IrascibleRedoubt Posted:

Look at Canada, they have a four party system. They have less crime in general. Less political uprising. Could creating a three or four party system help this? Discuss.

Canada legalized marijuana. I think that has more to do with their crime rate and lack of political uprising than the four party system does. Not to mention they aren’t in the middle of Vietnam-esque war and everyone gets free health care.

Vince Russo Posted:

I personally think that giving money to charity is a HUGE scam. I’d rather devote a few hours and help people myself.

Volunteering may work for you, but it doesn’t work for everyone due to time constraints or their pbumions (people who want to save the rain forests would probably have a hard time trying to get down there to hug the trees.) And unfortunately, you are right about a lot of charities being scams. That’s why you do your homework before donating. I, personally, will only donate to charities that use 15% (preferably 10% but there aren’t many of those) or less of their income for something other than their main purpose.

Amp Zaphrix Posted:

Damn right, man…

(Tokes)

Hey, puff puff pbum!Log in to see images!

Amp Zaphrix Posted:

(Puff… puff… puff…

...)

Uh… what was I supposed to do after puff?

you were supposed to tubmail me your bag.Log in to see images!

The greatest form of Capitalism becomes inherit in the fact the Hot Topic sells hundreds of thousands of Che Guerra tshirts every year at a 60% profit margin to kids who are raging against the capitalist conglomerate.

Paraone Posted:

The greatest form of Capitalism becomes inherit in the fact the Hot Topic sells hundreds of thousands of Che Guerra tshirts every year at a 60% profit margin to kids who are raging against the capitalist conglomerate.

Haha, seriously. Not to mention those t-shirts were made in sweatshops. Revolution will only come through contributing to the economic oppression of others!

Vince Russo Posted:

Absolutely AGREE.

Communism gets a horrible rep because of Stalin.. who did everything against the laws and ideals set by his predecessor Lenin. Stalin killed more people than Nazi Germany and unfortunately they were mostly his own.

Lenin killed about a hundred thousand but he only killed religious leaders and such. (something I as an atheist at least understand, though it isn’t very “human” to do such)

I’d like You to be more specific on the “understand” part, because right now I’m getting a very unsettling feeling that you don’t mind killing hundreds of thousands of people if they happen to not support your point of view.

The point is even Lenin who is considered one of the greatest Communist leaders in history (Deng Xiaoping is up there as well) had many failures among his morality and could not lead his people with a pure heart.

As much as I love the idea of a true communism or even to a lesser extent anarchy (I still feel leaders need to exist), the problem is that as humanity rolls on less and less people of pure and of “strong virtue” seem to exist.

My advice: get off the internet. Seriously, no wonder you’re getting bitter thoughts about humanity if you’re reading flamewars. Also, the idea of degradation of society is probably as old as any society. The very fact that humans are still out there proves that it’s not that bad.

But that’s a sidenote. My real point is, I’m starting to get very tired of that “I Log in to see images! communism, but I understand that it’s good only in theory” crap. It’s not even good in theory. People are not ants. The happiness of an individual is not achieved through happiness of the group he/she belongs to, or at least not primarily through it. The whole concept is wrong on so many levels, I don’t know where to begin. Maybe I’ll try to make a list:

* Since the goods are supposed to be distributed equally, you can’t get any reward for working harder. Also anyone who slacks off still gets as much as anyone else. The result? People stop trying to do their best, and instead try to work as little as possible. The ethos or work, which You mentioned later in your post, is destroyed.

* But there’s more to it: You forget that people have different needs. Since EVERY good is supposed to be distributed equally, there is no logical solution to how should, for example, books be distributd if only 50% of people want to have some. Continued…

Edit: Messed up the quote tags a bit

@Hungry – Yes, communism’s flaws might be to difficult for any government to overcome…but as I’ve said before, many countries have borrowed from socialist and Marxist theory. Even the most conservative American is very, VERY liberal (American conservatism is more-or-less ‘clbumical’ liberalism), and just because a country like France isn’t communist, doesn’t mean they can’t institute universal health care, or other socialist concepts.

HunyrgLiekTehWofl Posted:

But that’s a sidenote. My real point is, I’m starting to get very tired of that “I Log in to see images! communism, but I understand that it’s good only in theory” crap. It’s not even good in theory. People are not ants. The happiness of an individual is not achieved through happiness of the group he/she belongs to, or at least not primarily through it. The whole concept is wrong on so many levels, I don’t know where to begin. Maybe I’ll try to make a list:

* Since the goods are supposed to be distributed equally, you can’t get any reward for working harder. Also anyone who slacks off still gets as much as anyone else. The result? People stop trying to do their best, and instead try to work as little as possible. The ethos or work, which You mentioned later in your post, is destroyed.

* But there’s more to it: You forget that people have different needs. Since EVERY good is supposed to be distributed equally, there is no logical solution to how should, for example, books be distributd if only 50% of people want to have some. Continued…

I really suggest you pick up a copy of the Communist Manifesto.

Every argument you’ve placed here are myths, and are completely out of context of what Marxism is/was meant to be. But I’ll humor you and answer your concerns.

*1) The people are expected to put in as much as they receive as a whole society. This does not lead to hive mind actions (as you stated by your “ant” thought) nor does it give people the option of “slacking off”. Its a simple philosophy that is applied in Democracy (in theory) as well. You don’t work? You don’t eat.

Obviously it goes much further than that and the reality is a society based on Communism works under a prolific belief in their government and in their country as a whole, something America has not had since the death of Kennedy. Now democracy is so flawed that scam and con artists end up living well established lives for doing absolutely nothing or by getting by on the hard work of others. Tell me HOW IS THAT FAIR?

In Communism everyone is equal. Communism doesn’t fear and discriminate against race or sexual preferences. It doesn’t try and hold them back because of the language they speak or their personal spiritual beliefs. Communism re-establishes hope in a uniformed government that ACTUALLY cares about it citizens and HELPS them to achieve greater glory for their country, their family, and for themselves.

The American Democracy is HELLBENT on screwing over its people for every cent it can shove in their leaders pockets. Where as in a Communist government the leaders and the people are all paid the same.

*2) You speak of different needs? What is so drastically different of a need that someone would refuse to not only survive but THRIVE? Sure, not everyone is book smart and perhaps those people are better builders or artists. In Communism people are given a choice based on THEIR wants and their abilities.

No one is going to make Bob the Builder drop his hammer and start practicing biomedicine. Seriously. How you came up with that thought… I really don’t want to know.

EDIT: Sorry for the double post but the damn forums limit long rants. More coming Log in to see images! Vince Russo edited this message on 03/29/2008 3:55PM

HunyrgLiekTehWofl Posted:

* In fact, the whole idea of owning property is dicouraged in communism. Everything’s supposed to be owned by “the collective” which quickly translated to “no one”. And people are treating it appriopriately. Thus, the whole agriculture, for example, is of ****ty quality because no one cares about how the crops will grow. As thay belong to no one, it’s no one’s problem.

*3)Let me state simply that Democracy also doesn’t support owning your own property. Ever hear of taxes? Why do you pay them if what you’ve bought is already YOURS? Why is it if you cant pay your taxes, the American government comes and takes what is yours, because of a fee from the government on your land that was no longer theirs to charge for to begin with?

Communism does NOT alienate their citizens. The land you live on is property of the government, but it is your duty and probably in your own personal interests as well (no one likes living in squalor) to help your country and everyone in it. It’s hard to think that people would genuinely want to HELP the government being an American citizen and all, but the thing is the PEOPLE are the government and in “almost” every literal sense does that term apply.

HunyrgLiekTehWofl Posted:

* The graph of any hnatural ability in society will always resemble a Gauss bell curve. This means that people with above average abilities will always be a minority. Since communism promotes being avarage and punishes excelling in anything, it’s in their vital interest to be, coloquially speaking, to be as ****ing uninvolved in any communistic society as possible. And because since whe whole system works only if everyone’s supporting it, the government will do anything to keep them within the system. Which inevitably leads us to genocide. Yes, inevitably. The hasn’t been a single country in this world where communism worked. QED, I guess.

How do you know who has average ability? Do you base that on the lack of education that the American Democracy is notorious for ignoring? The American school system is so poor and dysfunctional that its only because of those children deemed as gifted (aka with lots of money) that give our country any kind of educational credibility.

If everyone was sent to Harvard and all schools were expected to teach all students with the same amount of fervor and pbumion that Harvard does it would be much more “fair” to judge people by their abilities, at least academically.

Perhaps there would be many people suffering from medical problems and handicaps. Well as we ALL know the American Diplomacy gets off on squeezing money from the poor and offering sub-par treatments and PHENOMENALLY high prices. HMO, PPO, Blue Cross-Blue Shield… its all bull****. Under a Communist government paid system there would be no worries about funding from the people.