World Republic

Uniting All People!
 
HomeHome  FAQFAQ  SearchSearch  RegisterRegister  UsergroupsUsergroups  Log in  

Share | 
 

 Why is this the image people think of

View previous topic View next topic Go down 
Go to page : Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
AuthorMessage
Jeiro Sijakeuigwan
Experienced Party Member


Posts : 974
Join date : 2008-02-03
Age : 26
Location : The Circle of Flow

PostSubject: Re: Why is this the image people think of   Thu Apr 03, 2008 4:07 am

Orly? I suppose the use of "pinko" is an extremely nice justification of "commies are ebil". Rolling Eyes Look around you and I'm sure you'll find no "killer commies" here.

Quote :
Fuck that, I'll take what's mine and earn what I can.

Oh? You wouldn't even help your family? Suppose EVERYBODY in the entire world was dying and living poorly around you, because of "neoliberal" capitalism.

What do you do then? Think about that LONG and HARD.

It's completely obvious you have NO idea or concept of wellbeing, since all you care about is the greens. Hardcore capitalism justifying the empire once again?

Well, tell you what. Green is simply paper. That's it. Nothing less, nothing more.

You sound VERY familiar however...

nihahahahaha! >:3

_________________
"I'll live on...in the hearts of the people I know... It's my own choice now."
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Diogritor
Experienced Party Member


Posts : 869
Join date : 2008-01-13
Age : 25
Location : USA USA USA

PostSubject: Re: Why is this the image people think of   Thu Apr 03, 2008 5:45 am

[quote="Ryom"]just thought ill post it Smile quote]
i lold
Back to top Go down
View user profile
nillerz
Arrested


Posts : 288
Join date : 2008-04-02
Age : 26
Location : Western NY

PostSubject: Re: Why is this the image people think of   Thu Apr 03, 2008 6:55 am

Jeiro Sijakeuigwan wrote:
Orly? I suppose the use of "pinko" is an extremely nice justification of "commies are ebil". Rolling Eyes Look around you and I'm sure you'll find no "killer commies" here.

What's wrong with the word pinko? You can't say it's an offensive way to say commie, because most people use commie as an insult anyway.

Quote :
Quote :
Fuck that, I'll take what's mine and earn what I can.

Oh? You wouldn't even help your family? Suppose EVERYBODY in the entire world was dying and living poorly around you, because of "neoliberal" capitalism.

My family, yes, I'll help because we're family. You? That depends. I won't feed you or take care of you. I'll hold the door open for you, I'll stop so you can cross the street, I'll call an ambulance if you're hit by a car. But, if you're looking for a handout, look elsewhere.

Quote :
What do you do then? Think about that LONG and HARD.

I'm not a neo-liberal capitalist. I'm just a capitalist.

If I had the ability, I'd pull you all out of the gutter, hire you to work in my business, and make myself out to be a god. People will lookon and think, "Wow, what a great man, giving those people jobs and putting them back on their feet!"

You'll be happy as you're working a job and spending the fruit of your labor. I'll be happy as I'm really quite rich now.

Quote :
It's completely obvious you have NO idea or concept of wellbeing, since all you care about is the greens. Hardcore capitalism justifying the empire once again?

I believe if you want anything in this world you have to work for it. It's not given to you. That means when you have it it's worth that much more to you, knowing you worked hard to get it. Sure, I could live in a homeless shelter, I could beg all day for food, but I decided not to. I'm going to make money if I want. If I don't feel like making money, I'll just have to content myself knowing that that was my choice. Everybody working to their ability and getting what their ability rewards them is my dream. If you don't work, you don't even get my handout.

Quote :
Well, tell you what. Green is simply paper. That's it. Nothing less, nothing more.
Green is a color, paper is processed wood fiber, Money is much much more than that. It's not just cloth. It says "I have a dollar, I worked hard for that dollar, and I will spend that dollar on what I feel I should, because it's mine, and I earned it".
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://nillerz.net
mononokifool
Experienced Party Member


Posts : 838
Join date : 2008-03-30
Age : 28
Location : Florida

PostSubject: Re: Why is this the image people think of   Thu Apr 03, 2008 7:03 am

Well...at least you stick to you guns lol. We are a group of evil Communist. We believe that every person is born with innate rights as a human being. He has the right to see a doctor, he has the right to have a house, he has the right to have a job and support his family, and he has a right to be treated as an equal no matter where he is from. Why should a government not provide people with that.

_________________
Back to top Go down
View user profile
nillerz
Arrested


Posts : 288
Join date : 2008-04-02
Age : 26
Location : Western NY

PostSubject: Re: Why is this the image people think of   Thu Apr 03, 2008 7:19 am

mononokifool wrote:
Well...at least you stick to you guns lol. We are a group of evil Communist. We believe that every person is born with innate rights as a human being. He has the right to see a doctor, he has the right to have a house, he has the right to have a job and support his family, and he has a right to be treated as an equal no matter where he is from. Why should a government not provide people with that.
Because the government's job is to protect the citizens from foreign invasion, build roads and highways, and prevent crime. If you give them other powers, they will abuse them in 100 percent of cases. The best option is deny them the power. Sure, it may sound good to let the government give everyone healthcare, but then they control your health. What if the government decides a certain operation is immoral, even with consent? They can do whatever they want to the healthcare system.

It's much better to keep everything in the private sector. If 2 hospitals are competing, they'll try to offer the best services at the lowest price to undercut the other hospital. If there's only one government owned hospital, who are they competing with? They can jack up the prices as much as possible. Even if its "free" healthcare, who's paying the doctors? Who's paying the guys who pay the doctors? We are.

Also, yeah, people should be treated as an equal until they prove themselves insufficient. Should Hitler be treated equal?
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://nillerz.net
mononokifool
Experienced Party Member


Posts : 838
Join date : 2008-03-30
Age : 28
Location : Florida

PostSubject: Re: Why is this the image people think of   Thu Apr 03, 2008 7:45 am

nillerz wrote:
mononokifool wrote:
Well...at least you stick to you guns lol. We are a group of evil Communist. We believe that every person is born with innate rights as a human being. He has the right to see a doctor, he has the right to have a house, he has the right to have a job and support his family, and he has a right to be treated as an equal no matter where he is from. Why should a government not provide people with that.
Because the government's job is to protect the citizens from foreign invasion, build roads and highways, and prevent crime. If you give them other powers, they will abuse them in 100 percent of cases. The best option is deny them the power. Sure, it may sound good to let the government give everyone healthcare, but then they control your health. What if the government decides a certain operation is immoral, even with consent? They can do whatever they want to the healthcare system.

It's much better to keep everything in the private sector. If 2 hospitals are competing, they'll try to offer the best services at the lowest price to undercut the other hospital. If there's only one government owned hospital, who are they competing with? They can jack up the prices as much as possible. Even if its "free" healthcare, who's paying the doctors? Who's paying the guys who pay the doctors? We are.

Also, yeah, people should be treated as an equal until they prove themselves insufficient. Should Hitler be treated equal?
How will the people be paying? There are no taxes. Also we still believe in the democratic process so it leaves less room for corruption

_________________
Back to top Go down
View user profile
mattabesta
Chairman of the Supreme Council


Posts : 3936
Join date : 2007-12-23
Age : 22
Location : Iceland

PostSubject: Re: Why is this the image people think of   Thu Apr 03, 2008 12:39 pm

nillerz wrote:
mononokifool wrote:
Well...at least you stick to you guns lol. We are a group of evil Communist. We believe that every person is born with innate rights as a human being. He has the right to see a doctor, he has the right to have a house, he has the right to have a job and support his family, and he has a right to be treated as an equal no matter where he is from. Why should a government not provide people with that.
Because the government's job is to protect the citizens from foreign invasion, build roads and highways, and prevent crime. If you give them other powers, they will abuse them in 100 percent of cases. The best option is deny them the power. Sure, it may sound good to let the government give everyone healthcare, but then they control your health. What if the government decides a certain operation is immoral, even with consent? They can do whatever they want to the healthcare system.

It's much better to keep everything in the private sector. If 2 hospitals are competing, they'll try to offer the best services at the lowest price to undercut the other hospital. If there's only one government owned hospital, who are they competing with? They can jack up the prices as much as possible. Even if its "free" healthcare, who's paying the doctors? Who's paying the guys who pay the doctors? We are.

Also, yeah, people should be treated as an equal until they prove themselves insufficient. Should Hitler be treated equal?

your a good pwner
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://Pichunter.com
Ryom
Senior Komsomol Member


Posts : 217
Join date : 2008-01-27
Age : 24
Location : The Fly On The Wall

PostSubject: Re: Why is this the image people think of   Thu Apr 03, 2008 1:52 pm

nillerz wrote:
If 2 hospitals are competing, they'll try to offer the best services at the lowest price to undercut the other hospital.
or they will form a cartel with organized prices, and they are free to jack up the prices as they want to

nillerz wrote:
Also, yeah, people should be treated as an equal until they prove themselves insufficient. Should Hitler be treated equal?
Hitler was a mass murderer, and should be treated as one. what if a boy who had the brain of genius but his mom and dad is poor, that means he has to work in factory to support his family, and he couldnt be the genius that he has the mind of because his mom and dad couldnt pay for his education, did he prove him self ¨insufficient¨?
Back to top Go down
View user profile
mononokifool
Experienced Party Member


Posts : 838
Join date : 2008-03-30
Age : 28
Location : Florida

PostSubject: Re: Why is this the image people think of   Thu Apr 03, 2008 6:50 pm

mattabesta wrote:
nillerz wrote:
mononokifool wrote:
Well...at least you stick to you guns lol. We are a group of evil Communist. We believe that every person is born with innate rights as a human being. He has the right to see a doctor, he has the right to have a house, he has the right to have a job and support his family, and he has a right to be treated as an equal no matter where he is from. Why should a government not provide people with that.
Because the government's job is to protect the citizens from foreign invasion, build roads and highways, and prevent crime. If you give them other powers, they will abuse them in 100 percent of cases. The best option is deny them the power. Sure, it may sound good to let the government give everyone healthcare, but then they control your health. What if the government decides a certain operation is immoral, even with consent? They can do whatever they want to the healthcare system.

It's much better to keep everything in the private sector. If 2 hospitals are competing, they'll try to offer the best services at the lowest price to undercut the other hospital. If there's only one government owned hospital, who are they competing with? They can jack up the prices as much as possible. Even if its "free" healthcare, who's paying the doctors? Who's paying the guys who pay the doctors? We are.

Also, yeah, people should be treated as an equal until they prove themselves insufficient. Should Hitler be treated equal?

your a good pwner
Your random pwn's are not in good places. Arrow

_________________
Back to top Go down
View user profile
mattabesta
Chairman of the Supreme Council


Posts : 3936
Join date : 2007-12-23
Age : 22
Location : Iceland

PostSubject: Re: Why is this the image people think of   Thu Apr 03, 2008 8:05 pm

Ryom wrote:
nillerz wrote:
If 2 hospitals are competing, they'll try to offer the best services at the lowest price to undercut the other hospital.
or they will form a cartel with organized prices, and they are free to jack up the prices as they want to

nillerz wrote:
Also, yeah, people should be treated as an equal until they prove themselves insufficient. Should Hitler be treated equal?
Hitler was a mass murderer, and should be treated as one. what if a boy who had the brain of genius but his mom and dad is poor, that means he has to work in factory to support his family, and he couldnt be the genius that he has the mind of because his mom and dad couldnt pay for his education, did he prove him self ¨insufficient¨?

my grandfather was a fisherman and now my unchel(his son) has an annual salary of 400,000$
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://Pichunter.com
Steel
Pioneer Leader


Posts : 92
Join date : 2008-04-02
Location : UK

PostSubject: Re: Why is this the image people think of   Thu Apr 03, 2008 9:26 pm

Quote :
What would you call a violent uprising of the proletariat against the upper classes in order to maintain a classless society?

What does that even mean? If there are proletarians and “upper classes” then by definition it is not a classless society.
However, I'll assume you said:
“What would you call a violent uprising of the proletariat against the upper classes in order to create a classless society?”
Classlessness is not the single defining characteristic of a communist society.
A communist society would be stateless and moneyless, with all of societies products available to all for free (amoungst other features). It is an inexcusable oversimplification to say communism is defined by 'classlessness' alone.

Quote :
No, it's one that aptly describes practiced communism.

Really? Would you like to back that up with some facts? Because I don't know about anyone else but I always thought that there was a bureaucratic ruling class (or perhaps 'caste' would be more appropriate) in the supposedly 'communist' countries (countries that did not even CLAIM to be communist)
As has been pointed out these countries AT BEST can be described as state-capitalist regimes, because they were:
1.Not Classless (bureaucratic rulers)
2.Not Stateless (they maintained a standing army etc.)
3.Maintained wage labour (work was not done voluntarily by citizens; “he who does not work, does not eat” (or something to that effect))
4.Maintained Commodity Production (goods were still produced to sell)
5.They were still divided into individual nations (conversely communism is a global system without borders)

Nor is this 'state-capitalist' label a new invention, to distance present socialist/communist parties (and it is by no means adopted by the majority of them) from the crimes of Stalin etc., the Socialist Party of Great Britain are the best example, maintaining that the USSR/Russian revolution was state capitalist and not socialist even whilst the anarchists were joining the Bolsheviks (Victor Serge being the most famous). (okay little crazy coming back to this but the SPGB only maintained that the Russian Revolution could not be socialist from the beginning state capitalism developed later. apologies for the mistake)


Last edited by Steel on Wed Sep 10, 2008 1:12 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top Go down
View user profile
inkus2000
New Party Member


Posts : 541
Join date : 2008-03-31
Location : I woke up this morning and I dont know where I am.

PostSubject: reply   Thu Apr 03, 2008 9:52 pm

Nillerz -

Personal responsibility may seem threatening, but I'll be damned if I'm going to enjoy prosperity on someone elses dime, or worse, everybodies dime.[/quote]




I think you misunderstand Marxist perspective on work and class.
Marx's 'theory of alienation' states that the capitalist expropriates profit from the labor of others by not paying the worker the full value of their toil, this creates what is know as 'alienated labor'. Marx maintains that the full value of a workers toil belongs to him alone. It is the capitalist class 'from the socialist perspective', who live of the labor of the working class without working themselves.


Last edited by inkus2000 on Fri Apr 04, 2008 1:10 am; edited 1 time in total
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Steel
Pioneer Leader


Posts : 92
Join date : 2008-04-02
Location : UK

PostSubject: Re: Why is this the image people think of   Thu Apr 03, 2008 11:01 pm

inkus2000 wrote:




I think you misunderstand Marxist perspective on work and class.
Marx's 'theory of labor value' states that the capitalist expropriates profit from the labor of others by not paying the worker the full value of their toil, this creates what is know as 'alienated labor'. Marx maintains that the full value of a workers toil belongs to him alone. It is the capitalist class 'from the socialist perspective', who live of the labor of the working class without working themselves.

I don't quite agree, I always saw the Marxist perspective being that the worker is entitled to an equal share of what society produces:

Marx, critique of the Gotha Program wrote:
But one man is superior to another physically, or mentally, and supplies more labor in the same time, or can labor for a longer time; and labor, to serve as a measure, must be defined by its duration or intensity, otherwise it ceases to be a standard of measurement. This equal right is an unequal right for unequal labor. It recognizes no class differences, because everyone is only a worker like everyone else; but it tacitly recognizes unequal individual endowment, and thus productive capacity, as a natural privilege. It is, therefore, a right of inequality, in its content, like every right. Right, by its very nature, can consist only in the application of an equal standard; but unequal individuals (and they would not be different individuals if they were not unequal) are measurable only by an equal standard insofar as they are brought under an equal point of view, are taken from one definite side only -- for instance, in the present case, are regarded only as workers and nothing more is seen in them, everything else being ignored. Further, one worker is married, another is not; one has more children than another, and so on and so forth. Thus, with an equal performance of labor, and hence an equal in the social consumption fund, one will in fact receive more than another, one will be richer than another, and so on. To avoid all these defects, right, instead of being equal, would have to be unequal.

But these defects are inevitable in the first phase of communist society as it is when it has just emerged after prolonged birth pangs from capitalist society. Right can never be higher than the economic structure of society and its cultural development conditioned thereby.

In a higher phase of communist society, after the enslaving subordination of the individual to the division of labor, and therewith also the antithesis between mental and physical labor, has vanished; after labor has become not only a means of life but life's prime want; after the productive forces have also increased with the all-around development of the individual, and all the springs of co-operative wealth flow more abundantly -- only then then can the narrow horizon of bourgeois right be crossed in its entirety and society inscribe on its banners: From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs!

Back to top Go down
View user profile
mattabesta
Chairman of the Supreme Council


Posts : 3936
Join date : 2007-12-23
Age : 22
Location : Iceland

PostSubject: Re: Why is this the image people think of   Thu Apr 03, 2008 11:08 pm

Steel wrote:




I don't quite agree, I always saw the Marxist perspective being that the worker is entitled to an equal share of what society produces:

but isn't the owner of the factory a part of society, I mean he worked hard and built a factory and hiers pepole to work in the factory.
do the workeres manage the factory?
do the workers pa for the material they are working?
or do they pay for the tax on the material they produce.
NO
If I am a worker in a company I don't own I didn't build even tho I am imesly important to the company I still don't deserve what is rightfully the owners, hell he even pays me so that I can build my own factory.
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://Pichunter.com
nillerz
Arrested


Posts : 288
Join date : 2008-04-02
Age : 26
Location : Western NY

PostSubject: Re: Why is this the image people think of   Thu Apr 03, 2008 11:14 pm

mononokifool wrote:
nillerz wrote:
mononokifool wrote:
Well...at least you stick to you guns lol. We are a group of evil Communist. We believe that every person is born with innate rights as a human being. He has the right to see a doctor, he has the right to have a house, he has the right to have a job and support his family, and he has a right to be treated as an equal no matter where he is from. Why should a government not provide people with that.
Because the government's job is to protect the citizens from foreign invasion, build roads and highways, and prevent crime. If you give them other powers, they will abuse them in 100 percent of cases. The best option is deny them the power. Sure, it may sound good to let the government give everyone healthcare, but then they control your health. What if the government decides a certain operation is immoral, even with consent? They can do whatever they want to the healthcare system.

It's much better to keep everything in the private sector. If 2 hospitals are competing, they'll try to offer the best services at the lowest price to undercut the other hospital. If there's only one government owned hospital, who are they competing with? They can jack up the prices as much as possible. Even if its "free" healthcare, who's paying the doctors? Who's paying the guys who pay the doctors? We are.

Also, yeah, people should be treated as an equal until they prove themselves insufficient. Should Hitler be treated equal?
How will the people be paying? There are no taxes. Also we still believe in the democratic process so it leaves less room for corruption
If no one is paying, why would the doctors help? It's an understanding of human nature that seperates a communist and a capitalist. People don't do things for free.

Quote :
Quote :
If 2 hospitals are competing, they'll try to offer the best services at the lowest price to undercut the other hospital.
or they will form a cartel with organized prices, and they are free to jack up the prices as they want to

If that happens, we're no worse off than a communist society that makes them form a cartel that's run by the people I trust the least, mister Gov T.

Quote :
Quote :
Also, yeah, people should be treated as an equal until they prove themselves insufficient. Should Hitler be treated equal?

Hitler was a mass murderer, and should be treated as one. what if a boy who had the brain of genius but his mom and dad is poor, that means he has to work in factory to support his family, and he couldnt be the genius that he has the mind of because his mom and dad couldnt pay for his education, did he prove him self ¨insufficient¨?

Oh wahh... mommy and daddy didn't flip the bill for my college education! If he really wanted it, he'd work for it just like everyone else. That's why there are banks that give out student loans. My parent's didn't give my brother a dime for his college. He's doing fine. In fact from what I've experienced, if mommy and daddy pay for a kids education, he values college less because he's not paying for it and is more likely to fail or quit.

Quote :
Quote :
What would you call a violent uprising of the proletariat against the upper classes in order to maintain a classless society?


What does that even mean? If there are proletarians and “upper classes” then by definition it is not a classless society.
However, I'll assume you said:
“What would you call a violent uprising of the proletariat against the upper classes in order to create a classless society?”
Classlessness is not the single defining characteristic of a communist society.
A communist society would be stateless and moneyless, with all of societies products available to all for free (amoungst other features). It is an inexcusable oversimplification to say communism is defined by 'classlessness' alone.

Right, there's also the corruption, gross violation of human rights, famine, and a lack of privacy.

Quote :
Quote :
No, it's one that aptly describes practiced communism.


Really? Would you like to back that up with some facts? Because I don't know about anyone else but I always thought that there was a bureaucratic ruling class (or perhaps 'caste' would be more appropriate) in the supposedly 'communist' countries (countries that did not even CLAIM to be communist)

Right, because it's human nature to try to get ahead of the crowd. Those who started the communist revolutions thought it was probably a good idea to give up on equality and sharing and instead sorta rule with an iron fist. It will never go any other way because if it did that would go against everything humans ever practiced since before we were humans. We are what we are today because we competed for food in the wild, competed with other tribes, let the inferior species die or change, and grew to fit into this world. You're going to try to put a stop to that? Nigga please.

Quote :
As has been pointed out these countries AT BEST can be described as state-capitalist regimes, because they were:
1.Not Classless (bureaucratic rulers)
People will never break from their classes. Everybody in the world wants to achieve more than others, have more than others, provide to their families more than others. Their success creates classes.
[quote]2.Not Stateless (they maintained a standing army etc.)Tell me, if we have a global commune and get invaded by aliens what will we do?Or, more realistically, if there is a large communist nation (just humor the idea) and they got invaded by capitalists with guns and cars looking for some nice oil to feed their ever demanding nation with? I mean, sure they don't NEED the oil, but dammit they want it!

Quote :
3.Maintained wage labour (work was not done voluntarily by citizens; “he who does not work, does not eat” (or something to that effect))
If you can go home at night and get fed even if you didn't do anything to deserve it, then by golly you will. Apply this to a global scale. If the government will provide you food when you go home even if you didn't work for it, then by golly you will. Wait, who's making the food? No one is.

Quote :
4.Maintained Commodity Production (goods were still produced to sell)
I like my MP3 player. I like my TV. Not possible in a commie society, you say? Well, fuck that.

Quote :
5.They were still divided into individual nations (conversely communism is a global system without borders)
This one is the most disturbing. I knew that the original marxist plan was a world-wide utopia where everyone existed under his ideas without a border. The thing is, that includes me. If this were to happen, I'd find a way to monetize off the situation. I'd start a store. I'd trade with people who were of a like mind and provided goods that I wanted. We'd get an economy rolling and probably make some sort of local currency. I'm sure I'm not the only one, either. I'd join with others who want to reap the fruit of their own labors and become insanely rich. What would you do? Stop me? Force me to be an equal? Violate my civil liberties so I can't trade with people? Or would you respect my decision not to help or hurt the system and live off my own work and those willing to be under my employ?

Quote :
Nor is this 'state-capitalist' label a new invention, to distance present socialist/communist parties (and it is by no means adopted by the majority of them) from the crimes of Stalin etc., the Socialist Party of Great Britain are the best example, maintaining that the USSR/Russian revolution was state capitalist and not socialist even whilst the anarchists were joining the Bolsheviks (Victor Serge being the most famous).
Probably a good idea to try and seperate yourselves from Stalin, no? Don't worry, I won't tell.

Quote :
Quote :
Personal responsibility may seem threatening, but I'll be damned if I'm going to enjoy prosperity on someone elses dime, or worse, everybodies dime.




I think you misunderstand Marxist perspective on work and class.
Marx's 'theory of labor value' states that the capitalist expropriates profit from the labor of others by not paying the worker the full value of their toil, this creates what is know as 'alienated labor'. Marx maintains that the full value of a workers toil belongs to him alone. It is the capitalist class 'from the socialist perspective', who live of the labor of the working class without working themselves.

If they want to work for less money than they deserve, then that's their business. They could quit, in fact they could all quit. The employer would have to pay them more in order to keep the business going. When you have a job, it's not like you're forced to work there. You do it because you want to.
Quote :

but isn't the owner of the factory a part of society, I mean he worked hard and built a factory and hiers pepole to work in the factory.
Totally agree with this statement. Communists forget that the rich are people too and therefore deserve what communists would take from them.
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://nillerz.net
nillerz
Arrested


Posts : 288
Join date : 2008-04-02
Age : 26
Location : Western NY

PostSubject: Re: Why is this the image people think of   Thu Apr 03, 2008 11:15 pm

seems the only result for ancrasist is this forum.
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://nillerz.net
mattabesta
Chairman of the Supreme Council


Posts : 3936
Join date : 2007-12-23
Age : 22
Location : Iceland

PostSubject: Re: Why is this the image people think of   Thu Apr 03, 2008 11:28 pm

[quote="nillerz"]
mononokifool wrote:
nillerz wrote:
mononokifool wrote:
Well...at least you stick to you guns lol. We are a group of evil Communist. We believe that every person is born with innate rights as a human being. He has the right to see a doctor, he has the right to have a house, he has the right to have a job and support his family, and he has a right to be treated as an equal no matter where he is from. Why should a government not provide people with that.
Because the government's job is to protect the citizens from foreign invasion, build roads and highways, and prevent crime. If you give them other powers, they will abuse them in 100 percent of cases. The best option is deny them the power. Sure, it may sound good to let the government give everyone healthcare, but then they control your health. What if the government decides a certain operation is immoral, even with consent? They can do whatever they want to the healthcare system.

It's much better to keep everything in the private sector. If 2 hospitals are competing, they'll try to offer the best services at the lowest price to undercut the other hospital. If there's only one government owned hospital, who are they competing with? They can jack up the prices as much as possible. Even if its "free" healthcare, who's paying the doctors? Who's paying the guys who pay the doctors? We are.

Also, yeah, people should be treated as an equal until they prove themselves insufficient. Should Hitler be treated equal?
How will the people be paying? There are no taxes. Also we still believe in the democratic process so it leaves less room for corruption
If no one is paying, why would the doctors help? It's an understanding of human nature that seperates a communist and a capitalist. People don't do things for free.

Quote :
Quote :
If 2 hospitals are competing, they'll try to offer the best services at the lowest price to undercut the other hospital.
or they will form a cartel with organized prices, and they are free to jack up the prices as they want to

If that happens, we're no worse off than a communist society that makes them form a cartel that's run by the people I trust the least, mister Gov T.

Quote :
Quote :
Also, yeah, people should be treated as an equal until they prove themselves insufficient. Should Hitler be treated equal?

Hitler was a mass murderer, and should be treated as one. what if a boy who had the brain of genius but his mom and dad is poor, that means he has to work in factory to support his family, and he couldnt be the genius that he has the mind of because his mom and dad couldnt pay for his education, did he prove him self ¨insufficient¨?

Oh wahh... mommy and daddy didn't flip the bill for my college education! If he really wanted it, he'd work for it just like everyone else. That's why there are banks that give out student loans. My parent's didn't give my brother a dime for his college. He's doing fine. In fact from what I've experienced, if mommy and daddy pay for a kids education, he values college less because he's not paying for it and is more likely to fail or quit.

Quote :
Quote :
What would you call a violent uprising of the proletariat against the upper classes in order to maintain a classless society?


What does that even mean? If there are proletarians and “upper classes” then by definition it is not a classless society.
However, I'll assume you said:
“What would you call a violent uprising of the proletariat against the upper classes in order to create a classless society?”
Classlessness is not the single defining characteristic of a communist society.
A communist society would be stateless and moneyless, with all of societies products available to all for free (amoungst other features). It is an inexcusable oversimplification to say communism is defined by 'classlessness' alone.

Right, there's also the corruption, gross violation of human rights, famine, and a lack of privacy.

Quote :
Quote :
No, it's one that aptly describes practiced communism.


Really? Would you like to back that up with some facts? Because I don't know about anyone else but I always thought that there was a bureaucratic ruling class (or perhaps 'caste' would be more appropriate) in the supposedly 'communist' countries (countries that did not even CLAIM to be communist)

Right, because it's human nature to try to get ahead of the crowd. Those who started the communist revolutions thought it was probably a good idea to give up on equality and sharing and instead sorta rule with an iron fist. It will never go any other way because if it did that would go against everything humans ever practiced since before we were humans. We are what we are today because we competed for food in the wild, competed with other tribes, let the inferior species die or change, and grew to fit into this world. You're going to try to put a stop to that? Nigga please.

Quote :
As has been pointed out these countries AT BEST can be described as state-capitalist regimes, because they were:
1.Not Classless (bureaucratic rulers)
People will never break from their classes. Everybody in the world wants to achieve more than others, have more than others, provide to their families more than others. Their success creates classes.
Quote :
2.Not Stateless (they maintained a standing army etc.)Tell me, if we have a global commune and get invaded by aliens what will we do?Or, more realistically, if there is a large communist nation (just humor the idea) and they got invaded by capitalists with guns and cars looking for some nice oil to feed their ever demanding nation with? I mean, sure they don't NEED the oil, but dammit they want it!

Quote :
3.Maintained wage labour (work was not done voluntarily by citizens; “he who does not work, does not eat” (or something to that effect))
If you can go home at night and get fed even if you didn't do anything to deserve it, then by golly you will. Apply this to a global scale. If the government will provide you food when you go home even if you didn't work for it, then by golly you will. Wait, who's making the food? No one is.

Quote :
4.Maintained Commodity Production (goods were still produced to sell)
I like my MP3 player. I like my TV. Not possible in a commie society, you say? Well, fuck that.

Quote :
5.They were still divided into individual nations (conversely communism is a global system without borders)
This one is the most disturbing. I knew that the original marxist plan was a world-wide utopia where everyone existed under his ideas without a border. The thing is, that includes me. If this were to happen, I'd find a way to monetize off the situation. I'd start a store. I'd trade with people who were of a like mind and provided goods that I wanted. We'd get an economy rolling and probably make some sort of local currency. I'm sure I'm not the only one, either. I'd join with others who want to reap the fruit of their own labors and become insanely rich. What would you do? Stop me? Force me to be an equal? Violate my civil liberties so I can't trade with people? Or would you respect my decision not to help or hurt the system and live off my own work and those willing to be under my employ?

Quote :
Nor is this 'state-capitalist' label a new invention, to distance present socialist/communist parties (and it is by no means adopted by the majority of them) from the crimes of Stalin etc., the Socialist Party of Great Britain are the best example, maintaining that the USSR/Russian revolution was state capitalist and not socialist even whilst the anarchists were joining the Bolsheviks (Victor Serge being the most famous).
Probably a good idea to try and seperate yourselves from Stalin, no? Don't worry, I won't tell.

Quote :
Quote :
Personal responsibility may seem threatening, but I'll be damned if I'm going to enjoy prosperity on someone elses dime, or worse, everybodies dime.




I think you misunderstand Marxist perspective on work and class.
Marx's 'theory of labor value' states that the capitalist expropriates profit from the labor of others by not paying the worker the full value of their toil, this creates what is know as 'alienated labor'. Marx maintains that the full value of a workers toil belongs to him alone. It is the capitalist class 'from the socialist perspective', who live of the labor of the working class without working themselves.

If they want to work for less money than they deserve, then that's their business. They could quit, in fact they could all quit. The employer would have to pay them more in order to keep the business going. When you have a job, it's not like you're forced to work there. You do it because you want to.
Quote :

but isn't the owner of the factory a part of society, I mean he worked hard and built a factory and hiers pepole to work in the factory.
Totally agree with this statement. Communists forget that the rich are people too and therefore deserve what communists would take from them.

I like you, can you become my Idol?
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://Pichunter.com
Ryom
Senior Komsomol Member


Posts : 217
Join date : 2008-01-27
Age : 24
Location : The Fly On The Wall

PostSubject: Re: Why is this the image people think of   Thu Apr 03, 2008 11:56 pm

nillerz wrote:


Oh wahh... mommy and daddy didn't flip the bill for my college education! If he really wanted it, he'd work for it just like everyone else. That's why there are banks that give out student loans. My parent's didn't give my brother a dime for his college. He's doing fine. In fact from what I've experienced, if mommy and daddy pay for a kids education, he values college less because he's not paying for it and is more likely to fail or quit.
i think you misunderstood me. when the parents cant pay for the education i think the state must step in and provide financial aid, because it would help the state in the end, because people would be doing what they want to not affected by social heritage like me i wanna get a PhD in Bioengineering but my father is a electrician and my mother is a social worker, its about 9 years in university and its gonna cost, and my train of thought here is when i spend 9 years of my life in university to get a great education why cant the state pay for it? when im done im gonna pay taxes and work in/for the state anyway so they will get back what they paid and more,
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Liche
Chairman of the Supreme Council


Posts : 4613
Join date : 2008-01-30
Age : 23
Location : USA-Virginia

PostSubject: Re: Why is this the image people think of   Fri Apr 04, 2008 12:13 am

mononokifool wrote:
well I wasn't really saying that particular propaganda, I meant the interpretation of communist as evil.
Communists have computers? Communists don't use open source do they? I suppose it makes sense if you think about the number of Russian mobsters who use it.
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://www.epol.forumotion.com
mattabesta
Chairman of the Supreme Council


Posts : 3936
Join date : 2007-12-23
Age : 22
Location : Iceland

PostSubject: Re: Why is this the image people think of   Fri Apr 04, 2008 12:19 am

Ryom wrote:
nillerz wrote:


Oh wahh... mommy and daddy didn't flip the bill for my college education! If he really wanted it, he'd work for it just like everyone else. That's why there are banks that give out student loans. My parent's didn't give my brother a dime for his college. He's doing fine. In fact from what I've experienced, if mommy and daddy pay for a kids education, he values college less because he's not paying for it and is more likely to fail or quit.
i think you misunderstood me. when the parents cant pay for the education i think the state must step in and provide financial aid, because it would help the state in the end, because people would be doing what they want to not affected by social heritage like me i wanna get a PhD in Bioengineering but my father is a electrician and my mother is a social worker, its about 9 years in university and its gonna cost, and my train of thought here is when i spend 9 years of my life in university to get a great education why cant the state pay for it? when im done im gonna pay taxes and work in/for the state anyway so they will get back what they paid and more,

why can't you just like work for it?
anyway I don´t need to worry collage here costs 30,000 isk a year when the avreg salary is 2,250,000
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://Pichunter.com
inkus2000
New Party Member


Posts : 541
Join date : 2008-03-31
Location : I woke up this morning and I dont know where I am.

PostSubject: Steel   Fri Apr 04, 2008 12:30 am

I don't quite agree, I always saw the Marxist perspective being that the worker is entitled to an equal share of what society produces:[quote steel

Marx maintains that the labor of the worker belongs to the worker and the capitalist has no stake in it, implementation of this idea would end the market economy because without exploitation and profit capitalism can no longer function.

As a result work is no longer used to feed the interest of the capitalist since 'profit' no longer exists. With the elimination of profit so comes the elimination of 'private' ownership over the means of production.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
mattabesta
Chairman of the Supreme Council


Posts : 3936
Join date : 2007-12-23
Age : 22
Location : Iceland

PostSubject: Re: Why is this the image people think of   Fri Apr 04, 2008 12:44 am

inkus2000 wrote:
I don't quite agree, I always saw the Marxist perspective being that the worker is entitled to an equal share of what society produces:[quote steel

Marx maintains that the labor of the worker belongs to the worker and the capitalist has no stake in it, implementation of this idea would end the market economy because without exploitation and profit capitalism can no longer function.

As a result work is no longer used to feed the interest of the capitalist since 'profit' no longer exists. With the elimination of profit so comes the elimination of 'private' ownership over the means of production.

wich ultemitly eliminaes competision and the fun in life.
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://Pichunter.com
mononokifool
Experienced Party Member


Posts : 838
Join date : 2008-03-30
Age : 28
Location : Florida

PostSubject: Re: Why is this the image people think of   Fri Apr 04, 2008 12:51 am

mattabesta wrote:
inkus2000 wrote:
I don't quite agree, I always saw the Marxist perspective being that the worker is entitled to an equal share of what society produces:[quote steel

Marx maintains that the labor of the worker belongs to the worker and the capitalist has no stake in it, implementation of this idea would end the market economy because without exploitation and profit capitalism can no longer function.

As a result work is no longer used to feed the interest of the capitalist since 'profit' no longer exists. With the elimination of profit so comes the elimination of 'private' ownership over the means of production.

wich ultemitly eliminaes competision and the fun in life.
So your idea of fun is having a walmart come to town, take all of the business, and close all of the individually owned little shops that have been in the neighborhood for 20 or 30 years?

_________________
Back to top Go down
View user profile
mattabesta
Chairman of the Supreme Council


Posts : 3936
Join date : 2007-12-23
Age : 22
Location : Iceland

PostSubject: Re: Why is this the image people think of   Fri Apr 04, 2008 12:55 am

mononokifool wrote:
mattabesta wrote:
inkus2000 wrote:
I don't quite agree, I always saw the Marxist perspective being that the worker is entitled to an equal share of what society produces:[quote steel

Marx maintains that the labor of the worker belongs to the worker and the capitalist has no stake in it, implementation of this idea would end the market economy because without exploitation and profit capitalism can no longer function.

As a result work is no longer used to feed the interest of the capitalist since 'profit' no longer exists. With the elimination of profit so comes the elimination of 'private' ownership over the means of production.

wich ultemitly eliminaes competision and the fun in life.
So your idea of fun is having a walmart come to town, take all of the business, and close all of the individually owned little shops that have been in the neighborhood for 20 or 30 years?

you know we do have BIG MARKETS.
the biggest icelandic company has an yearly revenue of 15,000,000,000$
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://Pichunter.com
mononokifool
Experienced Party Member


Posts : 838
Join date : 2008-03-30
Age : 28
Location : Florida

PostSubject: Re: Why is this the image people think of   Fri Apr 04, 2008 1:00 am

mattabesta wrote:
mononokifool wrote:
mattabesta wrote:
inkus2000 wrote:
I don't quite agree, I always saw the Marxist perspective being that the worker is entitled to an equal share of what society produces:[quote steel

Marx maintains that the labor of the worker belongs to the worker and the capitalist has no stake in it, implementation of this idea would end the market economy because without exploitation and profit capitalism can no longer function.

As a result work is no longer used to feed the interest of the capitalist since 'profit' no longer exists. With the elimination of profit so comes the elimination of 'private' ownership over the means of production.

wich ultemitly eliminaes competision and the fun in life.
So your idea of fun is having a walmart come to town, take all of the business, and close all of the individually owned little shops that have been in the neighborhood for 20 or 30 years?

you know we do have BIG MARKETS.
the biggest icelandic company has an yearly revenue of 15,000,000,000$
So you like it when they build one next to your neighbors store and force them to close?

_________________
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Sponsored content




PostSubject: Re: Why is this the image people think of   Today at 12:35 pm

Back to top Go down
 
Why is this the image people think of
View previous topic View next topic Back to top 
Page 2 of 4Go to page : Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
 Similar topics
-
» Latest Pix From Eyjafjallajökull
» Famous people (using the last letter of the previous name)
» "Missing People" go to Downing Street today - and guess who's "Missing"!!!
» Putting an image in your post
» How Many "Well Connected" People Do You Know?

Permissions in this forum:You cannot reply to topics in this forum
World Republic :: Capitol of the World Republic :: Red Square-
Jump to: