[QUOTE=mysteryman;22973171]Wow, You're an asshole.[/QUOTE]
Perhaps you could for once try to post something of relevancy to the thread?
[QUOTE=Synaesthesia;22976201]As I said before, when Marx talks about Private Property he is talking about the means of production, NOT the things that you own. These, in Marx's terminology, are known as Personal Property, and he says in the Communist Manifesto that Communists are not opposed to personal property that is "hard-won, self-acquired, self-earned" by the proletariat.[/QUOTE]
Isn't the whole idea of communism to make a classless society? How is that possible if an Aristocrat still has his giant house and fancy car?
[QUOTE=ProboardslolV2;22927779] as it inspired the most evil government known to mankind: The USSR.
[/QUOTE]
Nazis*.
[QUOTE]Isn't the whole idea of communism to make a classless society? How is that possible if an Aristocrat still has his giant house and fancy car?[/QUOTE]
Indeed. But the Aristocrat would not be a part of the proletariat.
Those who think communism wouldn't work watch this please :) [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l7AWnfFRc7g[/media]
Apply that to the economy
[QUOTE=Bllasae;22977498]Nazis*.[/QUOTE]
People's Republic of China
[QUOTE=StephenOrlov;22927918]Facepunch should be communist.
So we can all be a mix between Gold, Blue and Green.[/QUOTE]
Brown?
[editline]04:19PM[/editline]
[QUOTE=skifer;22977582]Those who think communism wouldn't work watch this please :) [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l7AWnfFRc7g[/media]
Apply that to the economy[/QUOTE]
Maybe society as a whole but i don't know if it'd work for the economy.
[QUOTE=Sigma-Lambda;22973219]Marx also wrote of alienated labor. It is possible to enjoy your job if you take pride in your work and the way your work improves society. If you enjoy your work and take emotional satisfaction from it, ie. you are not alienated in your labor, and you have your needs met through communal sharing of goods, then you have all the compensation you need for your labor.
Not hating your job, it's a radical concept to a lot of people, i know[/QUOTE]
Its more then just not hating your job. Alienation of labor stems from the fact that laborers work more then they need to to survive so the business can make profit. In socialism this system is a abolished and instead the proceeds of your labor (the 'value' you produce) entirely belong to you, instead of being appropriated in the form of profit. You work as long as you want to, as much as you need to survive.
[QUOTE=Earthen;22974999]Murder of innocents, well its implied but seems to always have been brought about through murder of innocents: [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marxism[/url] (point 3)
Quote for communal living: do I really need one? just look up communes[/QUOTE]
uh, proletariat revolution implies revolution which is usually against a government, so if a government is that bad the people will revolt, then they're not really innocent
now mind you, there are two types of revolution, reformist and violent. A country can become communist without a single drop of blood spilled.
humans still have a fucking concept of personal property.
[QUOTE=ProboardslolV2;22927779] he wanted essentially Canada.[/QUOTE]
what the fuck am i reading? Somehow I doubt Canada is Marx's vision of communism.
Marx book was pretty much putting everything on a big heap and sharing it. But there are always a few pigs greedier than the pig dogs on wall street who take a bigger bite of that heap.
[QUOTE=Synaesthesia;22976201]As I said before, when Marx talks about Private Property he is talking about the means of production, NOT the things that you own. These, in Marx's terminology, are known as Personal Property, and he says in the Communist Manifesto that Communists are not opposed to personal property that is "hard-won, self-acquired, self-earned" by the proletariat.[/QUOTE]
yeah, really, it's like fucking a few paragraphs after the private property part.
[QUOTE=Warhol;22972964]
mao wasn't communist[/QUOTE]
hitler was not a nazi
[QUOTE=tomcat13;22991845]hitler was not a nazi[/QUOTE]
Whether Mao was a Communist is, to me at least, irrelevant; The People's Republic of China, under his rule, definitely wasn't, that's for sure.
[QUOTE=tomcat13;22991845]hitler was not a nazi[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=Synaesthesia;22992119]Whether Mao was a Communist is, to me at least, irrelevant; The People's Republic of China, under his rule, definitely wasn't, that's for sure.[/QUOTE]
ok, tomcat, to be more precise, the PRC was not communist.
In that case, Nazi Germany was not fascist.
Mao was communist. So was the PRC.
They even called Mao the "Father and Savior of Communist China."
[QUOTE=zenhorse;22995041]Mao was communist. So was the PRC.
They even called Mao the "Father and Savior of Communist China."[/QUOTE]
No don't you see, it's not enough that he was a Marxist or that he was a member of the Chinese Communist Party, or that he founded a political organization that advocated the abolition of class inequalities with the eventual goal of a classless society. He clearly wasn't a communist because he wasn't successful and he just wound up killing millions of people. If you try to be communist but end up failing and killing everybody in the process then it "doesn't count" according to communist apologists.
The moar you know!
[QUOTE=Warhol;22993036]ok, tomcat, to be more precise, the PRC was not communist.[/QUOTE]
The Romans didn't create a republic.
[QUOTE=tomcat13;22994350]In that case, Nazi Germany was not fascist.[/QUOTE]
it was though.
[editline]04:16AM[/editline]
[QUOTE=zenhorse;22995041]Mao was communist. So was the PRC.
They even called Mao the "Father and Savior of Communist China."[/QUOTE]
name five policies of his that were communist
[editline]04:17AM[/editline]
[QUOTE=tomcat13;22995261]No don't you see, it's not enough that he was a Marxist or that he was a member of the Chinese Communist Party, or that he founded a political organization that advocated the abolition of class inequalities with the eventual goal of a classless society. He clearly wasn't a communist because he wasn't successful and he just wound up killing millions of people. If you try to be communist but end up failing and killing everybody in the process then it "doesn't count" according to communist apologists.
The moar you know![/QUOTE]
He didn't abolish class inequalities.
[editline]04:19AM[/editline]
so the congo calls it self a "democratic-republic"
is it?
Marx was a brilliant man an instead of wasting our time on studying the bible, we should be studying the Communist Manifesto.
I do dislike socialism however, in a country like America, Capitalism is the only thing that makes people work. Socialism also has been notorious for causing wars.
[QUOTE=M4 Sherman;22996373]Marx was a brilliant man an instead of wasting our time on studying the bible, we should be studying the Communist Manifesto.
I do dislike socialism however, in a country like America, Capitalism is the only thing that makes people work. Socialism also has been notorious for causing wars.[/QUOTE]
This is the weirdest post I have ever seen
[QUOTE=Warhol;22996163]it was though.[/quote] no it was not fascist because they didn't succeed
[quote]name five policies of his that were communist[/quote]
So then i imagine you believe that Agrarian Collectivization, Food rationing, using the proletarian class as the primary recruitment tool for his poltcical movement, trying to destroy "the bourgeoisie" as a social and political class, and establishing people's communes throughout the country are in no way related to communism? They're just fun things he decided to spontaneously do that had absolutely nothing to do with marxism or communist theory, right?
[quote]He didn't abolish class inequalities.[/quote] Hitler didn't get rid of all the jews.
[quote]so the congo calls it self a "democratic-republic"
is it?[/QUOTE]
We can play the label game all day long. The point is, what were their political intentions? What ideology did they subscribe to?
[QUOTE=archie200034;22977019]Perhaps you could for once try to post something of relevancy to the thread?
[/QUOTE]
Wow, that's a good idea.
But yeah, from what i've learned about communism, well actually more about socialism, I think Marx's view of socialism or marxism whatever you want to call his theory on it, was that it sounded like an ideal form of government. Everyone was equal. But it never took into account Human Error. Really humans in general, we are all not the same, and this system is wide open to exploitation. When stalin and trotsky took over and turned russia communist, they used a very flawed form of Marx's rendition. Stalin exploited the interpretation and used it to his full advantage.
[QUOTE=tomcat13;22995261]No don't you see, it's not enough that he was a Marxist or that he was a member of the Chinese Communist Party, or that he founded a political organization that advocated the abolition of class inequalities with the eventual goal of a classless society. He clearly wasn't a communist because he wasn't successful and he just wound up killing millions of people. If you try to be communist but end up failing and killing everybody in the process then it "doesn't count" according to communist apologists.
The moar you know![/QUOTE]
It's not what you say you're doing, it's what you actually do. Mao called himself a communist, but his political policies weren't communist at all.
Just like how you can call yourself a painter all you want, but if you never paint you're not actually a painter.
[editline]09:47PM[/editline]
[QUOTE=tomcat13;22996648]no it was not fascist because they didn't succeed
So then i imagine you believe that Agrarian Collectivization, Food rationing, using the proletarian class as the primary recruitment tool for his poltcical movement, trying to destroy "the bourgeoisie" as a social and political class, and establishing people's communes throughout the country are in no way related to communism? They're just fun things he decided to spontaneously do that had absolutely nothing to do with marxism or communist theory, right?[/QUOTE]
Mao did nothing to destroy the bourgeoisie. It was all rhetoric. And manipulating the lower classes isn't a communist belief, pretty much every major political movement ever has relied on manipulating the poor.
[QUOTE=Sigma-Lambda;22996761]It's not what you say you're doing, it's what you actually do. Mao called himself a communist, but his political policies weren't communist at all.
Just like how you can call yourself a painter all you want, but if you never paint you're not actually a painter.[/QUOTE]
Hitler called himself a fascist but his political policies weren't fascist at all.
See how retarded this statement sounds?
That's how you sound to everybody else right now.
[quote]Mao did nothing to destroy the bourgeoisie. It was all rhetoric. And manipulating the lower classes isn't a communist belief, pretty much every major political movement ever has relied on manipulating the poor. [/quote] He literally forced land owners and factory owners off of their property at the point of a gun. A forced collectivization that wound up killing millions of people. It was motivated by Marx's theories on collective ownership of the means of production. Don't fucking deny this.
[QUOTE=Warhol;22996402]This is the weirdest post I have ever seen[/QUOTE]
The exports of Libya are numerous in amount. One thing they export is corn, or as the Indians call it, "maize". Another famous Indian was "Crazy Horse". In conclusion, Libya is a land of contrast. Thank you.
[editline]09:54PM[/editline]
[QUOTE=tomcat13;22996817]Hitler called himself a fascist but his political policies weren't fascist at all.
See how retarded this statement sounds?
That's how you sound to everybody else right now.[/QUOTE]
No, his political policies actually were fascist.
Listen: just because you can make a comparison doesn't mean that the comparison is a good one. Yours isn't a good one.
Just because you can say that doesn't mean that it invalidates any statements similar to that. That's not how logic works.
[quote]No, his political policies actually were fascist.
[/QUOTE]
Name five of his policies that were fascist.
See I can play this stupid little game too.
[QUOTE=tomcat13;22996993]Name five of his policies that were fascist.
See I can play this stupid little game too.[/QUOTE]
No, here's the thing, he actually enacted those policies. You going on about mao "destroying the bourgeois" doesn't count because Mao didn't actually do anything destroy the bourgeois, he just talked about it. Whereas Hitler actually did take steps to exterminate undesirables and dissidents, Mao simply used communist rhetoric to manipulate the people without actually taking action to destroy the bourgeois and uplift the proletariat.
It's not hard to understand broheim. Don't take everything everyone says about themselves at face value.
[QUOTE=Sigma-Lambda;22997075]No, here's the thing, he actually enacted those policies. You going on about mao "destroying the bourgeois" doesn't count because Mao didn't actually do anything destroy the bourgeois, he just talked about it.[/QUOTE]
You can't be serious. Tell me you're joking.
[url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Leap_Forward[/url]
[url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cultural_Revolution[/url]
The redistribution of land and capital are central to Marxist theory. Are you really going to claim that forcing landowners off their land, abolishing private property, and the creation economic and social communes all across the country didn't happen? You're worse than a holocaust denier.
tomcat you are making a fool out of yourself
you're right in the sense that saying mao wasn't a communist is absurd, but you're 100% wrong in saying that the prc was communist. you repeatedly state policies that could be construed as communist, but you make the mistake of thinking these add up to a communist society
they do not.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.