Newgrounds.com — Everything, By Everyone.

At 7/4/01 02:51 PM, IamJacksalias wrote:
We should give resources to people who will do nothing with them and waste tax dollars? While the people who do well in school get the shaft and no reward for working hard? The problem with this country is that we need to start dealing with our own problems and stop trying to fix everyone else's. If you have seen South Park you will understand why I refer to this as Kyle's Mom Syndrome.

You are really a sad, strange little man. There is a not-so-covert racism and classism in your belief that the needy would only waste tax dollars. This isn't about fucking over the people who do well in school, it's about giving everybody an equal shot at doing well in school. We DO have the resources to do this.

I don't understand your "argument" that we need to stop worrying about everybody else's problems and fix our own. This discussion is about AMERICAN schools. This IS our problem.

And let's face it, there no longer is such a thing as "our problem" and "their problem". We are tied together in this global economy. The problems of the 3rd world are due mostly to the systematic looting of those countries by the West. This looting is still going on today, not so much by governments like in the past, but by corporations backed up by "free" trade laws.

IT IS OUR FAULT. We CAN fix it!

At 6/18/01 11:31 PM, Anarchon wrote:

At 6/16/01 09:17 PM, Anachronist wrote: I saw the communism discussion below, so I know that there is some interest in here in talking about evolution and communism.

For the most part, the arguments against communism were pretty bad, tired, and just plain wrong. On that note, some of the arguments for it were just as uninformed.

Anyway, the point of this post is to invite people over to my communism site, www.kazm.net (back in the day we were NG's first ever featured site).

I'm no regular to this forum, so I don't expect to be coming back for any discussion, but I encourage anybody interested to e-mail me or to post on my site's forum.

Thank ye.

"Communism is not a programme one puts into practice or makes others put into practice, but a social movement. Communism is not an ideal to be realised: it already exists, not as a society, but as an effort, a task to prepare for. It is the movement which tries to abolish the conditions of life determined by wage-labour and it will abolish them by revolution’ (Dauvé & Martin). Communism is not a utopian blueprint for the future nor has it got anything to do with the ‘communist’ regimes of the past where capitalism was managed by the state. Communism is the movement towards the abolition of states, classes, private property, money and hierarchies of power, and the collective creation of the means to satisfy our needs and desires."

- Antagonism Press

i love you!

Look I know what Communism is. It's when the community controls the government. But that would be a popularity contest, how ever........POTLITICS ARE NOT ABOUT BEING POPULAR!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Look I know what Communism is. It's when the community controls the government. But that would be a popularity contest, how ever........POTLITICS ARE NOT ABOUT BEING POPULAR!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Wrong, the "community" is the government, everyone is equal. I do, however, wonder what POTlitics is about, something to do with weed?
Anyway what the fuck? If you took about one second to look at how we elect our leaders, you would relaise that currently politics is about popularity.

Feh. This topic died. Good to see there are so many original arguments against communism out there.

<sarcasm>Good to see there are so many original arguments against communism out there.</sarcasm>

At 7/11/01 06:04 PM, Slizor wrote:
<sarcasm>Good to see there are so many original arguments against communism out there.</sarcasm>

THis topic died just like communism.

THis topic died just like communism.

If it's like communism then it never existed

To My Comrades:

What are your favorite stupid captialist lines?
I personally like...

"Ya. Karl Marx was russian."
"Stalin invented COmmunism didn't he?"
Any time one of them spells Karl with a c.
"Anarchists don't believe in groups so all those anarchists protesting are hypocrites."

And it goes on...

Your favorites? Slizor? Anarchonist?

"Ya. Karl Marx was russian."
"Stalin invented COmmunism didn't he?"
Any time one of them spells Karl with a c.
"Anarchists don't believe in groups so all those anarchists protesting are hypocrites."

Hmm well I hate people who think they know about communism then say something which shows they don't like
"Stalin was great!"
"Communism is always good in theory, but just look at russia"
"People are born greedy"

At 7/13/01 05:35 PM, Skewthat wrote: What are your favorite stupid capitalist lines?

Personally I think there is as much stupidity coming out of our movement as there is from the opposition.

I live in Washington, DC so I got to see the aftermath of the anti-IMF and WB protests last April. What happened? A bunch of idiots from the suburbs spraypainted up the downtown area. I even saw a picture where somebody sprayed a web address... what kind of idiotic shit is that?

Even better are the people who vandalize Starbucks shops - not only is it not gonna put a dent in the CEO's salary, but the people who are going to have to clean that up are the same people that "we" are "acting in the interests of".

At 7/13/01 10:02 PM, Anachronist wrote:
Personally I think there is as much stupidity coming out of our movement as there is from the opposition.

Amen.

It comes from the simple fact that most movement leaders (when I say leaders I mean, the more expereniced, wise members who can teach) are rarely over then age of 22, I find that most of my "comrades" are disconnected intellectals or immature mad-boys. We need people who are both.

I'm gunna have to disagree with you on the protest thing, the spray paint is, I think inevitable, but we can continue this in the inter-socialist Debate which is buryed somewhere down there in the Topic list.

Ok, Well this topic is somewhat dieing. let me give new life.

Here's what I see as the main problems of communism. I'm speaking directly about libertarian world wide communism, becuase my personal belife is that national communism and Authoritarian communism are simply diffrent ways of saying dictatorship.

1. Distrobution of product.
2. Lack of liberities and freedoms.

Let me expand on each topic.

1. Being that as a whole the earth creates a surplus of consumer goods and foods, and that the main reason for starvation is not from underproduction but Social Stratifacation, Communism would seem to be a viable solution. However, this still does not solve the problems of transportation. I.E. getting a food share from a high surplus area to a high demand area, also at this same topic, how would changing quotas be addressed? Even if transporation was assinged from one area, that would increase their demand for gasoline etc... and thus making one area of a larger amount of products then another, which defeats communism. Even if it were acceptable, then who jurisdicts how and when what area gets a specific amount of materials?
Surely you don't expect that the world community solves these problems? Such Minute matters would get mixxed with larger and larger and under the very aggresive work load any citizen would have, then the time simply would not be there. Who governs such things?

2. In modern democracy, many liberties and freedoms are enjoyed. That does not mean full freedom is reached, however to a point we do dable in freedom. A communist world however, would make this impossible. The communist thought is that at birth a child would be assinged a job even before his abilities are judged. Obviously to fill quotas, it would be impossible as well as unfair and against communist thought to allow the freedom of choice in this matter. Personally that Is not the way I want to live. I am my own person and do not want oppresion like this.

Communists are the biggest idealists to ever live, in my opinion. They trust that humans will be upstanding, hard-working, and not greedy. Shut your mouth and open your eyes. People aren't that way.

I do have a question tho. Do any of you "communists" think there have been any examples of real communism throughout history?

At 7/19/01 04:11 AM, SilentScream wrote: Communists are the biggest idealists to ever live, in my opinion. They trust that humans will be upstanding, hard-working, and not greedy. Shut your mouth and open your eyes. People aren't that way.

Ehh, Liberlist communists MAY trust that, but to a point communism is still feasable without it.

I do have a question tho. Do any of you "communists" think there have been any examples of real communism throughout history?

There is no such thing as "Real" communism. Just as America is not really a democracy or even in fact capitalist ( it's coorperate ) when you speak of philosophical ideals such as government structure, there is no real true definition. I assume that your speaking of a marxist communist example. Yes, In Boston america, various communities of social projects arouse during th late 1800's.

I tried to post this yesterday but it wasn't working, so I'll do the other post next

1. Distrobution of product.
2. Lack of liberities and freedoms.


Let me expand on each topic.

1. Being that as a whole the earth creates a surplus of consumer goods and foods, and that the main reason for starvation is not from underproduction but Social Stratifacation, Communism would seem to be a viable solution. However, this still does not solve the problems of transportation. I.E. getting a food share from a high surplus area to a high demand area, also at this same topic, how would changing quotas be addressed? Even if transporation was assinged from one area, that would increase their demand for gasoline etc... and thus making one area of a larger amount of products then another, which defeats communism. Even if it were acceptable, then who jurisdicts how and when what area gets a specific amount of materials?

Oh I get what you're saying now(read it several times), Obviously not everyone would have the same diet, how does it matter how products are moved?

Surely you don't expect that the world community solves these problems? Such Minute matters would get mixxed with larger and larger and under the very aggresive work load any citizen would have, then the time simply would not be there. Who governs such things?

Bit more explanation on that point, but one thing, the rulers in communism is everyone.

2. In modern democracy, many liberties and freedoms are enjoyed. That does not mean full freedom is reached, however to a point we do dable in freedom. A communist world however, would make this impossible. The communist thought is that at birth a child would be assinged a job even before his abilities are judged.

No it's not

Obviously to fill quotas, it would be impossible as well as unfair and against communist thought to allow the freedom of choice in this matter.

Umm this is authoriatarian communism you are talking about.

Personally that Is not the way I want to live. I am my own person and do not want oppresion like this.

Your arguement may be valid, but the pretences are not.

Communists are the biggest idealists to ever live, in my opinion. They trust that humans will be upstanding, hard-working, and not greedy. Shut your mouth and open your eyes. People aren't that way.

We don't trust that they won't be greedy(to an extent) People will work hard in a job they like, if we give them a job they like then they will work hard.

I do have a question tho. Do any of you "communists" think there have been any examples of real communism throughout history?

Long answer yes, short answer no. The setting up of "soviets" was real communism(the dictatorship of the proletariat) however, in all the cases(not just russia) they have either been taken over(U.S.S.R) or crushed(Germany, etc, etc)

At 7/19/01 07:10 AM, Slizor wrote: I tried to post this yesterday but it wasn't working, so I'll do the other post next

1. Distrobution of product.
2. Lack of liberities and freedoms.


Let me expand on each topic.

1. Being that as a whole the earth creates a surplus of consumer goods and foods, and that the main reason for starvation is not from underproduction but Social Stratifacation, Communism would seem to be a viable solution. However, this still does not solve the problems of transportation. I.E. getting a food share from a high surplus area to a high demand area, also at this same topic, how would changing quotas be addressed? Even if transporation was assinged from one area, that would increase their demand for gasoline etc... and thus making one area of a larger amount of products then another, which defeats communism. Even if it were acceptable, then who jurisdicts how and when what area gets a specific amount of materials?

Oh I get what you're saying now(read it several times), Obviously not everyone would have the same diet, how does it matter how products are moved?

The diet part I didn't even meantion. The point I made is that Being that diffrent areas of the world have diffrent amounts of resources, and to transfer these resources takes a certain amount of resources be it oil, vechiles or other. But at whos cost do the transpertaion resoucres come from? It's just one example of how equality isn't possible.

Surely you don't expect that the world community solves these problems? Such Minute matters would get mixxed with larger and larger and under the very aggresive work load any citizen would have, then the time simply would not be there. Who governs such things?

Bit more explanation on that point, but one thing, the rulers in communism is everyone.

Everyone is in rule, but how would problems be delt with. obviously sence the of the principles of communism is equality, then a personal quota must be met, but the amount of people/resouces ratio changes daily, so how would the quota be formed? Every person in the world couldn't go to a senate like forum and work it out. How would it be feasable, and still keep with traditional communism?

2. In modern democracy, many liberties and freedoms are enjoyed. That does not mean full freedom is reached, however to a point we do dable in freedom. A communist world however, would make this impossible. The communist thought is that at birth a child would be assinged a job even before his abilities are judged.

No it's not

Well, the Communist Manifesto By Karl Marx and Fredrick Engels describes this.

Obviously to fill quotas, it would be impossible as well as unfair and against communist thought to allow the freedom of choice in this matter.

Umm this is authoriatarian communism you are talking about.

Marxist Communism describe's this.

Personally that Is not the way I want to live. I am my own person and do not want oppresion like this.

Your arguement may be valid, but the pretences are not.

Then please desribe the way in wish you would conduct communism so that I can base my opinions on it.

Ok the way I would run it? (this is all over the world communism)
First of all stick to the rule "From each according to their abilty, to each according to their need"
Their would be a place to vote(wheater virtual or physical) on international and local issues and problems, they could also raise areas for discussion. People would be given jobs that they like and are good at and all the crappy jobs, that no-one wants would be put on a national(more local than national) service roster. There would one extremely small peace keeping force for any uprisings. Non-renewable energy sources would be changed for renewable ones. At first the animal farming would be changed for high-yeild grain farming, and then, whoi knows?!

This is a very brief version of it and I may have missed some areas out, if I have just remind me of them.

At 7/19/01 04:11 AM, SilentScream wrote: I do have a question tho. Do any of you "communists" think there have been any examples of real communism throughout history?

The Kronstadt commune.
The Makhovists in the Ukraine.
Hungary 1956.
Paris 1968.
N. Salta, Argentina like a month ago

The list goes on and on. Anywhere where there is a struggle for working class goals, there is communism.

At 7/17/01 02:59 PM, Anarchypenguin wrote: 1. Being that as a whole the earth creates a surplus of consumer goods and foods, and that the main reason for starvation is not from underproduction but Social Stratifacation, Communism would seem to be a viable solution. However, this still does not solve the problems of transportation. I.E. getting a food share from a high surplus area to a high demand area, also at this same topic, how would changing quotas be addressed? Even if transporation was assinged from one area, that would increase their demand for gasoline etc... and thus making one area of a larger amount of products then another, which defeats communism. Even if it were acceptable, then who jurisdicts how and when what area gets a specific amount of materials?
Surely you don't expect that the world community solves these problems? Such Minute matters would get mixxed with larger and larger and under the very aggresive work load any citizen would have, then the time simply would not be there. Who governs such things?

In communism we talk about the "administration of things" that is, people coming together to get something done, as opposed to being told what to do by a boss.

One guy that wrote a lot about the viability of communism and some of the points you make was Peter Kropotkin. Have you ever heard of him? He's awesome, and you should read some of his stuff.

So say that somebody in Africa needed food... the local council (since we are talking about council communism - anarchism) might contact the local council from where the food is to come from. That council would contact whoever could get the gas and other transportation (we're assuming that people are still using oil at this point).

I dunno what you mean by "aggressive work load". As soon as people stop working to create profit and just work so that they can live, there will be a hell of a lot more liesure time. This is basic communism.

Of course, we don't know what everything will be like. What we do know is what is wrong with society today. Searching for viable sollutions is part of communism. We need to look for the right solutions, and only human interaction can help us find them.

2. In modern democracy, many liberties and freedoms are enjoyed. That does not mean full freedom is reached, however to a point we do dable in freedom. A communist world however, would make this impossible. The communist thought is that at birth a child would be assinged a job even before his abilities are judged. Obviously to fill quotas, it would be impossible as well as unfair and against communist thought to allow the freedom of choice in this matter. Personally that Is not the way I want to live. I am my own person and do not want oppresion like this.

I have no fucking clue what you're talking about. This myth that "kids are asigned their jobs at birth" wasn't even true in the authoritarian Soviet Union. There are no Quotas in communism, either. People produce what they need, not what somebody told them to make in certain amounts.

Communism is the most libertarian system to ever exist - freedom is at the base, be it freedom of thought or whatever.

I suggest that anybody seeking to attack communism first learn what the hell they are talking about.

At 7/27/01 02:21 PM, Anachronist wrote:

I have no fucking clue what you're talking about. This myth that "kids are asigned their jobs at birth" wasn't even true in the authoritarian Soviet Union. There are no Quotas in communism, either. People produce what they need, not what somebody told them to make in certain amounts.

I'm not sure that your 'no quota' point is entirely accurate. One individual is unable to make everything that they need - you can't plant food, re-wire a house, play with your kids, write a book, lathe parts to repair a machine and so forth on your own. Each individual produces enough for himself and also enough for his neighbours/other members of his commune etc.

Am I way off in this assumption?

So - surely people are needed to work out a quota system so that enough food is grown by the farmers, that the houses are re-wired by the electrician, that each person will be able to have enough leisure time outside of their work to interact with their family, be creative or whatever?

At 7/28/01 09:40 AM, WipedOutBoy wrote:

At 7/27/01 02:21 PM, Anachronist wrote:

I have no fucking clue what you're talking about. This myth that "kids are asigned their jobs at birth" wasn't even true in the authoritarian Soviet Union. There are no Quotas in communism, either. People produce what they need, not what somebody told them to make in certain amounts.

I'm not sure that your 'no quota' point is entirely accurate. One individual is unable to make everything that they need - you can't plant food, re-wire a house, play with your kids, write a book, lathe parts to repair a machine and so forth on your own. Each individual produces enough for himself and also enough for his neighbours/other members of his commune etc.

Am I way off in this assumption?

Yes, you diffinetly are, there are thousands who live this way, in the U.S. they mainly live in the north west. Such as how timothy mcveigh lived in a shack by himself, people find that odd but in the northwest it's very common.

What I don't understand is what is being described is Utilitarianism. More of a everyone produces what they need to live rather than communism. Please explain how this would work, would say a farmer give his yeild to the communal holds or keep them to himself?

Yes, you diffinetly are, there are thousands who live this way, in the U.S. they mainly live in the north west. Such as how timothy mcveigh lived in a shack by himself, people find that odd but in the northwest it's very common.

Thousands of people do this? Whoa there is only 6 billion people in the world and thousands of them do it! It really doesn't help the human race if eveyone lived in shacks alone, I seem to get the impression that no babies would be born.

At 8/8/01 06:41 AM, Slizor wrote:

Yes, you diffinetly are, there are thousands who live this way, in the U.S. they mainly live in the north west. Such as how timothy mcveigh lived in a shack by himself, people find that odd but in the northwest it's very common.

Thousands of people do this? Whoa there is only 6 billion people in the world and thousands of them do it! It really doesn't help the human race if eveyone lived in shacks alone, I seem to get the impression that no babies would be born.

Thats off the subject, the subject was that sailais said that it's impossible to live by yourself, Well it's not. I don't chose to live this way, but many do and HAVE. It's not impossible, it's very viable.

Thats off the subject, the subject was that sailais said that it's impossible to live by yourself, Well it's not. I don't chose to live this way, but many do and HAVE. It's not impossible, it's very viable.

But is it viable in areas such as cities? Since a massive amount of the population of the world lives in cities.

At 8/8/01 04:16 PM, Slizor wrote:

Thats off the subject, the subject was that sailais said that it's impossible to live by yourself, Well it's not. I don't chose to live this way, but many do and HAVE. It's not impossible, it's very viable.

But is it viable in areas such as cities? Since a massive amount of the population of the world lives in cities.

I don't belive that utilitarian theory is soppose to be world wide. If it is, then it would take a very large soceital reformation, If utilitarian society were to be the dominate society in the world, then there would be no cities.

Slizor your just a upset mcdonalds or tacobell cashier that just wants to be paid as much as bill gates does.

Slizor your just a upset mcdonalds or tacobell cashier that just wants to be paid as much as bill gates does.

Do you background dickwad, I'm only just 15, I can't get employment(apart from newspaper rounds however it just turns out that I can't actually ride a bike, damn)

At 8/12/01 09:22 AM, Slizor wrote:

Slizor your just a upset mcdonalds or tacobell cashier that just wants to be paid as much as bill gates does.

Do you background dickwad, I'm only just 15, I can't get employment(apart from newspaper rounds however it just turns out that I can't actually ride a bike, damn)

To be fair, he's probably american, and in america you can work at age 15 with parental consent. Also sorry about the bike thing but there are those hemroid doughnut pillows.

To be fair, he's probably american, and in america you can work at age 15 with parental consent.

Damn, lucky americans

Also sorry about the bike thing but there are those hemroid doughnut pillows.

Look, I don't want to know how you overcame your problem, since mine is different:)