Excellent post...

A couple of American clients of mine like to talk about the "socialized" medicine in Canada being right up there with Romania and one guy was piping off about SARS in Toronto and the fact that it killed 40 people and that "socialized" medicine was to blame.

I put the shoe on the other foot and countered that if it weren't for universal health care coverage it would have been far worse because people would have put off seeing a doctor and just spread it around even more.

Revisionist history? Where are you basing that claim? It took years to make Germany a nice decent place. So far we are not even a year into Iraq? And again, how many natives are in the attacks as opposed to forgeiners, including Al Queda? If you think that Al Queda is NOT moving into the Iraq theater, then you are gravley wrong. So dont take the attacks as proof that IRaqis dont want us there, take the peace in 99% of the nation as proof as proof that they are pleased with us.
Only the media takes Al Queda's attacks as proof of the Iraqis disatifsaction.

PS your graph shows that there were INDEED a lot of terrorist actions in the first 8 months of occupation. THanks for sharing. And WOW Germany became a nice place to live. Actually the Capitalist part did, the Communist part didnt untill it became capitalist, but thats another thread.

Quick points:

1. My wife and I are both highly educated and "enlightened" folks (heck, we even have subscriptions to Harpers and The Economist! ;) ), and we only agree on about 60% of the "big" issues. What makes Mr. Communist think that an entire nation of human beings will suddenly be in agreement on ANY of the big issues, much less all? Will we all become homogenized clones?

2. The poor in this country, through medicaid, have access to the best medical care in the world, including virtually unlimited pharmaceutical benefits. The disabled and elderly have access through Medicare. No one in this country can be denied medical care if they need it. I have worked in the industry for over a decade, and I know all to well how it works.

There are problems with the healthcare system right now, but health care in the US still surpasses that of any of the socialized systems with regard to how quickly you can receive medical care and to the advanced technologies available in the US on demand, but not in socialized systems.

If you had read my post, "Mr Carafano", you would have seen where I am basing the charge of revisionist history. You do bring up one interesting point, and that is what percentage of the attacks are from al-queda cells that came in after the occupation, and what percentage are Iraqi rebels. But the fact is, I don't know, and you don't either.

It is not a case of making people clones, it is a case of SOLVING the big problems. There is a huge degree of political argument today because capitalism is a flawed economic and social system that creates many problems for people - exploitation, domination, racism, sexism, classism, nationalism, pollution, religious intolerance...

Nearly all of the things we argue about politically are things caused by the fact that capitalism is not working.

We will abolish nations, and nationalism.

All forms of mass prejudice (ie prejudice against social or ethnic groups) will be abolished.

exploitation, opression, dictatorship and the brutality of the state (especially the police) will be abolished.

In communism, the big issues have all been solved, the only debates are matters of organisation. We will have debates about how resources are organised, about how they are allocated, to which project, to which research...

These will be healthy debates, and all the more healthy because each person has equal access to the floor, to the power to make the decision...

In communism your wife and you might argue about whether the social organisation should build build a park or a road in this or that place, or about whether more money should be invested in conquering space or abolishing disease, and so on and so on... these debates may well be passionate and lively... but they are not confrontational - because we have solved the real problems, we have all agreed that communism has given us the solution to the problems of managing the government and the economy of this plannet

Those who do not agree with communism will be forced BY THE SUCCESS OF COMMUNISM IN EVERY ASPECT OF SOCIAL AND MATERIAL LIFE to commit themselves to the cause. Not by brute force, but by education and example, only the insane could wish to go back to the capitalist system.

You and your wife will not be arguing about the fact you have too much democracry, that the means of production have been placed under too much democratic contol, that communism has created incredible advances in techology... you will not be arguing against the revolution that all sane men and women will love and cherish.

And somehow, maybe using some 'magic' people will all be willing to work their hardest, and no one will try to take advantage of his fellows.

Let me tell you, I worked my ASS off for where I got to today, and I did it making almost no money, getting myself into debt, and losing most of my earlier friends since I didn't have time for them. The golden apple at the end of this was I would have a respected position and make a better then average living. I didn't just have to go to school and pass, I had to maintain a GPA that put me in the top 5% of an already select group as well as doing independent research.

Without the motivation of being able to provide for my family better there is NO way I would have put myself through 7 extra years of very hard work (past college).

Luckily communism has fallen into such disrepute that even communists like the greens are afraid to come right out and call themselves communists.

I still have to wonder if its a poor education, lack of intelligence, naiveté, or some sort of sickness which makes people advocate such a horrendous system.(or maybe just jealousy and laziness)

I would guess that it's a misguided ambition to "fix" the imperfect human condition? I believe that Strange Famous means well. I also think that he <i>really really</i> believes what he's saying.

I give him an "F" for his judgment and reasoning skills, but an "A" for embodying youthful optimism and a caring heart.

Like who gets to be in charge of the world. Why bother the people with those details.

LOL!

Exactly. Also, who are the counter-revolutionaries who need to be liquidated and dumped in an unmarked hole in the ground.

The enemies of the revolution are not murdered, and only would ever be killed in self defence. Enemies of the revolution should not be seen as vicious or savage, but as children, who must be educated. We do not beat the counter revolutionary with the gun, we beat them by showing them that communism CAN work and that this IS a better world.

So, "re-education" rather than a bullet, how kind.


This is sounding more and more like the USSR all the time...

education means education, people read euphanisms were none are intended. I mean that if someone does not approve of the revolution but accepts it is the democratic will of the people, but they argue against it, they have the freedom to do so. I suspect the vast majority of people will see them as a fool and laugh at them, but it will be their right to believe and argue for whatever they want - as long as it is not hate crime.

If someone opposes the revolution, and attempts to sabotage it by criminal activity, then they must be re-educated, as you say. They must be placed in a classroom and taught their lessons, this is a criminal individual we are talking about and every society must attempt to rehabilitate the criminal

In both cases, the goal is for them to be convinced of the revolution and that is good by practical example.

If a person, because they are pathologically insane, wishes to attack society, through criminal acts, and cannot be educated to cease this anti social behaviour, they must be locked up.

Well, hell, you've convinced me. If you can guarantee that the weather will always be a balmy 72 degrees then go ahead and sign me up...

I like how "racism and prejudice will be abolised" was tossed out in one sentence without any details or information as to how it will be done. Golly, thats enough for me!!! JEEPERS!

Racism is not a natural human emotion, it is a function of living in a divided society. Because the working class is forced to compete, both against itself in every country and against other countries, this creates unatural social divides between people.

The capitalist superstructure encourages this... for example, when there are job losses, the people do not say "this is because of exploitation, this is because capitalism is failing" they say "this is because of illigal Mexican labour which is competing against us" - and of course the media and state and so on have an interest in encouraged certain types of prejudice, so long as they do not create lynch mobs.

When people are not exploited, forced to compete, shunted around like cattle by Capital, then the motivation for false prejudice dissapears, and then we are left only with the human motivation, which does not exist - the things we all have in common are far greater than our differences.

You've got that in San Diego
Believe me...you pay a price for it in many different ways.
It's all an illusion.

Besides...it's boring.

I think you are missing the concept of real freedom.
The freedom to win or lose.
The freedom to change
The freedom of choice

These are lost in the society you describe.

Communists do not want to limit freedom of choice or change.

You are quite right that we wish to abolish the freedom to lose, and to abolish the freedom to win at someone else's expense.

Totally wrong. There has always been the group mentality. From Cavemen to the American INdians to now, there has always been an "us vs them" thing going on. It IS human nature, and the only way to defeat it is communication and education. There has been US VS THEM in what you call the only true communist times in human history, and in fact problably MORE so then. So once again, you are incorrect.

Unless your choice is to own a weapon, that choice is eradicated. Also the choice to own a better home, that choice is eradicated. The choice to speak against the state, that choice is eradicated. The choice to pick your own religion, that choice is rradicated.

Utopia? Sounds like Big Brother is watching.

Good. Then I choose against communism and elect to change my government if communist.

OF COURSE Communists want to limit freedom of choice or change! Otherwise people break free. Can't have your comrads running off to live in the only freedom of sewers or back woods. I'll gladly give up some creature comforts to live away from a totalitarian government. Hopefully before being 'reeducated'.

Don't come looking for me; I'll be armed.

You cant be armed, thats the first thing those peaceloving communist did, they took your weapons. Why would they do that if there is no reason to fear the populace?

You wont be armed, the first thing those peaceful, equality loving communists did was strip you of your ability to fight back. Why would any benevolant government do that?