focused government that does not infringe on the rights of the people, it makes me laugh. Capitalism's pure opposite would be fascism. Communism is much more similar to fascism, because it denies individual liberty.
The Native Americans were nearly extincted for their land. All of that while under Capitailism to recieve the most profit.
Thats still how everything is runned in the majority of the world. Go to South east Asia and Africa and see for yourself. Workers are still oppressed, kids make your shoes for 5 cents an hour, 10 hours a day, under gruesome conditions. The only deference is the machines now are safer then the one's at that time.Quote:
I've read The Communist Manifesto,and Marx makes some serious errors in his appraisal of the way society is run. What's sad is that there is a case to be said - most societies in the world at that time were in need of change, because they practiced capitalism with a class system based on inheritence (which is wrong, and destroys the virtues of capitalism).
Managers are elected under communism by those workers. But will still work like everyone else.Quote:
However, rather than explaining the importance of the workers as well, he goes on to denounce the "burgeoise", which is basically a hard-working individual who works for his own profit by trading his highest abilities with others. Yeah, really evil, Marx. Since the burgeoise didn't have to answer to the proletarian, he rallied the people to destroy ability for the sake of need. In other words, take over a factory, becuase somehow, a group of uneducated people know how to operate a factory without their managers. All right.
While some guy in a mansion is enjoying all the luxuries he recieved from his dad's company. Everyone circling around him live's in slum's under horrible condition's. Even after working hard at their job's. (Is this the reward you were talking about?).Quote:
He created a morality that made it evil to be rich.
Whereas you are paid for your virture in the lassiez-faire capitalist society,and you were rewarded for the amount you offered the world,
................ Are you even reading my posts? Communism is a stateless society. There is no Communist states.Quote:
communism states
Achievement for who? The people on top who are recieving all the profits. Their the ones who are achieving. When has marx ever said thats its evil to have your own money? Under communism you'll recieve payment's which is your own money, untill you spend it.Quote:
that to own money is an evil notion, and that the better you are the more reason you should sacrifice it. Then, he made the honest working man into a greedy moocher who sought to destroy achievement.
Again the Soviet Union was NEVER communist. Real Marxism has never been attempted. It was at best Socialist in the begining untill Lenin passed away before installing democracy. What your friends great-grandmother went through was Stalinism.Quote:
There is a girl here, who was alive during the Soviet Union. She told me about her great-grandmother. In order to make enough to support her children, she set up a private enterprise, under the table, offering her services to the world in exchange for her children's lives. She was sent to Siberia, and when she came back, she was never the same. Her great-granddaughter, my friend, told me sadly, "She just wanted to be able to live. But it was said that those who wanted to really live wanted to do so at the expense of others." The idea was chilling.
But communism is motivated for a love of man, after all.
Actually its the other way around. Just how are the workers in control right now? Since their the one's at the bottom. Capitailism isnt wonderfull when your the one exploited. Live in a Third world country and see if you'll think like that.Quote:
Originally Posted by Raistlin
Seems like the "brainwash" has work for you guys.Quote:
It has been proven over and over and over again that humans act primarily in their own selfish interests by the virtue of their being sentient. No matter how much communist brainwashing you give someone, you're never going to fully destroy this instinct; it is as natural as gravity or the changing of the seasons.
A truth! Silly pinkos. Is it "pinkos" or "pinkoes?" Pinkoes looks silly, so I'll go with pinkos.
Why should the workers be in control? They're the ones who lack the knowledge and/or the motivation to earn more than minimum wage.Quote:
Actually its the other way around. Just how are the workers in control right now?
Anyway, in a free society, businesses aren't in control either. A business can only survive as long as people are willing to work for it and other people are willing to buy its product.
Also, one thing people like to ignore: a business is a piece of property, owned by, obviously, the owner. The workers didn't have the ability or the resources to start that business, so they work for someone who has. An individual typical worker is expendable; the owner and/or manager (when they're different people, the owner has the resources and the manager has the ability).
Two things:Quote:
Originally Posted by FFGuevara
This has been the result of all attempts at communist states, though is most notable in Stalinism and Maoism.
Why are Capitalist systems which aren't pure Capitalism judged on their real and current nature, whilst Communism may only ever be judged according to the theoretical ideal? Essentially; the problems with Cuba and the Soviet Union are to be swept under the rug because a perfect Communist system was not in place in either, yet the problems of Japan and America are aired for all to see, even though a perfect Capitalist system is not in place in either?
Because their the majoirty, and the most oppressed. This sorta reminds me of how people believed peasant's were "barbaric" and shouldent go out on their own and start something when Capitalism first showed up. To say a workers isnt educated enough to rule is like saying a peasant is too barbaric to have the same opportunity as a nobel.(Which is already a low chance the buisness will succeed anyway)Quote:
Originally Posted by Raistlin
But their a big factor in this "free" society of your's. You work for them, and you buy their stuff, major corporation's if they want can overthrow the goverment installing a corrupted version of Capitailism (FFVII everyone)Quote:
Anyway, in a free society, businesses aren't in control either.
I already know that. What do you think we mean by revolution? It's when the Workers stop working and unite against the Capitalist's.Quote:
A business can only survive as long as people are willing to work for it and other people are willing to buy its product.
And your point is? :confused:Quote:
Also, one thing people like to ignore: a business is a piece of property, owned by, obviously, the owner. The workers didn't have the ability or the resources to start that business, so they work for someone who has. An individual typical worker is expendable; the owner and/or manager (when they're different people, the owner has the resources and the manager has the ability).
But you must understand the conditions those countries went through. And why it ended up horriblly.Quote:
Originally Posted by I'm my own MILF
Because Communism is a flawed idea and Socialism is its flawed precursor?Quote:
Originally Posted by FFGuevara
Additionally; you must understand the conditions of the West, and what has gone right and wrong there.
Quoted for truth.Quote:
Originally Posted by Raistlin
What about other countries? Like in Africa , South East Asia etc. The conditions in those countries are horrible while under Capitailism, have you ever been or even seen how it is in those country outside the US? (Except for the UK ,Canada and West europe.) So technically speaking Capitalism has only work in the US, UK, France, Canada, Italy, Japan, Germany and Australia. Thats it, all the other's ether failed or got robbed by the countries that did succedQuote:
Originally Posted by I'm my own MILF
Capitalism isn't good. It has its flaws, and many of them. But Communism is far worse, in my opinion, as is Fascism, Nazism and any other oppresive regime-style.
Mild Socialism can be good, as can a mild form of Capitalism. Going to extremes (i.e, the regimes described above) never does any good, nor does it last for very long. Communism sounds like a very, very bad idea to me. I sure as hell wouldn't want to live in a Communist country. I like being free too much.
capatlism relies on explotation. that is a huge flaw.
Capitalism has one major consequence: it doesn't guarantee success. In a free society, the economic success is based solely on the ability and motivation of individual people.Quote:
Like in Africa , South East Asia etc. The conditions in those countries are horrible while under Capitailism, have you ever been or even seen how it is in those country outside the US? (Except for the UK ,Canada and West europe.) So technically speaking Capitalism has only work in the US, UK, France, Canada, Italy, Japan, Germany and Australia.
"Justice" is the virtue of neither giving nor accepting the unearned. Just as justice is so important in the legal system, it is equally important in the economic sphere.
So just a "little bit of freedom?" You can't have degrees of freedom; there are only degrees of oppression. You either have freedom or you don't.Quote:
Mild Socialism can be good, as can a mild form of Capitalism.
What always amuses me about liberals is their contradiction towards individual rights. If the government, say, invades a house or arrests a suspected terrorist without a proper warrant, the liberals go nuts, saying - quite truthfully - that additional security is not worth sacrificing our individual rights. This is physical security, mind you - protection from harm, possible death for those who have not deserved it. However, when dealing with economics, the liberals are more than willing to sacrifice whatever individual rights are necessary to insure the merely economic security of those who have not earned it.
So basically, it's not worth it to sacrifice individual liberties to save the lives/well-being of those who have not earned any punishment, but it is worth it to sacrifice individual rights to try to save the economic well-being of those who have earned their current state. I don't get it.
hachifusa you forgot those who cannot earn it. the disabled, children, anyone in full time education, the sick, those made redundant etc. and the born poor who are destined to die poor.
Charity, parents, get rich before you get the education, invest in healthcare programs (Or get them from your employer.), don't be a retard when you get paid (Ie save your money up in case this happens.), and work hard to better yourself.Quote:
Originally Posted by Cloud No.9
To iterate the first couple of points: You won't find a Libertarian among us who has any problem with helping other people. We object to it being forced. We do not object to assisting people who actually need and, as we personally decide, deserve help.
persinally giving aid only shows up racism and discrimination. treat everyone equally.
and what if your parents are poor? and why whould anyone be forced to rely on charity or postpone their education? (can't get rich that well without one in fact).
But Communism isnt a opressive regime. How can it be opressive if the people are in power? It's the description of the ultimate democracy.Quote:
Originally Posted by War Angel
To succeed under Capitalism you must get your hands dirty. Such as what the us has done. Why would you have Capitailism in which only a few countries succeed while under Communism everyone succeeds? It's a win win situation for anyone at middle class and under.Quote:
Capitalism has one major consequence: it doesn't guarantee success. In a free society, the economic success is based solely on the ability and motivation of individual people.
"Justice" is the virtue of neither giving nor accepting the unearned. Just as justice is so important in the legal system, it is equally important in the economic sphere.
Charity doesnt help, it's just a Capitailist scam to make the upper class look good. It only works temporarally. "If you give a man a fish he'll eat for a day, if you teach him how to fish the fish market will go bankrupt."Quote:
Charity,
Whats the possibility of that ever happing? Especially in third world countries. Heck you cant do it in the united state's unless you won the lottery.Quote:
parents, get rich before you get the education,
But not alot of countries have such policy's. Such as African and South east Asian countries. But South America has FREE healthcare for everyone ever since Socialism rolled in.Quote:
invest in healthcare programs (Or get them from your employer.),
So basically starve yourself to get a education? Alot of people dont recieve enough money to get education. Education is very expensive, you know? And people need somewhere to eat and live they cant just save their money.Quote:
don't be a retard when you get paid (Ie save your money up in case this happens.), and work hard to better yourself.
Libertarian=Conservative same thing. It's not right to force your idealogies on other people who dont want it. That's how wars are caused.Quote:
To iterate the first couple of points: You won't find a Libertarian among us who has any problem with helping other people. We object to it being forced. We do not object to assisting people who actually need and, as we personally decide, deserve help.
And I don't need to talk to you anymore.Quote:
Originally Posted by FFGuevara
Can I quote you on that?Quote:
"If you give a man a fish he'll eat for a day, if you teach him how to fish the fish market will go bankrupt."
Capitalism is not freedom, it is an economic system. And, yes, there are degrees of freedom.Quote:
Quote:
So just a "little bit of freedom?" You can't have degrees of freedom; there are only degrees of oppression. You either have freedom or you don't.Quote:
Mild Socialism can be good, as can a mild form of Capitalism.
the western world is free to willingly and knowlingly starve 50,000 africans daily. sometimes freedom is bad. freedom to exploit is not freedom at all.
Sure.Quote:
Originally Posted by DarkLadyNyara
Dude, you're the one who bitches about how we aren't using sugar-coated language to refer to communism, but then you call libertarians conservative?Quote:
Originally Posted by FFGuevara
You either need to define your terms or stop with the insults. We're not "forcing" our ideas on anyone. That's what we're laughing at - that's what communism requires. Establish a communist regime, please, and tell me that if I wish to opt out of the system if they'll kindly let me and leave. I doubt it. There is nothing I am "forcing" on people. I want freedom. You can't "force" freedom on people; that's ridiculous.
I went to a communist bookstore today, and let me tell you that it's quite sick. I mean, I don't really know how much farther to get with the communist ideas. I've listed reasons, and I could list more, but with people who insist that Americans are bloodthirsty and that capitalism is evil (oh noes!) and that individual liberty is a useless, outdated concept invented by the rich, there's no reasoning.
They do the same things. . And the things that they do deferent are very similar to each other. It's like comparing the National Socailist party with the National Action party.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hachifusa
Actually its uniting the people and revoluting. And when have i insulted anyone?Quote:
You either need to define your terms or stop with the insults. We're not "forcing" our ideas on anyone. That's what we're laughing at - that's what communism requires. Establish a communist regime,
If Capitailism is "Freedom" then stop forcing it in the Middle east. If they dont want it leave them alone. Those Jihads arnt attacking you for no reason. And what good is this "freedom" if for you to enjoy it you need money?Quote:
please, and tell me that if I wish to opt out of the system if they'll kindly let me and leave. I doubt it. There is nothing I am "forcing" on people. I want freedom. You can't "force" freedom on people; that's ridiculous.
Reminder Communism is a Stateless society which means everyone governs where they live along with the other citizens of that area. Which means individual liberty.Quote:
I went to a communist bookstore today, and let me tell you that it's quite sick. I mean, I don't really know how much farther to get with the communist ideas. I've listed reasons, and I could list more, but with people who insist that Americans are bloodthirsty and that capitalism is evil (oh noes!) and that individual liberty is a useless, outdated concept invented by the rich, there's no reasoning.
No, not really. The Libertarian party is into individual liberty, and the Republican Party wants God to come back. The Libertarian is considered advocates of the free market (like Republicans are supposedly), but are also advocates of social freedoms (such as freedom of choice and whatnot).Quote:
Originally Posted by FFGuevara
You called me a conservative.Quote:
Actually its uniting the people and revoluting. And when have i insulted anyone?
Uniting whom - and for what - and for what cause?
Agreed; the Libertarian party does not support the war, and neither do I. And if you don't understand what the freedoms of speech, thought, and property represent, then it's obvious why you don't understand the freedom of dissent (i.e. America doesn't put people like you in jail).Quote:
If Capitailism is "Freedom" then stop forcing it in the Middle east. If they dont want it leave them alone. Those Jihads arnt attacking you for no reason. And what good is this "freedom" if for you to enjoy it you need money?
That's anarchy. What if I disagree with the citizens of my area and I don't want to give up my money?Quote:
Reminder Communism is a Stateless society which means everyone governs where they live along with the other citizens of that area. Which means individual liberty.
Hey why are some of you saying religion is pointless but its not it gives people direction no offence but i am christian and this forum should be locked people might take this as discrimanation
I just simply said Libertarian=Conservative.Quote:
You called me a conservative.
The people for the people , for a better future.Quote:
Uniting whom - and for what - and for what cause?
I might of been overexagerating when i said that. Which i admit.Quote:
Agreed; the Libertarian party does not support the war, and neither do I. And if you don't understand what the freedoms of speech, thought, and property represent, then it's obvious why you don't understand the freedom of dissent (i.e. America doesn't put people like you in jail).
By that point in time you'll have the same ammount of wealth as everyone else, which is middle class.Quote:
That's anarchy. What if I disagree with the citizens of my area and I don't want to give up my money?
Point taken. Basically, it seems to be what the Republican party was intended to be. (But isn't). Correct me if I'm wrong.Quote:
No, not really. The Libertarian party is into individual liberty, and the Republican Party wants God to come back. The Libertarian is considered advocates of the free market (like Republicans are supposedly), but are also advocates of social freedoms (such as freedom of choice and whatnot).
Do you know what Communism is? Communism is where the majority rules without question or opposition, without any constitution or even common set of laws to prevent them. Communism means that if the majority believe sculpture is not a valid use of time, there will be no sculpture. Communism means that, instead of a person having their own labor hours to sell to others, those others have the right to apply the labor hours wherever they feel it is most needed. If you believe anything else, you need to stop and think about how your idealistic theory will work in practise.Quote:
Originally Posted by FFGuevara
it worked fine in israel. til they got big ideas and ruined a few thousand years of good stuff. it can work.
And why is that bad? Everyone can do what they want , at what time they want. And in return they recieve their need's. If you wanna learn and be educated you'll be educated. You wont be forced to work while in school.Quote:
Originally Posted by I'm my own MILF
No, they can't do anything they want if everyone else decides it's not ok. That's the whole point. In Communism you don't own your own time, and you don't own yourself. 'The people' do, which is probably even worse than the State owning you. Especially as any random media scare will make pediatricians hated. What if 'the people' get convinced that black people are best suited for physical labor? What if 'the people' decide Christianity is a counterproductive religion? That is the power which Communism gives to people. There is no choice, there is only what you are ordered to do.Quote:
Originally Posted by FFGuevara
Everyone is their own indivdual nobody "owns" you. How can slavery be cause if that sorta of ethecity is also part of the people? Communism is pure Atheist which means theres no god. Even though by the time the world is fully communist they probablly will even forget what Christianity is. You can do what you want as long as you dont hurt no one, everyone is a part of the community, everyone has a say in everything. For racism to haapen would be impossible like i said since minorities will also have power.Quote:
No, they can't do anything they want if everyone else decides it's not ok. That's the whole point. In Communism you don't own your own time, and you don't own yourself. 'The people' do, which is probably even worse than the State owning you. Especially as any random media scare will make pediatricians hated. What if 'the people' get convinced that black people are best suited for physical labor? What if 'the people' decide Christianity is a counterproductive religion? That is the power which Communism gives to people. There is no choice, there is only what you are ordered to do.
I highly doubt every bible will be destroyed by then.Quote:
Originally Posted by FFGuevara
Maybe but nobody wont believe in them.
Mob rule (Which is what the highest forms of democracy are.) makes institutionalised racism more than possible. Indeed it makes it pretty much inevitable. There is absolutely no way to reconcile the concept of freedom and the concept of owing anything to anyone else, other than their own right to freedom. Responsibility to others is a choice, not a duty.Quote:
Originally Posted by FFGuevara
Everyone is in control. such Racist actions cannot be performed since not everyone will agree with it. Especially if the Majority is Atheist. Usually racism is caused by religious beliefs so if there arnt that mant people who are religious how can such belief be performed?Quote:
Originally Posted by I'm my own MILF
Exactlly and in Communism its not a duty. Your not forced to choose for others and no one chooses for you.Quote:
There is absolutely no way to reconcile the concept of freedom and the concept of owing anything to anyone else, other than their own right to freedom. Responsibility to others is a choice, not a duty.
I know plenty of racist athiest people, to begin with. Secondly, am I correct in thinking that every single individual will have the power to veto anything? What if some lunatic decides that life = suffering and therefore vetos the irrigation project?Quote:
Originally Posted by FFGuevara
So how does a Communist society deal with people who simply don't work?Quote:
Exactlly and in Communism its not a duty. Your not forced to choose for others and no one chooses for you.Quote:
There is absolutely no way to reconcile the concept of freedom and the concept of owing anything to anyone else, other than their own right to freedom. Responsibility to others is a choice, not a duty.
The record for longest time without food for a human-being is around 90 days. A normal human, however, lasts for considerably shorter periods of time after being shot or gassed. Freezing to death in the Gulags tends to have similiar results.Quote:
So how does a Communist society deal with people who simply don't work?
Are you actually judging that from US propaganda and Stalinism? Or did you even research what happens to none workers under Marxism? And to answer I'm my own MILF's question. Nothing happens,(No literally) they wont recieve nothing you dont work you wont recieve the benefits.Quote:
Originally Posted by War Angel
So they are working under threat of starvation. How is this in any way not force?Quote:
Originally Posted by FFGuevara
that's also the threat under laissez faire capatilism.
Exactly. You're not negating my point (US propoganda? WTF?). They recieve nothing, and since you can't BUY anything, they startve to death. Well, I suppose they could live on refuse and life in the wild or something... but that's the way to live for a very harsh individual - not a large, lazy majority.Quote:
they wont recieve nothing you dont work you wont recieve the benefits.
starving is also the product of not working in a capitalist society and even more so in a laissez-faire one.
so where's the beef?
In a capitalist society the able (And yes, sometimes the lucky) can earn their lifetime's keep in a few years. People start their own business, run it well, and retire at 40. I say good for them. How can I say this under Communism?Quote:
Originally Posted by Cloud No.9
Edit: At any rate my point wasn't that capitalism didn't in a way necessitate this, it was that claims that Communism doesn't employ force are farcical.
all economic systems employ force in that manner. wanna eat? then work.
I know that. Sweet Jesus. I've been saying exactly that. My point is that claims such as "Nothing happens,(No literally) they wont recieve nothing you dont work you wont recieve the benefits." are hardly examples of anything other than the application of force.Quote:
Originally Posted by Cloud No.9
then to have any society that doesn't apply any such force you need to give everyone everything required. that's socialism..........
No, you need to have a system which gives everyone everything required without requiring anything in exchange. And I mean time and expertise, not money. If there was a system whereby everyone had everything they needed, and nobody anywhere had to work to produce any of it, then I would support that system fully. Socialism is not that system. Unless there's a legion of Swedish robots I don't know about.Quote:
Originally Posted by Cloud No.9
What's the possibility of that buisness ever succeding? Very low, Restuarants which have the lowest possibility to failer, Has a 75 percent of failing. And what do you get under Capitailism if you dont work? And just how much do workers get? They have to compensate with instant noodle's and fast food. And if they lose a job it's a pain to find one it would take weeks even months. While under communism there is always a job. If your dont work under Communism and starve to death it's because of your own stupidity and lazyness.Quote:
Originally Posted by I'm my own MILF
Do you know how many times the US goverment has lied to you guys for? Come on "Terrorist who hate freedom" i cant believe anyone believes something so far fetched. Not to mention the incredible ammount of hate for Communism in the US which was because of propaganda.Quote:
Exactly. You're not negating my point (US propoganda? WTF?).
That also happens under Capitailism but it's not because of that person falt. You boss decides your pay, if he lowers it you have to accept. If you quit you'll be spending weeks or even months looking for another job. In which untill then you recieve nothing.Quote:
They recieve nothing, and since you can't BUY anything, they startve to death.
Fair point on that one. However, the job I could get will be extremely limited: It will be either whatever everyone else doesn't want to do, or it will be a piece of sheer luck which frees a decent job up quickly.Quote:
Originally Posted by FFGuevara
Actually, the Communism didn't need much propoganda. It is so antithetical to every single value America was founded on that it was pertty superfluous to tell people how evil it was.Quote:
Do you know how many times the US goverment has lied to you guys for? Come on "Terrorist who hate freedom" i cant believe anyone believes something so far fetched. Not to mention the incredible ammount of hate for Communism in the US which was because of propaganda.Quote:
Exactly. You're not negating my point (US propoganda? WTF?).
Oh yeah, and Stalin killed tens of millions of people. That's always good for propoganda.
[/quote]Quote:
That also happens under Capitailism but it's not because of that person falt. You boss decides your pay, if he lowers it you have to accept. If you quit you'll be spending weeks or even months looking for another job. In which untill then you recieve nothing.Quote:
They recieve nothing, and since you can't BUY anything, they startve to death.
It's called saving up and investing wisely.
You can choose you job even if they need people for other job's.Quote:
Originally Posted by I'm my own MILF
[quote]What point? The one which was cooked up by the united states?Quote:
Exactly. You're not negating my point (US propoganda? WTF?).
Yeah at a American point of view.Quote:
Actually, the Communism didn't need much propoganda. It is so antithetical to every single value America was founded on that it was pertty superfluous to tell people how evil it was.
So your goverment based it on Stalin and Stalinism that is propaganda? Stalin can burn. And he actually killed 1.4 million.Quote:
Oh yeah, and Stalin killed tens of millions of people. That's always good for propoganda.
With what? They need to eat and live somewhere. At some point they'll run out of money if they dont work for long.Quote:
It's called saving up and investing wisely.
stalin killed approximately 50 million.
You have no idea of how Communism would actually work in reality, do you? You do not own yourself. 'The People' own you..Quote:
Originally Posted by FFGuevara
NoQuote:
Quote:
Do you know how many times the US goverment has lied to you guys for? Come on "Terrorist who hate freedom" i cant believe anyone believes something so far fetched. Not to mention the incredible ammount of hate for Communism in the US which was because of propaganda.Quote:
Exactly. You're not negating my point (US propoganda? WTF?).
Yeah at a American point of view.Quote:
Actually, the Communism didn't need much propoganda. It is so antithetical to every single value America was founded on that it was pertty superfluous to tell people how evil it was.
In the history of Earth, only Mao and Genghis Khan have killed more. Thirty million, excluding WW2, is a generous estimate. It was probably far higher.Quote:
So your goverment based it on Stalin and Stalinism that is propaganda? Stalin can burn. And he actually killed 1.4 million.Quote:
Oh yeah, and Stalin killed tens of millions of people. That's always good for propoganda.
With what? They need to eat and live somewhere. At some point they'll run out of money if they dont work for long.[/QUOTE]Quote:
It's called saving up and investing wisely.
With the money they are getting WHEN THEY HAVE A JOB. My God, does it really escape people so much to not buy Black and White 2, and save the fifty bucks up in case something happens? And they use the money they save up to carry them over in case of redundancy. And that's why one has friends and family.
Easy Pickings for warmongering nations
Sort of. It was the sort of society the Founding Fathers had sort of envisoned. Whatever the conservatives might claim here in America, they are not what the founders wanted when they came upon America. I mean, hell, most of them were athiests, anyway.Quote:
Originally Posted by DarkLadyNyara
A country ruled by paranioa? Huh, sounds like the U.S. right now. What danger level are we on again?Quote:
Originally Posted by Cloud No.9