Newgrounds.com — Everything, By Everyone.

a friend at camp converted me...now that i think about it, communism might work!

Cool, did he tell you it ends in Anarchy

At 7/14/01 01:50 PM, -NuKe- wrote: a friend at camp converted me...now that i think about it, communism might work!

Errmm...communism has been tried and is still in use in some countries. Look at these and you'll notice one thing...it doesn't work.
They'd also make food packaging very bland. Could YOU live without the cream of wheat guy?

Errmm...communism has been tried and is still in use in some countries. Look at these and you'll notice one thing...it doesn't work.
They'd also make food packaging very bland. Could YOU live without the cream of wheat guy?

No it hasn't, none of them are communist

Communism is great but unfortunately it won't work because the rich want to keep on being rich. In commusnism everone would be equal. Imagine how much the scum sucking capitalist pigs of america would hate that. They couldnt have just as much money as everyone else. They have to have MORE. See what i mean. Communism would only work if we killed a whole bunch of ignorant fucks first like Dr. Laura Schlessinger and the person who posted that liberals are stupid thing.

Communisim is great.
But sadly it does not work out in the end.
Sad really.

At 7/14/01 01:50 PM, -NuKe- wrote: a friend at camp converted me...now that i think about it, communism might work!

family life is like communism. The person in charge decides when food and items are distributed. You can't question authority without swift punishment, and the leader will try with all their power to keep you under their control.

Bunny: We kill the rich
Magic: Communism has never been attempted properly
More: Communists aren't all authoritarian you know, non-authoritarian communism has never been attempted.

slizor: there's alot of rich. can't kill em all (in a short period of time anyway).

At 7/14/01 01:50 PM, -NuKe- wrote: a friend at camp converted me...now that i think about it, communism might work!

No, it was a good theory, but there were many flaws in Marx's thinking. Communism results in mediocrity, don't try and kid yourself to think it works. Vietnam, North Korea, Cuba, they are all hell holes. U.S., Western Europe, get my point? The proof is in the pudding.

Bunny: Not comapred to the poor

No, it was a good theory, but there were many flaws in Marx's thinking. Communism results in mediocrity, don't try and kid yourself to think it works. Vietnam, North Korea, Cuba, they are all hell holes. U.S., Western Europe, get my point? The proof is in the pudding.

Look here Mr. Lar-de-dar, Marx didn't say shit about totalatarianism. It's not like communism has even been welcomed/allowed. Vietnam-war, North Korea-war, Cuba-Bay of Pigs invasion. The U.S., Western Europe are rich because other countries are poor. Communism doesn't equate to mediocrity, it equates to equal.

At 7/15/01 06:16 PM, Slizor wrote: Bunny: Not comapred to the poor

No, it was a good theory, but there were many flaws in Marx's thinking. Communism results in mediocrity, don't try and kid yourself to think it works. Vietnam, North Korea, Cuba, they are all hell holes. U.S., Western Europe, get my point? The proof is in the pudding.

Look here Mr. Lar-de-dar, Marx didn't say shit about totalatarianism. It's not like communism has even been welcomed/allowed. Vietnam-war, North Korea-war, Cuba-Bay of Pigs invasion. The U.S., Western Europe are rich because other countries are poor. Communism doesn't equate to mediocrity, it equates to equal.

But before communism can succeed, there must be proper democracy beforehand

Look here Mr. Lar-de-dar, Marx didn't say shit about totalatarianism. It's not like communism has even been welcomed/allowed. Vietnam-war, North Korea-war, Cuba-Bay of Pigs invasion. The U.S., Western Europe are rich because other countries are poor. Communism doesn't equate to mediocrity, it equates to equal.

Your whole stance is based on nice little theories. Here's my theory, if everyone was nice to each other everything would be fine. Nice theory, right? But it doesn't work! Now Marx's flaws might have been less apparent, but they were there. He maintained that the economy was the sole reason for action, and he discarded politics, religion, and everything else. He also assumed that the partys in charge would not be corrupted by power, but it seems that was wrong also. Marx was not a very good judge on human nature.

At 7/14/01 01:50 PM, -NuKe- wrote: a friend at camp converted me...now that i think about it, communism might work!

I never really got into communism, I never really liked the idea. Marx did have good intensions, it seems. With communism, there wouldn't be the beauracracy that surfaces in capitalism, but... I still wouldn't be willing to give up my voting rights.

Ok, lemme just state my opinon.

Authoritarian communism is just another word for dictator ship.

Socalism is just another way of containing human nature, and really, I know alot of Communist raving kids, who wear 50 dollar jeans and 120 sneakers, and I doubt they understand that if we spread the money throughout the world which is one of the principles of Marxist socialism, and really the non-authritarian socialism as opposed to Natinalist socialism, that what the individual would be left with is remarkably little. It's easy to say that You would want that but I also bet that at sometime you're going to complain about some mechandise that you want and cannot afford not realising that the world you argue about would have you in a situation where what you can afford pretty much would be food, possibly some shelter and if you're lucky a dish towl. The sad sad truth is that modern day western civ. relys on Slave labor, and though it's not right, Deystroying it would deystroy the modern world. In stead I propose that we find the middle ground, and improve conditions of workers for us, instead of overhauling all of society. Another point to note is that changing the system within the system is much more efficent than deystroying and rebuilding. So I belive that in both a means to an end machieavellian though, and object morality My arguement would be supported.

Your whole stance is based on nice little theories. Here's my theory, if everyone was nice to each other everything would be fine. Nice theory, right? But it doesn't work! Now Marx's flaws might have been less apparent, but they were there. He maintained that the economy was the sole reason for action, and he discarded politics, religion, and everything else. He also assumed that the partys in charge would not be corrupted by power, but it seems that was wrong also. Marx was not a very good judge on human nature.

Your whole stance is based on being smarmy and condescending, while trying to cover-up gross inadecquacies in your own knowledge. What is politics? Politics is about the government, the government is an extension of the army, the army's purpose is to gain territory and loot. He didn't assume shit, he said (actually Trotsky did, but he is/was a leading Marxist) "Control your leaders". They wouldn't be corrupted by power because the majority hold power.

At 7/14/01 01:50 PM, -NuKe- wrote: a friend at camp converted me...now that i think about it, communism might work!

Yeah, and the XFL will make a big come back.

Ok I've left Slizor alone to defend communism all by himself and it's time to step in.

First authoritarain communism is more maoist than marxist. Marx said that after the revolution their should be the "dictatorship of the prolitariat" which means an effort to suppress the captalist leaders, some thing you would do after any revolution, look at ours, we didn't treat loyalists like kings in 1778.

Now Many a communist leader, Stalin most notably, were more conserned for themselves then the prolitatrat, and twisted the message of Marx, (for example Marx was a starch opponent of the Death Penalty).

Second Marxist-Leninist theories have been correct so far; it's the revisionists that have been wrong, captalism does over take and co-opt culture and relgion (globilation, hell it even co-opts the movements against it lok at punk). It does reley on a cycle of imperalism to keep profits up.

What most supporters of the captalist system argue is that Marx was wrong about a revolution, which in all reality he is still relavent as ever. a true marxist revolution has never occured. Marx miscalculated the way captalism can perpretuate it's self, so I doubt to see an uprising in my life time as well as my children's children's life time.

More to come.

Wasn't Communism working before Lennon reigned?

At 7/16/01 08:05 PM, BaDshakespeare wrote: Wasn't Communism working before Lennon reigned?

Neigh. The only other forays in to socialism were the paris commune [pre-marxist] (which was crushed brutaily by Napolian) and the 1844 revolution which was also crushed, Lenin brought his brand of Commie-nism to russia from germany.

At 7/16/01 07:43 PM, Skewthat wrote: Ok I've left Slizor alone to defend communism all by himself and it's time to step in.

Skew, Who are you addressing? Your post seems to be replying to someones message but I can't figure out who's.

AP

Wasn't Communism working before Lennon reigned?

I think I'll go kill myself

At 7/15/01 01:37 PM, Slizor wrote: Bunny: We kill the rich
Magic: Communism has never been attempted properly
More: Communists aren't all authoritarian you know, non-authoritarian communism has never been attempted.

thats the kind of communism im going fore. authoritarianism sucks

More: Communists aren't all authoritarian you know, non-authoritarian communism has never been attempted.

Acually yes it has in social projects in the U.S., scotland and france.

communism won't work!!!

At 7/14/01 01:50 PM, -NuKe- wrote: a friend at camp converted me...now that i think about it, communism might work!

Did he also promise you flying cars and the end to human suffering?

Anarchy: That is only in small communties, which happen to be surrounded by Capitilism.

Worm:You are a idiot

Shrapnel: Nuke says that his friend converted him, not promised him anything

Hooo boy. Alright kids, lets sit down to Obsolete Politics 101.
Communism has failed to work in the countries that are ostensibly communist around the globe (and which, yes, are not the dictionary definition of communitsts) because there are three types of communists.
Commie 1 - Power-mad lunatics who say they are doing things for the oppressed but are in fact just helping themselves (sound familiar?); see Stalin, Pol Pot et al.
Commie 2 - Nice, intelligent, well-meaning intellectuals who are either totally ineffectual or fuck things up by mistake (like re-housing slum tenants in affluent areas so that the affluence rubs off but actually just increase the crime rates - and yes it does, don't try to argue); they often end up dead - see Che Guevara, Trotsky et al.
Commie 3 - The ones who are wise and cynical enough to realise that people are always the weakest link in any revolution and try to give the people what they need, not what they think they want. See Lenin (died too early), Castro (crippled by the trade embargo) and depressingly few others.
The fatal flaw in communism is that, in a time of revolution the provisional government needs to act decisively, (as does any goverment during times of war). Peacetime governments need a large number of self-imposed safeguards that it can be hard for the new elite to swallow. Another, more practical flaw is that rising living standards has meant that there is no impetous to revolt, at least not in the West.

Hooo boy. Alright kids, lets sit down to Obsolete Politics 101.

It definatly is not Obsolete, it's actually coming back into fashion

Commie 1 - Power-mad lunatics who say they are doing things for the oppressed but are in fact just helping themselves (sound familiar?); see Stalin, Pol Pot et al.

Stalin said he was doing things for the oppressed?

Commie 2 - Nice, intelligent, well-meaning intellectuals who are either totally ineffectual or fuck things up by mistake (like re-housing slum tenants in affluent areas so that the affluence rubs off but actually just increase the crime rates - and yes it does, don't try to argue); they often end up dead - see Che Guevara, Trotsky et al.

How is Che Guevara and Trotsky like that?

Commie 3 - The ones who are wise and cynical enough to realise that people are always the weakest link in any revolution and try to give the people what they need, not what they think they want. See Lenin (died too early), Castro (crippled by the trade embargo) and depressingly few others.

The fatal flaw in communism is that, in a time of revolution the provisional government needs to act decisively, (as does any goverment during times of war).

How is that a flaw in communism?

Peacetime governments need a large number of self-imposed safeguards that it can be hard for the new elite to swallow. Another, more practical flaw is that rising living standards has meant that there is no impetous to revolt, at least not in the West.

Check out Genoa

Fair point on most of those. I wasn't, perhaps, as clear as I could have been.

At 7/21/01 02:28 PM, Slizor wrote:
It (Communism) definatly is not Obsolete, it's actually coming back into fashion

Nope. Dissent is coming back into fashion. Most of it isn't communist.

Stalin said he was doing things for the oppressed?

Yes. I believe that one of his many self-awarded titles was 'Father of the Country' and he always justified all of his revolting acts by claiming it was for the good of the nation. Lies, of course.

How is Che Guevara and Trotsky like that?

OK, maybe not Che. He just got unlucky. But Trotsky was too unskilled in realpolitik to effectively battle Stalin in the struggle for power in Russia after Lenin's death. He was a great intellectual, a compassionate man and might have been a good leader. But he wasn't tough enough to survive.

The fatal flaw in communism is that, in a time of revolution the provisional government needs to act decisively, (as does any goverment during times of war).

How is that a flaw in communism?

The remark is meant to be considered as part of the full statement, which is continued below.

Peacetime governments need a large number of self-imposed safeguards that it can be hard for the new elite to swallow. Another, more practical flaw is that rising living standards has meant that there is no impetous to revolt, at least not in the West.

Check out Genoa

Genoa isn't communist. It isn't even organised. There's a mix of communists, socialists, environmentalists, human rights campaigners and numerous other activists. A laudable protest definitely, but a chaotic and undirected one.