Join the fight against communism!

[butsbutsbutsbutsbuts]

Communists come in many shapes, names and sizes and you need to be on the look out for them. Have you heard of socialists? Perhaps social democrats? Democratic socialists? Leninists? Trotskyists? Maoists? Marxists? Anarchists? Social communists? Anarcho-capitalists? Anarcho-communists? Anarcho-liberals? They like to say they are all different but they all follow the same line of thought stemming from one man, Karl Marx, and they are all based on the same logical fallacy.

There are many practical policies and normal political parties choose which ones to use based on the outcomes they deem desirable, but communists, or whatever they called themselves nowadays, choose only one outcome and keep beating the drum about how that outcome is the only thing that could make the world a better place and how every other consideration is evil for getting in the way. For instance a socialist would look at the motto of france "Liberté, égalité, fraternité" meaning liberty, equality and unity and say "by liberty they mean the freedom of the rich to exploit the poor and by unity they mean united under control of the ruling class" and argue that we should only work for equality!

Ever since marx such groups have been progressively toning down their message so less people view them as insane, nowadays they call themselves "progressives". Fancy that! Claiming to be the sole political group in the world that is "progressive". Looks like they've got a while to go yet.

How can you help? Spread a meme. Just tell someone in your own way what I told you in the second paragraph and possibly the last paragraph. They will be reminded of socialism from time to time and will remember the fatal flaw you told them, they may then feel the need to bring it up in a discussion thus immunising others to the DISEASE of COMMUNISM. Think of it as geology, just as mountains are formed over 100s of years so are hearts and minds. Eventually socialism will die out like it's supposed to. What exactly are they fighting nowadays anyway? Evil capitalists with top hats, monocles and cigars?

[MultiCanimefan]

You can never kill an idea, even if all the Communists are gone by next year and the philosophy forgotten. There will always, always be at least one person who is dissatisfied with their current economical or government stucture no matter how many times you tell them it's "wrong."

[Saruman200]

At 8/9/08 07:05 PM, butsbutsbutsbutsbuts wrote: Communists come in many shapes, names and sizes and you need to be on the look out for them. Have you heard of socialists? Perhaps social democrats? Democratic socialists? Leninists? Trotskyists? Maoists? Marxists? Anarchists? Social communists? Anarcho-capitalists? Anarcho-communists? Anarcho-liberals? They like to say they are all different but they all follow the same line of thought stemming from one man, Karl Marx, and they are all based on the same logical fallacy.

There are many practical policies and normal political parties choose which ones to use based on the outcomes they deem desirable, but communists, or whatever they called themselves nowadays, choose only one outcome and keep beating the drum about how that outcome is the only thing that could make the world a better place and how every other consideration is evil for getting in the way. For instance a socialist would look at the motto of france "Liberté, égalité, fraternité" meaning liberty, equality and unity and say "by liberty they mean the freedom of the rich to exploit the poor and by unity they mean united under control of the ruling class" and argue that we should only work for equality!

Ever since marx such groups have been progressively toning down their message so less people view them as insane, nowadays they call themselves "progressives". Fancy that! Claiming to be the sole political group in the world that is "progressive". Looks like they've got a while to go yet.

How can you help? Spread a meme. Just tell someone in your own way what I told you in the second paragraph and possibly the last paragraph. They will be reminded of socialism from time to time and will remember the fatal flaw you told them, they may then feel the need to bring it up in a discussion thus immunising others to the DISEASE of COMMUNISM. Think of it as geology, just as mountains are formed over 100s of years so are hearts and minds. Eventually socialism will die out like it's supposed to. What exactly are they fighting nowadays anyway? Evil capitalists with top hats, monocles and cigars?

While I agree Communism is a failed ideology, and that they go by many names (Leninists, Trotsyites, Maoists, Marxists), your comparision to liberalism, socialism, and progressivism if flawed. Communism is more authoritarian/statist than liberal, because in communist society, both economic freedom and personal freedom are undermined. However, modern liberals, progressives, and some socialists favor greater personal liberty. As for "Liberté, égalité, fraternité", liberal/progressives are not at all opposed to liberty and unity. They better represent personal and individual freedom than their right-wing opponents. Unity is actually a strong-point of Communism, as it encourages the end of class-conflict. While I am not arguing in favor of Communism, I think you are wrong to compare it to modern liberalism and it's offspring, because this is based soley (like Communism) on economic factors, ignoring personal factors.
Otherwhise, I agree with taking a stand against communism, this can be done by people from both sides of the modern political spectrum.

[Kurt-1]

Wow.

That was toooo long.

I like seriously didn't read any of it.

At all.

[Sajberhippien]

Anyone saying anarcho-capitalism and communism being the same thing isn't worth even facepalming.

Fuck you.

[freddorfman]

normally i would think your a troll but that was far too long and detailed for trollige so in that case i must heartily say this you are a complete failure for not realizing how fucked things are and no one can kill communism you can only kill communists but that will only strenghten our numbers it kinda remindes me of a quote i once heard (not sure of the source ) i dont care if i am killed so long as there is a man behind me to pick up my un and keep fighting . now then i am also trying to figure out if you are nothing more than some ultra right christian extremist or some greedy full blown capitialist swine . now then

GOOD NIGHT AND MAY YOURE GENITLES TURN TO STONE AND FALL OFF

[gunner-564]

go on with out me ill catch up...

[CIX]

At 8/9/08 07:17 PM, Saruman200 wrote:

However, modern liberals, progressives, and some socialists favor greater personal liberty. As for "Liberté, égalité, fraternité", liberal/progressives are not at all opposed to liberty and unity. They better represent personal and individual freedom than their right-wing opponents.

This is completely incorrect. More regulations from the left-wing does not result in more freedom or liberty. Just because people think the Republican Party is comprised of mostly right-wing people does not mean it's true. Their policies are so close to the Democrats that I find them to on the left-wing side.

[Saruman200]

At 8/9/08 08:47 PM, CIX wrote:

At 8/9/08 07:17 PM, Saruman200 wrote:

However, modern liberals, progressives, and some socialists favor greater personal liberty. As for "Liberté, égalité, fraternité", liberal/progressives are not at all opposed to liberty and unity. They better represent personal and individual freedom than their right-wing opponents.

This is completely incorrect. More regulations from the left-wing does not result in more freedom or liberty. Just because people think the Republican Party is comprised of mostly right-wing people does not mean it's true. Their policies are so close to the Democrats that I find them to on the left-wing side.

I wasn't just talking about the US, there are other countries in the world too. Gay marriage, Abortion Rights, Legalized Marijuana, Legalized Prostitution, Lower Drinking Age, Lower Age of Consent, and No Election Funding Reform are greater personal liberty, like it or not. The defintion of left wing is more liberty. It orginated prior to the French Revolution when those who favored freer, republican style government sat on the left away from the king, while those who favored a more conservative, autocratic form of government sat on the right.

[Nitroglys]

At 8/9/08 07:05 PM, butsbutsbutsbutsbuts wrote: Communists come in many shapes, names and sizes and you need to be on the look out for them. Have you heard of socialists? Perhaps social democrats? Democratic socialists? Leninists? Trotskyists? Maoists? Marxists? Anarchists? Social communists? Anarcho-capitalists? Anarcho-communists? Anarcho-liberals? They like to say they are all different but they all follow the same line of thought stemming from one man, Karl Marx, and they are all based on the same logical fallacy.

you have some problems understanding some economic basics so i'll try to explain it using a very simple method...Cows.
Economics 101: Models explained - with Cows

SOCIALISM: You have 2 cows, so you give one to your neighbor.

COMMUNISM: You have 2 cows. The State takes both and gives you some milk.

FASCISM: You have 2 cows. The State takes both and sells you some milk.

NAZISM: You have 2 cows. The State takes both and shoots you.

TRADITIONAL CAPITALISM: You have two cows. You sell one and buy a bull. Your herd multiplies, and the economy grows. You sell them and retire on the income.

ENRON VENTURE CAPITALISM: You have two cows. You sell three of them to your publicly listed company, using letters of credit opened by your brother-in-law at the bank, then execute a debt/equity swap with an associated general offer so that you get all four cows back, with a tax exemption for five cows. The milk rights of the six cows are transferred via an intermediary to a Cayman Island Company secretly owned by the majority shareholder who sells the rights to all seven cows back to your listed company. The annual report says the company owns eight cows, with an option on one more. Sell one cow to buy a new president of the United States, leaving you with nine cows. No balance sheet provided with the release. The public buys your bull.

[CIX]

At 8/9/08 09:34 PM, Saruman200 wrote: I wasn't just talking about the US, there are other countries in the world too. Gay marriage, Abortion Rights, Legalized Marijuana, Legalized Prostitution, Lower Drinking Age, Lower Age of Consent, and No Election Funding Reform are greater personal liberty, like it or not. The defintion of left wing is more liberty. It orginated prior to the French Revolution when those who favored freer, republican style government sat on the left away from the king, while those who favored a more conservative, autocratic form of government sat on the right.

If you were going by the French revolutionary definitions then you should not have associated liberalism with socialism. Most of the countries besides America classify classical liberalism as the system of natural liberty that supports natural rights (life, liberty, and property) and free markets.

The New Left movement in America during the 1970s sough to differentiate it's authoritarianism from the ones of Mao, Stalin, Hitler, Chavez, Castro, Mugabe, Pol Pot, etc. but when you look at all of those people they all fought for what today's left is fighting for.

[CheGuevara72]

Join the fight against capatalism which can be just as bad as any stalinist system. As long as their is an upper calss the lower class will be oppressed. As long as there are the oppressed the beliefs won't die and the fight won't stop so fuck you asshole and. RASH for life.

[Tony-DarkGrave]

communism fails look at china the USSR and north Korea all violations of human rights.

[Cuppa-LettuceNog]

The fact that you called Anarcho-capitalism (the complete and utter opposite of Communism) communism makes me think you have no idea what you're talking about and makes me not read your topic.

[Der-Lowe]

At 8/10/08 03:54 AM, Cuppa-LettuceNog wrote: The fact that you called Anarcho-capitalism (the complete and utter opposite of Communism) communism makes me think you have no idea what you're talking about and makes me not read your topic.

Heh, same here.
Plus, "the fight against communism" has a different connotation here, which makes the op look worse than the people he's trying to attack.

[SpartanMartan]

I was a LT. back in Nam. I killed many comunists and amish
also i killed many fascist's as well

[drDAK]

Stalin wasn't a communist. He was a military dictator.

[therealsylvos]

At 8/10/08 01:29 PM, drDAK wrote: Stalin wasn't a communist. He was a military dictator.

Oh.
That is an interesting economic philosophy.
I hadn't heard of it.
Please tell me more about this kind of economic theory?

[drDAK]

At 8/10/08 01:32 PM, therealsylvos wrote: Oh.
That is an interesting economic philosophy.
I hadn't heard of it.
Please tell me more about this kind of economic theory?

First of all, it goes against the first rule of Communism to have everyone in power over another.

His economic style was never bad. In fact, the USSR was the second largest economy in the world. But they were also fighting natural human greed, which is something that cannot co-exist with Communism.

[Shaggytheclown17]

I think comunism would be pretty good only if the few people with actual power couldn't launder the wealth n keep it from the citizens.
That would cure the whole big business thing too I bet, most of the money made by them will go into expansion+advertising+pay workers+enough money to keep the owner alive, n the rest would go back to the comunity to help wherever its needed. Sure there will be rich n poor people still, poverty is commone for people too lazy to get off their asses n work.

So in conclusion I agree with whoever said they cannot kill the comunism idea, what sohuld be done is fabricate the idea into something doable, something that will benifit the people more than the government, they are the ones who are supposed to be the searvants of the people, not the other way around.

That brings me to another topic, why the fuck do we have to die for our country?
The frigin government should be the ones fighting, here's my idea, all countries abd togather in alliance, at least all the most powerful ones, so now if one or two people get out of line they'll simply deconstruct their government n set up a new one hopefully without any struggle. Eh whatever.

[butsbutsbutsbutsbuts]

At 8/9/08 07:36 PM, Kurt-1 wrote:

tl;dr

At 8/9/08 07:46 PM, Sajberhippien wrote: Anyone saying anarcho-capitalism and communism being the same thing isn't worth even facepalming.

Fuck you.

They are both obsessive. Communists obsess over equality. Anarcho-capitalists obsess over liberty.

At 8/9/08 08:08 PM, freddorfman wrote: normally i would think your a troll but that was far too long and detailed for trollige so in that case i must heartily say this you are a complete failure for not realizing how fucked things are and no one can kill communism you can only kill communists but that will only strenghten our numbers it kinda remindes me of a quote i once heard (not sure of the source ) i dont care if i am killed so long as there is a man behind me to pick up my un and keep fighting . now then i am also trying to figure out if you are nothing more than some ultra right christian extremist or some greedy full blown capitialist swine . now then

GOOD NIGHT AND MAY YOURE GENITLES TURN TO STONE AND FALL OFF

Hahahaha. So my logical argument doesn't exist and I dont like communism because i am an evil capitalist. Communists will never be better trolls than the nazis. Keep trying.

At 8/10/08 03:24 AM, CheGuevara72 wrote: Join the fight against capatalism which can be just as bad as any stalinist system. As long as their is an upper calss the lower class will be oppressed. As long as there are the oppressed the beliefs won't die and the fight won't stop so fuck you asshole and. RASH for life.

Ok so you think equality is so important, but why must everything be sacrificed for it? There are other considerations.

[positively-negative]

Great, I thought Joesph McCarthy died in 1957.

[ThePretenders]

At 8/9/08 07:05 PM, butsbutsbutsbutsbuts wrote: Perhaps social democrats?

Social democracy has nothing to do with communism. Social democracy was a reaction to communism and aims to reform capitalism democratically by creating social programs to remove excess inequality and promote social justice.

Sweden is an example of social democracy.

[butsbutsbutsbutsbuts]

Sorry it's this double post thing I can't post 2 times in a row... had to wait until someone else posted before posting this xD

At 8/9/08 07:09 PM, MultiCanimefan wrote: You can never kill an idea, even if all the Communists are gone by next year and the philosophy forgotten. There will always, always be at least one person who is dissatisfied with their current economical or government stucture no matter how many times you tell them it's "wrong."

By "died" I meant no one takes it seriously. Like the phlogiston theory of fire it will become history.

Also since when has being non-conformist meant being communist? I disagree with the government on many things but I don't have to be a communist to do it.

At 8/9/08 07:17 PM, Saruman200 wrote: While I agree Communism is a failed ideology, and that they go by many names (Leninists, Trotsyites, Maoists, Marxists), your comparision to liberalism, socialism, and progressivism if flawed. Communism is more authoritarian/statist than liberal, because in communist society, both economic freedom and personal freedom are undermined. However, modern liberals, progressives, and some socialists favor greater personal liberty. As for "Liberté, égalité, fraternité", liberal/progressives are not at all opposed to liberty and unity. They better represent personal and individual freedom than their right-wing opponents. Unity is actually a strong-point of Communism, as it encourages the end of class-conflict. While I am not arguing in favor of Communism, I think you are wrong to compare it to modern liberalism and it's offspring, because this is based soley (like Communism) on economic factors, ignoring personal factors.
Otherwhise, I agree with taking a stand against communism, this can be done by people from both sides of the modern political spectrum.

Well I focused on their similarities for the sake of argument, but yeh, socialism is a toned down version of communism, democratic socialism is a toned down version of socialism, social democracy etc... Also they can obsess over different things like collectivism or state intervention. Though the things they have in common and the obvious link to marx set them apart from the rest of politics.

Liberalism is a very ambiguous term. Labour in the UK and the Democrats in the US are considered liberal yet are supported by both market liberals and progressives, the 2 groups are generally distinguished by the point decide to stop pushing for more equality. Paying extra tax so the government can step in when orphans are being thrown out into the snow is one thing, considering 350 lb welfare queens to be in "poverty" is another.

At 8/9/08 10:54 PM, Nitroglys wrote:

At 8/9/08 07:05 PM, butsbutsbutsbutsbuts wrote: Communists come in many shapes, names and sizes and you need to be on the look out for them. Have you heard of socialists? Perhaps social democrats? Democratic socialists? Leninists? Trotskyists? Maoists? Marxists? Anarchists? Social communists? Anarcho-capitalists? Anarcho-communists? Anarcho-liberals? They like to say they are all different but they all follow the same line of thought stemming from one man, Karl Marx, and they are all based on the same logical fallacy.

you have some problems understanding some economic basics so i'll try to explain it using a very simple method...Cows.
Economics 101: Models explained - with Cows

SOCIALISM: You have 2 cows, so you give one to your neighbor.

COMMUNISM: You have 2 cows. The State takes both and gives you some milk.

FASCISM: You have 2 cows. The State takes both and sells you some milk.

NAZISM: You have 2 cows. The State takes both and shoots you.

TRADITIONAL CAPITALISM: You have two cows. You sell one and buy a bull. Your herd multiplies, and the economy grows. You sell them and retire on the income.

ENRON VENTURE CAPITALISM: You have two cows. You sell three of them to your publicly listed company, using letters of credit opened by your brother-in-law at the bank, then execute a debt/equity swap with an associated general offer so that you get all four cows back, with a tax exemption for five cows. The milk rights of the six cows are transferred via an intermediary to a Cayman Island Company secretly owned by the majority shareholder who sells the rights to all seven cows back to your listed company. The annual report says the company owns eight cows, with an option on one more. Sell one cow to buy a new president of the United States, leaving you with nine cows. No balance sheet provided with the release. The public buys your bull.

hahaha oh wow xD

At 8/10/08 09:36 AM, SpartanMartan wrote: I was a LT. back in Nam. I killed many comunists and amish
also i killed many fascist's as well

That's the spirit.

At 8/10/08 01:29 PM, drDAK wrote: Stalin wasn't a communist. He was a military dictator.

It was communist ideology that got him there. Stalin used it to justify a dictatorship of the "proletariat", effectively sacrificing liberty for equality.

At 8/10/08 04:26 PM, Shaggytheclown17 wrote: I think comunism would be pretty good only if the few people with actual power couldn't launder the wealth n keep it from the citizens.
That would cure the whole big business thing too I bet, most of the money made by them will go into expansion+advertising+pay workers+enough money to keep the owner alive, n the rest would go back to the comunity to help wherever its needed. Sure there will be rich n poor people still, poverty is commone for people too lazy to get off their asses n work.

So in conclusion I agree with whoever said they cannot kill the comunism idea, what sohuld be done is fabricate the idea into something doable, something that will benifit the people more than the government, they are the ones who are supposed to be the searvants of the people, not the other way around.

That brings me to another topic, why the fuck do we have to die for our country?
The frigin government should be the ones fighting, here's my idea, all countries abd togather in alliance, at least all the most powerful ones, so now if one or two people get out of line they'll simply deconstruct their government n set up a new one hopefully without any struggle. Eh whatever.

You are right in saying they should fabricate a doable idea, but the trouble is communism's entire basis is non-scientific. Scientific method requires that you base your assertions on facts and evidence, communism only looks at the evidence that proves equality is the best thing ever and ignores everything else. For example property rights allow the rich to own the means of production and exploit workers, however they also allow those workers to have some sort of claim to what few property they have making it more difficult for them to be evicted and pushed around, if property rights extend to the right to bear arms then it makes them extremely difficult to oppress. I'm not saying property rights solve all the world's problems, I'm just looking at the pros aswell as the cons.

[butsbutsbutsbutsbuts]

At 8/11/08 07:38 AM, positively-negative wrote: Great, I thought Joesph McCarthy died in 1957.

Are you or have you ever been a member of the communist party?

At 8/11/08 07:59 AM, ThePretenders wrote:

At 8/9/08 07:05 PM, butsbutsbutsbutsbuts wrote: Perhaps social democrats?

Social democracy has nothing to do with communism. Social democracy was a reaction to communism and aims to reform capitalism democratically by creating social programs to remove excess inequality and promote social justice.

Sweden is an example of social democracy.

Well it's a start if they at least accept they can only make social changes through consent, but it's still a waste of time to obsess over one outcome. The only reason it's not a failure is because they have to listen to the people who suffer or benefit from their policies.

[butsbutsbutsbutsbuts]

I thought you weren't allowed to post 2 times in a row. hm..

[donkey1233]

I believe communism in one nation can't work.

However, if there were worldwide revolutions as Marx theorised then true communism could actually occur: nation states would dissolve and people would live in communes, no wars would occur and there would be equality. Just saying that this is the only way I could ever see it working.

Still, I'd much rather sit here in my cushy middle-class lifestyle. Workers of the world, stay down!

[Der-Lowe]

At 8/10/08 01:49 PM, drDAK wrote:

At 8/10/08 01:32 PM, therealsylvos wrote: Oh.
That is an interesting economic philosophy.
I hadn't heard of it.
Please tell me more about this kind of economic theory?

First of all, it goes against the first rule of Communism to have everyone in power over another.

He's mocking you, a dictatorship is not an economic system.

His economic style was never bad. In fact, the USSR was the second largest economy in the world.

Meh, the USSR's statistical data was lies.

But they were also fighting natural human greed, which is something that cannot co-exist with Communism.

That's why they fought against it?

[butsbutsbutsbutsbuts]

At 8/11/08 09:45 AM, donkey1233 wrote: I believe communism in one nation can't work.

However, if there were worldwide revolutions as Marx theorised then true communism could actually occur: nation states would dissolve and people would live in communes, no wars would occur and there would be equality. Just saying that this is the only way I could ever see it working.

Still, I'd much rather sit here in my cushy middle-class lifestyle. Workers of the world, stay down!

What would the revolutions achieve exactly? If you think all of a sudden people will turn their guns into ploughshares and dance hand in hand you are sadly mistaken. The state is a monopoly over power, whether it's good or bad depends on the state. A polyopoly over power is always the same, a patchwork of gangs and tribes with nothing to stop them from attacking each other like Somalia or the Democratic Republic of Congo.

Obviously you are obsessing over equality to the point that you ignore the reality of power structures like I said.

[MultiCanimefan]

At 8/11/08 09:45 AM, donkey1233 wrote: I believe communism in one nation can't work.

I agree.

However, if there were worldwide revolutions as Marx theorised then true communism could actually occur: nation states would dissolve and people would live in communes, no wars would occur and there would be equality. Just saying that this is the only way I could ever see it working.

And you're absolutely correct.

Still, I'd much rather sit here in my cushy middle-class lifestyle. Workers of the world, stay down!

Yes, workers of the world that help make this person's cushy middle-class lifestyle happen, stay down! Yes, workers of the world that labor in sweatshops and factories for minimum wage and in poor conditions that create the items middle-classers like us take for granted, stay down!