Political Compass

[The Man]

Oh yes, Mao was a philosopher, just like Marx. In fact, Mao's communist policy was about as close to Marx as there's ever been. I consider that more than sufficient reason to call him a raving lunatic.

There was nothing in Marx's theories that involved killing anyone, so comparing Mao to Marx is like comparing him to Gandhi. Sure, they may have all been significantly to the left of today's mainstream American politics, but one was a murderer and the other two weren't.

[Raistlin]

There was nothing in Marx's theories that involved killing anyone, so comparing Mao to Marx is like comparing him to Gandhi. Sure, they may have all been significantly to the left of today's mainstream American politics, but one was a murderer and the other two weren't.

"He who is permitted by law to have no property of his own can with difficulty conceive that property is founded in anything but force."
-Thomas Jefferson

Mao is the logical conclusion of Marxism.

[The Man]

The logical conclusion of Marxism is for the working class to rise up around the nation, create its own political party, and, by voting that party into office, oust the ruling class out of power. However, as long as the media remains under corporate control and people consider the media to be a credible source of information, that will not happen.

And I don't buy Jefferson's reasoning there. Just because I'm forced to share with my neighbours, I'm going to use violence against them? Unlikely.

[Yamaneko]

In a small population, like an Israeli Kibbutz, maybe. Larger populations require government to hold its citizens at gunpoint in order for the system to appropriate resources across said population. I sure as hell wouldn't share my hard-earned money/resources with anyone else unless I chose to, and if the government forced me I would probably resist, like many others I'm sure.

If it's not corporate media it would be The Party media. Sorry, I just don't see Socialism as a more productive system than what we have now. I mean, the smart people can still think for themselves and not watch Fox News.

[SoulTaker*]

Marxism is a paper government, it is based on an idealic humanity, people are lazy, greedy, selfish, and stupid, capitalism compensates for this, Marxism doesnt.

[Raistlin]

Capitalism doesn't compensate for anything - it's just freedom.

To me, capitalism is far more ideal than communism.

And I don't buy Jefferson's reasoning there. Just because I'm forced to share with my neighbours, I'm going to use violence against them? Unlikely.

if you're forced to share everything, how do I keep, say, a loaf of bread to keep myself from starving when everyone's trying to take it from me due to their entitlement to anything anyone else has? Only by force.

[The Man]

Society wouldn't allow people to take things from others who needed them. You wouldn't be allowed to starve, that's the whole point of a socialist government, things go to people who need them.

In a small population, like an Israeli Kibbutz, maybe. Larger populations require government to hold its citizens at gunpoint in order for the system to appropriate resources across said population. I sure as hell wouldn't share my hard-earned money/resources with anyone else unless I chose to, and if the government forced me I would probably resist, like many others I'm sure.

I'm sure many people would resist, because our society places an immense value on acquiring as much wealth as possible regardless of the detriment it causes to other people. However, the ideal of Marxism is that it would be a society-wide thing that the entire working class would agree to, and since the working class is the backbone of society, the ruling class would either submit or starve.

Of course, I don't see that happening in our current society. That's idealism for you.

If it's not corporate media it would be The Party media. Sorry, I just don't see Socialism as a more productive system than what we have now. I mean, the smart people can still think for themselves and not watch Fox News.

Ideally there would be room for all viewpoints, entirely without censorship except for things that are patently false and (possibly) obviously destructive and hateful ideologies, like anti-Semitism.